Trump-Epstein saga: The Short Guide
The long-simmering Epstein scandal is becoming more explosive than ever. Here's a summation for busy people who just need to know the gist.
Convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died in 2019, but the scandal he spawned seems like it might live forever. Why?
As a presidential candidate in 2024, Donald Trump said that if elected, he’d release all the files the federal government has on Epstein, presumably revealing everything there is to know. But after he took office in January, Trump blocked the release of those files and said the whole thing is a hoax.
Now, Trump has suddenly changed his mind and blessed the new Congressional measure requiring the Justice Dept. to release the so-called Epstein files. This comes after some of the documentation dribbled out, via Congress. Those selective tidbits undercut Trump’s claim that he scarcely knew Epstein. They also suggest Trump might be complicit in … something.
Here’s your Short Guide to the whole lurid affair:
¶ There’s never been a full accounting of everybody who may have participated in Epstein’s criminal sexual abuse of underage teenage girls. Epstein knew many famous and powerful people and it’s possible some of them committed criminal acts that victimized the underage girls, just as Epstein did.
¶ Despite many denials by Trump, newly released emails and other evidence make it clear that Trump knew Epstein and was friendly with him for years. Trump once said Epstein liked women “on the younger side,” which suggests Trump may have known Epstein was sexually abusing underage teenagers and committing crimes.
¶ The most explosive question is whether Trump himself ever abused any of the underage girls Epstein seems to have provided as sexual playthings for some of his rich friends. There’s no clear evidence that Trump did. But one newly released Epstein email from 2011 says Trump “spent hours” with Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, at some point in the past when Giuffre would have been a minor. Was Trump alone with her? The email doesn’t say. Was there any kind of sexual act? Also doesn’t say.
¶ Giuffre committed suicide in April, at the age of 41. She wrote a memoir, published posthumously, and spoke publicly about Epstein, starting in 2011. The most salacious thing she ever said about Trump is this: “He didn’t partake in any sex with any of us but he flirted with me.”
¶ There’s another murky case involving a woman using the pseudonym Katie Johnson who filed a federal lawsuit in 2016 claiming that Trump and Epstein both raped her in 1994 at Epstein’s Manhattan home, when she was 13. She dropped that suit shortly after she filed it in 2016, without explanation, after Trump unexpectedly won the presidential election.
¶ If Trump has nothing to hide, as he claims, why is he so flustered by the Epstein files? That’s what nobody understands. In that same 2011 email, Epstein wrote that the “dog that hasn’t barked is trump.” That was five years before Trump was first elected president. What did Epstein mean?
¶ Even with the new Congressional mandate, there are still major limits on what the Justice Dept. can release. And Attorney General Pan Bondi has wiggle room. DOJ is supposed to furnish the Epstein documents by December 19. But that will hardly be a complete dump. It’s illegal to release protected material such as grand jury information, for instance. DOJ has to protect details about victims and people investigated but never prosecuted. Bondi can also cite ongoing federal investigations as a reason to withhold information. There will be tons of redactions that could raise suspicions even more.
¶ If you’re wondering if all of this new disclosure stuff is political theater—good instinct. Trump probably flipped from no to yes on the Epstein disclosure because he knew Congress was going to vote for it anyway, and he didn’t want to be on the losing side. The vote in Congress was unanimous (minus one) because nobody wants to vote for more secrecy on a toxic issue. But Trump’s Republican allies in Congress also know they can have it both ways, by voting for full disclosure knowing there are built-in limits on what DOJ can release.
¶ Is there a better way to handle this disgusting mess? Ben Wittes of Lawfare argues that the best approach would be for the House and/or Senate to conduct bipartisan investigations meant to establish a definitive account of the Epstein mess, including Trump’s involvement. That won’t happen with Republicans in control of both chambers. Motivations could change if Dems win either house in the next year’s midterms. Realistically, only a split Congress could produce a relatively unbiased assessment.
¶ To spell out the political subplot: Congressional Republicans voted to release the Epstein files because many of their constituents think there’s a huge coverup. It’s the first major breach between Trump and his fellow Republicans since Trump took office in January. Democrats are going along with full disclosure simply because it could damage Trump and it doesn’t matter any more if Bill Clinton or Larry Summers or other old Democrats who have been mentioned in the Epstein files take a hit.
¶ Will we ever know the full truth? Nope. Those limits on Justice Dept. disclosure mean there will always be some secret Epstein files, which is more than it takes to fuel the types of conspiracy theories the Epstein scandal has hatched.
¶ Bottom line for ordinary people: If you want to be outraged about Epstein forever, there will be nothing to stop you. But you’d be wise to stop yourself.
Acknowledgement: This Short Guide isn’t exactly short. But Epstein is a bedeviling topic and I aimed for a high meaning-to-word ratio. Feedback always welcome.