logo
Trump's relationship with Epstein is indisputably scandalous

Trump's relationship with Epstein is indisputably scandalous

Vox18-07-2025
is a senior correspondent at Vox. He covers a wide range of political and policy issues with a special focus on questions that internally divide the American left and right. Before coming to Vox in 2024, he wrote a column on politics and economics for New York Magazine.
A group of young protesters holds pictures of Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump outside federal court in New York City on July 8, 2019. Luiz C. Ribeiro/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Democrats want you to know that President Donald Trump definitely might be protecting a cabal of child abusers. Or so the party's recent messaging suggests.
For years, extremely online conservatives have been agitating for the release of the 'Epstein Files' — a hypothetical trove of confidential documents that reveal the powerful co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein, the financier and accused sex trafficker who died in prison in 2019. When Fox News asked Trump last year whether he would release these files upon winning reelection, the Republican said, 'I guess I would.'
Upon taking office, the Trump administration hyped the imminent disclosure of these documents. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested in February that a list of famous people who had abused Epstein's trafficked girls was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' Around the same time, Bondi and Trump's FBI released what it billed as the 'first phase of declassified Epstein files.' But these proved to be binders comprised largely of already public information.
Then, earlier this month, the Justice Department declared that Epstein did not actually maintain a 'client list,' that he had died by suicide (contrary to the popular theory that he'd been murdered to prevent the exposure of his clients), and that no further files on his case would be made public. This incensed much of the online right. And Democrats have decided to echo its outrage.
This story was first featured in The Rebuild.
Sign up here for more stories on the lessons liberals should take away from their election defeat — and a closer look at where they should go next. From senior correspondent Eric Levitz.
The party's decision to dedicate so much energy to promoting this controversy might seem dubious. For one thing, Democrats' ostensible outrage over the alleged suppression of the Epstein Files is obviously hypocritical. After all, he died six years ago. A Democratic administration was in power from January 2021 through January 20 of this year. If there are secret federal documents about this case that incriminate public figures, then Joe Biden had them at his disposal.
Thus, by affirming the notion that incriminating 'Epstein Files' exist, Democrats risk perpetuating the idea that both parties are toxically corrupt — a form of cynicism that Trump has long exploited to excuse his shameless graft and malfeasance.
Separately, Democrats have already spent much of the past decade trying to tar Trump's image by spotlighting his scandals. Yet the minority of Americans who are open to supporting Trump — but not dead set on doing so — haven't evinced much concern for his character. Generally, messaging that emphasizes how Trump's policies would materially hurt ordinary Americans has tested better than attacks on the demagogue's shady dealings or authoritarianism. Whatever one may say about the White House's handling of the Epstein case, it does not seem likely to increase Americans' cost of living. By focusing on Epstein, Democrats are thus arguably defraying attention from Trump's true vulnerabilities — such as the tariffs that are raising prices for consumers or Medicaid cuts that will take health insurance from lower-income people.
But these worries are misguided. The Democrats' decision to lean into the Epstein controversy is a political no-brainer for several reasons.
Trump's relationship with Epstein – and handling of his case – is genuinely eyebrow raising
To a degree, the furor over Epstein is rooted in beliefs that are unproven, if not outright false. For instance, there is no public evidence that he kept a labeled list of fellow sexual abusers, much less that such a document is in the government's possession.
But the Trump administration has genuine liabilities on this subject, which Democratic advocacy can direct public attention toward.
First, the incontrovertible facts about Trump's relationship with Epstein are unflattering and eyebrow raising, even though they are not incriminating.
In the 1990s, Trump and Epstein were repeatedly photographed and video taped beside each other at social events. This by itself isn't especially damning. There's no reason to presume that everyone who ever associated with Epstein participated in his sex crimes. Criminals do not generally socialize exclusively with their co-conspirators.
But in 2017, Epstein told the journalist Michael Wolff that he had been Trump's 'closest friend for 10 years.' And in 2002, Trump told New York magazine, 'I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.'
What's more, on Thursday night, the Wall Street Journal published the text of a letter that Trump sent to Epstein to celebrate the latter's 50th birthday. In that missive, Trump wrote his signature below the following lines of imaginary dialogue, which were typewritten:
'Voice Over: There must be more to life than having everything,' the note began.
Donald: Yes, there is, but I won't tell you what it is.
Jeffrey: Nor will I, since I also know what it is.
Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey.
Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it.
Donald: Enigmas never age, have you noticed that?
Jeffrey: As a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you.
Trump: A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be anothedr wonderful secret.
It's as though the administration cannot anticipate the most obvious consequences of its own actions, or think a single step ahead.
It's possible that Trump did not realize quite how young Epstein's sexual targets were. And it's also conceivable that the playful references to 'age' and a 'secret' in Trump's letter reference something innocuous. Yet Trump is more liable to be tainted by these remarks and associations than the average politician, given that the president once boasted about nonconseusally grabbing women's genitals and was found civilly liable for sexual abuse.
Making matters worse for him, his own claims about the Epstein controversy are wildly contradictory. In recent days, Trump has claimed that the government does possess secret files with explosive claims about Epstein, but that these documents were forged by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, ex-CIA Director John Brennan, and 'the Losers and Criminals of the Biden administration.'
He has also insisted that this whole controversy is dull and deserves no public attention, telling reporters, 'I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. It's sordid, but it's boring.'
As The Atlantic's Jonathan Chait notes, these two claims are a bit hard to square. On the one hand, Trump suggests that the FBI, CIA, State Department, and the Obama and Biden administrations all conspired to fabricate defamatory documents about an alleged child sex abuse conspiracy. On the other hand, he says that this is a really boring story that shouldn't interest anybody. But an elaborate conspiracy involving the highest levels of the US government — and seemingly aimed at politically damaging Trump — seems like something that would quite naturally interest Americans in general, and Trump supporters in particular.
What's more, even if we put Trump's conspiracizing to one side, his claim that he doesn't understand why the Epstein case interests people still seems disingenuous. After all Trump, accused former President Bill Clinton of visiting 'the famous island with Jeffrey Epstein' in 2015, and spread allegations that Clinton was behind Epstein's death four years later.
Trump subsequently demanded 'a full investigation' into Epstein's death and crimes, telling reporters, 'You have to ask: Did Bill Clinton go to the island? That's the question. If you find that out, you're going to know a lot.'
It seems clear then that Trump knows perfectly well why the Epstein case interests people. The fact that he now feels compelled to claim otherwise, while begging his supporters to stop talking about the controversy, seems rather odd — and also, like an indication that Democrats would be wise to keep attention focused on this matter.
Meanwhile, it is clear that Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel deceived the public about the Epstein case — either when they suggested that the government had been suppressing documents about his co-conspirators, or when they later insisted that such documents did not exist.
In 2023, Patel suggested that the Biden administration possessed Epstein's 'black book,' and insinuated that this document was not merely a catalog of the financier's contacts, but rather, a list explicitly identifying various famous people as 'pedophiles.' As noted above, Bondi told Fox News that an Epstein client list was sitting on her desk. Now, Patel and Bondi maintain that no such lists exist.
This leaves two possibilities: Either America's two top law enforcement officers misled the public about the Epstein case in the past, or they are doing so today. Put more pointedly, Patel and Bondi either cynically promoted conspiracy theories about a Biden administration coverup, despite knowing they lacked evidence for their smears, or they suddenly decided to perpetrate such a coverup themselves. Neither interpretation recommends them for high office.
And both readings of their actions make the Trump White House look grossly incompetent. If the administration knew that it had no compelling information about Epstein to unveil — or else, that it possessed explosive information that it didn't wish to make public — why did Bondi spend months hyping the release of the Epstein documents? It's as though the administration cannot anticipate the most obvious consequences of its own actions, or think a single step ahead (a suspicion also raised by Trump's trade strategy).
Cuts to Medicaid provider taxes are never going to get more clicks than conspiracy theories about elite child sex abuse rings
If the Democratic Party had the power to dictate which topics would trend on social media, then they would be well-advised to pick Trump's Medicaid cuts or tariffs. But they do not have such power. Every Democratic official in the country could spend all day every day talking about Trump's defunding of rural hospitals — posts and podcasts about Medicaid provider taxes still wouldn't outperform content about whether Epstein was a CIA asset. Millions of Americans may vote once every four years on the basis of mundane economic policy concerns. But they are not typically going to entertain themselves by viewing TikToks about the 'de minimis' exemption on a daily basis.
Democrats can and should foreground their party's strongest policy arguments in paid media. With a TV or YouTube ad, you can force the public to think about the subject of your choice. But the range of topics that you can get people to post about for free is much narrower. And of all the stories that could plausibly drive weeks of public conversation, Trump purportedly suppressing information about Epstein — to the chagrin of his own allies — seems like one of the most favorable for Democrats.
There's a major difference between this scandal and all Trump's prior ones
Generally speaking, when you have an opportunity to increase the salience of an issue that divides your opposition, it's wise to do so.
But Trump's base was behind him in all of those instances. Today, by contrast, major right-wing influencers are validating the Democratic Party's narrative that a Republican White House is hiding something. And Trump's attempts to shut down discussion of the Epstein case have gotten him 'ratioed' on his own social media platform.
Generally speaking, when you have an opportunity to increase the salience of an issue that divides your opposition, it's wise to do so.
This is especially true when that issue also pits your adversary against majority opinion. And in trying to persuade the broad electorate that the Trump administration is mishandling the Epstein case — possibly, for nefarious reasons — Democrats are pushing on an open door. A YouGov/Economist poll released this week found that nearly 80 percent of Americans want the government to 'release all the documents it has about the Jeffrey Epstein case,' while more than two-thirds — including half of Republicans — say that the government is 'covering up evidence it has about Epstein.'
Internal Democratic polling tells a similar story. A recent survey from Blue Rose Research found that 70 percent of the public — including 61 percent of Trump voters — believes that law enforcement is 'withholding information about powerful people connected to Epstein.' And a majority of voters agreed with the statement, 'authorities are keeping secret' a list of Epstein's clients to 'protect powerful people like Donald Trump.'
There's a broader narrative here about Trump betraying his campaign promises, in service of the powerful
Finally, it isn't that hard to weave the Epstein controversy into a broader story that touches on voters' material concerns. And Democrats are already doing this.
In the party's telling, Trump's refusal to release documents related to the case reflects a core truth about his presidency: his fundamental commitment is to protecting the powerful, even if doing so requires breaking campaign promises. Hence, Trump's willingness to slash Medicaid — after promising for years that he wouldn't — so as to finance tax cuts for the rich.
As Pat Dennis, president of the Democratic super PAC American Bridge, told Politico, the Epstein controversy is 'an interesting foot in the door to the overall case' that Trump 'doesn't have your back on Medicare, on health care, on veterans.'
Thus, the Epstein story is a clear boon for Democrats, who've been right to increase its salience.
Still, Democrats still have a lot of work to do
Even as the party savors Trump's squirming, however, it should not lose sight of its own lackluster political standing.
As CNN's Harry Enten noted this week, Democrats' poll numbers are far worse today than at this point in the 2006 and 2018 midterm election cycles — years when the party enjoyed large congressional gains amid a Republican presidency. In the generic congressional ballot, Democrats lead Republicans by just 2 points today, compared to seven points in 2006 and 2018.
All else equal, the Epstein scandal is a helpful development for Democrats. But its impact so far is miniscule. The online right's freakout notwithstanding, 90 percent of Republicans still approve of Trump in a recent Quinnipiac poll. By contrast, Democrats disapprove of their own congressional leadership by a 13-point margin.
Democrats can and should continue cultivating distrust in Trump. But to increase faith in their own party, they will need to do more than affirm voters' conspiratorial suspicions about a long dead sex offender.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Justice Department opens grand jury probe into investigation of Trump and Russia: Reports
Justice Department opens grand jury probe into investigation of Trump and Russia: Reports

USA Today

time27 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Justice Department opens grand jury probe into investigation of Trump and Russia: Reports

The Justice Department has escalated efforts to investigate those behind the years-old probe into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election by launching a grand jury probe. The Justice Department has opened a grand jury investigation into allegations that Obama administration officials broke the law when they investigated Russia's involvement in the 2016 presidential election, according to news reports. Attorney General Pam Bondi signed an order Aug. 4 directing a federal prosecutor to present evidence to the grand jury, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal reported, citing sources familiar with the investigation. The Justice Department declined to comment. The move marks a major escalation of the Trump administration's efforts to investigate the investigators behind the years-old probe. Robert Mueller, who ultimately took over the probe as special counsel, concluded that the Russian government interfered to help then-presidential candidate Donald Trump defeat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, but that there was not evidence anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. The new criminal probe follows allegations National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbardmade at a July 23 press briefing that the Obama administration pushed a 'contrived narrative' that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to benefit Trump. That same day, the Justice Department announced it was creating a "Strike Force" to assess evidence highlighted by Gabbard and "investigate potential next legal steps." When Trump was asked on July 22 about his Justice Department's conduct when it comes to investigating convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Trump pointed to allegations from Gabbard, saying she caught Obama "absolutely cold" and Obama had committed treason. Obama responded that Trump's remarks were a "weak attempt at distraction." Contributing: Sudiksha Kochi, Kinsey Crowley - USA TODAY

President Trump accuses prominent banks of political discrimination
President Trump accuses prominent banks of political discrimination

USA Today

time27 minutes ago

  • USA Today

President Trump accuses prominent banks of political discrimination

Trump is said to be weighing an executive order that could lead to fines or disciplinary action against lenders accused of political discrimination. WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump accused prominent banks of discriminating against him and his supporters as he weighs an executive order that would urge regulators to go after lenders accused of political bias. Trump alleged in a CNBC interview that JPMorgan Chase dropped him as a personal banking customer without explanation and Bank of America also would not take him on as a client. 'The banks discriminated against me very badly, and I was very good to the banks,' Trump said. More: Trump considers four finalists for new Fed chair, rules out Scott Bessent Trump said he had hundreds of millions of dollars in his accounts when JPMorgan Chase notified him they were cutting him loose. The bank swiftly rejected the allegations. In a statement, JPMorgan Chase said it does not close accounts for political reasons, and it agrees with Trump that regulatory changes are needed and it hopes to work with the White House on the order. Bank of America declined to comment. But the company said in January that political beliefs "are not a factor in account closure decisions.' In a statement about a potential executive order provided before Trump's CNBC interview, it said it had provided detailed proposals to Trump's administration and Congress that are intended to improve regulations. The president said financial institutions were discriminating against "many conservatives," including Trump supporters whom he said he'd consulted on the topic. "I believe what they did is they went to the regulators," he said. "Banks are not afraid of anything but a regulator. Their regulators and their wives. They're more afraid of their wives than the regulators," he said. Trump also accused the Biden administration, without evidence, of directing banks and their regulators to destroy him. The president made the accusations in response to a question about a report in the Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 5 that a draft copy of the order directs bank regulators to investigate potential violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act by financial institutions. The news outlet said the order threatens to fine or discipline lenders accused of political discrimination. It also calls for regulators to refer alleged violations to the Department of Justice. It's unclear when the president plans to sign the executive order. The White House declined to provide details about what is under discussion or the content of the expected executive action.

Trump knocks Taylor Swift in post supporting Sydney Sweeney, American Eagle jeans ad
Trump knocks Taylor Swift in post supporting Sydney Sweeney, American Eagle jeans ad

USA Today

time27 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump knocks Taylor Swift in post supporting Sydney Sweeney, American Eagle jeans ad

President Donald Trump revived his criticism of one of the world's biggest pop stars: Taylor Swift. Trump posted on Truth Social on Aug. 4 in support of Sydney Sweeney, who has been at the center of a debate around an American Eagle ad campaign she appears in. The ad features Sweeney in all denim, and plays on words implying she has good "jeans" and "genes," which some have argued has an undertone of eugenics. During the debate around the ads, reports surfaced that Sweeney is a registered Republican in Florida, and Trump quickly took her side when talking to reporters on Aug. 3, saying "Oh, now I love her ad ... If Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic." In the subsequent winding post about the American Eagle ad, a Jaguar ad and the Bud Light boycott, he took aim at Swift. "Just look at Woke singer Taylor Swift," the post read. "Ever since I alerted the world as to what she was by saying on TRUTH that I can't stand her (HATE!). She was booed out of the Super Bowl and became, NO LONGER HOT. The tide has seriously turned — Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be." USA TODAY reached out to a representative for Swift. More: American Eagle stock rises after Trump praises Sydney Sweeney ad amid backlash Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris in the 2024 election Swift endorsed the Democratic nominee after the presidential debate between former Vice President Kamala Harris and Trump. Harris had a historically short campaign after stepping in for former President Joe Biden following his disastrous debate with Trump earlier in the summer. "(Harris) fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them," Swift said in a post, which took a subtle jab at JD Vance's viral comments about "childless cat ladies." "I think she is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos." Days later, Trump took to Truth Social to declare "I hate Taylor Swift," though his campaign leaned into the clash by selling T-shirts with a similar design to the Taylor Swift Eras Tour merchandise, only with Trump's face on it. Trump also claimed in May that "she's no longer HOT" since he said he hated her. Trump has threatened legal action on Harris' celebrity endorsements Trump has said he wants a major investigation into celebrity endorsements of former Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential election. On May 19, Trump questioned whether Harris paid Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé and Oprah, a few of the big names who stumped for Harris in her presidential campaign. "This was a very expensive and desperate effort to artificially build up her sparse crowds," Trump said on Truth Social. "IT'S NOT LEGAL! For these unpatriotic 'entertainers,' this was just a CORRUPT & UNLAWFUL way to capitalize on a broken system." He did not mention Swift, but left accusations open-ended in a separate post by saying "perhaps many others." But the claims come without evidence, as the Federal Election Commission does not explicitly ban paid endorsements. Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store