Trump Already Confessed He Knew about “the Girls”
On the same day Adelita Grijalva will finally be sworn in and provide the 218th vote to force a vote to release the Epstein files, Oversight Dems have released three records from Jeffrey Epstein’s estate making it clear Trump is more implicated in Epstein’s crimes than he has let on.
There’s one email that will ensure that Melania Trump backs off her threat to sue Michael Wolff. He and the sex trafficker were discussing how to craft an answer Trump could give to CNN about their relationship during the 2015 election.
Effectively, Epstein was offering to provide Trump an answer to make things easy on Trump.
The most damning describes Epstein, discussing with Ghislaine Maxwell in 2011 one of the victims spending “hours at [Epstein’s] house with Trump.
That conversation transpired in April 2011, just a month before Trump dropped out of the presidential race.
The most intriguing was another email exchanged with Wolff, just six months before Epstein was arrested and then suicided, in which Epstein claimed Trump was lying when he “said he asked me to resign, never a member ever.”
One of the first times this claim was aired was in a 2007 Page Six story that preceded many of the details becoming public.
Meanwhile, the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach last night confirmed a Web site report that Epstein has been banned there. “He would use the spa to try to procure girls. But one of them, a masseuse about 18 years old, he tried to get her to do things,” a source told us. “Her father found out about it and went absolutely ape-[bleep]. Epstein’s not allowed back.” Epstein denies he is banned from Mar-a-Lago and says, in fact, he was recently invited to an event there.
Trump has, at times, admitted he served as an anonymous source for Page Six.
Trump repeated this story, in two parts, in July.
First, days after Todd Blanche sat down with Ghislaine Maxwell, Trump described that Epstein “hired help” from Trump, and continued doing so even after Trump “said, don’t ever do that again,” implying that he told Epstein to stop.
What caused the breach with him? Very easy to explain. But I don’t want to waste your time by explaining it. But for years I wouldn’t talk to Jeffrey Epstein. I wouldn’t talk. Because he did something that was inappropriate. He hired help. And I said, don’t ever do that again. He stole people that worked for me. I said, don’t ever do that again. He did it again. And I threw him out of the place. Persona non grata. I threw him out. And that was it.
Then, the next day, Trump confessed that Virginia Giuffre was one of the “young women” that Epstein “stole.”
Reporter 1: I’m just curious. Were some of the workers that were taken from you — were some of them young women?
Trump: Were some of them?
Reporter 1: Were some of them young women?
Trump: Well, I don’t wanna say, but everyone knows the people that were taken. It was, the concept of taking people that work for me is bad. But that story’s been pretty well out there. And the answer is, yes, they were.
[inaudible]
Trump: In the spa. People that work in the spa. I have a great spa, one of the best spas in the world at Mar-a-Lago. And people were taken out of the spa. Hired. By him. In other words, gone. And um, other people would come and complain. This guy is taking people from the spa. I didn’t know that. And then when I heard about it I told him, I said, listen, we don’t want you taking our people, whether they were spa or not spa. I don’t want him taking people. And he was fine and then not too long after that he did it again and I said Out of here.
Reporter 2: Mr. President, did one of those stolen persons, did that include Virginia Giuffre?
Trump: Uh, I don’t know. I think she worked at the spa. I think so. I think that was one of the people, yeah. He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know. None whatsoever.
Both these limited hangouts, delivered in the wake of Blanche’s interviews with Maxwell, blame Epstein for stealing his girls.
But it wasn’t Epstein stealing the girls and he didn’t tell Epstein to stop.
He told Maxwell to stop.
And then he lied and claimed he had kicked Epstein out as a result.
And then Todd Blanche moved Epstein’s co-conspirator, who didn’t mention the girl Trump spent hours with or remind Blanche of Trump’s knowledge she was trafficking girls from his club, into comfier digs.
I presume that it’d be hard to prove that Epstein was never a member from the outside but it’d be easy to prove he was a member, or Maxwell was a member, with club records. If Democrats hold a hearing on Maxwell’s preferential treatment in prison, I presume that Trump Organization will fight any subpoenas for club records, especially membership records, to the bitter end. How does that play out?
If I understand this correctly, Trump was well aware of what Maxwell and Epstein’s interest in Mar-a-Lago’s female staff was about and didn’t then call in law enforcement?
Correct.
And we know that bc Ghislaine stole Giuffre in 2000, then stole another girl maybe in 2004.
So Trump did nothing to rescue Giuffre.
My beloved and I were discussing what could be in these files that were so damning they could never be released, and after sleeping on it (allegedly the Iroquois never made a major decision without letting the brain toss it around) one other very ugly alleged possibility comes to mind: Convict-1 was a conduit like Maxwell was. It would be worse if the girls were paid for in some way, and FWIW no one would think it was OK beyond the hardcore MAGAs. Again, this is rank speculation so take this as a possibility.
Arguing in favor of this is the confidence I see in Epstein’s messages that he has something really big to hold over Convict-1, and the timing of the 2012 dropout is … curious if not dispositive by itself. This would also be buttressed by the over-the-top efforts by the GOP (many of whom are probably documented as well) to prevent even the redacted releases. We know that Giuffre was singled out as a cause for Epstein’s removal from Mar-A-Lago by Convict-1 when ‘I never knew them’ is his reflexive response. I suspect there is a lot more there and I’d start digging with Giuffre.
If as reported a thousand or so federal agents combed through the files to remove Convict-1 references (looking like Hogans Heroes prisoner letters afterward) those are a lot of people to pay off to keep quiet. Some pressure might be useful there as well. That task is a lot easier if the Ds get Congress back in 2026.
The guy who bragged about furniture shopping and moving on her like a bitch, just kissing them, you can do anything, and grabbing them by the pu**y because they let you do it was involved in sex trafficking underage girls. UGH!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhsSzIS84ks
Let’s see how he “locker room talks” his way out of this one.
According to Michael Wolff, Epstein believed that Trump “dropped a dime” on Epstein as result of the battle over Maison de L’Amitie, a mansion purchased from auction on 11/15/04.
Epstein believed Trump purchased as part of a money laundering scheme with a Russian oligarch via Deutsche Bank.
The main investigation into Epstein began from a March 2005 local PBPD complaint involving a 14 year old, which they referred to the FBI in 2006.
Other complaints/investigations include:
* March 2004 local police complaint about a “17-year-old girl”, source unknown (or maybe I just couldn’t find)
* 11/28/04 local police complaint about “young women”, source Alfredo Rodriguez, who was the Epstein employee who snagged and later released the “black book” of phone numbers [is it possible Trump got Rodriguez to make that call?]
* Early 2005 federal grand jury [AFAIK, no reporting on this, we only learned about because Blanche asked for those grand jury records to be released in SDFL
I mentioned Michael Reiter in my comment further down the comment section. If you look at his wiki, he DID talk about the Grand Jury. It’s also mentioned in the November OPR in fn 21 of Reiter’s wiki.
The Unger substack also has useful info.
The grand jury involving Reiter would be at the state level.
Todd Blanche listed 2 grand juries from SDFL. 1 each from 2005 and 2007. The 2007 one would likely be the one that we that escalated from the state investigation after Reiter lost faith in the local DA in 2006.
Yeah, zscore, that sounds right. I think the Detective in the OPR who was working with Reiter was Joseph Recarey. He met with Villafaña and the FBI case agent to tell them what he learned during the state’s investigation.
That’s one of the reasons why Craig Unger’s substack about John Mark Dougan is interesting. Dougan claims that Recarey gave him DVDs that had copies of videos from 1994 to 2005.
Recarey was the detective who did most of the work, he has passed away and so wasn’t interviewed for the OPR Report (nor is he available to fact check Dougan), which interviewed Reiter and the DA. And of course the federal people.
Dougan isn’t really credible. He appears to be a front for putting out Russia’s narrative. He did the same thing with Seth Rich. He didn’t lean into Epstein tapes until later in the game. So, my suspicion is that, however Russia obtained the Epstein materials, Dougan is front to cover a narrative for how they were really obtained.
Zscore, are you claiming Recarey didn’t speak with Villafaña? He didn’t pass until 2018. The “Detective “ in the OPR spoke with Villafaña in 2006. So most likely that was Recarey.
I’m looking at the November 2020 OPR from fn 21 in the Reiter wiki.
From p. 17 of the Nov. 2020 OPR:
“1. The PBPD Presents the Matter to the FBI and the USAO
In May 2006, the lead Detective handling the state’s investigation met with Villafaña and the FBI case agent to summarize for them the information learned during the state’s investigation.18
…..
The Detective explained that the defense had hired private investigators to trail Reiter and the Detective, had raised claims of various improprieties by the police, and, in the view of the PBPD, had orchestrated the removal of the Assistant State Attorney initially assigned to handle the matter, who was viewed as an aggressive prosecutor, by hiring a defense attorney whose relationship with the Assistant State Attorney created a conflict of interest for the prosecutor. Further, given the missing computer equipment and surveillance camera videotapes, the Detective believed Epstein may have been “tipped off” in advance about the search warrant.”
Reply to Savage Librarian, I read the OPR recently and don’t recall even seeing “Recarey ” mentioned once. And searching the PDF shows 0 instances.
It describes the US Attorney office, including Villafana and at least one more prosecutor as interacting with Chief Reiter. Elsewhere, I have seen reporting about Recarey being a huge part of the investigation.
June 2018 would have been before OPR began investigating, and well before the November 2020 publication.
Also, I believe, June 2018 was before Dougan began making his claims about having Epstein data and that he received from Recarey.
9/25/19 article with Dougan claim he received the data from Recarey: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7499171/Ex-cop-MI6-fears-leaked-secrets-Prince-Andrews-friendship-Jeffrey-Epstein-breaks-silence.html
9/21/19 article not saying anything about a colleague and written in a way that could make the reader think Dougan received the data from his own work on the investigation: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/royal-family/article/mi6-fears-russia-can-link-prince-andrew-to-jeffrey-epstein-abuse-wc995nj7x
Reply to Savage Librarian:
Thanks, I stand corrected about Recarey interacting with FBI.
There is much more information pertaining to Chief Reiter.
Zscore, I agree with you that Dougan has credibility issues. He produces primarily disinformation. So I wonder if his photo with Pavel Borodin is real. If it is, it’s interesting. I agree that he could be a diversion or distraction for something or someone else.
The dog that didn’t bark is, of course, from Sherlock Holmes. It’s the key piece of evidence that ties the entire case together. The dog didn’t bark because the dog recognized the perpetrator
Maybe I’m being thick, but I’m struggling to see the answer to the question – why was Trump not mentioned in 2011? Why did the dog not bark? “police chief etc. I’m 75% there.” What does that mean?
Was Epstein suggesting that Trump was acting as a CI for law enforcement? That seems unlikely to be true, as it would have come out by now, but Epstein may have thought it to be true at the time. Or that Trump was being protected in some other way, in which case what was it?
Didn’t Speaker Johnson briefly assert that Trump was a CI against Epstein, only to backtrack immediately?
My read of Epstein’s email to Maxwell is, he suspects Trump is providing information about him.
His application of the “dog that didn’t bark” metaphor is slightly inapposite; he doesn’t mean that Trump has been curiously silent, he instead means it’s peculiar to him that Trump’s name has yet to come up, when he (Epstein) rightly expected that it ought to have. Epstein took that as a signal that Trump was cooperating with the police/journos/whoever. “I’m 75% there” he says, meaning, he’s not quite sure of it, but he’s getting close…
Seems to me that the “dog that didn’t bark” is used to mean that law enforcement did not “bark” after one obvious perpetrator, Trump.
I think you’ve got it right.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/08/mike-johnson-trump-epstein-fbi-informant
I wonder if Trump informed to fbi about Epstein so he could get the property they were fighting over??
Silver Blaze.
““Is there any point to which you would wish to
draw my attention?”
“To the curious incident of the dog in the nighttime.”
“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
“That was the curious incident,” remarked Sherlock Holmes.”
It seems to me that Epstein was noting that Trump HAD NOT cooperated with law enforcement and HAD NOT ratted out Epstein. So, Epstein was 75% of the way to extinguishing what ever interest there was in Trump related to Epstein.
Admittedly, just my speculation!
In the story (Silver Blaze), the dog didn’t really do anything “wrong.” But he did not raise the alarm when the perpetrator came because he knew him well, so in the end, he failed as a watchdog. If we assume that Epstein was being 100% accurate in his usage, then, all it means is that Trump (the dog) did not bark (raise the alarm) over Epstein’s behavior because he knew him and what he was up to didn’t bother him. (Unlike a dog, he could be presumed to have known that sex trafficking, especially involving minors, was a bad thing.) I’m not sure exactly what criminal charges would follow from that (failure to report a conspiracy? accessory after the fact?), but it would not look good.
On the other hand, if Epstein was a bit “loose” or inaccurate in his literary citation, he *could* have meant that Trump was more directly involved in the criminal activity but not officially suspected because he was someone the law enforcement officials knew and respected.
Suicided? Is that an official Emptywheel position that Epstein didn’t kill himself?
Nope. Just a good verb when there’s any uncertainty.
Indeed – could be the active or passive voice, depending on your POV.
About the Page Six article dated 10/15/07.
It says “the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach last night confirmeda Web site report that Epstein has been banned there.”
I have been trying to locate whatever the “Web site report” that was confirmed by Mar-a-Lago on 10/14/07. 10/14/07 may even be the date of the “Web site report”.
Interestingly, the November 2020 OPR Report has a footnote listing a 10/14/07 article that I can’t find online.
Footnote 301 on page 208 includes this article among several listed: “Andrew Pal Faces Sex List Shame,” Mail on Sunday, Oct. 14, 2007
Maybe I’m doing something wrong, but I can’t find it online, searching through the Mail archives. There is a similar article mentioning Andrew from 9/22/07.
https://web.archive.org/web/20251112152615/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/lifestyle/article-483401/Prince-Andrews-friend-Ghislaine-Maxwell-underage-girls-disturbing-story.html
There is reporting that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago in October 2007.
Link to 2020 Miami Herald article citing a book the Grifter’s Club: https://archive.is/y31zt
Which is way after 2004, if that is allegedly when Epstein “stole” the second victim from Mar-a-Lago. But shortly after the above 9/22/07 article and articles like the 10/01/07 NY Post article “‘Unhappy Ending’ Plea Deal—Moneyman to Get Jail For Teen Sex Massages”.
https://web.archive.org/web/20250716130252/https://nypost.com/2007/10/01/unhappy-ending-plea-deal/
I was about to post something similar from the Miami Herald. https://web.archive.org/web/20250506173059/https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article244689497.html
Oddly, the 9/22/07 article wasn’t cited in the OPR Report, but about 6-10 articles were cited in that report.
And oddly this article hadn’t even been Waybacked until now. I haven’t even seen it going around social media.
You could try reaching out to the authors of The Grifter’s Club to see if they knew; wonder if they included that “Web site report” in their work.
https://web.archive.org/web/20250506173059/https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article244689497.html
You might also try drilling down on reports by the closest local newspapers circa 10/2007. They may not be turning up in search if they’ve been through changes in their content management systems facing the internet since 2007.
Thanks for the suggestions, I will try that out.
I was able to locate an article from the Mail on Sunday with this headline, dated Oct 14 2007, using a subscription news database at my workplace (I work at a major research library). It’s 143 words total.
What?!?! You are awesome.
Anything in there referencing Mar-a-Lago and kicking out Epstein?
I will head to the library when I can.
No, there’s nothing in there about Trump at all. So whatever the Page Six article is referencing, it’s not this item from the Mail on Sunday.
According to CSPAN: U.S. House of Representatives – November 12, 2025
The House will vote on the Senate-passed legislation to reopen the federal government, shutdown for 43 days. The House last voted on Sept. 19. Rep.-Elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ07), who won a Sept. 23 special election, will also be sworn into the House.
This is the only House session scheduled for this week.
I wonder if Johnson will allow a vote on the Bill and:
a) Not swear-in Grijalva and end the session with an adjournment sine die?
or
b) Swear her-in and then adjourn sine die after the vote?
Thereby avoiding any motion to add her vote to the discharge petition for the Epstein files.
Curious if he has procedure do this… or the lack of spine. “Spatchcock Johnson”
I’ve lost track of where this “report” came from. Long ago some MAGA said the FBI or let’s say someone is going to clean it all up. Who might have seen the original ‘report’ or even have a copy who might question the released report.
Is it a singular document or a collection of them? Was there a single author?
How isn’t questioning the provenience of this report not going send us off into the weeds for the next decade?
“I’ve lost track of where this ‘report’ came from.”
After admitting that, you probably should have stopped typing.
OK, the Epstein Files. So questions about the completeness of the files and the provenience of them isn’t and won’t be an issue?
When Epstein’s alleged membership at MAL was hotter news, I believe the reporting was that Maxwell had the membership, but Epstein used it at will. That would make Epstein’s claim that he was never a member correct, while also deceptive, a game both he and Trump are addicted to.
I’ve heard that the hardest lies to find and prove are those that contains some truth.
“Then why did you say you canceled Epstein’s membership that he never had but let Ghislaine Maxwell renew hers?” becomes a difficult question to address.
And add to that, if Maxwell could retain hers and let Epstein be her permanent guest, at what point was Epstein really cut off? Only after this arrest (the first one)? Or later?
Too clever by half and the one area where Trump seems to have put a LOT of thought into answers ahead of time.
One point that I never hear mention of these days: Trump’s ownership of the Miss America beauty pageant. Any connection with those beauty pageants and Epstein/Maxwell?
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short and common, your username will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. /~Rayne]
Not Miss America; Trump was a co-owner of Miss Universe Organization of which Miss U.S.A. and Miss Teen U.S.A. pageants are subsidiaries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_USA
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/a-timeline-of-donald-trumps-creepiness-while-he-owned-miss-universe-191860/
Great question, Ace! Trump did own the Miss Universe pageant for almost two decades and had contact with thousands of young models (many of whom complained of Trump’s obvious creepiness) and also allowed him access to powerful people like Vladimir Putin. In fact, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow is particularly interesting, as this might have been the trip when the alleged “golden shower” incident may have occurred. Trump’s trip to Moscow was also a focus of the Senate’s investigation into Trump’s Russia ties in his first term:
https://tinyurl.com/bdememvt
In this interview, it sounds like rapper Uncle Luke refers to the presence of “pageant girls” at a Trump party many years ago. He wisely left early.
https ://www.msn [dot] com/en-us/news/other/uncle-luke-details-underage-girls-and-unfiltered-sex-at-trump-parties-in-resurfaced-interview-video/ar-AA1J6o1G
Thank you Dr. Marcy. Excellent point about Trump told Maxwell to stop not Epstein.
Thick as thieves, so much more to be revealed …
AND
Email released today includes Jeffrey Epstein writing on August 23, 2018, “you see, i know how dirty donald is.”
“Dirty Donald”. That is an apt moniker. A man so dirty, that sex trafficking pedophiles consider him dirty.
Epstein certainly isn’t very complimentary about Trump’s mental acuity. The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/13/jeffrey-epstein-emails-trump) have a couple of choice quotes :
And:
That would probably be reason enough for the notoriously thin-skinned ‘very stable genius’ to keep any files related to himself hidden even if there was nothing worse in there.
Agree.
Michael Reiter was the Police Chief in Palm Beach from 2001-2009, and is credited with beginning the Epstein investigation there. He has been called a hero. You may want to read his wiki, which also has the November 2020 OPR at fn. 21.
And then you might also find some interesting info in this substack, especially noting the photo with Pavel Borodin:
“Too Good to Be True” – Craig Unger, 8/1/25
“John Mark Dougan, a former deputy sheriff for Palm Beach County, told me he has 478 Jeffrey Epstein sex tapes. He may be lying, but he’s become a major force behind Russia’s flood of disinformation.”
This lengthy article will give you a great deal of insight into how skilled and relentless John Mark Dougan is. It will also alert you to numerous websites, tools and techniques (including AI) he has used to sow Russian disinformation.
Coincidentally, in February 2013, Dougan had a meeting with Pavel Borodin in Russia. Later that year (November 2013,) Trump attended the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow.
“The Fugitive Florida Deputy Sheriff Who Became A Kremlin Disinformation Impresario” – McKenzie Sadeghi, 5/29/24
https://www.newsguardtech.com/special-reports/john-mark-dougan-russian-disinformation-network
Wasn’t that Micheal Cohen that was quoted in the email?
Isn’t Wolff’s “let him hang himself” email clear evidence that Epstein had blackmail & extortion leverage over Trump?
This is why we shouldn’t elect crooks to the presidency…
Coincidental that Epstein’s death was by hanging?
The real trick will be how the Dems counter Trump’s attempted extortion, as he tries to keep Republicans from joining the Dems in veto-proof majorities to disclose the Epstein files.
Michael Wolff’s emails with Epstein are interesting. If I recall correctly, the the first term Trump WH gave Wolff access to Trump and other WH insiders. He then writes a book, not flattering to Trump. Even after the book, he is seen at Trump parties.
The emails suggest Wolff was giving Epstein advice on sabotaging or saving Trump.
How does Michael Wolff remain on good terms with both Trump and Epstein?
Just watched a Daily Beast podcast with Joanna Coles interviewing Michael Wolff after the emails were released. Wolff answers criticisms from journalists. His explains that he practices a form of access journalism in which he worms his way (my words) into the good graces of the person he is writing about. His explanation of the email in which he is giving media advice to Epstein is that Epstein knew that Wolff was media savvy and that Wolff was trying to maintain credibility with the subject.
Wolff also says that he has a hundred hours of taped interviews with Epstein and that he pitched those tapes to the major media outlets, with no takers.
The way The NY Times reporters are covering these emails suggests a level of timidity. They highlight that the 2011 email says that Trump didn’t receive any massages at Epstein’s house but fail to mention that Trump recently denied ever being in Epstein’s house. Or to wonder why Trump was talking to Giuffre (allegedly) for hours in Epstein’s house.
In related news, Jamie Dimon (and other bankers) are meeting with Trump tonight at the White House.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-expected-dine-wall-street-004006215.html
In context, and coincidentally lined up with today’s Epstein doc release, Narativ’s new thread in their Greatest Heist series focuses on Jamie Dimon and Wexner and Ohio and JP Morgan and Jes Staley, that the relationships therein are deeper and originated earlier than otherwise what is on the record.
https://web.archive.org/web/20251113025329/https://www.narativ.org/p/the-greatest-heist-book-2-chapter
The Greatest Heist series focuses on Epstein, Maxwell family, Trump and how they have extracted value from the economy either through theft and money laundering and reaping from economic bubbles bursting. Pump and dump at levels that are “too big to fail.”
Are you guys still talking about Jeffery Epstein?
I fear Venezuela will be his distraction.
This is an Epstein thread, not a Venezuela thread.
I fear someone doesn’t get your sense of humor.
I believe there is little that will trump sex and pretty underage girls.
If that was supposed to be humor or a pun, try again.
RE: “Trump: Uh, I don’t know. I think she worked at the spa. I think so. I think that was one of the people, yeah. He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know. None whatsoever.”
I wouldn’t bank too heavily on Trump admitting anything here, other than being a bullshit artist. I remember when he said that thinking he’s bullshitting. He doesn’t know who the hell she is, and why would he? He’ll say whatever he has to say to divert attention away from what people are actually asking about.
ETA: Hi, Rayne. Not sure why I keep going to moderation, am I quoting too much?
Thanks,
Bugboy321
No idea what kicked you into auto-mod. You didn’t use any known triggers, could be that security is more sensitive today.
Might be the use of the word “bullshit” or a variant three times in one paragraph, too, on this particular comment but I have no idea.
Thanks for your patience.
Ok, well by my count it’s only 2 BS’s but I take your meaning that there’s a profanity trigger? Will do better going forward if that’s the case.
Thanks for your quick response.
[You’re right, only two, but I really don’t know what the trigger is, may/may not have been repeated use. As for speed, you got lucky I’m not doing my other work and had the time to be at the keyboard. Sometimes clearing moderation waits until one of us has the time to do it. /~Rayne]
9/30/18 EPSTEIN advises BANNON re: KAVANAUGH [re: Christine Blasey Ford testimony]
Quinta Jurecic reposted:
https://bsky.app/profile/snmrrw.bsky.social/post/3m5hqgclxnc2p
November 12, 2025 at 5:50 PM
Here’s a seemingly minor detail, but I think represents something deeper, likely as a result of a convergence of:
* Trump’s ineffective attempts to control Epstein narrative
* Mamdani/Nov 4 election
* The economy blues
The minor detail: on Friday November 7, Trump’s daily fundraising scheme changed in a way suggesting desperation, either financial or with attention/messaging.
Trump normally sends daily fundraising emails from donaldjtrump dot com. November 7, he started to send emails via the generic right winger starter pack method. Which is 3-5 emails within an hour of each other from Post Millennial, Human Events, Human Events Posobiec, Law Enforcement Today, or UncoverDC.
These emails sport the graphic of “Trump Vance 2025”. Money goes to “Trump National Committee JFC, Inc”, which splits money 17.5% RNC, 77.5% to Trump’s Never Surrender, 5% to Working Ohio.
A few months ago, Trump’s emails switched from the raising money for the JFC to just simply his Never Surrender, which iirc is the one tied to Steven Engel. The generic GOP emails he is now sending goes to the JFC and will likely increase the reach of his emails.
Kings lose their crowns
And nobody wants to stick around
When the truth comes out, when the truth comes out
Time will be on your side
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZN4Uw4mnuk&list=RDOZN4Uw4mnuk&start_radio=1
Kathleen Edwards, When The Truth Comes Out, Billionaire, 2025
Problem with acronyms: I had no idea how to translate JFC, by context perhaps joint fundraising committee? But my brain immediately went to an alternate translation, the one with the bad word in the middle of the Redeemer’s name.
Here’s document #02354 from the House Oversight dump that caught my eye: according to Epstein, Trump and “Pulty” collaborated on the 2005 purchase of the Abe Gosman property in Palm Beach. That’s the one that Trump bought at auction for $45m and flipped to a Russian buyer a few years later for $100m. Epstein wrote: “I became the stalking horse bidder at 36 m. ie if someone bid higher I would receive a fee. trump buys the house at the telephone auction. only me trump andd his friend pulty the developer.” [sic, sic, sic to the many typos]. I assume “his friend pulty” in the reference is to William J. Pulty of Bloomfield Hills, the grandfather (or maybe father) of the current head of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. See EW’s Nov 5th post on Bill Pulte firing the IG
I keep thinking about what Trump said on the Howard Stern show about young Lindsay Lohan. ‘Deeply damaged’ girls are good in bed. You could say Epstein’s victims were chosen because they were ‘damaged’ in some way.
https://time.com/ 4532008/donald-trump-lindsay-lohan-howard-stern-great-in-bed/
And, for some reason Megyn Kelly decided she needed clickbait by saying that Epstein wasn’t really a pedophile because the girls had gone through puberty. I’m not sure how she knows that, but there is a reason for the age of consent. Perhaps that is the new approved gambit, that Epstein wasn’t a real pedophile and therefore Convict-1’s close friendship means nothing.
The victims would like to differ, along with Truth and Civilization. There’s a reason Epstein was in custody.
Megyn Kelly has a young teen daughter. I wonder if she would apply that same standard to her. And I wonder what her daughter thinks of that.
Indeed. It appears that Megyn’s cutoff is 14 and she did take some pains to say it’s all disgusting (can’t argue with that). However, your point is well taken and my speculation is that this is another trial balloon for MAGA justification. I also see that they’re back to blaming Biden again (‘he had four years to prosecute’).
It seems the House shut down after eight hours for the rest of the week Wednesday to avoid talking about you-know-who on the signed discharge petition. Leavitt admitted to a Situation Room meeting with Republicans to try to get them to rescind their signatures as an indication of just how desperate Convict-1 is. I noted in another thread my suspicion Convict-1 was an alternate conduit to Maxwell and antics like these don’t proclaim innocence. Instead, he protests too much (h/t Shakespeare).
So many awful people these days. Way more than I ever thought possible.
Perhaps my mind has been warped by all of this Epstein/Maxwell/Trump sexual perversion. Over the last few days the media have been reshowing, among others, the video of Trump and Epstein ogling young women at Mar-a-Lago. Am I not seeing Ghislane directly behind Trump, interacting with an extremely tall gray-haired man. While he shields Ghislane with has jacket, she appears to be doing something with him and suddenly she gives a look out as if caught red-handed doing something. Her huge buddy then exits, covering his crotch.
Has anyone else noticed?