The government does have an Epstein list — here's the proof
I confess I feel a little cheap writing about this. So I have to remind myself that this is really the opposite of a conspiracy theory. And just so I don't keep you in suspense, there is a list of clients related to the billionaire sex offender's underage trafficking charges, and its existence is a matter of public record.
For those of you lucky enough not to know all the details already, Trump has been talking up Epstein conspiracy theories for years. His base is now hooked on the idea that the case files contain a huge amount of mud-slingable dirt on the rich and famous. During the 2024 campaign, Trump promised to make the files public and, in February, he even held a public event at the White House to release the ' first phase ' of the information.
Attorney General Pam Bondi — the official Trump tasked with the release — when asked about the Epstein client list and when it would be released, responded, 'It's sitting on my desk right now.'
Now, suddenly, Trump and Bondi are telling everyone to move along, there is nothing to see here. In a memo closing the case, released on Sunday of the July 4 holiday weekend, Bondi said there was no so-called 'client list,' that no more information would be released, and that the case was closed.
Trump's subsequent reactions have been equally inexplicable. He has gone from promising his followers amazing things to shouting at them for asking questions. He even published a post on Truth Social 'firing' his supporters for refusing to drop the inquiry.
'Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this 'bulls—,' hook, line, and sinker,' the president posted Wednesday. 'Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don't want their support anymore!'
Trump is also now claiming that Barack Obama and James Comey ' made up' the Epstein files. That's complete nonsense. Epstein was arrested on July 6, 2019, and his New York mansion was raided on the same day. Obama had been out of office for more than two years, and Trump himself was president — the same president, in fact, who had fired Comey on May 9, 2017, for his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election on Trump's behalf.
If Trump believes Obama and Comey had anything to do with the Epstein files, he's an idiot. If Trump believes his supporters will buy this excuse, then he thinks they are.
We know that Bondi's carefully crafted memo claiming that there is no Epstein 'client list' — the quotation marks are in the memo— is also nonsense. There might not have been a 'client list' in the FBI's Epstein files, but the FBI certainly has compiled a list of clients.
When the FBI raided Epstein's New York mansion, they seized a vast amount of material. In a court memo filed on July 8, 2019, two days after his arrest, the Department of Justice outlined some of the evidence they had seized. This included stacks of compact disks labeled 'Young [Name] + [Name].' In short, Epstein kept a carefully curated library of videos showing various people having sex with underage women. Even if Epstein was not actively blackmailing anyone, he sure seems he had plenty of insurance at the ready.
But that's not the only reason Bondi's claim is nonsense. There's also the question of math. Bondi admits that 'Epstein harmed over one thousand victims.' But we also know that, once a part of Epstein's 'system,' his victims were trafficked several times.
Virginia Giuffre, for example, described being sexually trafficked multiple times over two years in New York, Palm Beach, the U.S. Virgin Islands and London. Let's say that each victim was involved, on average, in five incidents. That's over 5,000 sexual encounters. It's safe to assume this wasn't all Epstein. And with over a thousand victims to interview and piles of DVDs labeled with perpetrators' names, the FBI and Pam Bondi know exactly who was involved.
So the question remains: Why has Trump suddenly turned on his followers on this issue and gone from being a champion of transparency to engaging in one of the clumsiest coverups in American political history? Why is Trump willing to die on the Epstein hill?
Make no mistake, Trump has a lot to lose from protecting Epstein's clients. His base is furious. If nothing else, he's now going to get booed at his own rallies. It's even likely to be a potent issue in the 2026 midterms. House Democrats are already pushing Republicans to subpoena witnesses. You can almost hear them now — 'Give us control of Congress and we'll conduct proper hearings and get to the bottom of the Epstein mess!'
I can only assume that Bondi discovered something in the Epstein evidence that is much more dangerous for Trump than the wrath of his base.
I'd be surprised if it's evidence that Trump himself was one of Epstein's clients. Having sex with a 14-year-old at a friend's house is the kind of thing you would remember — if Trump knew he might be 'on the list,' I doubt if he would have made so many promises to release the information. Nonetheless, something in those files has Trump running scared in a way he never has before.
Does someone on the Epstein list have some sort of hold over Trump? I won't speculate — I'm just asking questions.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
Yen firms as investors gird for political uncertainty
The yen firmed on Monday after Japan's ruling coalition lost its majority in the upper house as investors braced for a period of policy paralysis and market disquiet in the world's fourth-largest economy ahead of a deadline on tariff negotiations with the U.S. The Japanese markets are closed for the day leaving the yen as an indicator of investor angst, with early trading suggesting the election results were mostly priced in by markets. The yen firmed to 148.46 per dollar, but stayed close to the 3-1/2-month low it hit last week as investors fretted about Japan's fiscal outlook. The yen nudged higher against the euro to 172.64 and against sterling to 199.03. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party returned 47 seats, short of the 50 seats it needed to ensure a majority in the 248-seat upper chamber in an election where half the seats were up for grabs. While the ballot does not directly determine whether Ishiba's administration will fall, it heaps political pressure on the embattled leader who also lost control of the more powerful lower house in October. Carol Kong, currency strategist at Commonwealth Bank of Australia, said markets likely priced in a much worse outcome for the ruling coalition heading into the election and doubted that the yen could sustain its strength. "It remains unclear whether Ishiba can indeed survive as the prime minister... and what it means for Japan's trade negotiations with the U.S. Prolonged political uncertainty will be negative for Japanese assets, including the JPY." The election result, while not entirely a shock to markets, also comes at a tricky time for a country trying to get a tariff deal with U.S. President Donald Trump before an Aug. 1 deadline. Japanese government bonds (JGBs) plunged last week, sending yields on 30-year debt to an all-time high, while the yen slid to multi-month lows against the U.S. dollar and the euro. If Ishiba resigns, the political maelstrom could be a trigger for foreign investors to sell Japanese shares and the yen, analysts said. Tariff Uncertainty Investor focus has been firmly on Trump's global tariff salvos, with a Financial Times report last week indicating the U.S. president was pushing for steep new tariffs on European Union products. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Sunday he was confident the U.S. can secure a trade deal with the European Union, but said August 1 was a hard deadline for tariffs to kick in. The euro was 0.12% lower at $1.16165, while sterling last fetched $1.13417. The dollar index, which measures the U.S. currency against six others, was at 98.352. The European Central Bank is due to meet this week and is expected to hold its rates steady after a string of cuts, while investor attention has been on whether the Federal Reserve succumbs to pressure from Trump to cut interest rates. Trump appeared near the point of trying to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell last week, but backed off with a nod to the market disruption that would likely follow. The U.S. central bank is widely expected to hold rates steady in its July meeting. Traders are pricing in a rate cut in October with the odds of a second rate cut this year not fully priced in yet. The New Zealand dollar eased 0.18% to $0.5951 after annual consumer inflation accelerated in the second quarter but stayed below economists' forecasts, leading markets to raise the chance of a rate cut next month given the broader economic weakness. In cryptocurrencies, bitcoin fell 1% to $116,939, holding below a record $123,153 reached last week.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Reactions to President Trump's demand that the Commanders change their name
Trump calls for Washington and Cleveland to change their names back to the Redskins and Indians. 97% of you agreed both teams should do this in a recent poll I ran on here. The discussion about the Washington Commanders' name just won't seem to go away. New ownership, led by managing partner Josh Harris, has already come out and said the name will not change. Even if Harris wanted to change the name back to the Redskins, the team he grew up idolizing, he understands it's simply not possible. President Donald Trump has other ideas. Multiple times since returning to the Oval Office, Trump has been questioned about the Commanders. He has said that he wouldn't have changed the name. The team changed its name initially in July 2020 from Redskins to the "Football Team," as corporate sponsors threatened to pull their support. In 2022, the "Football Team" became the Commanders. While the name and uniforms have been a divisive issue for longtime fans, the team had its best season in 33 years in 2024, so while the name may not be overwhelmingly popular with all, winning made things a little better. Back to Trump. On Sunday morning, Trump posted the following message on social media. He wasn't done. There's more: Like with everything President Trump discusses, this blew up. Of course, there are many who believe this is a positive, while the usual detractors remain. In short, everything comes back to politics, regardless of your "side" or political allegiance. Will Trump get involved in the RFK talks? The DC City Council didn't help things by not voting on this before the July 15 deadline. Why? Because of politics. Anyhow, let's look at some of these wide-ranging reactions. I played in the NFL and was drafted by the Washington the 'Washington Football Team' or the 'Commanders.' @POTUS is right. It's time to bring the Redskins' name back. The thing about the Washington Redskins stuff is that Donald Trump is a pedophile, a rapist, and a human trafficker, and his party and his base don't give a shit. Rick Snider's Washington says Donald Trump is right - bring back the Washington Redskins. Gimme two minutes. 🤞 Deport Rosie?Imprison Obama?Demand the Redskins name come back?He's playing all the hits I'm not a Redskins fan, but would love to see them make their name great again!Same with the Cleveland Indians! President Trump says BRING THEM BACK- Washington Redskins and Cleveland Indians!Want them back? Share this post - Make the Indians Great Again! Look, if you want the Redskins name Stand ten toes on that. That's your right. But don't try, as a non-Native American, to use them to futher your cause. Some of you couldn't care less about Native Americans or their issues. The native community wants the name Redskins back. It's the white liberals who cry about it. I love you Mr president @realDonaldTrumpI'm sure you been reading my tweets.I take yall we were getting our Redskins means culture, passion and fans love native Americans and native Americans love RedskinsHTTR #ForOurName This is exactly what I'd expect from Trump, who had six companies go teams make more than double in local corporate sponsorships/partnerships than in sales of their licensed apparel. Going to back to Redskins is bad for business (like Trump was for many of his). President Trump is right, as usual — changing the Redskins and Indians names was NEVER about real progress. It ERASED history, ignored fans, and gave in to WOKE elites. These names honored tradition and identity. Bring them back! I fully support the President and his stance! Donald Trump threatens to block a new stadium deal for the Washington Commanders unless the team changes its name back to the this legal? I can't lie…I do miss the Redskins The reason Trump still wants to call them the Washington Redskins is because he genuinely believes that white people should always be able to be as freely racist as they want to be. He wouldn't like them being the Rednecks. Trump wants to bring back the RedskinsI'm down!! President Trump is calling for the restoration of the names of the Washington Redskins and the Cleveland 100% right! Just like with our military bases, this is a shameful legacy of peak woke and should be corrected immediately. 5 years ago: "No stadium unless you change the name FROM Redskins"Today: "No stadium unless you change the name TO Redskins"😐 Trump says he'll cancel the new Washington football stadium deal if they don't change back to the RedskinsWe finally have a GOP leader that uses his power instead of being a coward Trump wants Washington to change the name back to the Redskins 'immediately'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The British editor who revealed Trump's Epstein letter
On Tuesday afternoon, as her newspaper prepared to publish details of a bawdy birthday card Donald Trump allegedly wrote to Jeffrey Epstein, Emma Tucker's phone rang. It was the US president, dialling in from Air Force One to have a word with the British editor of the Wall Street Journal. Earlier that day Mr Trump had been announcing an AI investment package in Pittsburgh. Now he was irate, demanding the 'fake' story was pulled and threatening to sue if Ms Tucker did not yield. His efforts were in vain. On Thursday night, the newspaper published details of a message said to be signed off with a drawing of a nude woman. Mr Trump had used his signature to represent pubic hair, it is alleged. The report was certainly salacious; it sparked further questions about Mr Trump's relationship with the paedophile financier. It helped fan the flames of arguably the biggest crisis of Mr Trump's presidency so far, the growing demand for his administration to release the full so-called Epstein files. But it also brought Mr Trump into open conflict with one of the world's most powerful media moguls, the Wall Street Journal owner Rupert Murdoch. The call between Ms Tucker and Mr Trump was tense, The Telegraph understands. After the story was published, Mr Trump fired off a lengthy denial on Truth Social, his own media platform. The 79-year-old accused Ms Tucker of running a 'false, malicious, and defamatory story' and filed a $10bn lawsuit against the WSJ, naming Mr Murdoch and the reporters who wrote the story as defendants. Holding her nerve has earned Ms Tucker the wrath of the US president and many of his loyal followers. But the Epstein story is the type of reporting Ms Tucker made a name for on Fleet Street – and now the US – those close to her say. For months, Mr Trump has been angered by the WSJ's coverage of his policies as the newspaper has continued to refuse to shy away from criticising his policies. While NewsCorp's media outlets, the New York Post and Fox News, often portray the president in a positive light, the WSJ has not attempted to curry favour with the White House. Media executives such as Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos have appeared to try and appease the US president, but the WSJ has stood out for critical pieces, at times skewering his policies. In May, when a reporter from the newspaper attempted to ask Mr Trump a question on Air Force One, he denounced the paper as 'rotten' and as having 'truly gone to hell'. However, the WSJ has maintained its influence. Last month, JD Vance, the vice-president, travelled to Mr Murdoch's Montana ranch to speak to the media mogul, his son Lachlan and other Fox News executives. Ms Tucker, 58, was selected by Mr Murdoch as the newspaper's first female editor-in-chief, replacing Matt Murray in February 2023 in a bid to shake up the publication. Born in London in 1966, she grew up in Lewes, Sussex, before going to study Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at University College, Oxford, where she edited the university magazine Isis. After joining the graduate trainee programme at the Financial Times, where she met her close friend Rachel Johnson, Boris Johnson's sister, she went on to work in the newspaper's Berlin and Brussels bureaus. In 2020, she became the first female editor of The Sunday Times in more than a century. Ex-colleagues describe her as tenacious. Asked about the run-in with Mr Trump, John Witherow, the former editor of The Times, told The Telegraph of his former deputy: 'I know she's tough.' Within weeks of arriving at the WSJ, Ms Tucker demonstrated her determination to back her reporters in the campaign to release WSJ journalist Evan Gershkovich, who had been detained in Russia. But while she received praise for her campaign for Mr Gershkovich's release, her arrival was not welcomed by everyone. Many staff were abhorred by job cuts, restructuring and a push to digital-first to attempt to bring an edginess back to the publication. Last year, more than 100 journalists staged a protest against the changes, covering the walls of her office in Post-it notes with comments such as 'the cuts are killing morale'. Ms Tucker told Vanity Fair that while the cuts 'may look callous, it's so that we get it right, so I don't have to do it over again.' She has also come under fire for coverage from both sides of the political aisle. The WSJ was the first newspaper to report on Joe Biden's mental fitness, journalism that was denounced by some left-leaning publications at the time. She also clashed with Mr Murdoch, with reports suggesting he was 'livid' with her after the WSJ described a newsletter launched by a former CNN reporter as a 'must-read'. Ms Tucker has also been outspoken about standing up to the Trump administration. Responding to claims by the CEO of Elon Musk's X that her newspaper had run a fake news story about the platform, she said: 'Many of the stories we publish do upset political leaders or CEOs, but we can't, you know, we have to be thinking about the validity of the story.' Ms Tucker will now likely face Mr Trump in court in some form as her paper defends the $10bn lawsuit. Whether full details of the alleged birthday card will come to light is not yet clear. Unlike the two reporters who brought her the story, and Mr Murdoch she is not named in Mr Trump's legal action. Since parts of the letter were published on Thursday, the Trump administration has already promised to release more transcripts from the investigations into Epstein. But the scandal shows little sign of going away. The release of the grand jury documents may fall short of what many of Mr Trump's supporters have sought. On Sunday, one of Epstein's former attorneys called on the US Justice Department to release additional investigative records from its sex-trafficking investigation, and urged the government to grant Ghislaine Maxwell – Epstein's former girlfriend and former British socialite – immunity so that she can testify about his crimes. In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Alan Dershowitz said the grand jury transcripts that Attorney General Pam Bondi on Friday asked a federal judge to unseal would not contain the types of information being sought by Mr Trump's supporters, such as the names of Epstein's clientele. 'I think the judge should release it, but they are not in the grand jury transcripts,' Dershowitz said on the programme. 'I've seen some of these materials. For example, there is an FBI report of interviews with alleged victims in which at least one of the victims names very important people,' he said, adding that those names have been redacted.
