Category: Epstein
Thomas Massie teases ‘back up plan’ to out Jeffrey Epstein accomplices
Form New York Post: Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, a friend of Trump’s, said the Epstein Files Transparency Act had “loopholes big enough for a plane with Bill Clinton to fly to Epstein’s island” and that the group is hopeful it will receive a different, potentially less censored set of information. The FOIA process requires […]
The post Thomas Massie teases ‘back up plan’ to out Jeffrey Epstein accomplices appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Federal judge in Florida orders release of long-hidden Epstein grand jury documents
After the nearly unanimous passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act last month, many have wondered what other files and information have yet to be disclosed amid the heated controversy over the Epstein files.
A federal judge in Florida just ordered the release of grand jury documents from an old case against Epstein, defying past orders not to release them.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith argued that a recent law now takes precedence over the rules that prohibited past disclosure.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith has ordered the release of grand jury transcripts related to investigations from 2005 and 2007 involving convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
RELATED: Was the latest Epstein document dump just Trump’s 4D chess trap? Steve Deace answers.
Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images
Grand jury proceedings are often conducted in private and there are higher standards to meet in order to disclose transcripts from them.
However, U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith, in his short decision to release the transcripts, argued that a recent law now takes precedence over the rules that prohibited past disclosure.
Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky), who spearheaded the effort for disclosure, posted the news of the ruling on X on Friday afternoon.
Massie highlighted the fact that the Epstein Files Transparency Act played a crucial role in the judge’s decision to override past decisions against disclosure.
The Act, being “later-enacted” and more “specific”, trumps the rules barring the release of the documents in the past.
Epstein was not convicted of any crimes as a result of this grand jury investigation..
Instead, he famously pleaded guilty to comparatively minor charges in 2008 under the U.S. Attorney at the time, Alex Acosta, who later became Trump’s Labor Secretary in his first term. Acosta subsequently resigned following scrutiny over the non-prosecution agreement in 2008.
It is not clear when the grand jury transcripts will be released or exactly how much new information will be disclosed.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed into law on November 19, gives the government 30 days to prepare and release all relevant records.
Those following the case can expect an update on the release of any remaining files by December 19.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Epstein Files Update!
Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Epstein Records Subpoenaed by House Committee Judicial Watch Sues for Jack Smith’s Emails Targeting Donald Trump New Air Marshal Assistant Director has a Questionable Past Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Epstein Records Subpoenaed by House Committee The U.S. Department of Justice is sitting on information about Jeffrey Epstein that […]
The post Epstein Files Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Epstein-Related Records Subpoenaed by House Oversight Committee
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records subpoenaed by the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform regarding accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-04123 )). Judicial Watch sued in the U.S. […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for Epstein-Related Records Subpoenaed by House Oversight Committee appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘Conspiracy theory’ is just media code for ‘we hope this never comes out’
Here are the basic rules.
First: If the corporate left-wing press doesn’t like a claim, it invariably becomes a “right-wing conspiracy theory,” usually with the tag “without evidence.” The evidence may exist. It may even sit in plain sight — but the press decides what counts.
The ruling class wants your trust back. It hasn’t done the first thing to deserve it.
Second: Some claims get taken seriously no matter what. Those become “allegations.” Allegations quickly morph into “fact.”
Take the recent example of Democrats who alleged on X that President Trump spent Thanksgiving in 2017 with Jeffrey Epstein. The story collapsed in minutes — presidents don’t slip away unnoticed on major holidays to meet notorious sex criminals — but the claim still got ample attention. Point it in the right direction, and it gets a hearing. Point it at the wrong people, and it gets the back of the hand.
Sharon Waxman’s recent column at the Wrap follows the script. The former Washington Post correspondent was shocked to discover the Epstein emails prove that “conspiracy theorists were right.” She writes as if she uncovered some long-lost truth.
Hardly.
Waxman’s column is less revelation than admission: For years, the people who run newsrooms turned a blind eye to the obvious. Donald Trump wasn’t the big fish in those files. Their sources were.
The Epstein email cache runs more than 20,000 documents. Nothing in it should shock any honest observer. The messages show politicians, financiers, academics, diplomats, think-tankers, and media figures seeking introductions, favors, and even dating advice from a convicted sex offender.
Some wanted Epstein’s contacts. Others wanted his money. Some wrote to him while serving in public office. This is not rumor. It is record.
And yes, Epstein talked a lot about Trump, which should surprise no one. They ran in the same social circles. They were friends until they fell out.
Waxman’s piece matters because of what it shows about her profession. Reporters are oddly incurious creatures. They love the line: If your mother says she loves you, check it out. In practice, the checking stops the moment a story threatens the wrong interests. Then skepticism fades. The questions stop. The story dies.
Epstein proved this in real time. His 2008 sweetheart deal with the feds should have made him untouchable. Instead, it signaled that he was protected.
After that deal, Epstein did not retreat. He didn’t slink off into the shadows. He worked the same world that lectures the rest of us about “norms” and “Our Democracy.™” He gave the very married Larry Summers advice on how to seduce a colleague who happened to be the daughter of a high-ranking official in the Chinese Communist Party. He dined with Bill Gates. He hung out with Ehud Barak and ex-Prince Andrew.
Americans saw this and reached the obvious conclusion: rules for the public, exemptions for the powerful.
Say that aloud, though, and the press rolled their eyes and muttered “conspiracy theory.” The famous rule about checking every claim never applied to Cabinet officials, donors, university presidents, or tech titans until the obscenities were too outrageous to let pass.
The press know their own history. They know the government lies. They know institutions close ranks. They know networks protect themselves.
They know about the Tuskegee experiments and MK Ultra and the Gulf of Tonkin sham. They watched the Wuhan “lab leak” go from preposterous to plausible. “You will own nothing” and the “Great Reset” aren’t right-wing fever dreams — they’re actual publications.
But when a live case of elite protection appeared in Jeffrey Epstein, suddenly none of this counted. Suddenly it was unthinkable — not in their circles, not involving their friends, not touching their institutions.
Waxman’s column accidentally exposes the pattern: Our establishment manufactures ignorance and then uses that ignorance as proof that nothing is wrong.
Remember the 2017 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity? The same experts who drone on about “no evidence of widespread fraud” attacked the commission for probing “unsupported claims” — while states withheld the data needed to determine the truth. When a system blocks audits and then declares itself clean, it isn’t proving confidence. It is proving fear.
That is how Epstein was protected. Not through lack of evidence, but lack of curiosity. Evidence didn’t vanish. Inquiry did. And anyone who noticed was treated as the problem.
RELATED: The right must choose: Fight the real war, or cosplay revolution online
Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images
But trust isn’t owed. Trust is earned.
And the people who demand it have done the most to destroy it. The loss of trust didn’t come from memes or bots. It came from watching Jeffrey Epstein remain welcome among the same people who so archly declare that “democracy dies in darkness.” It came from watching the press spend more time policing public suspicion than scrutinizing powerful friends. It came from institutions that treat questions as insults.
Now Sharon Waxman tells us the “conspiracy theorists” were right.
Gee, thanks, Sharon. Better late than never, I guess.
America didn’t need that revelation. The country has seen it time and again, as the “conspiracy theorists” turn out to be right. The only people who pretended otherwise were the people paid to find the truth.
The ruling class wants your trust back. It hasn’t done the first thing to deserve it.
Was the latest Epstein document dump just Trump’s 4D chess trap? Steve Deace answers.
After two major Epstein document dumps left the nation deeply disappointed — no bombshells, no convictions — America is once again holding her breath in anticipation of the “big one”: the full DOJ files mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which President Trump signed into law last week.
In the meantime, however, a separate batch of more than 50,000 pages of Epstein estate records released by the House Oversight Committee in September and November 2025 has already delivered some politically explosive material.
Steve Deace, BlazeTV host of the “Steve Deace Show,” says he has gotten the same question over and over again from his audience: Was this Trump’s 4D chess master plan all along: Let Democrats dig their own grave by demanding transparency, knowing these already-released House documents would drop and embarrass some of their biggest names?
While the question is undoubtedly warranted, Steve says the answer is no — this was not some premeditated plan. It’s just the age-old paradigm at work again.
“I know people very close to the president of the United States … the kind of people that would know if such a plan existed,” says Steve, “and they were quite dismayed this summer when the president just kind of suddenly changed his tune back in July and said … ‘It’s not a story. Why do you care? Move on.”’
But the chain of events certainly has the optics of a big Democrat gotcha scheme, he says. The timing of the revelations that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) asked Epstein for campaign donations after Epstein’s sex-crime convictions and U.S. Virgin Islands Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D) was taking real-time instructions from Epstein on what questions to ask during a congressional hearing seem almost too perfect to be accidental.
“And so I can see why people are wondering, ‘Was this just part of a very well-coordinated plan?’” says Steve. “It wasn’t. I can promise you it wasn’t.”
There’s an “undeniable truth in American politics” we all need to understand: “You can always count on Republicans to pre-emptively surrender,” and “you can always bank on Democrats then completely overreaching in response.”
This is true of our current administration, says Steve. The only difference is “their surrender line is not as pre-emptive as the previous people.”
“This dynamic plays out over and over and over and over and over again,” he says, citing the most recent cycle: Republicans folded early on Obamacare repeal and lost 40 House seats in 2018; Democrats then overreached with a stolen 2020 election, lawfare against opponents, and vaccine mandates, only to get crushed in the 2024 red wave that swept Trump and the GOP back into power.
The same cycle is repeating itself with Epstein right now, he says. The GOP promised that heads would roll, but nearly a year into President Trump’s second term, not a single arrest has been made. Then Democrats overreached by demanding full transparency on the Epstein files — pushing the bill through Congress themselves — only to watch their own members get scorched by the revelations. Enter Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) — a “total clown,” says Steve — trying to deflect by screaming “what is Trump hiding?” even though Democrats never touched the Epstein files during their four years in power.
So will this third release finally deliver?
Steve says most likely no. “I’ve already seen Tom Fitton at Judicial Watch going through the language of the legislation. He’s like, ‘I’m still going to have to sue these guys like a half a dozen times to get really everything we want.”’
But that doesn’t mean the drop will be all smoke like the first two. The fact that Larry Summers — Harvard president emeritus and Democrat heavyweight — has already resigned in anticipation of the release tells us there’s some real heat behind the smoke.
Steve reiterates his lesson: “You can always count on Republicans to pre-emptively surrender, and then you can always count on Democrats to way overreach in response to that, thus self-generating their own backlash.”
Add to that the fact that Donald Trump has this “providential anointing” that allows him to benefit greatly from his enemies, and it’s clear: This is no “seventh-dimensional chess that was nine months in the making,” says Steve.
“It’s just the paradigm.”
To hear more of Steve’s analysis, watch the episode above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Hakeem Jeffries’ campaign allegedly solicited money from Jeffrey Epstein
Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) has accused a Democratic colleague of trying to solicit money from convicted sex predator Jeffrey Epstein.
On the House floor on Tuesday, Comer slammed Democratic fundraisers for inviting Epstein to an event, including to potentially privately meet with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D). This invite was a part of a 2013 campaign effort, just a handful of years after Epstein pleaded guilty to solicitation of prostitution involving a minor under 18.
‘Of course, I have no recollection of the email.’
“Hakeem Jeffries’ campaign solicited money from Jeffrey Epstein,” Comer declared.
Comer was referring to an email sent by a political consulting firm to Epstein in May 2013, just a few months into Jeffries’ first term in Congress. The email stated that the firm was “working with Congressman Hakeem Jeffries” and invited Epstein to a “fundraising dinner with President Obama.”
CNN’s Kaitlan Collins questioned Jeffries about the allegations that his campaign invited Epstein to an event.
“Of course, I have no recollection of the email. I’ve never had a conversation with him. Never met him, know nothing about him, other than the extreme things that he’s been convicted of doing,” Jeffries told Collins. “And that’s why I’m just strongly supportive of the efforts backing the survivors to make sure that everything can come out, whatever is in those Department of Justice files.”
Hakeem Jeffries. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
Jeffries stated that he never received a donation from Epstein.
Earlier during the floor proceedings, Comer accused Democratic lawmakers of trying to leverage the Epstein scandal to attack President Donald Trump.
James Comer. Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
“When the Oversight Committee interviewed former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta, Democrats whipped themselves into a frenzy trying to manufacture a ‘gotcha’ moment. But they failed,” Comer stated, adding that Acosta’s testimony confirmed there was no connection to Trump in the Epstein case.
“Next, Democrats resorted to selective leaks and doctored documents to mislead the American people,” he continued. “In their latest selective leak, Democrats released just three, three of the 23,000 pages of documents from the Epstein estate. And they made redactions to two of those emails that changed both the context and meaning of the three pages they released.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Democratic lawmaker texted Epstein during hearing — appeared to use his tips to grill Trump’s ex-lawyer
A Democratic lawmaker admitted to texting with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing, seeking his advice on how to question President Donald Trump’s so-called “fixer,” Michael Cohen.
Cohen has claimed that Trump tried to conceal a $130,000 hush-money payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels to hide an alleged extramarital affair. Trump has denied these claims, stating that the funds were sent directly to Cohen, his then-personal attorney, for legal expenses. Cohen testified against the president in the case led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D), in which Trump was convicted on all 34 counts of falsifying business records. Trump has filed an appeal seeking to reverse the criminal conviction.
‘During the hearing, Congresswoman Plaskett received texts from staff, constituents and the public at large offering advice, support and in some cases partisan vitriol, including from Epstein.’
Documents released Wednesday by the House Oversight Committee revealed that a member of Congress, whose name was redacted, had been exchanging text messages with Epstein during a February 2019 hearing where lawmakers heard testimony from Cohen.
Epstein’s messages to the lawmaker appeared to indicate that he was watching the hearing live. Although the name of the congressperson was redacted from the committee’s documents, the timing of the messages indicated that the convicted sex predator was texting Democratic Delegate Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Washington Post reported.
Plaskett’s office released a statement on Friday, admitting that she had been texting with Epstein.
Plaskett reportedly sent a message to Epstein before the hearing. When the hearing began and the live feed started, Epstein complimented the delegate’s outfit.
RELATED: Trump felony conviction in doubt? President files appeal to clear his name
Stacey Plaskett. Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
“Are you chewing,” read Epstein’s message to the lawmaker moments after the camera cut to Plaskett, who was seen moving her mouth in a chewing motion.
“Not any more,” Plaskett responded, according to the documents. “Chewing interior of my mouth. Bad habit from middle school.”
“Cohen brought up RONA – keeper of the secrets,” Epstein wrote at 11:24 a.m. His message seemed to reference Rhona Graff, Trump’s former executive assistant and former vice president of the Trump Organization, although Plaskett did not immediately grasp the reference.
“RONA??” the lawmaker replied.
“Quick I’m up next is that an acronym,” Plaskett asked, appearing to indicate that it would soon be her turn to question Cohen.
RELATED: Sorry, liberals — the Epstein emails don’t nail Trump
Michael Cohen. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
At 12:25 p.m., Epstein suggested the lawmaker ask Cohen about other individuals close to Trump.
“Hes (sic) opened the door to questions re who are the other henchmen at trump org,” he wrote.
When it was Plaskett’s turn to question Cohen, she inquired about Trump’s associates, as Epstein had recommended.
“During the hearing, Congresswoman Plaskett received texts from staff, constituents and the public at large offering advice, support and in some cases partisan vitriol, including from Epstein,” the statement from Plaskett’s office read. “As a former prosecutor she welcomes information that helps her get at the truth and took on the GOP that was trying to bury the truth. The congresswoman has previously made clear her long record combating sexual assault and human trafficking, her disgust over Epstein’s deviant behavior and her support for his victims.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
