epstein file

Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi’s decision to appoint an “emergency police commissioner” in Washington is just the latest attempt to change an increasingly uncomfortable subject for the White House. Last month President Trump told the American people he was never briefed on the files regarding Jeffrey Epstein, who in 2019 was charged with sex trafficking minors. We now know that Bondi told the president in May that his name appeared multiple times in those files, which traced Epstein’s operation back to the mid-1990s.

So — either you believe a city experiencing a 30-year low in crime is suddenly in need of an emergency police commissioner or you agree with Joe Rogan’s assessment: This administration is gaslighting the public regarding those files.

Now there will be pundits who will try to say Republicans are too focused on kitchen table issues to care about the Epstein controversy.

If only that were true.

According to the Consumer Price Index, goods cost more today than they did a month ago. And prices are higher than they were a year ago. It would be wonderful if Congress were in session to address kitchen table issues like grocery prices. However, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ended the House session early to avoid a vote on the release of the Epstein files — a vote that could have displeased Trump. Those are the lengths some in the MAGA movement are willing to go to prevent the public from knowing the truth about Epstein’s clients. That is the backdrop for what is currently happening in the streets of Washington. It’s not inspired by a rise in crime, but by a fear of transparency.

It’s important to look at Bondi’s “emergency police commissioner” decision with clear, discerning eyes because the administration is purposefully conflating the issues of crime and homelessness in order to win back support from Trump’s base. While it is true that the district has made huge progress against crime, and the number of unhoused residents is far lower than a decade ago even though homeless populations nationwide have soared, the rise of conspicuous encampments around Washington is one of the reasons Virginia was almost able to lure away the city’s NBA and NHL teams. However, the nation’s capital was able to keep those sports franchises because of the leadership of Mayor Muriel Bowser.

Instead of taking over the city’s police force, perhaps Bondi should ask Bowser for some advice that could be replicated in other cities nationwide. Ask the mayor’s office what resources it might need to continue its progress on homelessness and crime. But again, this really isn’t about what benefits the people, is it? It’s really about what’s in the best interest of one person.

Now there will be pundits who will try to tell you Republicans are too focused on making this country “great” to worry about who is in the Epstein files. I ask you, when has trampling over democracy ever made us great? In Iran, we contributed to the overthrowing of Mohammad Mosaddegh in the 1950s, and we continue to be at odds with the nation. In Chile in the early 1970s, we moved against Salvador Allende, and it took 20 years to normalize our relationship again.

Here at home, in 2010, the state of Michigan took over the predominantly Black city of Benton Harbor under the guise of a financial emergency. The City Council was prevented from governing as state officials tried to save the city from a crippling pension deficit and other financial shortages. There was temporary reprieve, but Benton Harbor is still on economic life support. That’s because the issue wasn’t the policies of the local government. It was the lasting effects of losing so much tax revenue to a neighboring suburb due to white flight. The explanation for Benton Harbor’s woes lies in the past, not the present.

The same is true in Washington. The relatively young suburbs of McLean and Great Falls, Va., are two of the richest in the country. When you have the same financial obligations of yesteryear but less tax revenue to operate with, there will be shortfalls. And those gaps manifest themselves in many ways — rundown homes, empty storefronts, a lack of school resources.

Those are legitimate plagues affecting every major city. What Bondi is doing in Washington isn’t a cure for what ails it. And when you consider why she’s doing what she’s doing, you are reminded why people are so sick of politics.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

A quarter of Latinos who supported President Donald Trump in the November election are not guaranteed to vote for Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections, according to a new national poll by Equis, a leading research and polling group.

Last week Equis, alongside progressive think tank Data for Progress, released a July memo that summarized key findings from a national poll of 1,614 registered voters, conducted between July 7 and July 17.

This time frame coincides with some notable turning points in politics: namely, when Trump signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill” into law, as well as his execution of mass deportations and controversial handling of the Epstein files.

Respondents were asked, “If the 2026 election for United States Congress were held today, for whom would you vote?” Only 27% replied that they would vote for a Republican candidate, marking a significant political party drop from the 45% who said they voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election.

A quarter of those polled said they were not sure whom they would vote for (16%), would vote for someone else (5%), or would not vote at all (4%).

This shaky political alignment comes at a critical time for Republicans, who are banking on continual Latino support in 2026 — especially as Texas Republicans plan to flip five blue seats under a newly proposed congressional map.

The Equis study also found that 63% of Latinos disapproved of Trump’s job as president in July, a slight uptick from polling numbers in May, when 60% disapproved. This rating seems to reflect broader sentiments regarding the state of the U.S. economy: 64% of Latinos rated the economy as “somewhat or very poor,” while only 34% viewed it as “somewhat or very good.”

However, a disapproval of Trump does not mean Latinos have rushed to back the Democratic Party. Half the Latinos polled said Democrats care more about people like them, versus the 25% who said Republicans care more. Meanwhile, 17% said they believe that neither party cares.

Swing voters — including those who Equis calls “Biden defectors,” or voters who elected Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024 — are twice as likely to say that neither party cares about people like them (38%).

“Growing dissatisfaction with Trump offers Democrats an opportunity, but only if they are willing to capitalize on it,” the July memo states.

Overall, Trump’s national approval ratings are taking a nosedive, according to aggregate polling by the New York Times, which notes that Trump’s approach to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation has angered his base.

On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the Justice Department for the files; lawmakers believe they could implicate Trump and other former top officials in the sex-trafficking investigation.

Trump’s anti-immigration policies have also likely shifted his popularity. Early July Gallup polling revealed that Americans have grown more positive toward immigration — 79% of Americans say immigration is a “good thing” for the country, which marks a 64% increase from last year and a 25-year record high.

WASHINGTON — The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the Justice Department on Tuesday for files in the Jeffrey Epstein sex-trafficking investigation and is seeking depositions with the Clintons and former law enforcement officials, part of a congressional probe that lawmakers believe may show links to President Trump and former top officials.

The Republican-controlled committee issued subpoenas for depositions with former President Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and eight former top law enforcement officials.

The committee’s actions showed how even with lawmakers away from Washington on a monthlong break, interest in the Epstein files is still running high. Trump has denied prior knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and claimed he cut off their relationship long ago, and he has repeatedly tried to move past the Justice Department’s decision not to release a full accounting of the investigation. But lawmakers from both major political parties, as well as many in the Republican president’s political base, have refused to let it go.

Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, the Republican chair of the Oversight Committee, noted in letters to U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and the former officials that the cases of Epstein and his former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell “have received immense public interest and scrutiny.”

“While the Department undertakes efforts to uncover and publicly disclose additional information related to Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell’s cases, it is imperative that Congress conduct oversight of the federal government’s enforcement of sex-trafficking laws generally, and specifically, its handling of the investigation and prosecution of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell,” Comer said.

Epstein’s circle

Since Epstein’s 2019 death in a New York jail cell as he awaited trial on sex-trafficking charges, conservative conspiracists have stoked theories about what information investigators gathered on Epstein — and who else knew about his sexual abuse of teenage girls. Republican lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee nodded to that line of questioning last month by initiating the subpoenas for the Clintons, both Democrats, as well as demanding all communications between President Biden’s Democratic administration and the Justice Department regarding Epstein.

Bill Clinton was among a number of luminaries acquainted with Epstein, a wealthy financier, before the criminal investigation against him in Florida became public two decades ago. Clinton has never been accused of wrongdoing by any of the women who say Epstein abused them.

One of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Giuffre, once gave a newspaper interview in which she described riding in a helicopter with Clinton and flirting with Trump, but she later said in a deposition that those things hadn’t actually happened and were mistakes by the reporter. Clinton has previously said through a spokesperson that while he traveled on Epstein’s jet, he never visited his homes and had no knowledge of his crimes.

The committee is also demanding interviews under oath from former attorneys general spanning the last four presidential administrations: Merrick Garland, William Barr, Jeff Sessions, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder and Alberto Gonzales. Lawmakers also subpoenaed former FBI Directors James Comey and Robert Mueller.

However, it was Democrats who sparked the move to subpoena the Justice Department for its files on Epstein. They were joined by some Republicans last month to successfully initiate the subpoena through a subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee.

“Today was an important step forward in our fight for transparency regarding the Epstein files and our dedication to seeking justice for the victims,” said Democratic Reps. Robert Garcia of Long Beach, the top Democrat on the committee, and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, who initiated the subpoena, in a joint statement. “Now, we must continue putting pressure on the Department of Justice until we actually receive every document.”

Will the subpoenas be enforced?

The subpoenas give the Justice Department until Aug. 19 to hand over the requested records, though such requests are typically open to negotiation and can be resisted by the Trump administration.

The committee is also asking the former officials to appear for the depositions throughout August, September and October, concluding with Hillary Clinton on Oct. 9 and Bill Clinton on Oct. 14.

Multiple former presidents have voluntarily testified before Congress, but none has been compelled to do so. That history was invoked by Trump in 2022, between his first and second terms, when he faced a subpoena by the House committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, riot by a mob of his supporters at the U.S. Capitol.

Lawyers for Trump resisted the subpoena, citing decades of legal precedent they said shielded an ex-president from being ordered to appear before Congress. The committee ultimately withdrew its subpoena.

The committee had previously issued a subpoena for an interview with Maxwell, who had been serving a prison sentence in Florida for luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein but was recently transferred to a Texas facility.

However, Comer has indicated he is willing to delay that deposition until after the Supreme Court decides whether to hear an appeal to her conviction. She argues she was wrongfully prosecuted.

As the Justice Department has tried to appease demands for more disclosure, it has turned attention to Maxwell. Officials interviewed her for 1 1/2 days last month.

But Democrats stressed the importance of gaining direct access to the investigative files, rather than relying on Maxwell’s words.

“We need these files now in order to corroborate any claims she makes,” Garcia and Lee said, adding: “This fight is not over.”

Prosecutors say there’s not much new in grand jury transcripts

Another way the Trump administration is trying to address the public clamor for more transparency is by asking federal judges to unseal grand jury transcripts in the cases against Epstein and Maxwell. But prosecutors indicated Monday the public already knows a lot of what’s in the documents.

Much of the information “was made publicly available at trial or has otherwise been publicly reported through the public statements of victims and witnesses,” prosecutors wrote in court papers Monday.

The prosecutors also made clear they’re seeking to unseal only the transcripts of grand jury witnesses’ testimony, not the exhibits that accompanied it.

Groves writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Jennifer Peltz and David Caruso in New York and Eric Tucker in Washington contributed to this report.

LOS BANOS, Calif. — When it comes to President Trump, Angie Zamora and Phaidra Medeiros agree on very little.

Zamora, a 36-year-old Army veteran, has nothing good to say.

“The laws. All the rights taken away from women. The stuff with ICE,” Zamora said, ticking off her frustrations as she stopped outside the post office in the Central Valley community of Los Banos. “Why are they going after people working on farms when they’re supposed to be chasing violent criminals?”

Medeiros, by contrast, is delighted Trump replaced Joe Biden. “He wasn’t mentally fit,” Medeiros said of the elderly ex-president. “There was something wrong with him from the very beginning.”

Despite all that, the two do share one belief: Both say the government should cough up every last bit of information it has on Jeffrey Epstein, his sordid misdeeds and the powerful associates who moved in his aberrant orbit.

Trump “did his whole campaign on releasing the Epstein files,” Zamora said. “And now he’s trying to change the subject. ‘Oh, it’s a ‘hoax’ … ‘Oh, you guys are still talking about that creep?’ And yet there’s pictures throughout the years of him with that creep.”

Medeiros, 56, echoed the sentiment.

Trump and his fellow Republicans “put themselves into this predicament because they kept talking constantly” about the urgency of unsealing records in Epstein’s sex-trafficking case — until they took control of the Justice Department and the rest of Washington. “Now,” she said, “they’re backpedaling.”

Medeiros paused outside the engineering firm where she works in the Central Valley, in Newman, on a tree-lined street adorned with star-spangled banners honoring local servicemen and women.

“Obviously there were minors involved” in Epstein’s crimes, she said, and if Trump is somehow implicated “then he needs to go down as well.”

Years after being found dead in a Manhattan prison cell — killed by his own hand, according to authorities — Epstein appears to have done the near-impossible in this deeply riven nation. He’s united Democrats, Republicans and independents around a call to reveal, once and for all, everything that’s known about his case.

Epstein, seen in court with his lawyers, was found dead in his prison cell while awaiting prosecution for sex crimes.

(Uma Sanghvi / Palm Beach Post / AP)

“He’s dead now, but if people were involved they should be prosecuted,” said Joe Toscano, a 69-year-old Los Banos retiree and unaffiliated voter who last year supported Trump’s return to the White House. “Bring it all out there. Make it public.”

California’s 13th Congressional District, where Zamora, Medeiros and Toscano all live, is arguably the most closely fought political terrain in America. Sprawling through California’s midriff, from the far reaches of the San Francisco Bay Area to the southern edge of the San Joaquin Valley, it’s farm country: Flat, fertile and crossed-hatched with canals, rail lines and thruways with utilitarian names such as Road No. 32 and Avenue 18½.

The myriad small towns are brief interludes amid the dairy and poultry farms and lush carpeting of vegetables, fruit and nut trees that stretch to the hazy-brown horizon. The most populous city, Merced, has fewer than 100,000 residents. (Modesto, with a population of around 220,000, is split between the 5th and 13th districts.)

Democratic Rep. Adam Gray was elected in November in the closest House race in the country, beating the Republican incumbent, John Duarte, by 187 votes out of nearly 211,000 cast. The squeaker was a rematch and nearly a rerun. Two years prior, Duarte defeated Gray by fewer than 600 votes out of nearly 134,000 cast.

Not surprisingly, both parties have made the 13th District a top target in 2026; handicappers rate the contest a toss-up, even as the field sorts itself out. (Duarte has said he would not run again.)

The midterm election is a long way off, so it’s impossible to say how the Epstein controversy will play out politically. But there is, at the least, a baseline expectation of transparency, a view that was repeatedly expressed in conversations with three dozen voters across the district.

A tractor clears the rows in an orchard in Merced.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Zachery Ramos, a 25-year-old independent, is the founder of the Gustine Traveling Library, which promotes learning and literacy throughout the Central Valley. Its storefront, painted with polka dots and decorated with giant butterflies, sits like a cheery oasis in Gustine’s four-block downtown, a riot of green spilling from the planter boxes out front.

Inside, the walls were filled with commendations and newspaper clippings celebrating Ramos’ good works. As a nonprofit, he said, “we have to have everything out there. All the books. Everything.”

Epstein, he suggested, should be treated no differently.

“When it comes to something as serious as that, with what may or may not have taken place on his private island, with his girlfriend” — convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell — “I do think it should all be out in the open,” Ramos said. “If you’re not afraid of your name being in [the files], especially when you’re dealing with minors being assaulted, it should 100% be made public.”

Ed, a 42-year-old Democrat who manages a warehouse operation in Patterson, noted that Trump released the government’s long-secret files on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., even though King’s family objected. (Like several of those interviewed, he declined to give his last name, to avoid being hassled by readers who don’t like what he had to say.)

Why, Ed wondered, shouldn’t the Epstein files come to light? “It wasn’t just Trump,” he said. “It was a lot of Republicans in Congress that said, ‘Hey, we want to get these files out there.’ And I believe if Kamala [Harris] had won, they would be beating her down, demanding she do so.”

He smacked a fist in his palm, to emphasize the point.

Madera, with a population of roughly 70,000, is one of the largest communities in the 13th District.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

Sue, a Madera Republican and no fan of Trump, expressed her feelings in staccato bursts of fury.

“Apparently the women years ago said who was doing what, but nobody listens to the women,” said the 75-year-old retiree. “Release it all! Absolutely! You play, you pay, buddy.”

Even those who dismissed the importance of Epstein and his crimes said the government should hold nothing back — if only to erase doubts and lay the issue to rest.

Epstein “is gone and I don’t really care if they release the files or not,” said Diane Nunes, a 74-year-old Republican who keeps the books for her family farm, which lies halfway between Los Banos and Gustine. “But they probably should, because a lot of people are waiting for that.”

Patrick, a construction contractor, was more worked up about “pretty boy” Gavin Newsom and “Nazi Pelosi” — “yes, that’s what I call her” — than anything that might be lurking in the Epstein files. “When the cat is dead, you don’t pick it up and pet it. Right?” He motioned to the pavement, baking as the temperature in Patterson climbed into the low 90s.

“It’s over with,” the 61-year-old Republican said of Epstein and his villainy. “Move on.”

At least, that would be his preference. But to “shut everybody up, absolutely, yeah, they should release them,” Patrick said. “Otherwise, we’re all going to be speculating forever.”

Or at least until the polls close in November 2026.

WASHINGTON — President Trump sued Dow Jones and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, for libel on Friday, striking back against the publication of a bombshell story in the Wall Street Journal alleging the president sent a sordid letter to notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein in the early 2000s.

The Journal, a Dow Jones publication, reported Thursday that Trump sent a raunchy 50th birthday card to Epstein that included a sketch of a naked woman, featuring breasts and a squiggly “Donald” signature mimicking pubic hair.

The paper said it had reviewed copies of a collection of lewd letters that Epstein’s longtime companion, Ghislaine Maxwell, gathered from Epstein’s friends and colleagues and compiled in an album to mark his 2003 birthday.

“We have just filed a POWERHOUSE Lawsuit against everyone involved in publishing the false, malicious, defamatory, FAKE NEWS ‘article’ in the useless ‘rag’ that is, The Wall Street Journal,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Friday, adding that the suit also targets Murdoch and the reporters on the story.

The suit comes amid renewed questions over the nature of Trump’s years-long friendship with Epstein, the late and disgraced financier whose sprawling sex trafficking ring victimized more than 200 women and girls.

On Friday, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said that FBI officials reviewing more 100,000 records from the Epstein investigation in March were directed to flag any documents that mentioned Trump.

In a letter to leadership of the Justice Department, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said his office “was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned.”

Trump had already been facing mounting pressure from his MAGA base to publicly release Justice Department files from the case of Epstein.

Trump ordered Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to reverse course on a recent decision to close the case and unseal grand jury testimony. The Justice Department filed a motion to begin that process on Friday afternoon.

“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 announced Thursday on Truth Social. “This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!”

The Department of Justice and FBI declared earlier this month in a memo that Epstein’s case was closed and his 2019 death in a New York city jail was a suicide. But Bondi, a Trump appointee and arch loyalist, immediately agreed Thursday to Trump’s new demand.

“President Trump — we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts,” Bondi wrote on X.

It remains to be seen if Trump and Bondi will persuade a federal judge in New York to release the grand jury transcripts. Such documents are typically not made public and released only under narrowly defined circumstances.

Trump and Epstein became friends in the 1980s.

“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Mr. Trump told New York magazine, in 2002, noting that Epstein was “a lot of fun to be with” and “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

But their friendship apparently broke down in 2008 after Epstein was convicted of child sexual offenses. Their relationship — and the possibility of Trump’s involvement in Epstein’s crimes — has been scrutinized ever since.

The Epstein case has riveted Trump’s Republican base, largely because of the multimillionaire financier’s connections to rich and powerful people they suspect were involved in his child sex trafficking.

But releasing the files is not entirely up to Trump, even if he wanted to.

“You’ve got decades’ worth of materials,” said David Weinstein, a Miami defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, who said the disclosure of grand jury information is governed by federal rules and cannot be released without a court order.

Even if material does get released, it will pertain only to Epstein and Maxwell’s direct activities — and will be much more limited than the volume of investigative materials, including witness interviews, emails, videos and photos that otherwise exist.

Additionally, “there’s a lot of redactions that will have to be made,” Weinstein said, noting the number of individuals who might have been associated with Epstein during the investigation but were not themselves suspected or charged with crimes. “You’ve seen some of that already in the civil cases that were filed, and where courts have said, ‘No, this is what can be put on the docket.’”

After the Department of Justice dropped the case, many of Trump’s most vocal allies, such as U.S. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), openly dissented from the administration and called for the release of all files.

Earlier this week, Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie introduced the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, which would require Bondi to make public all unclassified records, documents and investigative materials that the Department of Justice holds on the Epstein case.

“We all deserve to know what’s in the Epstein files, who’s implicated, and how deep this corruption goes,” Massie said in a statement. “Americans were promised justice and transparency. We’re introducing a discharge petition to force a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on releasing the COMPLETE files.”

A poll conducted by the Economist/YouGov this month found that 83% of Trump’s 2024 supporters favor the government releasing all material related to the Epstein case.

Wilner reported from Washington, Jarvie from Atlanta. Times staff writer Clara Harter contributed to this report.

For an entire decade now, Donald Trump has been immune to alienating his supporters — a base so loyal they’d drink bleach if he told them it would own the libs (and some probably did).

Stormy Daniels? A spiritual growth opportunity for evangelicals to witness a modern-day King David. Inciting a Capitol riot? Boosted his Q-rating (not to mention his QAnon rating). Bombing Iran? Sure, a few “America First” types grumbled into their microphones about endless wars before dutifully moving on.

Trump himself bragged he could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue, shoot somebody and not lose a single voter. He was right.

But the current wave of intra-MAGA criticism — over the Trump administration’s defensive insistence that Jeffrey Epstein (a) definitely committed suicide, and (b) never had a client list — feels categorically different.

Trump can usually smother an inconvenient news cycle by tossing a fresh carcass on the table, be it a deranged Truth Social post or a threat to jail an enemy.

This time, however, his suggestion that Rosie O’Donnell should have her citizenship revoked barely registered above ambient noise, as the mob kept hammering him over his refusal to release the Epstein files. His latest weapon of mass distraction is a not-so-subtle hint that he might fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. But even that hasn’t managed to shift the spotlight away from Epstein.

Having failed at distraction, Trump reverted to bullying. He scolded the press for dredging up old news (“Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?”) He took to Truth Social to tell his MAGA supporters not to “waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein.” He absurdly claimed the Epstein files were a “scam” and a “hoax” made up by Democrats, and described the folks who “bought into this bull—” as “weaklings” and his “PAST supporters.”

These efforts tamed some of the criticism inside the MAGA tent. But for others, it only reinforced the perception of a cover-up.

So why has the Epstein scandal — of all things — threatened civil war on the right? I have some thoughts.

First: It speaks to where the passions of MAGA really lie. For some percentage of Trump supporters, exposing the satanic, blood-drinking pedophile cabal was supposed to be the deliverable — his raison d’être — the payoff.

Instead they got, what, corporate tax cuts?

Second: The Epstein narrative is too lurid and concrete to be handwaved away. Epstein really was a sex trafficker. There really are those photographs of him palling around with Trump. He really was on “suicide watch.” Minutes really are missing from the surveillance video near Epstein’s cell. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi really did say on Fox News in February that Epstein’s client list was “sitting on my desk right now.” You don’t need to be in a tin-foil hat to notice the fishiness here.

And third: The incentives have changed for MAGA influencers. Trump finally feels like a lame duck, and the knives are out, not just to inherit the throne, but for the whole spoils system of the MAGA grift.

To be clear, plenty of the usual sycophants have decided to “trust the plan” and go along with the party line. But others — Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nick Fuentes and assorted alt-right B-listers — seem to have caught the scent of blood in the water.

Even the new cohort of MAGA-adjacent bro podcasters — guys like Andrew Schulz — have started to openly criticize him. Schulz recently called Trump’s failure to release the Epstein files “insulting our intelligence,” which, for that demographic, is tantamount to open revolt.

Here, Trump could really face some attrition. Unlike the evangelical core, these manosphere podcasters (and their legions of young male listeners) are not partisans or ideologues; their support for Trump has always been more middle finger than mission. And middle fingers, as everyone eventually learns, can be directed at new targets anytime.

So how does this end?

Eventually, this story will be suppressed or at least professionally ignored. But it won’t be fully memory-holed. It will linger somewhere between subliminal and ubiquitous, in much the same way that George W. Bush never fully escaped the stench of those nonexistent WMDs (even after Republicans agreed to stay the course).

So Trump survives — but he carries with him a dormant virus that could flare up again.

There’s a certain irony here that’s almost too obvious to point out, except that it’s also irresistible: Trump built an entire ecology of paranoia — a system that rewards its most theatrical paranoids. He spent years feeding his ravenous base suspicion and spectacle. And it worked. Until he finally got out-conspiracy-theoried.

Even the best carnival barker runs out of new tricks eventually. And when the crowd starts peeking behind the curtain, the spell is broken, and the jig is up.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

WASHINGTON — The case of Jeffrey Epstein, closed long ago by investigators but nevertheless a constant source of fascination to conspiracy theorists, is the story that won’t go away for President Trump, who this week continued to resist releasing documents in the case against bipartisan calls and increasing national interest.

The case has dogged Trump’s second term from the start, ever since the attorney general, Pam Bondi, alluded to the existence of a list of Epstein’s clients sitting on her desk in February. Bondi later said she misspoke and that no such list exists. But the president’s MAGA base and Democrats alike are now calling for the entire Justice Department file of Epstein material to be released, an appeal so far rejected by Trump and his aides.

Trump’s defensiveness over the file has put Republicans on Capitol Hill in the difficult position of appearing to protect Epstein’s co-conspirators, as Democrats take advantage of the internal Republican divide with calls for a vote to release the documents. A poll conducted by the Economist/YouGov this month found that 83% of Trump’s 2024 supporters want the government to release all material related to the Epstein case — “past supporters,” as Trump referred to them Wednesday, calling them “weaklings” and “foolish” for pressing their interest in the case.

Epstein, a wealthy financier with a deep bench of powerful friends, died in a New York City prison in August 2019 facing federal charges over a child sex trafficking conspiracy. The charges followed reporting by the Miami Herald of a scandalous sweetheart deal brokered by federal prosecutors in Florida that had allowed Epstein to serve a months-long sentence and avoid federal charges that could have resulted in life imprisonment.

One of those prosecutors, Alexander Acosta, later became Labor secretary in Trump’s first administration. He resigned amid a public outcry, weeks before Epstein’s death.

The New York City medical examiner and the inspector general of the Justice Department have ruled Epstein’s death a suicide. This month, the FBI released what it characterized as the “full raw” footage from a camera near what it says was Epstein’s prison cell at the time of his death. But suspicions of conspiracy were only turbocharged by the release of the tape, which Wired first reported had three minutes cut from the original footage, according to metadata of the file.

Epstein’s known association with some of the world’s most famous men, including Bill Gates, Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, have fueled calls for their release. But it is Trump’s highly public relationship with Epstein that has caused the story to resurface.

“Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files,” Elon Musk, Trump’s largest donor in the 2024 presidential campaign and his close aide in the White House at the beginning of his term, wrote on X during their fallout last month. “That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!” (He later deleted the post.)

Photos of Trump and Epstein attending parties together have proliferated online. And Trump frequently acknowledged their friendship before entering politics. “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York magazine in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

On Wednesday, Trump said Bondi should release only material from the Epstein files that “she thinks is credible.” When asked whether he would support the appointment of a special counsel to examine the case, he replied, “I have nothing to do with it.”

“I would say these files were made up by [former FBI Director James] Comey and [former President] Obama, made up by the Biden [administration], and we went through years of that with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax,” he said.

On Wednesday, Maurene Comey, James Comey’s daughter and a federal prosecutor who had worked on the Epstein case, was dismissed from the Justice Department. Comey said Thursday that the department gave her no reason for her firing.

In a briefing Thursday, White House Press secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated the president’s opposition to a special prosecutor.

“The president would not recommend a special prosecutor in the Epstein case,” she said. “That’s how he feels.”

Legitimate concerns have been raised over releasing documents from the case that could reference individuals who are not credibly suspected of wrongdoing. But those calling for the release of the entire file now say that the scale of Epstein’s child sex trafficking ring, and the corruption around efforts to protect him over nearly two decades, are a matter of public interest.

“We want the entire file — we don’t trust Bondi to say what’s credible and what’s not,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland and ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, told MSNBC on Thursday. “We can be the judge of that ourselves.”

On Capitol Hill, responding to Republican concerns over the optics of voting against the release, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is considering a measure that would call for the files to be made public.

The measure would be nonbinding, a source familiar with the matter said.

A lot of people online have been very, very upset over the Trump Department of Justice’s twofold conclusion, announced last Sunday, that Jeffrey Epstein’s death in jail in 2019 was a suicide and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had no “incriminating ‘client list’ ” among its Epstein files.

The tremendous uproar against the Justice Department and FBI has crossed partisan lines; if anything, it has been many conservative commentators and some Republican elected officials who have expressed the most outrage, with accusations and implications that the government is hiding something about the case to protect powerful individuals.

Given the sordid nature of the underlying subject matter and the fact the feds closely examined “over ten thousand downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography,” the obsession with the “Epstein files” gives off a vibe that is, frankly, somewhat creepy. To be sure, it is always righteous to seek justice for victims, but many don’t want public scrutiny.

The Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein files has not been its finest hour. During a February interview on Fox News, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said, in response to host John Roberts’ question about whether the Justice Department would release a “list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients,” that the list was “sitting on [her] desk right now to review.” It is an astonishing about-face for Bondi to now disavow that investigators have any such list. The Trump administration owes us all a clear explanation.

With that large caveat aside, though, the fact remains: This is just not the biggest deal in the world — and if you think it is, then you probably need to log off social media.

The midterm elections next fall are not going to be determined by the existence — or absence — of a “client list” for an extravagantly wealthy dead pedophile. Nor will they be decided on the absurd grounds of whether FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino have somehow been “compromised.” (They haven’t.) Instead, the election — and our politics — will be contested on typical substantive grounds: the economy, inflation, immigration, crime, global stability and so forth. This is as it should be. There are simply better uses of your time than fuming over the government’s avowed nonexistence of the much-ballyhooed client list.

You might, for instance, consider spending more time, during these midsummer weeks, with your family. Maybe you can take the kids camping or fishing. Maybe you can take them to an amusement park or to one of America’s many national park treasures. You can spend less time scrolling Instagram and TikTok and more time reading a good old-fashioned book; you will learn more, you will be happier and you will be considerably less likely to traffic in fringe issues and bizarre rhetoric that alienates far more than it unifies.

Instead of finding meaning in the confirmation biases and groupthink validations of social media algorithms, perhaps you can locate meaning where countless human beings have found it since time immemorial: religion. Spend more time praying, reading scripture and attending services at your preferred house of worship. All of these uses of your time will fill you with a sense of stability, meaning and purpose that you will never find deep in the bowels of an X thread on the Epstein files.

Too many people today who are deeply engaged in America’s combustible political process have forgotten that there are more important things in life than politics. And even within the specific realm of politics, there are plenty of things that are more deserving of attention and emotional investment than others. Above all, it is conservatives — those oriented toward sobriety and humility, not utopianism and decadence — who ought to be able to properly contextualize America’s political tug-of-war within our broader lives and who ought to then be able to focus on the meaningful political issues to the exclusion of tawdry soap opera drama.

Like many others, I expect that the Justice Department’s recent — and seemingly definitive — waving away of the Epstein files saga will not actually prove to be the final word on the matter. To the limited extent that I allow myself to think about this sideshow, I hope that the administration does squarely address the many legitimate and unanswered questions now being asked by a frustrated citizenry that has seemingly been misled by the Trump administration, either in Bondi’s February statement or in this month’s report. But I also hope that the extent of this past week’s rage might serve as an edifying moment. Let’s return to the real things in life and focus on what matters most.

Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. @josh_hammer