All posts tagged "pam bondi"

This timeline of Trump's Epstein cover-up reveals so much

Drip, drip, drip…

For months, Donald Trump has tried to divert public attention from the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell files. But he can’t shake the story, and it keeps getting worse.

Reversal

Trump campaigned on the promise to release all of the files relating to Epstein’s sex trafficking in minors. To supercharge his MAGA base, he fueled conspiracy theories that the files contained something sinister involving prominent Democrats.

February 2025: Trump’s Attorney General, Pam Bondi, told a Fox News interviewer that Epstein’s client list was sitting on her desk, awaiting her review before its release.

May: Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche informed Trump that his name appeared in the Epstein files, the New York Times later reported.

July 7: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel — who pushed conspiracy theories about the files during Trump’s campaign — issued a two-page memo stating that there was no Epstein client list and that the Justice Department would not release any additional materials relating to the matter.

July 16: Assistant US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Maurene Comey was fired. Comey was a lead prosecutor in the investigation and prosecution of Epstein and his coconspirator, Maxwell. She was also the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey and chief of the Violent and Organized Crime Unit. The memo gave no reason for Comey’s abrupt termination.

July 17: The Wall Street Journal published Trump’s alleged birthday note to Epstein that included his sketch of a naked woman.

Blowback

Trump’s MAGA base erupted in anger over his refusal to release the Epstein files. Trying to appease his followers, Trump directed Bondi to ask that the courts release grand jury transcripts. This was disingenuous because: 1) the courts were not likely to release the material; and 2) even if they did, the transcripts would constitute a small fraction of the Epstein-Maxwell files.

July 23: A Florida judge denied Bondi’s motion to release the files relating to Epstein investigations in 2005 and 2007 that resulted in a non-prosecution agreement. Trump’s first-term Secretary of Labor, Alex Acosta, negotiated the agreement with Epstein’s high-powered lawyers while serving as US attorney for the Southern District of Florida during George W. Bush’s presidency.

Blunder

July 24: Deputy Attorney General (and former Trump attorney) Todd Blanche flew to Tallahassee and met with Maxwell for two days — an unprecedented visit for a No. 2 official in the Justice Department. Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking.

July 31: Contrary to prison assignment policies for sex offenders, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Prisons transferred Maxwell from a Tallahassee prison to a “Club Fed” camp in Texas.

Boomerang

August 11: A federal judge in New York denied Bondi’s motion to unseal Maxwell’s grand jury files. The court observed that anyone “who reviewed these materials expecting, based on the Government’s representations, to learn new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes and the investigation into them, would come away feeling disappointed and misled. There is no ‘there’ there.”

The entire exercise was a farce — another Trump con job:

The one colorable argument under that doctrine for unsealing in this case, in fact, is that doing so would expose as disingenuous the Government’s public explanations for moving to unseal. A member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government’s motion for their unsealing was aimed not at “transparency” but at diversion — aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such.

August 20: A different federal judge in New York blasted Bondi’s motion to unseal the grand jury transcripts. Describing the “trove” of materials that the Justice Department had assembled but withheld from the public, the court observed:

The Government’s 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70-odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials.

Trump’s directive that Bondi seek the release of the grand jury materials was always a ruse. As the court continued:

The Government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein files. By comparison, the instant grand jury motion appears to be a “diversion” from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government’s possession.

The court specifically called out Trump’s about-face on releasing the files:

In February 2025, the Government, as noted, was prepared to release the “Epstein Files” to the public. See DOJ Press Release. But then, on July 6, 2025, the Government announced that it would not make the files available to the public.

And the judge concluded: “The information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts pales in comparison to the Epstein investigation and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice.”

New scam

On August 5, several Republicans voted with Democrats on the House Oversight Committee to force chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) to subpoena the Justice Department for Epstein-Maxwell materials. Comer also issued subpoenas to former Attorneys General William Barr, Merrick Garland, Jeff Sessions, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, and Alberto Gonzales; former FBI Director James Comey; former special counsel and FBI Director Robert Mueller III; former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and former President Bill Clinton.

That’s superficially impressive, but purely performative. Notably missing are the frontline prosecutors and investigators who actually know something meaningful about the Epstein-Maxwell cases.

One is Maurene Comey.

August 22: The FBI’s surprise search of former National Security Advisor John Bolton’s home and office dominated the media. The Justice Department also released a transcript of Blanche’s interview with Maxwell during which she asserted that no one connected with Epstein’s alleged crimes had done anything wrong — including her and, of course, Trump, upon whom she lavished praise.

Sharing the news cycle was the Justice Department’s production of documents to the House Oversight Committee. It provided a fraction of the DOJ’s Epstein file, and only 3 percent was new.

August 25: The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed materials from Epstein’s estate and announced that it will depose Alex Acosta on September 19.

Drip, drip, drip…

Trump just delivered the darkest of messages

On Friday, the FBI raided the home and office of John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser.

Although it cannot be confirmed that the agents wore flak jackets emblazoned “DJT Retribution Tour 2025” on the back, they didn’t need to. Trump’s DOJ apparatchiks had already swarmed social media in the most unserious law-enforcement performance since the great Leslie Neilsen’s Police Squad classics.

The tweets were something to see. All just happened to get posted right around the times FBI agents were showing up for coffee with the Boltons. All were delivered in classic mean-face protocol, which of course demanded that no reference be made to anything in particular.

From FBI Director Kash Patel: “NO ONE is above the law … @FBI agents on mission.”

Agents on mission? What are you, 12?

But Patel’s was the serious stake in the ground. Others just retweeted it:

From Attorney General Pam Bondi: “America’s safety isn’t negotiable. Justice will be pursued. Always.”

From Deputy FBI Director Don Bongino: “Public corruption will not be tolerated.”

Bongino’s prospective bunkmate, Andrew Bailey, must be chomping at the bit to have a piece of this action.

This is such amateur hour. These performative fools have debased the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

We have a real problem here. The specifics of Bolton’s situation are beside the point.

In matters referencing national security, affidavits are almost always sealed — sometimes forever. There won’t be a lot of substance for liberals to pore over this weekend with their biscuits and gravy at Cracker Barrel.

The only part of this story worthy of prospective consideration is whether somehow, some way, the Republican political establishment might get nudged out of its cultish trance by this happening to old ally. I don’t think so.

Bolton is not a sympathetic figure on a personal level. From his earliest days as a vitriolic, super-militaristic, hyper-partisan neocon, his persona has remained the rarest of acquired tastes across the political spectrum.

More directly to the point of this story, it remains impossible to forgive Bolton for putting his bank account ahead of his country in 2019. That’s when he refused to testify in Trump’s first impeachment so as not to compromise upcoming profits from the 2020 release of his explosive tell-all book, The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir.

Who knows what would have happened had Bolton done the right thing?

It’s widely assumed that the book — and Trump’s years-long public feud with Bolton — are the beginning, middle and end of this FBI adventure. And yes, karma’s a bitch.

But remember that famous old passage? “They came for the crotchety national security advisors, but I wasn’t a crotchety national security advisor, so I said nothing.”

In that sense, Bolton presents an ominous test case. Whatever natural base of supporters he might have had is likely limited to his cellphone contacts. He could be in for a rough time.

And I truly don’t believe anyone should be celebrating that.

I’ll harken back to my June 9 column on another part of Trump’s terroristic playbook. That was about ICE stormtroopers, but it applies equally to the police-state tactics involved today with the FBI:

“There’s an ancient Chinese proverb that reads: “Hang one to scare a hundred.”

I assure you there a whole lot more than a hundred former Trump officials, military brass and other vocal critics who won’t sleep well tonight. Trump just delivered the darkest of messages — and it has been received.

If anyone might harbor even the slightest doubt that this is 100 percent about vindictive, petty and malicious retribution, it’s helpful that the Dark Lord of Vengeance couldn’t contain his devilish glee.

“Good morning. John Bolton. How does it feel to have your home raided at 6 o'clock in the morning?” — Roger Stone.

This is what America voted for.

And John Bolton’s home won’t be the final venue.

This stunning finding shows Trump is destroying his own support

By Tatishe Nteta, Adam Eichen, Alexander Theodoridis, Jesse Rhodes, and Raymond La Raja, UMass Amherst.

Has President Donald Trump survived the latest and most serious firestorm of controversy over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal? Or has the Trump administration’s handling of the release of information concerning the prosecution of a convicted child sex trafficker, Trump’s former friend, hurt the president?

A number of journalists, pointing to recent public opinion polls, have claimed that the scandal has hurt Trump. Others have argued that the public has largely moved on and the Epstein controversy no longer presents a political liability for Trump.

But both of these conclusions are based on limited polling about the Epstein controversy and thus may be premature.

Our recent University of Massachusetts Amherst national poll includes particularly detailed questions about the Epstein controversy and attitudes toward Trump, and thus provides fresh insights on how the controversy has affected public support for Trump.

We find that Trump’s handling of the Epstein controversy has done significant damage to his standing, particularly among his core supporters.

'Fumbling the matter’

Americans are paying close attention to the prolonged Epstein controversy. Our polling finds that three in four respondents have heard, read or seen “a lot” or “some” about Epstein.

Moreover, most believe that Trump is fumbling the matter.

Seven in 10 Americans believe that Trump is handling the matter “not well.” This includes pluralities of Trump’s most loyal supporters: 43 percent of Republicans, 43 percent of conservatives, and 47 percent of those who voted for him in 2024.

When we drill down on the 47 percent of 2024 Trump voters who disapprove of Trump’s handling of the Epstein controversy, we find significant cracks in the MAGA facade. Among members of this group, 28 percent now disapprove of Trump as president.

When we take demographics, ideology, partisanship and assessments of the economy into account, disapproval of Trump’s handling of the release of the Epstein files is still associated with an increase in disapproval of Trump.

Voter regret

Even more significantly, we find that among 2024 Trump voters, negative views of Trump’s handling of the Epstein files are associated with an increased desire to make a different choice if the 2024 election could be rerun.

More specifically, among Trump voters who believe that the president has mishandled the release of the Epstein files, more than one quarter – 26 percent – indicate that they would not vote for Trump if they had the opportunity to vote again in the 2024 election.

While there are no election do-overs, it is clear that the Epstein scandal has hurt Trump among his base of voters.

Much can happen between now and the midterm elections in November 2026, of course.

But if Trump fails to satisfy his political base, perceptions among Trump voters that he has mishandled the controversy could reduce enthusiasm and participation in the elections. Even if the share of Republicans alienated by the Epstein controversy is relatively small, this could hurt Republicans in close contests.

With over a year to go, the facts on the ground will likely change. But as of today, the controversy over the release of the Epstein files remains relevant. Whether the president responds in a manner that satisfies his voters is a question that could have important political consequences.

'Pam Bondi backed down': Ex-prosecutor flags 'pitfall for Trump' amid power grab

As Donald Trump tries to expand the presence of armed forces in Democratic-run cities, he will run into a major roadblock, according to an ex-prosecutor.

Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, in a Substack article dated Saturday, argued that Trump is trying to "shift" the so-called Overton Window, which she describes as "a model that describes the range of policies considered acceptable at a given time by the public and policymakers."

"For instance, the idea of deploying the National Guard, or even the military, on American streets to control the local population is something we would have considered far outside of the Window for decades," according to the analyst. "Think of what Donald Trump is doing in the District of Columbia in these terms. He’s made up a crisis—a wave of crime that doesn’t exist. The law in the District is different from how it is elsewhere because of limited home rule and a law that was drafted, at least arguably, to give the president alone the ability to declare an emergency that would permit control of local law enforcement. Trump tried it in Los Angeles, but ran into issues, like the Governor’s objection and the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents direct law enforcement by the Guard and the military. But in the District of Columbia, Trump has asserted the ability to seize control of the Metropolitan Police for at least thirty days and longstanding DOJ interpretation of the law says Posse Comitatus doesn’t apply in D.C."

For Trump, Vance says, the idea is to go further.

"Next stop, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Oakland, New York and Chicago, all cities Trump said were 'bad, very bad,' without explanation. All cities where the law is less friendly to a Trump takeover than it is in the nation’s capital," the ex-prosecutor wrote.

That's where the pitfall comes in, according to Vance.

"A potential pitfall for Trump is that outside D.C., he’ll need to convince courts, where his moves will certainly be challenged, that his determination of an emergency or other condition necessary to allow him to interfere with state and local control is not reviewable," she wrote. "Since his first day in office, when he declared an emergency at the border, Trump has been relying on that notion, that contrary to the checks and balances the Founding Fathers set up, any decision he makes that there is a national emergency can’t be challenged in the courts."

Regarding Trump's push to define these national emergencies, the pitfall seems to be slowing Trump down, Vance wrote.

"So far, the lower federal courts seem to be skeptical," she wrote with a word of caution. "At some point, that issue will make its way to the Supreme Court. If SCOTUS lets him get away with that, our position becomes that much more precarious."

Citing a specific instance in which the courts have held Trump back, Vance wrote, "On Friday, Judge Ana Cecilia Reyes, born in Uruguay and appointed to the district court in D.C. by Joe Biden in 2023, wasted no time in scheduling a hearing after the District filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s attempt to exceed the power granted by the home rule law in his attempt to take over the Metropolitan Police. The previous night, Attorney General Pam Bondi tried to replace the D.C. Chief with the head of the DEA."

"In the end, Attorney General Pam Bondi backed down, agreeing to let Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith continue to run the Department’s day-to-day operations under Mayor Muriel Bowser’s orders," the attorney added.

Read the full post on Substack here.

One powerful remedy would rid us of Trump — and he's scrambling to hide it

It has become increasingly apparent that Donald Trump is turning his presidential administration into the most corrupt in U.S. history. Nothing that comes from the mouth of Trump or his loyalist appointees can ever be trusted.

Trump appointees John Radcliffe, Kash Patel, and Pete Hegseth, heads of the CIA, FBI, and Pentagon respectively, reiterated Trump’s lie that the U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities “obliterated” the country’s nuclear program.

Damage assessments by the Pentagon Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) proved the claim to be patently false.

Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, had testified to Congress that there was no evidence Iran was building a nuclear weapon. Since that assessment ran contrary to Trump’s reason for bombing Iran, Gabbard reversed course, lying that she had been wrong.

Trump’s Education Secretary, Linda McMahon, lied to the Senate Appropriations Committee that massive cuts in employee numbers are not intended to reduce the role or effectiveness of the DOE. In reality, McMahon is doing her intended job: to oversee the dismantling of the department at Trump's behest, to eliminate the federal government’s support for public education.

Attorney General Pam Bondi claimed months ago that she had the list of people associated with convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein sitting on her desk. Since such a list would embarrass Trump at the least or implicate him at the worst, she later contradicted herself and said that she was referring to all Epstein documents, not a specific associates list.

After releasing several monthly reports citing positive U.S. job growth, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported much slower growth for July. Since the report didn’t support Trump’s claims of a booming US economy, Trump attacked BLS commissioner Erika McEntarfer, falsely claimed the numbers were rigged, and fired her. No doubt she will be replaced by a Trump loyalist, the veracity of the BLS jobs report never again to be trusted.

Trump’s consistent modus operandi is to attempt to alter reality whenever the truth doesn’t suit him and to get rid of anyone who doesn’t go along.

Trump continues to lie that the 2020 presidential election was fixed, that he had no role in inciting the violent January 6 Capitol riot, that he had no role in the fake presidential electors' scheme, that he didn’t attempt to coerce the governor of Georgia to “find votes,” and that he had the right to abscond with highly classified documents after leaving office in 2021.

His illegal acts earned him two DOJ indictments and potential prison time had he not been elected president.

Of course, Trump’s lying never ceases. To support his demand that the Fed lower interest rates, Trump lied that there is no inflation when the last report indicated a worrisome spike.

To humiliate Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell, Trump ambushed Powell on TV, lying that the Fed had grossly overrun its renovation costs by throwing in a building that was renovated five years ago. Powell called out Trump on the lie and reversed the humiliation, his days as board chair assuredly numbered.

The corruption at the core of Trump’s being has permeated the Republican-controlled federal government. The understood charge of all Trump appointees is to peddle his lies, gloss over his failures, and put their agencies and departments at his disposal. The vast majority of Republican congressmen share in the corruption, either by allowing Trump and his appointees’ lies to go unchallenged or by reinforcing them.

Think tariffs are a boon to Americans? That Trump has the gravitas to bend Putin and Netanyahu to his will? That greater consumer spending will reduce America’s gigantic deficit? That ICE is only going after immigrants with criminal records?

If so, the Trump administration’s perpetual lying machine along with a complicit Republican Congress is accomplishing its purpose.

When a democratic government loses the trust of the people, there is one powerful remedy: turning out the scoundrels who betray the American people with their every dishonesty. But Trump and his servile allies are banking on Americans being so dupable that we will continue swallowing their every deceit.

If they are right, we are fast approaching a totalitarian future where the truth is whatever guileful lie the government fabricates. If they are wrong, we the people will unceremoniously sweep them from office, beginning in 2026, and restore Americans’ trust in our democratic government.

  • Tom Tyner is a freelance editorialist, satirist, political analyst, blogger, author and retired English instructor.

'Hypocrisy off the charts': Pam Bondi's new 'tough on crime' comment instantly backfires

Attorney General Pam Bondi was fiercely ridiculed Thursday for her statement condemning the alleged assault of a federal agent this week with a Subway sandwich.

“If you touch any law enforcement officer, we will come after you,” Bondi wrote Thursday in a social media post on X.

“I just learned that this defendant worked at the Department of Justice – no longer. Not only is he fired, he has been charged with a felony. This is an example of the deep state we have been up against for seven months as we work to refocus (the) DOJ. You will not work in this administration while disrespecting our government and law enforcement.”

Critics were quick to point out, however, that the DOJ is currently employing a criminally indicted participant in the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol, Jared Wise, who was tapped by Trump to serve as an investigator with the DOJ.

“DOJ is employing Jared Wise, a Jan. 6 defendant who called cops ‘Nazis’ and urged the crowd to ‘kill em’ as they stormed the Capitol,” wrote senior Politico reporter Kyle Cheney in response to Bondi’s statement.

Tracey Gallagher, an attorney with more than 8,000 followers on X, also pointed to what she characterized as Bondi’s hypocrisy on the matter, and argued the alleged sandwich attack did not rise to the level of being a federal crime.

“You mean like the DOJ employing Jared Wise, a Jan. 6 defendant who called cops ‘Nazis’ and urged the crowd to ‘kill em’ as they stormed the Capitol?” Gallagher wrote in a social media post on X. “By the way, hitting someone with a sandwich under state or federal law is not a felony. You're missing the element of a deadly weapon or (great bodily injury); you have neither.”

Others, including the content creator known as Redd, who hosts the “Divisive Content” podcast and has nearly 10,000 followers on X, pointed to Bondi’s mishandling of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the late and disgraced financier accused of sex trafficking and operating a blackmail operation targeting powerful figures.

“You are tracking down and arresting sandwich throwers but not the corrupt politicians and Epstein clients,” they wrote on X.

“Funny how they talk about ‘respecting law enforcement’ while their own commander-in-chief is convicted and still under investigation in connection to Jeffrey Epstein – but that’s apparently fine,” wrote X user “Sincere Doge,” a Floridian crypto enthusiast with more than 10,000 followers.

And others pointed to what they labeled as Bondi's "hypocrisy" in her posturing, despite having okayed a wave of pardons from President Donald Trump for those who stormed the U.S. Capitol in 2021.

"But you all pardoned 1,500 J6 Rioters who attacked and harmed many Capitol Police," wrote X user BK, a Californian with more than 6,500 followers. "Your hypocrisy and fake Christian beliefs are off the charts."





Trump's AG Pam Bondi blames 'deep state' plot after Subway sandwich is thrown at officer

Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested the "deep state" was to blame after a man was caught on video throwing a Subway sandwich at a federal officer.

Jeanine Pirro, the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, announced on Wednesday that the man had been charged with felony assault on a federal agent after the sandwich hit the officer in the chest. The suspect was later identified as Sean Dunn, a 37-year-old resident of D.C.

Bondi reacted to the incident in a Thursday post on X.

"If you touch any law enforcement officer, we will come after you," Bondi wrote. "I just learned that this defendant worked at the Department of Justice — NO LONGER. Not only is he FIRED, he has been charged with a felony."

"This is an example of the Deep State we have been up against for seven months as we work to refocus DOJ," she added.

In a video posted to X on Wednesday, Pirro claimed to be following President Donald Trump's policy: "If you spit, we hit."

"He took a Subway sandwich about this big and took it and threw it at the officer," Pirro explained. "He thought it was funny. Well, he doesn't think it's funny today because we charge it with a felony, assault on a police officer."

"So there, stick your subway sandwich somewhere else," she quipped.

This MAGA hero may be the one to finish off Trump

Joe Rogan built an empire on being the guy who asked the questions nobody else would. That’s why millions of Americans — especially younger men — trust him more than they trust the nation’s media, Congress, or the Supreme Court. They believe he sees through the spin. He talks to conspiracy theorists and scientists alike, grills politicians, mocks the media, and makes it all feel like truth-telling.

But now, Rogan is at a crossroads. The question isn’t whether Joe Rogan will change the country. The question is whether power is changing Joe Rogan.

The Trump administration is deep in the middle of its biggest credibility crisis since they sent troops into the streets of Los Angeles. And it’s not about inflation, immigration, or international war. It’s about the long-promised release of the Epstein files, something candidate Trump used as a political weapon in 2024, vowing to expose “elite pedophiles” and “drain the deepest part of the swamp.”

He won votes on it. He fired up his base with it. And now, seven months into his second term, his same administration is walking it back. Slowly, clumsily, but unmistakably.

On July 24, Attorney General Pam Bondi released a heavily redacted summary of the Epstein investigation, meant to satisfy the public hunger for transparency. Instead, it sent up a flare: no client list, no blackmail, no follow-up indictments. It was all information already publicly available with a simple Google search.

The Department of Justice claimed the “case was closed,” the evidence exhausted, and Epstein’s 2019 death during Trump’s last administration was once again ruled a suicide. What followed was backlash not from liberals, but from the hard-right Trump base itself.

And Joe Rogan was at the center of that backlash. “Do they think we’re babies?” he said in a scathing segment just days after the release. His tone wasn’t one of performative outrage: it reflected a true sense of betrayal. The tone of someone who’d believed the government would finally tell the truth.

He questioned whether the administration had buried the real story. Whether the American people had once again been gaslit by elites pretending to clean house while shielding their own.

Now, the Trump administration is trying something unprecedented: CNN reports they’re discussing looking to Joe Rogan to help fix the mess. Not by spinning it through Fox News. Not by putting Bondi on Meet the Press. But by putting Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche — Trump’s own criminal defense lawyer — on The Joe Rogan Experience, in what Trump aides are calling a “high-profile truth-telling interview.”

That alone should shock anyone who cares about democracy.

Let’s not forget: Rogan’s show has become the most powerful media platform in America. It bypasses traditional scrutiny. There are no time limits, no fact-checking in real time, no editors. Just vibes and persuasion and the illusion of transparency. It’s where millions go to “hear both sides,” but in reality, it’s where narratives are shaped in long, charismatic monologues and interviews.

That’s what the Trump team is counting on, and the implications are massive.

If Rogan accepts the interview with Blanche, he becomes part of the administration’s containment strategy. If he then softballs it — if he lets the White House rewrite history through his mic the way Fox “News” is now downplaying Epstein — he doesn’t just sell out his listeners. He becomes a tool of state power. The very power he built his brand opposing.

Rogan isn’t stupid. He knows this. Which is why this moment is so critical.

He’s already voiced doubts. He’s asked the obvious questions: Why would Epstein record everything if there’s nothing to hide? Why is there no official questioning of the men who flew on his plane dozens of times? Why is Ghislaine Maxwell in prison for trafficking girls to ... nobody? These questions have been asked for years, and yet the Trump administration wants to pretend that the final word is in. Case closed. Let’s move on.

If Rogan turns his studio into a soft landing pad for Trump’s damage control, it means something profound has shifted. It means even the loudest, most powerful “outsiders” can be absorbed by Trump’s deep-state machine.

That matters. Because democracy doesn’t die in big dramatic explosions. It dies when truth becomes just another version of events. It dies when public watchdogs become platforms for official spin. It dies when those who claim to speak for the people get so close to power, they forget who they’re supposed to be speaking to.

This isn’t about Joe Rogan being a Republican, or about hating Donald Trump. This is about whether the largest independent voice in the media landscape can resist the gravitational pull of power when it needs him most.

Rogan once warned us about this kind of thing. He talked about the CIA’s ties to the media. He aired claims about elite sex trafficking rings and called for radical transparency. Now, the Trump administration is banking on the idea that they can weaponize his credibility to bury the very narrative he helped popularize.

That should set off every alarm.

If Rogan presses Blanche — if he demands un-redacted documents, if he calls out the inconsistencies, if he challenges the entire narrative being pushed from the White House, if he interviews victims instead of toadies — then there’s hope.

As one victim wrote to the Department of Justice in a public letter:

“You protect yourself and your powerful and wealthy ‘friends’ (not enemies) over the victims, why? The victims know the truth, we know who are in the files and now so do you.”

If Rogan helps with the whitewash instead, then it confirms something darker: that the administration knows what we all suspect. That the truth doesn’t matter as long as the story feels good coming out of someone you trust.

There are people in Trump’s inner circle who understand the stakes. They know they’ve lost control of the Epstein narrative. They see the fury building online from their own supporters. They know that Rogan has the power to calm it down or to inflame it. That’s why they’re courting him. That’s why they’re hoping he’ll play ball.

But this is not a game.

This is about the credibility of justice in America. About whether billionaires and presidents and media personalities get to decide what’s real. About whether we still have independent truth-tellers, or only influencers whose truth depends on who’s in office.

In the coming days, we may see that interview happen. We may see Blanche sit across from Rogan and explain away the gaps, the redactions, the implausible conclusions. And we may see Rogan nod along, crack a few jokes, and let it slide. Or we may see him fight for the truth, press harder, dig deeper, platform the victims, and hold the most powerful man in the country accountable.

The future of media credibility — of citizen trust — may hang in that balance because the most dangerous lie isn’t the one politicians tell. It’s the one the public stops questioning.

So now the real question becomes: Will Joe Rogan help or harm democracy?

This festering open wound will finally end our Trump nightmare

There’s a tape.

Not a metaphor, not a rumor, not some fuzzy third-hand whisper passed from burner phone to basement podcast. A real audio recording. Two full days of Ghislaine Maxwell, the trafficker-in-chief of Jeffrey Epstein’s underage empire, speaking directly to Deputy Attorney General and Trump former criminal lawyer Todd Blanche. The Justice Department has it. Transcribed, digitized, real. Senior officials have confirmed it exists. And they’re sitting on it.

Why?

The answer, as always, is simple: because the truth is radioactive and most suspect that there’s no way she told the truth. And this time, it may not be the crime that blows the doors off. It’ll be the coverup.

For decades, we’ve watched this script play out in American politics. Watergate wasn’t about a second-rate burglary, it was about the tapes. Nixon wasn’t brought down by what his men did, but by what he tried to hide.

Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached because of an affair. He was impeached because he lied under oath.

Even Ronald Reagan escaped the full weight of Iran-Contra by claiming he didn’t know what was going on when his campaign manager cut a deal with the Mullahs to hold the Iranian hostages until after the election.

It’s always the cover-up. The moment the lie collapses, the whole edifice of power starts to rot from the inside out. And yet here we are again. Only this time, the man at the center of the storm is someone for whom coverups are not mistakes; they’re operating principles.

Donald Trump, once again, is facing a story he’d rather bury in a golf course like his first wife. The Epstein network is no longer a scandal. It’s an open wound. The suicides, the dead ends, the sealed documents, the missing logs: it all reeks.

And now the woman who may know more than anyone alive has given a two-day interview to the Deputy AG and was immediately transferred out of a high-security Florida prison into the upscale, open-campus Bryan facility in Texas.

Why does that matter? Because Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking minors. Under federal prison policy, that makes her an automatic “public safety factor,” a designation that makes her ineligible for such cushy reassignment. And yet — poof — it was waived. Gone. Erased like it never existed.

Craig Rothfeld, a prison consultant who’s worked with the worst of the worst, says he’s never seen it happen:

“No one I know in this world can recall in all their years a time that the Bureau of Prisons had an inmate’s public safety factor waived.”

That’s not a bureaucratic quirk. That’s a favor. A deal. A signal.

So again, we ask: what did she say? And how extensively did she agree to lie on behalf of Trump in order to get better treatment and an eventual pardon?

There’s no official answer. There’s just the echoing silence and the frantic attempt to get ahead of it. Or a frantic editing of the audio or videotape to make it work for Trump when Bondi — who, herself, ignored Epstein as he raped young girls while she was Florida Attorney General — finally decides to release it for maximum impact.

Inside the White House, according to multiple officials, the debate is not about truth, transparency, or justice. It’s about optics. About timing. About whether releasing the tape will reignite a story they think has “died down.”

Former Trump insider Lev Parnas reports that there’s a top-secret meeting going on today at JD Vance’s residence to nail down the details of the coverup:

“I told you it was coming — and here it is: Trump has activated Comer. This is coordinated. Calculated. The subpoenas, the Oversight Committee drama, it’s all part of the show. And while the press focuses on the chaos, the real operation is happening behind closed doors—at J.D. Vance’s home.

“They think they can get away with it. They think the circus act Congressman James Comer is rolling out—waving around subpoenas and distractions—is enough to keep the public entertained while they try to pull off one of the biggest cover-up’s in American history—erasing Trump from the Epstein files like he was never there.”

But this story doesn’t die. It festers. Because Trump, Qanon, and other Republicans spent literally years convincing their cult followers that Epstein’s pedophile clients were all Democrats or left-leaning billionaires, with Bill Clinton and Bill Gates at the front of the line.

And now, to their shock, they’re discovering that Trump appears to be right in the middle of it all.

We’re talking about a billionaire pedophile who died in federal custody under “suspicious circumstances” while Trump was president.

We’re talking about his lieutenant and procurer, convicted and imprisoned, suddenly being treated like somebody who wrote a bad check or even, as some on Fox “News” are now suggesting, a victim herself.

And we’re talking about a man who rode Epstein’s plane, partied at Mar-a-Lago with him, and was once quoted — on the record — saying Epstein “likes beautiful women … many of them on the younger side.”

America is talking about Donald Trump.

The former and current President has spent years trying to distance himself from the Epstein circle, claiming they had a “falling out,” pretending he hardly knew Maxwell. But photos, depositions, and flight logs all say otherwise. Epstein's black book didn’t leave Trump out; it put him near the top.

And yet, despite all that, Trump continues to skate. Because the story keeps getting absorbed into the noise. Until now. Until the tape.

If Maxwell named names, if she detailed events, if she confirmed rumors that have swirled for decades — that Trump attended parties where teenage girls were traded like party favors, that he joked about needing a glove to protect his “sacred scepter,” that he was anything more than a bystander — it would tear a hole in the center of his narrative.

The “tough guy” image. The populist champion. The innocent victim of political witch hunts. All of it collapses if a voice from inside Epstein’s house of horrors ties him directly to what the rest of us have only guessed at.

And that’s why the coverup matters more than ever and it’s entirely unlikely that Ghislaine said anything of the sort. Because the crime, grotesque as it is, happened in the shadows.

But the coverup? The coverup is happening in broad daylight. And the key to it will be Ghislaine Maxwell saying that Donald Trump had nothing to do with any of it in exchange for a better prison and an eventual pardon. That’s already now being reported.

It’s the DOJ debating “timing.” It’s Trump floating the idea of clemency on cable news, then walking it back with a wink like he has for other criminal associates so many times before. It’s the inmates in the Bryan minimum security dormitory, furious that a convicted trafficker is now sharing their yoga and puppy-training classes and is their softball teammate.

It’s the raw, visible machinery of power closing ranks.

We’ve become numb to it. Trump doesn’t need to deny anymore. He just deflects. “I haven’t spoken to Blanche,” he says. “He’s a very talented guy.” That’s it. No denial. No condemnation. No outrage. Just the same oily shrug he gave when asked about Ghislaine in 2020: “I wish her well.”

Meanwhile, the country gasps for accountability. It’s not just that we suspect the truth; it’s that we know we’ll never be allowed to see it unless someone leaks it. The tapes from Epstein‘s house. The blackmail material. The dirty heart of a scandal that refuses to die.

Because this isn’t about sex. It’s not even about Epstein. It’s about what we tolerate when a leader has enough power, enough money, and enough enablers to rewrite the rules and make a coverup work in real time.

When politicians lie and cover up — not just mistakes but actual crimes — they’re not merely shielding themselves: they’re redefining what power means in a democracy.

Every coverup chips away at the public’s belief in truth as a civic standard. It teaches that truth is optional, that deception is just another tactic.

When leaders escape consequences, they don’t just model corruption; they normalize it. Nixon’s resignation proved even presidents could be held accountable, but Ford’s pardon arguably led to Trump’s impunity, which sends the opposite message: power protects itself, and denial is more effective than confession.

The same was true with Reagan’s deal to hold the hostages until the 1980 election. And with George W. Bush’s brother Jeb throwing 90,000 mostly African American voters off the Florida rolls just weeks before the 2000 election that George “won” by 527 votes and the help of Clarence Thomas, his daddy’s appointee on the Supreme Court.

Institutions meant to serve the public; the DOJ, courts, Congress, and the press all become accomplices when they look the other way. Silence becomes complicity. Trust erodes, voter turnout drops, and conspiracies rush into the vacuum left by a vanished belief in facts.

When people stop trusting the system, they start craving saviors like Putin, Orbán, and Trump. Strongmen rise not because they’re strong, but because democracy seems weak.

And once a corrupt leader learns that consequences can be dodged with a lie, there's no limit to how far he’ll go.

The irony is brutal: most coverups aren’t even necessary. The crime could’ve been survivable. The lie is what metastasizes. The lie is what turns a mistake into a crisis, staining everyone who touches it.

Nixon could’ve disowned the burglars. Clinton could’ve told the truth. But power convinces men they can bend reality. In the end, the damage isn’t just legal; it’s theatrical. The truth never makes it to stage, justice is a costume, and the audience realizes the show is rigged. That’s when coverups tear at the fabric of democracy.

And the sad truth? Trump’s not alone in either the crime or the coverup.

History is filled with men who believed they were untouchable. Nixon, pacing the halls, muttering about “enemies.” Clinton, calculating the risk of a lie over the truth. Diddy, Weinstein, even Epstein himself: rich and powerful men surrounded by yes-men and fixers who believed the world would never catch up to them.

But the pattern always cracks. Always. The lie gets too big. The system bends just far enough. The coverup fails.

So we wait. For the tape. For the transcript. And the predictable outrage when it’s clear that Maxwell is now participating in the coverup, in the whitewash. For the moment when the wall around Trump’s past starts to tremble as even his most ardent followers realize he’s now the deep state itself, orchestrating his own coverup.

And when it does, it won’t be because of what he did. It’ll be because of what he tried to hide.

Because it’s always the coverup.

Time to massage the truth

Nick Anderson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist.