Completely foreseeable result of the Epstein files dump
[Hat tip: commenter “Mike Plaiss.”]
From an editorial in the WSJ:
The Justice Department’s release of the so-called Epstein files has gone pretty much as skeptics warned. The feds published another three million pages on Friday. Such investigatory materials are usually kept private to protect innocent victims and witnesses—a lesson that Congress will now relearn at their expense.
Though the Justice Department sought to redact sensitive information, Congress mandated disclosure in 30 days. The Journal reports that last week’s documents initially failed to black out the names of at least 43 victims of Jeffrey Epstein, “including many who haven’t shared their identities publicly or were minors when they were abused by the notorious sex offender.” Some of their addresses or email addresses were posted.
The files also included “dozens of unredacted nude images,” showing the faces and bodies of “young women or possibly teenagers,” the New York Times said. The Justice Department scrambled to fix the oversights. “You’re talking about pieces of paper that stack from the ground to two Eiffel Towers,” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Fox News. “We knew that there would be mistakes.”
Meantime, heinous accusations are circulating against prominent people, without any evidence they’re true. Since Epstein died in 2019, prosecutors have had time to chase real leads. The Epstein emails that show elites privately cozying up to a wealthy sex offender are embarrassing, but the government isn’t supposed to be in the business of posting scandalous raw evidence without a verifiable criminal case.
And yet this is what way too many people demanded. And now anyone who had dealings with Epstein is fodder for gossip and incorrect assumptions. Some are completely innocent. Some did smarmy and embarrassing but legal things. Casting the first stone is often so much fun, though, and good for clicks.
As Republican Representative Clay Higgins said when he voted to not release these files (apparently the only member of Congress to do so): the release “abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure” and “will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt.”
The only good result I can see is that it should shut down demands for more – although there probably are many people who, disappointed in the evidence of actual crimes, think there’s still a big coverup and more files exist that would really implicate the elites, the Jews, or whomever is their particular target du jour.
I don’t like any of this, and I’ve written as much many times before (a typical example of such posts of mine can be found here).
there probably are many people who, disappointed in the evidence of actual crimes, think there’s still a big coverup and more files exist that would really implicate the elites, the Jews, or whomever is their particular target du jour.
There’s no “probably” about it, that thing has already happened, and the supposed coverup already is being denounced.
The Epstein files long ago passed the Kennedy Assassination conspiracy threshold where no matter what anyone says or what evidence is produced it will never end.
As an aside I’ll note that what the two cases have in common is that the (presumed) perp died of violent unnatural causes. So perhaps just human nature to imagine conspiracy.
It seems to me the one thing that cannot, should not, be ignored, is that highly elite people sought out the favor, company, etc of a convicted child sex offender. As I stated in yesterday’s Open Thread, that is not “nothing” in my book.
Sharon W:
He was sentenced in 2008 under a plea deal. Many contacts (such as Trump, for example) were prior to that. In addition, although he was indeed a child sexual predator, the children were post- adolescent, which allowed some people to shrug it off more than if his his victims had been pre-adolescent. I’m not saying it was right to shrug it off. I’m just saying it probably led some people to rationalize continuing to have contact with him.
The emails that Matt Walsh cites are post 2008. The fact that I am a devout Catholic might explain my unwillingness to overlook these kinds of offenses, nor any truth associated with them. For instance, the Church still doesn’t admit that ephebophilia was/is the major issue–not pedophilia, and I believe I understand why that is the case. I won’t look the other way, nor buy-in to the gloss-over.
Both Left and Right were clamoring for full release of the docs.
Let us not forget that purportedly Republican congressman Thomas Massie lead the effort to force the release of all the documents.
On a distantly related point, fellow Kentucky politician Senator Mitch McConnell is reportedly hospitalized. I wish him a speedy recovery since Kentucky has a democrat governor who will surely nominate a Democrat to replace him.
Kentucky passed a bill (over Beshear’s veto) that would require him to choose from a list of three candidates presented to him by the Ky Senate to replace McConnell (or Paul, for that matter). It’s my understanding that an identical law passed in another state has already been ruled constitutional. The Democrats would of course have infinite money to challenge it but I don’t think they could do more than delay implementation.
There will be more Bill Gates out there. We don’t even know if the allegations made against him are true, and it will happen to others. British Govt is being rocked right now over allegations against the former British Ambassador to the US. Will it ensnare Starmer? That would make me happy
Note that Starmer is digging his own—and his indecent party’s—political grave without needing any help from Epstein, thank you very much.
That is, UNLESS, Starmer and Labour are sufficiently able to first subvert—as a pre-emptive operation—the British political system wit the abject assistance of the country’s legal and law-enforcement (including secret service and military) branches, with the minions of imported thugs providing essential physical support.
Would be interesting how Mad King
GeorgeCharles responds to this attempted obliteration of Britain. (I have a feeling he’d be on-board with it, though Prince William may, one hopes, we’ll be another story entirely. If so, it is with him tgat the country’s future lies….SHIREHOME:
The allegations against Gates are speculations by Epstein with absolutely no corroboration or evidence and no attempt at corroboration or evidence.
Trump warned against releasing all the files because of the harm it could do to innocent people. But the Left, particularly the TDS crowd, knew, just knew, that Trump’s objection meant that he was guilty of some egregious involvement in the Epstein sex crimes. They were sure they had Trump this time and so demanded the release of all the files. So now here they are, hoist with their own petard.
Agreed with what Sharon W said, and I would add it is damning that there were so many – esp Dems – that got onboard happily coordinating with the convicted sex offender and predator.
Prior to that conviction is another thing. Up until that point it was entirely believable Epstein was “just” some vaguely smarmy, rich douche limo liberal with lots of sleaze but no real villainy. That wasn’t the truth of course, but Horowitz, Trump, and most others would not have known. It is why I really did not care that much about people being on the files or knowing Epstein until the nature of his crimes became undeniable even by himself.
That’s why the “Trump was Epstein’s friend” (true) or “Best Friend” (baseless claim from Epstein himself, almost certainly self serving) not only struck me as hollow but even counterproductive for the left to attack, since once Trump did learn Epstein had been abusing girls including at least one Mar a Lago staff member he went on the jihad and helped both the Feds and the victims’ legal teams take Epstein down.
But the people that were trying to cozy up to the monster AFTER that can make no such excuses, have no such exoneration. I may be a Protestant of the much suffering Episcopalian flavor, but with respect to my Papist friend she is completely right on this. We don’t need to pretend those still trying to call up Epstein afterwards were all Grade A Child abusers themselves or involved in some intricate legal criminal network to conclude they are guilty of a grave moral crime.
But can’t we enjoy the Chomsky fallout a little bit?
___________________________________
Newly released files shed new light on Chomsky and Epstein relationship
Latest communications undermine Chomsky’s earlier claims that he primarily had financial dealings with Epstein
The close friendship that Noam Chomsky maintained with Jeffrey Epstein continued being detailed extensively among millions of investigative records pertaining to the late convicted sex offender recently released by the US justice department, including Chomsky “fantasizing about the Caribbean island”.
In Friday’s tranche of documents, which built upon earlier disclosures of their close social ties, there is no specific indication that the famed academic and linguist was referring to his friend’s private Caribbean island where children were sexually abused. But the personal familiarity between the two men in that exchange is palpable, as it is in numerous other emails between Chomsky and Epstein aimed at planning more mundane social gatherings.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/03/epstein-files-noam-chomsky
@Turtler:Prior to that conviction is another thing.
I wonder who at the time would have even known exactly what he had been convicted for. Of course Alan Dershowitz would have known since he was involved in negotiating the agreement. Epstein pled guilty to “soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution.” The line is not drawn at the age of 18 even in all US states, and it is not so in Canada or the United Kingdom to this day (in Canada it was 14 until 2008). If all a person knew was what he’d pled guilty to, and not specifically any details about the victims, I’m not sure how grave their culpability is for maintaining some kind of contact with him, though I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t want him in my house just knowing that he solicited prostitutes, much less one under 18.
I think there is much graver culpability in the state and Federal prosecutors who cut deals with him. They were in possession of all the facts. And while Epstein’s lawyers did have an obligation to zealously represent their client, they knew the details too and should not have had anything to do with him outside of representing him–and of course they always had the option not to represent him at all.
Meanwhile, the British Magistrate’s handling of the Pakistani rape gangs makes Jeffery Epstein look quite amateurish. The industrial scale, callous, mean gang rapes in England dwarf the entire Epstein oeuvre.
Given that the DoJ is dominated at the lower levels by Leftists, the release of nude photos and doxxing of victims should be seen as a feature, not a bug.
In other words, intentional.
The more people you know, the more people you know (at one degree of separation, or as it is sometimes said, “at one remove”)
I think it was Kevin Bacon who observed that everybody in the US knows everybody in the US at six degrees of separation.
Given the arithmetical result of exponents larger than, say, three, Epstein could have been connected to a crap ton of people, some of whom may not have been aware.
And every time he meets personally, one person, that’s how many more…?
So person once removed gets a note from Epstein, ‘My friend (name) said you might be interested in the whatchamacallit foundation. Let me know if I can help.”
If there’s a response, Epstein’s Rolodex jumps by how many?
And that means a bunch more from whom one or two might be interested in a visit….
Not to mention the guy who delivers the dry cleaning.
The problem with Epstein is we still lack a narrative that makes sense. That’s why I think the speculation and political titillation continues. If evidence is unexplainable, or the potential explanations are unsatisfying or don’t make sense, the natural human reaction is to assume there’s more to the story. With Epstein, maybe there is. The evidence still doesn’t make sense in any satisfying way.
@steve walsh – Trump spent years leveraging every scrap of political capital that was available from calling for the release of the “Epstein files.” The fact that he changed his tune once he had the power to actually do it isn’t a defense of Trump, it’s actually an indictment. Either he was too uninformed to know what an unholy, unjust mess such a release would be, or he is just that cynical and didn’t care. Even if you want to be completely Machiavellian about it, all of the political damage that he’s taken over Epstein in the last year was completely self-inflicted. He was hoist by his own petard.
@neo – I completely agree with your premise about the impropriety of dumping files from criminal investigations. We used to understand why keeping those files secret was vital to our basic freedoms, but no more. I strongly suspect that the breakdown of trust in institutions has something to do with the change in public perception. It still damages all of us and the criminal justice system.
Re the release of the Epstein files (or whatever), not sure what you’re saying.
1. That Trump “had the power to do so” between 2017 and 2021, but didn’t?
2. That once out of power (starting in 2021) that he lobbied incessantly to release them?
3. That once back in power (in 2025) that he intended to release them but then changed his mind about it once he—one assumes—became aware of what they did, and didn’t, contain…and thus became aware of how unreliable and pernicious a distraction they could become?
4. All of the above?
5. None of the above?
6. Other?
BTW, how ought one feel about the Democrats who, when THEY were in power could have released the files but didn’t, only clamoring mightily to release them during Trump’s second term because they believed (with perfect faith) that doing so would cause much—gleeful—damage to DJT?
(IOW, as in many other cases, we appear to be gazing—and wandering—“through a looking glass”…rather darkly(?))…
Surprised and shocked that to CC™ every thing The Great Orange Whale does or does not do is an indictment.
It is remarkable how many on the left blindly accept that trump is a pedophile and that the epstein files can prove it, and also accept that the Biden administration knew this and sat on this information for 4 years while trying to throw him into prison on the basis of much flimsier claims.
an interesting anecdote, greg kelly is in the files, how pray tell, because of a conversation about them in 2020, with richard grenell
the mo of ‘the incredible man of mystery’ gets even more oblique, such as his portfolio in 2014, involved stocks that went under subsequently, mostly in the biotech sector,
of course, the doj settlements in 2022, foreclosed many lawsuits,
the panoply of persons connected like the documents noted in the bank job caper,
What I don’t get is what is the point of releasing millions of “files.” It seems that anyone who knew the man, was at some affair – and it seems he was at a lot of them, or threw them – is being tarred with some guilty brush. I don’t know how one man managed to insert himself into so many lives. But it doesn’t mean everyone named in these literally millions of files is guilty of the abuse of young girls or young women unwilling. I am NOT saying there were not abused girls and women, but destroying so many lives so many years later because they knew this man or had some correspondence with him There obviously is a great deal of politics involved, specifically the Dems who think there’s a chance they can catch Trump committing a crime. There are GOP members who want to get Clinton. (They’ve gotten away with a whole lot that we know they did. This almost seems minor in comparison).The lengths they’ve gone to, for so many years is truly astonishing. (And to me, who likes most of what he does vs. not a lot of what he says, he can be rather arrogant, does not seem to have been a choir boy and was very embedded in NY society, but through all these years, those with the most virulent Trump haters had to make up crimes to try to get him. Just read last night in WSJ that head of Paul Weiss (huge and one of most prominent law firms) resigned because his name is in these files). King Charles stripped his brother of his royal title, even as everyone knows he cheated on Diana with Camilla for years. With all that is going on in the world, the fact that the politicians and the press are so obsessed with the acquaintances of one dead man just boggles my mind.
Barry Meislin – I don’t recall Trump campaigning on Epstein prior to 2020. My recollection is that the Epstein thing really took off after Epstein died in jail. It looks to me as though Trump took it up because the MTG/Massie portion of his base was exercised about it.
@Bauxite: My recollection is that the Epstein thing really took off after Epstein died in jail.
Recollection is not supereliable on stuff like this. There was a reason why it was big news when Epstein died in jail. The Epstein thing took off with Virginia Giuffre’s tabloid accusations and lawsuits well before Epstein died in jail or no one would have cared that he died in jail. Politico was tying him to Trump in 2017. Earliest I can find Virgina Giuffre is in the Daily Mail in 2015 and that article references her claims from 2014.
Instapundit was pimping Epstein stories as far back as January 2015, when Epstein was still alive, working the Bill Clinton angle of course.
the MTG/Massie portion of his base was exercised about it.
Lots of the Right were, hoping to bag Bill Clinton.
Niketas Choniates – The issue isn’t when Epstein became a news item, or when Epstein was first tied to Trump. The issue is when Trump first started campaigning on a promise to release the “Epstein files.”
FWIW, my best guess on the whole matter is that Trump promised to release the “files” in 2024 because he knew it would hurt a lot of Democrats and didn’t think that he or his friends had any exposure. But after taking office, he found out that he did have some exposure. And exposure doesn’t necessarily mean that he did anything wrong. For example, the mainstream sources have been abuzz about an accusation about Trump and a 13-year-old that was dumped over the weekend. I think this is what neo is talking about. It looks like some nut called in an almost-certainly-false tip to the FBI about Trump and a 13-year-old. And that made it into the “Epstein files,” even though the investigators at the time didn’t find the tip credible enough to even follow up. And now, anyone consuming mainstream news is getting a week of discussion about how there’s “evidence” of Trump abusing a 13-year-old.
Regardless of how or why it happened, campaigning on the releasing the Epstein files, having Bondi promise full exposure of Epstein, and then clamming up when it came time to actually release anything does a number on Trump’s credibility.
@Bauxite:The issue is when Trump first started campaigning on a promise to release the “Epstein files.”
That’s the issue for you, yes, we all get that. That’s not the issue for why a promise to release the “Epstein files” was popular in the first place. Trump’s promise was a symptom, it’s not the disease, which can be said about most issues involving Trump. Pimping Epstein conspiracies has been a bipartisan sport for a very long time now.
The disease is that tabloid journalism convinced many people of a conspiracy that probably did not exist, and the collateral damage is affecting not only innocent people but also highly-connected sleazebags who really should have known better than to continue to court Epstein, and this stuff was always covered up for them before and now it’s not.
does a number on Trump’s credibility.
I really don’t know why you bother to say things you obviously don’t believe. It’s not the case for you personally that you found him credible before the Epstein files and now you don’t, and everyone here knows that.
Trump’s “credibility” has only ever been a function of what people think of Trump, and everyone has known that for a long time.
Related:
“We are rapidly approaching the denouement of the 2020 election drama.”—
https://instapundit.com/774337/
Barry, what bauxy is saying is the same thing he always says – Orange Man Bad. Someone’s paying him to do it so just ignore it. By the way bauxy do you still have to use EBT since “Trump destroyed trillions of dollars” in the stock market lol
csimon621:
Sex sells, conspiracies sell, the rich and famous sell, anti-Semitism sells. The Epstein case has it all.
Several years ago I decided the following: the only person who knowingly abused underage girls at the Epstein manse or island was Epstein himself. And Epstein killed himself.
Not a popular set of beliefs. I’ve written about why I believe those two things, so I won’t go into it again here. But as time goes on nothing has changed my mind on either score.
I searched the DOJ Epstein Library for my name.
Nothing. I feel so … nothing.
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/search
Neo-You have every right to draw your conclusions that can’t be proven or unproven. The issue remains that a rubicon has been crossed like that in the Catholic Church when McCarrick–a known and proven predator continued to be esteemed and given great authority in the mechanisms of the Church, including interfacing with China for new policies, at the behest of Pope Francis. The lowly and decent Bishop in China was summarily ignored by the elite of the Vatican though he had completely different concerns. McCarrick had relations with the Biden family–so the “investigation” operated at a snail’s pace. The findings of the Vatican to look into what all went on were delayed and delayed and when finally published hardly mentioned McCarrick and pointed fingers at upstanding clerics instead. As far as I’m concerned the correlations with Epstein and world leaders of every stripe is similar. In 20 minutes Matt Walsh begins with an example of the utter nonsense that is exploited with regards to actual events, but then succinctly calls-out people who clearly had a buddy-buddy relationship with Epstein, again after exposure as a predator. For me, no excuses. None.
I think Massie really fell out with Trump because Trump supported Israel and bombed Iran. I think that was a large part in his drive to release the files.
The demand for such a quick, total release seemed unreasonable.
And I agree with others that no amount of release of files will temper the people who are most driven by it. In the pizzagate thing we saw how many on the right will really focus on child sex abuse cases.
A lot of what’s driving it now though is the left so they can call Trump a “pedophile” because he once had dealings with Epstein. Never mind that most of the names in the files are Dems or that there is zero evidence of Trump doing anything wrong, facts don’t matter to them.
the Russian hoax or more properly the Danchenkos maskirovna, did a number on a host of supposed journalist and even intelligence operatives, Tim Weiner’s the Mission, is full of their grand mal delusions, many fiction writers were also afflcted I mentioned lawrence wright’s Andromeda strain revisiting but also another fellow, Paul Vidich, who happened to be the nephew of Frank Olsen, the CIA officer, that either committed suicide or suffered foul play, in the MK Ultra exercise, a recent outing, has a president that is Trump in all but name, who is operating under the delusion above, at the end of the tail, he admits there was no evidence, of the charges he alluded to, but like the boy in that Reagan tale, they are still looking for the pony,
now many figures in finance science and other endeavours should have steered clear, but apparently the reputation managers were also deeply oblivious or contemptuous of such concerns about such a person,
In retrospect Elon put his foot in his mouth, in his persuasion exercise,
as did Reid Hogffman, and even members of the Norwegian royals as well as the fellow who awarded Obama the nobel prize,
Don
There’s no reason not to be concerned about child sex abuse cases. It has been said by those paying more attention than I that the reason the Pizzagate conspiracy is proven untrue is that the pizza place in the story doesn’t have a basement. QED. Point is, everything else looks like it might be true. Is it true Ghslaine owned a pizza shop, if only in name?
Even before the doc dump, things looked kind of slimy. One of Hillary’s admin types was married to the congressman sexting kids with pics, Didn’t seem offputting to the social scene. BJ himself was a scumbag in using and abusing women. Hollywood had its “types’. Who was the guy who hired guys to come tohis home and then drugged them? At least one died, but being on the dem donor list he’d had a free run for a while. Ol’ Harve, of course.
Turned out adrenochrome is a thing. Difference is how you get it and Hollywood was accused, validly or not, of not being legal about it,
So there seemed to be a kind of universe above the rest of us inhabited by rich, influential types doing unspeakable things and getting away with it. Maybe it didn’t happen in a pizza shop,,,,
Oh, yeah. Reports of a couple of high end brothels run by folks from other countries dealing with big shooters in NYC and DC. Didn’t have to be Epstein to make the whole thing a good deal thicker and smellier. But no pizza shop.