Trump Bows To Reality, Says Release Epstein Files
After months of demanding Republicans resist, he says "We have nothing to hide."
The top story on Memeorandum this morning is a WSJ report titled “Trump Plays Hardball With GOP Lawmakers as Epstein Vote Approaches.” Except that, clicking through, the headline is now “Trump Backs Vote to Release Epstein Files in Sharp Reversal.” (The URL still highlights the original title.)
President Trump threw in the towel on dissuading House Republicans from backing a measure to release files related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, saying Sunday night that GOP lawmakers should instead embrace the vote.
The vote set for this week had been shaping up as a major test of GOP loyalty to the president, who has kept an iron grip over the party since starting his second term in January. Dozens of Republicans were expected to potentially break with the president when the measure hit the House floor, and Trump’s announcement avoids a potential embarrassment for the White House.
“House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax,” Trump wrote on social media, calling it a distraction from GOP successes.
It amounted to a sharp reversal for Trump, who had sought for months to deter Republicans from supporting the measure. But a last-minute push wasn’t getting results, officials said, and risked calling even more attention to the matter as Trump seeks to calm voter anxiety over the cost of living. Some people thought in hindsight it would have been best to support the release of files from the beginning.
Last week, Trump failed to stop a House petition from reaching the critical 218th signature—comprising all Democrats plus four Republicans—prompting the House to hold a vote soon mandating that the Justice Department turn over its Epstein-related files.
Trump had been pushing Republicans to stand firm. Democrats “want to waste people’s time, and some of the dumber Republicans like that,” Trump said on Air Force One on Friday. Trump also last week pressed the Justice Department to launch an investigation into Epstein’s relationship with prominent Democrats.
The vote, sought for months by GOP Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, along with Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California, stood to put all House lawmakers on the record. GOP lawmakers have been balancing voters’ outrage over the case against Trump’s claim that the push for more Epstein disclosures is a Democratic effort to hurt Republicans politically.
The move to release the records is surely, first and foremost, about hurting President Trump politically. As Cheryl Rofer rightly notes, “None of the things being pulled out of the latest tranche of many thousand emails is new.” The fight is over politics, with the girls who were victimized as an afterthought.
Oddly, I can not find the above-quoted message from Trump on his Truth Social feed.
Regardless, it’s clear that enough Republicans—indeed, possibly a groundswell—was going to vote to release, regardless. There were enough votes to force a vote, and there is enough demand within the Republican base to release the records to force Republican Members into a Hobson’s choice.
AP (“In reversal, Trump says House Republicans should vote to release Epstein files“):
The president’s shift is an implicit acknowledgement that supporters of the measure have enough votes to pass it the House, although it has an unclear future in the Senate.
It is a rare example of Trump backtracking because of opposition within the GOP. In his return to office and in his second term as president, Trump has largely consolidated power in the Republican Party.
[…]
Lawmakers who support the bill have been predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for it, bucking the GOP leadership and the president.
[…]
Lawmakers who support the bill have been predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for it, bucking the GOP leadership and the president.
We shall see what happens in the Senate, although I suspect that it will pass that body, which is on the whole considerably more mainstream than the House, as well. Like Rofer, I expect to learn nothing that will change my opinion on Trump.
Well if Trump is now ready to release the files, I assume he has had them excised of any mention of his name in the context of any sort of smoking gun.
As someone here pointed out, in the release legislation there’s a proviso for keeping the file under wraps if there is an ongoing criminal investigation and the felon just ordered DoJ to investigate Dems. The release may pass and he could sign it and still bury the file.
There’s a difference between not learning anything that will change your opinion of Trump, and nothing in the emails being new. I’d argue there’s a lot in the emails we didn’t know, with more being found every day. Not about Trump, but various people surrounding Epstein. Plus, the grammar.
Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised — rather than take the loss delivered by members of his own party, he made a last minute jump to the winning side.
While Democrats no doubt believe it’s an issue that should damage Trump politically by exposing vile behavior and hypocrisy, the Republicans who signed the discharge petition don’t appear to have been targeting Trump, and dozens of other Republicans were set to vote yes on the bill to protect their own reputations.
As for the recent tranche of emails released by the House committee, it’s categorically different than the DOJ’s files. The House obtained files that were still the privately-held property of the Epstein estate. The DOJ files are orders of magnitudes larger and contain information derived from investigations dating back at least to the GWB administration when Acosta investigated Epstein and mysteriously arrived at a non-prosecution agreement. Sure, Epstein and Trump were buddies back then and the DOJ files may well dirty Trump, but there’s no good argument to be made for letting his past misdeeds slide, considering his present open corruption and persistence in breaking constitutional norms.
@Rick DeMent:
Kash Patel has had plenty of time to rig the evidence. But it won’t work, they’ll fuck it up.
@Sleeping Dog:
This is the big worry, that this release move is bullshit and he thinks he can stall til he’d out.
But I do not know. Interesting times.
Just like all the Trump related legal stuff of 2024, nothing will come of this either.
@Sleeping Dog:
Right, the bill says that the DOJ can withhold information for reasons including an ongoing investigation. His change of position on the House vote may just be a fallback to the next defense — the Senate (we’ll see what happens there), and then a potential veto if he thinks it’s tenable at that time, and then the various reasons (excuses) for the DOJ to not release the most incriminating portions of the files.
@Bill Jempty:
Disagree. First, this story has created a rift in MAGA, and second, it’s showed Trump can be bullied. The ‘strong man’ looks weak, and that’s not good for an authoritarian. Knives are being sharpened that were sheathed before this blowup.
Do I think he’ll be driven from office? No. But he’ll be weakened, too weakened to pursue Stephen Miller’s sick wet dreams of an American Reich.
In bullfighting, before the Matador steps into the plaza de toros, the picadors and the banderilleros have weakened the bull. Trump is staggering around the ring dripping blood.
@Michael Reynolds:
The bull to the Matador… Okay, but hopefully not Maximus to Commodus (as depicted in Gladiator), as Maximus was severely wounded by the Emperor’s soldiers, but was still able to vanquish Commodus before his time was up.
@Eusebio:
Oh, the bull still has horns.
I used to know a guy, an American, who trained as a matador. I attended a bullfight with him in Spain and saw a bull, something like 800 pounds, put a horn through the matador’s Achilles tendon, lifted the poor bastard up in the air, tossed him like a rag doll, and then leapt over the inner fence that was probably 5 feet high.
But I don’t think Trump has a leap in him.
@Sleeping Dog:
That. IANAL, but that seems the key fact here, and I believe it’s also DOJ policy. If there’s one thing Trump has proven in court, and I think it’s the only thing he’s ever proven in court, the law provides all the due process the defendant can afford. And as prez, it’s all the due process DOJ can afford. His endorsement of release by “House Republicans” is a hollow gesture, making a show of accepting something forced on him, and falling back to the Senate, to veto, to DOJ, to Roberts.
And if Rofer is right that there’s nothing new there, the best thing is for this to drag on until Nov. 2028.
A quick reminder that there is a difference between the emails that are being released and the files that are in the hands of the DOJ. The emails were provided by the Epstein estate.*
My guess is that the vote to release will be carefully worded to exclude anything that “would affect the President’s ability to do his job” or some such weaselly construct.
ETA: *Ooops, as Eusebio said above.
There’s less for Trump to worry about with Ghislaine Maxwell’s “amnesia” secured and Kash Patel with a gallon of White-out in hand after dozens of agents were assigned to flag all the references to DJT. And it is hard to square political damage to Trump being the prime motivation to release when there has been considerable Republican support for it all along, including from Trumpaholics like MTG (her current feud with him notwithstanding). Trump’s Truth (sic) Social order to Bondi to investigate Bill Clinton, and any other prominent Dems mentioned in the file, was “taking a good joke a step too far.” The change of heart may be an indication that Trump actually listened to someone with better political judgment.
@gVOR10:
Exactly. It doesn’t matter how much of the Epstein news is new. It does matter if it is relentless. How much new information did the public get after the initial bolus of news in previous scandals? Not much as I remember it. On the other hand, the scandals were on the news all the time.
The more the medias (both mainstream and social) talk about Epstein, the more the scandal seeps between the information siloes. When it is viral, it’s harder for Trump to control, which is pissing him off.
It is enough that Trump be perpetually pissed off.
Trump doesn’t need Congress’ permission to release the files; He can order the DOJ to just do it and they would.
This is about managing headlines, and getting gullible people to think he is actually willing to release the files.
1. I highly doubt the current DOJ will be able to sufficiently whitewash those files, they are a group of venal, vindictive, idiots. Never underestimate how stupid they are. Also, I expect the DOJ is full of enemies right now. Decent lawyers a being made to look like foolish scumbags, here’s an excellent chance for revenge. Not to mention, scores to settle.
2. Until proven otherwise, I’m going to assume that there is stuff in those files that will either destroy people or provide evidence that for the last 20 years people in power have gone out of their way to protect absolute shitbags. I want to know what Holder knows and when he knew it. I want to know what Obama knows about both Epstein and Larry Summers. A whole lot of people know exactly who molested and fucked over countless women and girls.
3. As far as I’m concerned, Harvard as an institution needs to be burned to the ground, it’s endowment given to the poor, and the ground salted underneath it.
FWIW: I heard one of the Epstein victims who wants the files released.
But yes, this is primarily about Tump at this stage.
I would add, however, that anything that gets more members of the public to truly see who we have as president the better.
It’s less about changing opinions about Trump than changing opinions about Trump supporters have about other Trump supporters. Fox is already trying the ’15-year olds aren’t really kids’ line. Imagine hearing this in defense of the guy for another few years from someone pressed about their support of Trump.
The nausea level is so high with these people. Last year at this time, Mark Zuckerberg was transitioning to a real man in support of the new Trump coalition of diverse righteous voters. How’s that looking now? A year of masked ICE bullies attacking random drivers, Musk in a k-hole finding 12.43 of fraud via DOGE, Trump nodding off/dying in public, and every lackey on their knees defending him while the costs go up and jobs collapse into an unreported black hole.
So just imagine having to top off your defense of Trump by pointing out that it wasn’t like the 15-year old he raped was a 7-year old kid. Next year at this time there’s going to be serious talk about how to off your MAGA relatives and get away with it. And for good reason…
@Beth:
It’s important to note that these men are not appearing as they wished to appear. Epstein was not the Stones decamped for tax purposes to a chateau in southern France doing coke, shooting up, and recording Exile while being surrounded by models. He was an idiot with terrible taste, an absolutely boring moron, and these powerful men are all so lame that they treated like him Mick and Keith.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Disagree, this is about all of them across the board. They had to know what these people were doing.
I mean, look what makes an appearance…
They all knew what these people around them were doing and did nothing as women and girls were fed to the woodchipper for the delight of disgusting men.
@Beth:
Allow me to restate: I think that for a lot of Democratic House members, and a lot of Democratic operatives, this is mostly about Trump.
As a more general matter, yes, this is about all of the perpetrators.
Maybe to put it as succinctly as possible: I don’t think a discharge petition would be being debated at this point in time in the Congress if Trump wasn’t involved.
I am not downplaying the story, I am just noting that there can be no doubt that this story is getting the treatment it is getting because of the Trump angle.
@Beth:
My thoughts exactly. They’d be sure to fuck something up. Doesn’t mean they won’t try, they’re dumb enough to.
I’m not sure how I feel about burning Harvard down, but every one of these motherfuckers needs to be torched. Trump seems to imagine that we’re concerned with protecting Bill Clinton. Nope.
@Bill Jempty:
This prediction of yours does not exactly make you Nostradamus. I kind-of feel the same as you, but a bit differently. Do I think this will cause a critical mass of MAGA critters to demand that he steps down now and we get Vance as a President, no, do I think he will end up in jail due to what is in the Epstein files, no, but do I think this helps blow up the GOP fantasy of Trump getting a third term as President, yes (similar to how MR feels about this).
I say this knowing the GOP will try to claim that Trump is eligible to run again because his second term as Prez was not contiguous, but now that dream is likely to wither away like a fresh cut rose left laying on the ground on a sunny California day.
Look, President Trump tried his by now very worn out schtick of saying wow, we need to have Pam Bondi and the Justice department go hard after Clinton, etc., but this is also a witch hunt/hoax, and that really flew like a lead balloon.
So now knowing that unfortunately even his possibly caressing young girls in front of characters like Epstein will not get a critical mass of the American public to turn against him he bows down to the reality that the files are going to get released and he might as well get behind their release.
This is a smart move on his part. It might make quite a few folks sick to realize he is going to get away with this (avoiding jail, avoiding stepping down) but that is where we find ourselves in America these days.
I think this will just barely (and I mean barely) damage President Trump enough that he does not get a third term.
If everyone is being real honest with themselves, releasing the files is not about taking down President Trump right now, or arresting him, it is all about damaging his prospects of getting a third term.
I think MAGA will be happy to pivot to electing Vance in 2028, given that Vance will be just as happy, if not more so, than even President Trump to do their bidding.
Vance is not exactly a profile in courage, if someone says I want you to go even harder and arrest anyone found on the street without papers (regardless of this persons color, they can be black, white, brown, or orange) I can picture him saying Sir, Yes Sir! Instead of him saying Sir, why are you asking me to direct such hate towards my fellow Americans?
@Michael Reynolds:
I agree but this is all atmospherics. Inside politics stuff.
A book I recently read, Mongoose RIP, contained a bullfighting scene. I don’t think I’ll ever write one in one of my books because I know very little on the subject. That hasn’t stopped me in the past. As seen by conversions to Judaism, competitive figure skating, Japanese Yakuza, dung beetles, all of which were the central focus of books I have written.
@inhumans99:
Donald Trump is a lame duck. The 22nd amendment precludes him from running again. You even write this won’t be Vance’s problem in 2028 if he’s on top of the GOP ticket then.
A plurality of American voters last year weren’t at all bothered by Trump’s legal problems. They aren’t going to care anymore now. Thinking otherwise is a case of political fantasy.
What I’m looking for is something that in the financial world is called “capitulation”. This is a phase of a bear market, typically near the end, where all those traders who were resisting the idea that there actually was a bear market throw in the towel and sell.
So, that’s a bit different than “capitulation” in international politics or high-stakes negotiation.
I would like to see this happen to Trump. I estimate that maybe half of Trump’s support is contingent: They back him because he wins.
The question then is when do they walk away? When do they decide “we got what we need, let’s move on?”
I am not holding my breath for Trump to leave office. I have been looking for, maybe expecting capitulation for quite some time now. And no.
Yeah, it might help in the midterms, but I think that the reversal is meant for damage control with regard to the midterms.
@Bill Jempty:
A bit shorter reply this time around, I promise. Lol!!
I am not a tin foil wearing hat person (really, if you met me IRL you would find I am not a conspiracy theorist, and really not even usually adjacent to being considered a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy believing oddball), however, in this instance I have partially slipped on a tin foil hat in that I feel that President Trump would be more than open than listening to folks in his orbit talk about ways around the 22nd amendment pretty much clearing the runway for him to run again.
I do feel his connection to Epstein pretty much means that for Trump it should also be a political fantasy that he gets another term. However, he has talked about being “owed” a third term way too much in the last several months for me to roll my eyes at his words.
This part is directed at no one in particular, I just want to add to this post by saying that if anyone believes the 22nd amendment does indeed clearly prevent Trump from running for a third term, than all the folks listening to Trump when he declares that Birthright Citizenship is no longer a thing in America need to stop listening to him and accept that Trump’s words do not have the power to undo what is in the Constitution. A baby being born to an immigrant (legal or otherwise) right this second is giving birth to another American Citizen, regardless of one’s political leanings, the 14th says this is so.
Also, sorry, but I did say this reply would only be a bit shorter.
I think I’ll wait to 1) see if anything gets released, 2) what gets released, and 3) what effect does it have.
@inhumans99:
I also think that he won’t end up in jail due to this, but that’s not really on the table excepting some truly stunning developments since the bar for criminal conviction is high, and the statute of limitations applies for everything except sex crimes involving a minor — and even that is a Biden era law that could be argued to the SC to not apply to older crimes. IANAL, but this part of it seems pretty straightforward.
@Rick DeMent:
I doubt that’s possible: there appear to be multiple copies of the “files”, and deleting invites leaking.
Bungling a cover-up attempt can be very dangerous.
@Sleeping Dog:
The thing is, the files are likely to have indicators of financial transactions.
Following up on them is likley to be the real motherlode in all this.
Another thing to bear in mind: Epstein and Maxwell appear to have been runiing a classic multi-layered influence/enticement/entrapment operation.
Using “charitable” and “science support” activity as the outer cover.
One in the penumbra, those considred corruptible can then be drawn into the really nasty activity.
I’d wager a fair amount a lot of “names in the files” are guilty of nothing more than gullibility.
NB: That does NOT apply to anyone continuing their association after Epstein’s first conviction, still less anyone actual involved in the pedo-sexual crimes and perversions.
@JohnSF:
Indeed. So, so many political scandals are about the cover-ups. And those involved always are myopic enough to think that they/this time will be different.