Epstein's ghost is haunting Trump, and America's enemies could summon more
Trump has survived a felony conviction and was twice impeached and acquitted. He was found liable by a judge of sexual assault, owes potentially millions of dollars in libel suits for his actions and avoided possible prosecution and considerable jail time for gross mishandling of highly classified material.
None of these mishaps prevented Trump from being reelected as America's 47th president. Yet, despite this graphic history, Trump is now threatened by the ghost of a convicted sexual predator. How can this be?
As Epstein's attorney Alan Dershowitz wrote in the Wall Street Journal on July 16, Trump was free and clear of any and all entanglements with his client. And it was reported that Trump had once barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago.
Extreme elements of his MAGA constituency have turned against Trump. For what seem to be irrational reasons, they have accused the president of a cover-up and lying about not providing full transparency on the Epstein saga and releasing the so-called 'client's list' that Dershowitz asserted was nonexistent.
Conspiracy theories sprouted like mushrooms: for example, that Trump was obviously hiding his relationship with Epstein or protecting others in his administration and circle of friends from the Epstein stain. Shrill calls reverberated through Washington's political gasosphere for Attorney General Pam Bondi to resign over this failure to release the Epstein files.
Having bragged that he could shoot someone dead on Park Avenue and be absolved, it is incredible that Trump could be attacked by his MAGA allies on such an extraordinarily trivial matter, given the magnitude of obstacles he has previously faced and overcome.
Worse, so far, the explanations of why part of his base is incensed make little sense. That Trump has somehow now become part of the 'deep state' that he vowed to eliminate is nonsensical.
Promising to release all 'any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony' on Epstein (and, for that matter, JFK's assassination) and not following through has been part of Trump's lifelong pattern of deception and disinformation, if not outright lying.
It is quite possible — again, quoting Dershowitz — that there simply was no there there regarding the Epstein files, and that Trump simply exaggerated or distorted that possibility to play to his base.
Then he got caught. And now Trump is lashing out against this base.
Whether this is a minor tempest and will dissipate soon or has tsunami-like consequences remains to be seen. Why has this brouhaha over Epstein been so explosive? Is this the state of American politics today when a leader's credibility among his followers fractures over literally nothing, as occasionally happens in marriages?
Has Trump violated some mythical bond or unspoken oath with this base? Or is the MAGA movement's instability or irrationality causing such a backlash?
The timing is not helpful to Trump. In the midst of what could be a major global tariff war, the conflict in Gaza still blazing and Vladimir Putin given 50 days to put up or shut up on a cease-fire and peace negotiation in Ukraine, how do these outside players react?
Do all or many shake their heads believing that this is simply the vulgarity of U.S. politics and ignore this display? Or do others, probably in Beijing and Moscow, see this as a fatal weakness in American culture and society to be exploited?
Despite Trump's refusal to believe Russia interfered on his behalf in the 2016 election, make no mistake: Chinese and Russian, as well as other intelligence services, are exploring how these flaws and cracks in American politics can be exploited.
For example, assuming that ex-KGB officer Putin wanted to alter the 2016 election, imagine how he could have exploited the so-called Steele dossier that alleged Trump's sexual misconduct in Moscow. The internet would have been filled with torrid stories and deep fake shots of Trump in compromising positions.
With AI and other technical means, identifying seemingly minor issues that could have otherwise profound political consequences would not be difficult for an adversary or for anyone wishing to meddle in politics. This happened during Brexit.
With social media as a force multiplier, it is easy to see how political fractures could be generated. As a thought experiment, suppose the resurrection of Epstein's ghost originated in a certain building in the Kremlin or inside Beijing's Forbidden City.
That, I am sure, did not happen. But it could.
Harlan Ullman, Ph.D., is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior advisor at Washington, D.C.'s Atlantic Council, the chairman of two private companies and the principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He and David Richards are authors of a forthcoming book on preventing strategic catastrophe.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
4 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Doing its best to dismantle the Constitution': Biden slams Trump administration
Former President Joe Biden on Thursday accused President Donald Trump and his administration of trying to "dismantle the constitution." At the National Bar Association's 100th Annual Awards Gala, Biden said the Trump White House "is doing its best" to go after the nation's core principles and that "they've been doing it all too often with the help of a Congress that's just sitting on the sidelines and enabled by the highest court in the nation." The speech echoed the "Soul of the Nation" theme in Biden's 2020 and 2024 presidential campaigns. "In the life of our nation there are moments so stark that they divide all that came before from everything that follows. Moments that force us to confront hard truths about ourselves, our institutions and democracy itself," Biden said in his July 31 speech. "We are, in my view, at such a moment in American history." The former president also swiped at law firms that have made deals with the Trump administration, saying they were "bending to bullies." Biden, who accepted the association's C. Francis Stradford Award, called on lawyers in the room to defend the rule of law. "It means take the client that can't write the big check but needs protecting of basic fundamental rights. It means sign on to that brief that may draw the ire of people in power, but you know its the right thing to do," Biden said. Biden, Obama contrast on Trump responses Biden's remarks came just over a week after former President Barack Obama issued a statement in response to Trump's accusations of treason and the posting of an AI generated video of the 44th President being arrested. The statement, attributed to a spokesperson, called Trump's comments a "ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction" from the ongoing controversy surrounding the Trump administration's handling of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's criminal files. Trump has had his own share of criticism for Biden, both recent and in the past. In April, Trump blamed his predecessor for a poor economy, saying "This is Biden's Stock Market, not Trump's," adding that "we have to get rid of the Biden 'Overhang.'' He's also ordered an investigation of Biden's alleged "cognitive decline." At a 2022 rally in Arizona, Trump said "Biden has utterly humiliated our nation." In the rare post-presidency public appearance Thursday evening, Biden said that "the hard truth" of the Trump administration was that it aimed "to erase fairness, equality, to erase justice itself." Biden's remarks echoed his first post-presidency speech in April, when he accused Trump of "taking a hatchet" to the Social Security Administration.
Boston Globe
4 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump sharpens sanctions threat on Russia, while admitting it may not work
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Administration officials gave no reasons to believe the latest engagement with Russia would be any more useful. And Trump himself, usually a true believer in the power of economic sanctions to alter the decisions of foreign leaders, admitted for the second time this week that Putin appears to be immune. Advertisement 'I don't know that sanctions bother him,' he said Thursday. Nonetheless, Trump has now executed a 180-degree turn on Russia, at least in tone, in roughly 180 days. He came to office questioning whether Russia was truly the invader of Ukraine, and hinting that the Ukrainians were responsible for their own troubles. His famous blowup with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office in February led him to briefly cut off aid to the Ukrainian military. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared that Ukraine would never join NATO -- a reversal of stated American policy -- and Vice President JD Vance spoke out against arming the Ukrainians. Russia was exempted from most tariffs. Advertisement That has been followed by a series of apparent reversals, with no public acknowledgment from Trump that he is changing strategy. He no longer relies on what he has framed as a deep past relationship with Putin in an effort to win him over. In fact, he has been quite open about his frustration that conversations about ceasefires are usually followed by Russian escalation, often in the pace of drone and missile attacks. 'I think what bothers the president the most is he has these great phone calls where everyone sort of claims yeah, we'd like to see this end, if we could find a way forward,' Rubio said in his Fox interview, 'and then he turns on the news and another city has been bombed, including those far from the front lines.' 'So at some point,' Rubio told his interviewer, Brian Kilmeade of Fox News Radio, 'he's got to make a decision here about what -- how much to continue to engage in an effort to do ceasefires if one of the two sides is not interested.' On Monday, Trump said he would give Russia about 10 to 12 days to end the war before imposing 'sanctions and maybe tariffs, secondary tariffs,' a reference to sanctions on countries that trade with Russia. But there is reason to question how far Trump will push for full secondary sanctions, which would involve threatening the three countries buying much of Russia's oil and gas: China, India and Turkey. All are key to other American interests, and Trump is likely to need future favors and cooperation from them. And it is hard to imagine that China's president, Xi Jinping, would abandon Putin, his most critical partner in challenging American power. Advertisement Rubio took up the hard choices in his conversation with Kilmeade, arguing that 'the president has a lot of options.' He noted that if the United States could get at Russia's oil sales, it 'is a huge part of their revenue.' For their part, Russian officials who have long been presumed to speak with Putin's blessing have dismissed Trump's threats, portraying him in Russian media as erratic and unpredictable. 'Fifty days, it used to be 24 hours, it used to be 100 days,' Sergey Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, said a few weeks ago, as Trump kept moving the deadlines. 'We've been through all this.' Democrats say Trump has other options: He could provide direct military aid to Ukraine, as Congress did during the Biden administration. Instead, he has an elaborate plan to sell arms and related technologies to Europe, which will then donate them to Ukraine. Trump once suggested he could end the war in 24 hours simply by negotiating with Putin, man to man. But now, as Trump's frustration over the conflict grows, his threats have raised questions about how much leverage the United States has with Russia -- and whether Trump is willing to use it. This article originally appeared in Advertisement
Hamilton Spectator
4 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Trump pushed tariffs on Canada to 35 per cent, but a CUSMA carveout creates a shield
WASHINGTON - U.S. President Donald Trump has increased tariffs on Canada to a staggering 35 per cent but a critical carveout is likely to shield most goods from the devastating duties. The White House has said the tariffs won't be applied to goods that are compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade, also known as CUSMA. Here's what that means for Canadian companies: What is CUSMA compliance? CUSMA was negotiated during the first Trump administration to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement. Companies can claim preferential treatment under CUSMA if they meet its rules of origin. While it is different depending on the product, generally it requires a specific amount of the goods be made of products or with labour originating from Canada, Mexico or the United States. About 80 to 90 per cent of Canadian goods might be able to comply with CUSMA's rules of origin, said Michael Dobner, the national leader of economics and policy practice at PricewaterhouseCoopers Canada. Not all exporters have filed the necessary paperwork to avoid the duties. There's been an increase in businesses claiming preferential treatment under CUSMA but it's not clear exactly how much of Canadian exports are currently compliant. Are any industries more at risk? Dobner said there's no specific industry that he expects to be hit the hardest. Certain companies may not be able to source input materials from North America to make their product. That means they would not be able to apply for preferential treatment under CUSMA and will face the 35 per cent tariff. But Dobner said 'it's the minority of the exports of Canada to the U.S.' What's the impact on small and medium-sized businesses? Small and medium-sized businesses may have not applied for CUSMA preferential status before Trump's tariffs because the process can be burdensome for enterprises of that size. Some small and medium-sized businesses might not meet CUSMA rules of origin requirements and don't have the financial flexibility to change their inputs to North American products. Dan Kelly, president and CEO of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said many of these businesses were absorbing some or all of the costs associated with Trump's tariffs under the assumption that there would a resolution coming. Kelly said some small and medium-sized businesses facing the 35 per cent tariff may have to stop selling into the United States. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 1, 2025.
