quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

SNIP SNIP!!

Excellent. If this is all Trump did in his term, I would be happy.

I used to have one of those little pocket FM radios with earbuds.

I'd listen to NPR "Car Talk" with Click & Clack, the Tappet Brothers. When they retired (2012?),
I had no further use for NPR.

I now expect to be entertained by several of my liberal friends' righteously-indignant whining about NPR being weaned from the Taxpayer's Tit©.

I did enjoy the Antique Roadshow on PBS. I hope OTHER people give THEIR money to keep it going.

Sig2340’s post by Margot Cleveland about Boasberg and the DC Circuit judges’ prejudice against Trump should be re-read by all of us.

This is rock solid evidence that Trump cannot get a fair hearing in the DC circuit.

Boasberg at least needs to be impeached and removed from office as an example to other little would-be kings.

quote:

Originally posted by whanson_wi:
"POLL: Trump’s Popularity Grows with Republicans amid Epstein Uproar"

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...amid-epstein-uproar/

With a little luck, the walking deads - I mean talking heads - will figure that Epstein news is helping PDJT, and so will stop covering it.

Maybe their choice of topics to cover explain why you never see a newspaper stand anymore.

I'll tell you something else- this Epstein shit will pass, but we will not forget who abetted those trying to divide MAGA, and we shall we not forgive them.

PBS and NPR will just need to wake Elmo and his Sesame Street friends up and have them walk to the toy factories and their likenesses copied into more dolls that kids would want to play with and their parents not have regrets about buying. PBS may get royalties from each doll. Mel Brooks would call it "Merchandising! Where the real money is made."

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
Boasberg at least needs to be impeached and removed from office as an example to other little would-be kings.

Impeachment is achievable, but removal from the bench is a pipe dream. Conviction requires two-thirds of the Senate. When was the last time the GOP had 67 in the chamber? Never.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfr...dkt_nbr=010504628sk4

Kristi Noem: More 'Alligator Alcatraz' Centers Coming Soon

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said she has talked with five Republican governors about developing large-scale detention facilities for illegal immigrants, similar to “Alligator Alcatraz” in Florida.

During a news conference Saturday in Tampa, Florida, Noem applauded Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis for partnering with DHS to open "Alligator Alcatraz," a detention facility on a remote airstrip surrounded by the Everglades.

"We've had several other states that are actually using Alligator Alcatraz as a model for how they can partner with us, as well," Noem said, without revealing the states involved.

Noem said she hadn’t asked the governors if she could use their names but added the talks were “ongoing,” with announcements on additional new detention facilities “coming soon.”

“As you all know, we need to double our capacity and detention beds because we need to facilitate getting people out of this country as fast as possible and to sustain our operations,” Noem said.

Spokespersons for governors in South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas said they are ready to assist in President Donald Trump’s mass deportations of illegal immigrants, without confirming whether they have been contacted, NewsNation reported Thursday.

“Texas will continue to assist the Trump administration in arresting, detaining, and deporting illegal immigrants,” Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesman for Gov. Greg Abbott, said.

“Mississippi will do whatever it takes to help support President Trump’s immigration agenda,” Cory Custer, chief of staff to Gov. Tate Reeves, said. “Nothing is off the table.”

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster has directed state officials to “keep exploring how The Palmetto State’s unique assets can be utilized,” a spokesman told NewsNation. The statement came after Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., posted July 1 on X: “Dear DHS: We’ve got a swamp and a dream. Let’s talk. South Carolina's gators are ready. And they’re not big on paperwork. If I was Governor, we'd be bringing Alligator Alcatraz to South Carolina.”

Mace is contemplating running for the Republican nomination in next year’s gubernatorial election given that McMaster is term-limited from seeking a third consecutive term.

Alligator Alcatraz, which received its first detainees July 1 – the day Noem and Trump toured the facility – has a capacity for 3,000 people. During his visit, Trump said because of "miles of treacherous swampland" surrounding the area, the only escape route for illegal immigrants detained there is “deportation.”

Noem on Saturday urged Democrat governors to work with the administration on illegal immigration as well while praising the “fantastic” Republican governors she has talked with.

“Those governors have been fantastic,” she said. “I will tell you, they are all Republicans. So, I would challenge some Democrats to start taking care of your states, partner with us in a way to make your communities safer.

“What shocks me every day is these sanctuary cities and sanctuary states where they don't mind letting rapers and murderers run their streets. I mean, every day when you look at who we're picking up off these streets, they're perpetuating violence on communities, and I don't understand local law enforcement officers or governors protecting criminals and victimizing their people.”

Newsmax reached out to Homeland Security for comment on which states Noem has talked with.

The intellectual dishonesty is sickening, but at the same time, delicious to behold. I can take or leave Piers Morgan but in this case I give him credit for not letting Reid bury his question.

Reid and at least one of her allies later called this interview an "ambush of a black woman" whatever her race and sex have to do with it. Facts are racist and sexist, I guess.

Reid is a clown. For years, she had the microphone of her show but was immune to any sort of push-back against her illogical and racist bullshit. The reality of this encounter is a much needed dose of cold water on her hilariously massive ego.

https://x.com/PiersUncensored/.../1945923960492970128

TRUMP DIRECTS PAM BONDI TO RELEASE GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPTS IN JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE

https://justthenews.com/govern..._campaign=newsletter

President Donald Trump on Thursday said that he has directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to release relevant grand jury testimony related to the disgraced, late financier Jeffrey Epstein.

The order comes as the Trump administration faces heavy bipartisan backlash over its handling of the Epstein case, including its promise to release additional files related to its investigation into the late financier.

Trump has heavily criticized the media coverage devoted to Epstein, who died while serving a prison sentence in 2019.

"Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval," Trump posted to Truth Social. "This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!"

Bondi responded in a post on X that she was ready to "move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts."

Somehow, it didn't work out like they figured.

https://x.com/DogRightGirl/status/1946021809817616676

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
Boasberg at least needs to be impeached and removed from office as an example to other little would-be kings.

Impeachment is achievable, but removal from the bench is a pipe dream. Conviction requires two-thirds of the Senate. When was the last time the GOP had 67 in the chamber? Never.

However prosecute for judicial misconduct and interference with the operations of the executive branch. Should be good for 40 years at GitMo.

Murdoch and the WSJ are next in line to have their asses sued.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...-epstein-letter.html

21:22 EDT 17 Jul 2025, updated 23:49 EDT 17 Jul 2025
By BRITTANY CHAIN FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

President Donald Trump went ballistic on The Wall Street Journal and owner Rupert Murdoch, threatening to 'sue his a** off' over a salacious birthday card Trump allegedly sent Jeffrey Epstein.

The president called for Attorney General Pam Bondi to clear his name by releasing testimony in the disgraced financier's prosecution as the Epstein saga threatened to engulf his presidency.

'The Wall Street Journal printed a FAKE letter, supposedly to Epstein,' he wrote on Truth Social.

'These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don’t draw pictures. I told Rupert Murdoch it was a Scam, that he shouldn’t print this Fake Story. But he did, and now I’m going to sue his ass off, and that of his third rate newspaper.'

The WSJ report claimed Trump took part in Epstein's 50th birthday album by sending well wishes along with a randy message and a hand-drawn nude woman.

The alleged birthday card featured the outline of a woman with pubic hair drawn out with the signature 'Donald.' The typewritten text reads: 'Happy Birthday - and may every day be another wonderful secret.'

Within hours of the report's publication, Trump issued a scorched earth message insisting the letter was fake and asked Bondi to release 'all pertinent' Grand Jury testimony.

Bondi instantly responded: 'President Trump - we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.'

It comes after days of mounting fury following Bondi's decision not to release the infamous Epstein files despite Trump's campaign promise.

Trump said Thursday he spoke directly with both the editor of the WSJ, Emma Tucker, and Murdoch himself about the contents of the letter they were citing.

'[They] were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,' Trump wrote.

'Mr. Murdoch stated that he would take care of it but, obviously, did not have the power to do so.'

Trump claimed Tucker 'did not want to hear' from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt that the 'letter was a FAKE.'

'Instead, they are going with a false, malicious, and defamatory story anyway. President Trump will be suing The Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp, and Mr. Murdoch, shortly.

'The Press has to learn to be truthful, and not rely on sources that probably don’t even exist.'

Trump doubled down on his earlier claims that the Epstein saga is a 'hoax' perpetuated by Democrats, arguing that if he were involved in anything scandalous, it would have been released by 'Comey, Brennan, Crooked Hillary and other Radical Left Lunatics years ago.

'It certainly would not have sat in a file waiting for “TRUMP” to have won three Elections. This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS,' he wrote.

Trump said he 'looks forward to suing and holding accountable the once great Wall Street Journal.

'It has truly turned out to be a “Disgusting and Filthy Rag” and, writing defamatory lies like this, shows their desperation to remain relevant.'

DailyMail.com has contacted the Wall Street Journal for comment.

According to the Journal, the naked woman appeared to have been hand-drawn with a marker, with a pair of arcs indicating the woman's breasts and a squiggly signature reading 'Donald' appearing in her pubic region, mimicking hair.

Trump categorically denied any involvement in the drawing or writing of the text.

'This is not me,' he said. 'This is a fake thing. It's a fake Wall Street Journal story.

'I never wrote a picture in my life. I don't draw pictures of women. It's not my language. It's not my words.'

Trump vowed to sue the Wall Street Journal if it published the story, warning: 'I'm gonna sue The Wall Street Journal just like I sued everyone else.'

Although Trump claimed he 'never wrote a picture in my life', several sketches he made of New York City landmarks as early as 2004 are readily available online.

The alleged letter reportedly contained an imaginary conversation between Epstein and Trump, written in third person.

In the imaginary conversation, 'Donald' writes: 'We have certain things in common, Jeffrey', to which 'Jeffrey' replies: 'Yes we do, come to think of it.'

'Donald' then responds: 'Enigmas never age, have you noticed that', and imaginary 'Jeffrey' says 'as a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you.'

Vice President JD Vance rubbished the allegations on Thursday night, writing on X: 'Forgive my language but this story is complete and utter bulls**t. The WSJ should be ashamed for publishing it.

'Where is this letter? Would you be shocked to learn they never showed it to us before publishing it? Does anyone honestly believe this sounds like Donald Trump?'

'Will the people who have bought into every hoax against President Trump show an ounce of skepticism before buying into this bizarre story?'

The publication states that a compilation of letters were put together in a leather-bound album, organized by Maxwell for Epstein prior to his first arrest in 2006.

The album contained poems and photos from businesspeople and high-flying executives.

It is understood the letter forms part of the initial investigation into Epstein and Maxwell that the Justice Department conducted years ago, however it is unclear whether it was examined during Attorney General Pam Bondi's recent search.

Bondi and Trump are both under immense pressure from MAGA loyalists after failing to expose Epstein's client list and reveal the truth about his alleged suicide inside his cell in 2019 while awaiting trial for child sex trafficking charges.

Bondi in February shared binders with MAGA influencers called 'Phase 1' of the Epstein release, but the folders contained previously published information.

She assured the public at the time that the client list was 'on her desk to be reviewed' and that more bombshell information would soon follow.

Last week, she backtracked and insisted the highly sought after client list 'doesn't exist.' She also said that Epstein killed himself in jail, and that there was no evidence to suggest he was murdered.

The lack of new information has sparked mutiny among MAGA and deeply divided Trump's base.

Trump on Wednesday lashed out at his own supporters and accused them of being duped by Democrats over the Epstein saga as he looks to shield himself and Bondi from backlash.

'Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this 'bulls**t,' hook, line, and sinker,' Trump wrote Wednesday.

'They haven't learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years.'

'Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don't want their support anymore!'

There is no evidence former Democratic officials tampered with the documents or played any role in promoting conspiracies about the files, which members of Trump's administration stoked for years.

Elon Musk, Trump's former first buddy, has been among the loudest critics, unfollowing Bondi on X and describing her comments as 'the final straw.'

Back in early June when he and Trump first fell out over the Big Beautiful Bill, Musk sensationally claimed on X that the president was 'in the Epstein files' and thus trying to delay their publication.

'Time to drop the really big bomb: [Trump] is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!',' he wrote, before ultimately deleting the post and apologizing.

On July 8, Musk weighed in again, writing: 'How can people be expected to have faith in Trump if he won’t release the Epstein files?'

But on Thursday even Musk questioned the validity of the letter the Journal has cited, responding to Megyn Kelly's X post with a statement which read: 'Yeah, the letter sounds bogus.'

Shows you how far WSJ has fallen that they are willing to fabricate a letter out of thin air to cash in on the Epstein news cycle. Now I'm seeing all sorts of AI pictures of Epstein and Trump together and I'm left wondering how you combat libel when it's coming from a million different directions.

quote:

Originally posted by rat2306:
PBS and NPR will just need to wake Elmo and his Sesame Street friends up and have them walk to the toy factories and their likenesses copied into more dolls that kids would want to play with and their parents not have regrets about buying. PBS may get royalties from each doll. Mel Brooks would call it "Merchandising! Where the real money is made."

May the Swartz be with you!

May the MAGA be with you!; might work better in this instance.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Right now the US needs to issue new bonds to cover debt, much of it from Bidens Covid spending, current interest rates will cost taxpayers untold massive amounts of interest.

Getting rid of Powell and getting the interest rates down helps the US on the path to reducing costs, interest costs are a big part of the problem.

The Fed doesn't control long-term interest rates... the Fed only controls the federal funds rate which is the interest rate the federal reserve charges its' member banks for overnight loans.

The Federal Reserve's target range for the federal funds rate is currently 4.25% to 4.50%, according to the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) sets this target range, and it influences other interest rates, including those for loans and savings.

Long-term interest rates are set by the market, at auction, and it depends on supply and demand and perceived risk. Inflation is the primary risk of buying bonds.

While you are technically correct the fact of the matter is that the Feds Fund Rate DOES impact almost all other rates including mortgage rates and commercial lending rates like Prime.

The issue is that with our rates at over 4% we are at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the developed world, primarily the EU where there rate is currently sitting at 2.15%.

quote:

the Feds Fund Rate DOES impact almost all other rates including mortgage rates and commercial lending rates

We should have listened to Andrew Jackson:

“Unless the corrupting monster should be shraven with its ill gotten power, my veto will meet it frankly & fearlessly.”

President Andrew Jackson to John Coffee,
February 19, 1832

Congress established the First Bank of the United States in 1791 to serve as a repository for Federal funds. Its charter expired in 1811, but in 1816 Congress created a Second Bank of the United States with a charter set to expire in 1836. By the 1830s the Bank had become a volatile political issue. Some, especially in the trans-Appalachian West, were suspicious of banks because they distrusted the paper money issued by them and because banks controlled credit and loans. To them, the Bank of the United States was the worst of them all: a greedy monopoly dominated by the rich American and foreign interests.

The Bank’s most powerful enemy was President Andrew Jackson. In 1832 Senator Henry Clay, Jackson’s opponent in the Presidential election of that year, proposed rechartering the Bank early. This bill passed Congress, but Jackson vetoed it, declaring that the Bank was "unauthorized by the Constitution, subversive to the rights of States, and dangerous to the liberties of the people." After his reelection, Jackson announced that the Government would no longer deposit Federal funds with the Bank and would place them in state banks. Supporters of the Bank in the Senate were furious and took the unprecedented step of censuring Jackson. The President held fast, however, and when the Bank’s charter expired in 1836, it was never renewed.

https://www.archives.gov/exhib...text/page9_text.html

End the Fed!

“I was born for a storm and a calm does not suit me” - President Andrew Jackson

Another good take on Trump's latest move on the Epstein files from Coffee and Covid:

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

-------
The final battle is beginning. Yesterday, the New York Times excreted a top-of-page story cluster triumphantly headlined, “Trump Tells Bondi to Seek Release of Epstein Grand Jury Testimony.” The sub-headline sneered, “Even if the request succeeds, it would fall far short of critics’ demands to release all investigative materials.” In other words: it hasn’t happened yet; they don’t know what it will be; but already it isn’t good enough.

President Trump has them right where he wants them. I first must walk you through the fog, but the final dot will blow your mind.

The media and the internets burst into flames last night, after President Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to immediately seek court approval to release the sealed 2019 Epstein Grand Jury testimony.

image 2.png
The move came shortly after the Wall Street Journal published a salacious and thinly sourced birthday note allegedly sent from Trump to Epstein in 2003. The letter included “a sexually suggestive drawing,” hints of “shared secrets,” and an implied threat of blackmail-by-leak. Trump immediately denied the report and promised prompt lawsuits, accusing CEO Rupert Murdoch of reneging on a promise to “take care of it.”

Let’s take a moment to look at this “letter.”

The Wall Street Journal’s hit piece was headlined, “Exclusive - Jeffrey Epstein’s Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump.” Allegedly, the letter was included in a leather-bound scrapbook of birthday wishes that Ghislaine Maxwell collected for Epstein in 2003.

To say the letter was ‘thinly sourced’ is like saying the Titanic had a slight moisture problem.

First, the Journal has neither the Birthday Scrapbook nor the letter. It said it “reviewed” the letter. When? Where? How? Was it just read to them over the phone? What does “reviewed” even mean? For sure, it means they don’t have it. The Journal described the letter as being “among documents examined by Justice Department officials” —what officials?— “according to people who have reviewed the pages.” People? The Village People? Psychics?

“I’m sensing the letter was typed… I’m seeing small arcs… there’s… a signature? Yes! It’s forming… it’s… Donald!”

In other words: the whole Scrapbook story is double anonymous hearsay. Some unnamed “people” said some unidentified “officials” reviewed the birthday binder and the original letter. Even bad lawyers wouldn’t consider trying to admit that in court. “Um, your Honor, someone told us that some government officials may have seen a letter, which someone else described to us… and we’d like to enter that into evidence.” Okay.

Next, the Journal’s future defendants admitted they know nothing about the letter’s provenance. “It isn’t clear,” the Journal admitted, “how the letter with Trump’s signature was prepared.” Great. And there’s no chain of custody. Nobody’s ever even heard of this Birthday Scrapbook before. “The existence of the album and the contents of the birthday letters,” the Journal conceded, “haven’t previously been reported.”

No leaks, no mention in any of the court cases, nothing, in over twenty years.

It’s just too much. Biden’s DOJ raided Mar-a-Lago for newspaper clippings, indicted Trump four separate times, subpoenaed everyone but Barron, surveilled campaign officials, and criminalized memes. They even leaked photos from the Mar-a-Lago raid. But we’re supposed to believe Democrats sat on a perfectly gift-wrapped, visually grotesque, plausibly deniable Trump–Epstein letter since 2019 or earlier— and just … what? Forgot to use it? Even during impeachment one and two?

Notwithstanding all those problems, the Journal glowingly described the “bawdy” letter. It waited till about three pages in, and then set out a very non-Trumpian, odd, quippy typed (not handwritten) fake dialogue between Trump and Epstein that sounds just like a scripted confession. “Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey,” the letter gushed. “Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it.”

To make sure we got the message, the carefully scripted, incriminating-sounding typed dialogue was allegedly placed inside a hand-drawn cartoon of a naked woman, with “breasts denoted by small arcs” (small breasts? pre-pubescent ones?) above “Donald,” scrawled as a signature in the sketch’s pubic region.

Get this— despite the obvious, explosive, salacious potential, the Journal did not publish a picture of the actual letter. It did not even explain the letter’s absence. Why not show the letter? Is it sealed? Confidential? Restricted? If so, why not just say that? Or is it possible the Journal never actually saw the letter but just “reviewed” an oral description?

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the Journal did not mention any forensic analysis. The convenient fact the incredibly suspicious ‘dialogue’ was typed eliminates handwriting analysis of that part, but what about the signature? The drawing? You’d think they’d have cited six forensic handwriting analyses before going to print with something like this.

Only the original letter with the wet ink signature could be subjected to forensic analysis. Anything else could be copy-pasta. Stroke direction, pen pressure, ink composition, paper age and source— none of these things can be analyzed from a PDF or cell phone snap.

In other words, it’s thinner than Shell station toilet paper. It’s so thin, if you held it up to the light, you’d see the ghost of J. Edgar Hoover shaking his head. So, the alleged letter is a stinking pile of hot garbage, and Trump is about to get another fat settlement to fund the “Golden Defamation Wing” of his presidential library.

image 7.png
Now let’s get back to Bondi.

Before Jeffrey Epstein could face trial in 2019 for running a sex trafficking ring so depraved it made Eyes Wide Shut look like a summer church potluck, a federal grand jury had to greenlight the case. A grand jury is like a legal litmus test. It doesn’t decide guilt, just whether there’s enough sketchy behavior to let prosecutors haul someone into court. In Epstein’s case, the grand jury reviewed evidence and testimony about a conspiracy to commit sex trafficking and sex trafficking of minors, then issued the indictment that landed him in that now-infamous Manhattan jail cell, where the cameras flickered, the guards napped and … well, you know the rest.

The grand jury in the Epstein case likely saw a one-sided highlight reel from prosecutors—because that’s how grand juries work. No defense attorneys, no cross-examination, just prosecutors walking jurors through flight logs, victim statements, bank transfers, surveillance footage, and possibly a who’s-who of eyebrow-raising guest lists.

They probably heard tearful testimony from survivors, saw photos of underage girls at Epstein’s homes, and maybe even reviewed those infamous massage room schedules. The pitch wouldn’t have been subtle: “Here’s a billionaire who shipped teenage girls across state lines like Amazon packages. Now can we please charge him with conspiracy and sex trafficking of minors?”

The jurors, ordinary citizens locked in a private, secured courtroom with all this filth, only had one job: to decide whether there was probable cause to indict. They did. And that indictment probably contains some very awkward facts for very powerful people.

To get an indictment, prosecutors did not necessarily need to show the jurors the client list, Epstein’s intelligence connections, the blackmail ring, or even name a single customer. But in 2019, they were operating under the full assurance that the grand jury room was a legal black box. Prosecutors present evidence to a grand jury understanding that the proceedings are secret, and that any records, transcripts, or testimony will remain sealed, absent a very rare court order.

In a politically charged case like Epstein’s, federal prosecutors almost certainly and confidently assumed that the grand jury transcripts would never see daylight. Prosecutors try to make their best case to a grand jury. That’s literally the job. And in a case like Epstein’s, they might have made it with a firehose, believing no one would ever read the transcript.

If the court grants Bondi’s request to unseal the Epstein grand jury transcripts, don’t expect a Hollywood-style exposé with names, photos, and smoking-gun confessions. Expect a dense, heavily redacted legal document—probably hundreds of pages long—filled with euphemisms, “Witness A”-style pseudonyms, and enough black ink to empty a toner cartridge.

Victims’ identities will be shielded, uncharged third parties will be scrubbed out, and any still-classified investigative details will vanish beneath thick redaction bars. But what does remain —timelines, charges, patterns, and unredacted narrative structure— could still paint a damning picture of what prosecutors knew, when they knew it, and how close they may have gotten to people the public has never been allowed to name.

Still, if the Epstein grand jury transcripts are unsealed, it would be one of the most explosive document releases in modern American legal history. If Epstein was killed to prevent the trial, releasing the Grand Jury report will give us the best look at what evidence would have surfaced in public. Presumably, it was evidence worth killing for.

In a way, this is Trump’s Revenge.

The DOJ renewed the Epstein investigation during Trump 1.0’s first year in office. They indicted the Financial Man of Mystery (at the Grand Jury) in 2019, and were preparing to try his case when Epstein died in federal custody, driving the whole thing into a graveyard ditch. Now, President Trump is ordering Pam Bondi to expose what was about to come out at trial in 2019, but had never gotten the chance.

And this probably wouldn’t have been politically possible, absent the Democrats’ recent demands for transparency while they were drunk on scandal momentum. Now, it’s bipartisan.
What about the court? The case now lands into the lap of an unlucky federal district judge, who will probably have to wade through tons of opposition. Lawyers for the victims will probably oppose release. Shady third parties will probably file sealed motions to at least scrub references to themselves. Each of these opposing motions is entitled to due process. Absent a miracle, expect the process to take weeks or even months.

The New York Times sneered that unsealing the grand jury transcripts isn’t the same as releasing “the whole Epstein file.” That’s technically true; but it’s also deeply misleading.

The Grand Jury testimony represents the best version of the case the DOJ believed it could prove, before Epstein’s death, before redactions, and without political caution. It’s the raw indictment pitch, presented to citizens in private, without spin or PR filter. Unlike rumors, anonymous leaks, or pages of potentially related or unrelated documents, grand jury material is presented under oath. The witnesses are sworn. The evidence is carefully cataloged. It’s all been formally curated by prosecutors.

Releasing the transcript offers a way to pull back the curtain without doxing the victims or dumping volumes of child sexual abuse material (CSAM). It threads the delicate needle between secrecy and public interest. On the other hand, the full Epstein archive —meaning, the totality of what was seized by the FBI (photos, hard drives, flight logs, emails, letters, videos, contacts, interviews, account statements, etc.)— almost certainly contains a hopeless chowder of damning evidence, irrelevant junk, and misleading red herrings.

Any experienced litigator will agree that too much evidence is just as bad, or maybe even worse, than too little evidence.

Now we reach the most curious aspect of this developing ‘scandal.’ Some people have speculated that Biden’s DOJ invested its four years packing the Epstein file with misleading disinformation, or even manufactured evidence (like Birthday Scrapbooks nobody’d ever heard of), intentionally turning the full file into a politically useless powder keg of devastating ammunition aimed at Democrat enemies.

Let’s explore that notion a little further.

When Trump calls the Epstein scandal a “Democrat hoax” and “scam,” most people assume he’s gaslighting. But … what if he means something more tactical? Maybe Trump isn’t saying that Epstein didn’t commit crimes. Maybe he’s hinting that Democrats (and their deep state allies) weaponized the aftermath. Such as padding the FBI case file with misleading misinformation; creating just-plausible-enough “evidence” to entrap Trump or his allies; flooding the archive with innuendo, red herrings, and manufactured grotesqueries (like “bawdy letters” allegedly signed “Donald”); and intentionally making it too politically dangerous to release.

Maybe they aimed to put Trump in an impossible fix: either don’t release, and break his promises, or release, and get manufactured Epstein spooge all over himself and every other significant Republican. Headline from WaPo, Wednesday:

image 4.png
Democrats had four long years to get ready. This theory would explain why Bondi first said, “I have the file”— and then said, “there’s nothing to see here.” Maybe she wasn’t backtracking. Maybe she was dodging the trap. She didn’t flip— she recognized a setup. Ecstatic NPR headline, this week:


In other words, when Trump says Democrat hoax, maybe he means they sabotaged the file.

Did Bondi discover the Democrats had prepared a honeypot? They were aware of all the many promises made by Bondi, Kash, and Bongino to release the entire Epstein file. Did they prepare for it, by loading the file up with so many lies it would be impossible to untangle? Fine. We’ll pack it so full of so much scandalous crap that when it comes out, it destroys Trump’s people, not ours.

But Trump went sideways, and said, “we’re not releasing it.” It caused the Democrats to lose their marbles, turn on a dime, and suddenly start demanding it now! Hence the sudden surge of press coverage, calls from the left for “full transparency,” and suspiciously timed media grenades (like the mystery Birthday Scrapbook) that just happened to target Trump and no one else.

Unlike the bloated FBI archive, the grand jury transcript is court-sealed, time-locked (2019), prosecutor-curated, sworn and vetted, and immune to post-hoc deep-state meddling. It’s the version of the case built before Epstein’s death, before Biden’s DOJ, and before the cleanup crew arrived. It’s the last known account of the crimes as the Trump DOJ saw them.

When Democrats suddenly start demanding the release of the “full Epstein file” —after four years of DOJ silence, sealed records, and zero momentum— they mean they want their trap to spring. The last thing they want is for the grand jury file to be opened.

So Trump decided not to pry open the compromised FBI file, but the sealed courtroom vault. He outplayed them.

Finally, despite the overheated corporate media claims and wishful thinking, CNN found that the MAGA faithful are not leaving Trump. If anything, Trump’s approval rating among Republicans is climbing:

CLIP: CNN finds increasing Trump approval rating among Republicans (1:37).

The Epstein case’s global scale, and its involvement with some of the world’s most well-known celebrities and top political figures, make it potentially the greatest scandal in human history. Nothing else comes close. Not Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, or even perhaps the Church Abuse Scandal. So it should surprise no one that the route to the truth looks like something from a “Family Circus” cartoon drawn by a schizophrenic whistleblower with an LSD-infused Sharpie.

Forget about predicting it; the Epstein story defies description. It isn’t just a scandal, it’s a whole genre; somewhere between political thriller, true crime, and cold war noir. We’ll have to wait impatiently for the grand jury materials to appear. We’ve officially entered Disclosure Phase 1, thanks to Trump’s move to unseal the one document they didn’t get to rig.

Now, the game is on. Expect ‘them’ to pull out all the stops. It’s going to be lit.