The evidence could go missing, but to the people who have built influencer careers out of Epstein conspiracies, that would likely just fuel the fires of speculation.
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it.
And she doesn't even have to stash the evidence. A copy of the evidence would be just as good, maybe even better, for convincing the conspiracy theory enthusiasts that it's real. "The Elites destroyed the original. But we've gotten a copy out and we'll destroy them with it!"
Of course, the minute there's one copy out, there will be a dozen (hey, I said the first minute) variations splashing across the Internet. No doubt Trump will feature in at least some of them.
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it. Given all that we have seen from Trump in the past, the only way to protect yourself is to have leverage. If she were to get rid of it, she would have no leverage.
Yeah, good point. It's not as if all these "super loyal" toadies don't know what kind of scummy guy they are dealing with, and will act accordingly.
Time will (hopefully) tell, but currently my own bet would be that there is no real evidence that Trump personally took advantage of the opportunities offered by Epstein (have you all followed the recent case of Jes Staley and his exchange with Epstein? "That was fun. Say hi to Snow White for me" Epstein: "What character would you like next time?" Staley "Beauty and the Beast"), but maybe he is being pressured by another person who is in the files, and in a position to threaten him in some way. As I say, I hope we will find out some time.
Here's hoping. And here's also hoping that they don't find a way to just destroy any evidence that does exist....
At this point you have to assume that there are many people who have seen the evidence - some in the Biden administration, and some, possibly Patel and Bongino, in the Trump administration.
The evidence could go missing, but to the people who have built influencer careers out of Epstein conspiracies, that would likely just fuel the fires of speculation.
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it. Given all that we have seen from Trump in the past, the only way to protect yourself is to have leverage. If she were to get rid of it, she would have no leverage.
this is a real fault line that could be a wedge issue. I'd et the infighting rage, and work to poke holes in the Trump cover story that there is nothing to be seen. All that is required is to remain skeptcally agnostic and ask questions. They'll do the rest themselves.
Here's hoping. And here's also hoping that they don't find a way to just destroy any evidence that does exist....
I think Trump simply believed that if he said that the evidence was not conclusive, his followers would rally around that. I think he's genuinely surprised that there are MAGA fanatics that are not following their cues.
The problem that he has, I think, is that there are two major MAGA factions (with some overlap - it's a continuum). There's the P2025 crowd that are in it for the Christian Nationalism and there's the QAnon crowd that are deeply invested in the "elite pedophile ring" narrative. The QAnon faction, and the people in the middle of the mix that are committed to both are all going to balk at Trump's avowals and assume that someone in the mix is a Deep State plant. My bet is that they land on Bondi for that, which would be fine for Trump so long as she doesn't keep an insurance copy to leak if he comes after her.
My other bet is that they are eventually going to land on the narrative that the Biden administration tampered with the evidence in some way that made it unreliable, and they will use that narrative everywhere that does not involve oaths and the risk of perjury charges.
But it's not going to simply go away, and it will take time and constant massaging to make the new narrative take hold.
I know that the mainstream Dem attitude is that all this conspiracy crap is bad and should not be encouraged, but this is a real fault line that could be a wedge issue. I'd et the infighting rage, and work to poke holes in the Trump cover story that there is nothing to be seen. All that is required is to remain skeptcally agnostic and ask questions. They'll do the rest themselves.
At a guess, there are a fair few powerful men who enjoyed what Epstein had to offer, from both parties. Trump is one of them.
It didn't occur to him before that a real investigation would be bad for him, because he's stupid and entitled.
He's now saying that any "credible" information should be released. "Credible" here means "not implicating Trump".
I agree it may not move the needle enough on the MAGA people, but still, every development shows Ubu has not understood how unhelpful so much of this is to him:
From 2 hours ago in the Guardian: Trump doubles down on 'Epstein hoax' and says Republicans pursuing it are 'stupid people'.
The president then was asked what evidence he might have seen to change his stance on the Epstein case, which this morning he called a “hoax”.
Trump doubled down on his claim that it’s a “big hoax,” but did not provide evidence to support this claim. He also claimed the Epstein case was “started by the Democrats,” but again cited no evidence (though he did mention the Steele Dossier, a report on Trump’s 2016 campaign that alleged cooperation with Russia?).
“Some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into the net and try to do the Democrats’s work,” Trump said.
“They’re stupid people,” he continued to say about Republicans who believe there is more to be revealed about the Epstein case.
“It’s much easier to be angry at an immigrant than to wonder whether you’ve been lied to for the last eight years.”
I think this is where the Lewis goes wrong. They don't have to struggle with the idea that they've been lied to. They just have to maintain their outrage at the Elites for covering this up. Doesn't matter that Trump might have lied to them (ya think he might have?). All that matters is that they are heavily invested in the idea of a conspiracy to cover up massive Elite morality. And that now there is a chance to drag it into the open.
In the end, they're more wedded to their conspiracy beliefs than they are to Trump. And massively more so than to anybody else in his administration. Hence the immediate demands for Bondi's removal. I agree with hsh that his best course would be to just shut up about it. Let the ravening hordes focus of the rest of the administration, and throw them to the dogs as necessary. But he's probably incapable of that. His loss is the country's gain.
You know how AI is starting to run into this phenomenon, where it gets fed its own output, and over time the quality of what it generates keeps degrading?
Looks like people do that, too.
One thing that could make this thing a lasting problem for L’ Orange is his own reaction to the current MAGA outrage. If he would just shut up about it, it would probably blow over. But he seems to be intent on attacking his critics, even those within the MAGA-sphere. We'll see.
hairshirthedonist: I would love to be wrong, but I think not. The blood-and-bone MAGAs are not (IMO) sentient in a traditional sense: they are outrage-tropists, who respond automatically to the Outrage du Jour. Doesn't matter if it directly contradicts yesterday's Outrage du Jour.
No object permanence, no problem!
The concluding paragraphs from the Guardian piece:
Despite the importance of the Epstein files to the Maga and QAnon movements, Lewis thinks that “it’s unlikely this outrage will last”.
“The culture war will move on to its next target … and the rage machine will follow with conspiracies and vitriol,” said Lewis. “It’s much easier to be angry at an immigrant than to wonder whether you’ve been lied to for the last eight years.”
I hope he's wrong, but, after reading his words, I think he's right. How many times has tRump contradicted himself over the last 10 years?
It's quite a contradiction, though, to go from "This thing will implicate all the Dem pedos" to "The Dems made the whole thing up." Does it matter in the long run to MAGA/QAnon?
Just for the benefit of anyone coming to this in the future, the last three entries in the Plus ça change... thread are also on this topic.
Apologies to those here for not making it a thread initially. Unfortunately, I was on my phone and didn't have easy access to create a new thread. (Probably ought to fix that....)
Well, clearly the Epstein files show that the suicide was faked: Epstein SURVIVED, Trump gave him a pardon and put him in the Witness Protection Program.
Epstein is now working in a truck-stop diner in Nebraska, along with Elvis.
Too bad there isn't a Weekly World News to report on this. Oh well.
I wonder, do they really have NOTHING? Otherwise I would have expected a highly redacted version giving the impression that only Dems and some GOPsters fallen from grace were on the list. Or something like the 'total exoneration' stuff as with the reports about the scandals of His Orangeness during his first term totally misrepresented by his henchcritters.
The current
a) nothing incriminating to see in those files and
b) it's all fabricated by Biden and Obama to incriminate His Orangeness
does not make sense even in the MAGAverse.
If the files were really as toxic as they made it look until recently, they should have known it and been prepared to distort it to their advantage and, if there was nothing, what would have stopped them to go on with insinuations and fakes:'The previous administrations tampered with the evidence, so no original files, but here is what we found out...'?
A somewhat different case of Plus ça change...:
One of the favorite obsessions of the MAGA-verse, for the past decade, has been the Epstein Files. Trump used it to smear his opponents. And to demonstrate how he was in sync with the common folks against the Elites. He regularly demanded that they be made public.
But then, Trump's Attorney General, after saying shortly after taking office that she had the file on her desk, announced that there was nothing there that warranted publication. And Trump posted various suggestions that it was old news and people should just move on.
No surprise: while a few cultists followed directions, a substantial majority are having none of it. They want to see those files. They are demanding to see them. (And, incidently, demanding that the AG be fired for not publishing them.)
A lot of us have wondered what would hit the MAGAts hard enough to wake them up. Which, we innocently assumed, was what would get them to abandon Trump. Lots of discussion of economic pain, loved ones dying for lack of medical care, other real stuff. Somehow nobody (that I saw) suggested that one of the conspiracy theories would turn around and bite him.
My guess is that, if they'd just published them, no matter how damning the contents the true believers would have come up with a conspiracy theory to explain it all away. SStereotypically,it's not the crime, it's the cover-up.
Last week, the DNC launched a new account on X that posts messages each day reminding its followers that Trump has “not released the Epstein files.” The account has also reposted Trump-focused, Epstein-related criticism from key social media influencers. It also includes a header image of comments billionaire Elon Musk made after a spat with the White House — and without offering any evidence — in which Musk charged that Trump “is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.” (Trump has described having had a warm social relationship with Epstein, but he long ago distanced himself from Epstein. There has never been any evidence connecting Trump to Epstein’s criminal behavior.)
This makes me a little queasy, but maybe it's the sort of thing Democrats need to do right now.
Just 10% of users produce roughly 97% of political tweets.
(...)
A mere 0.1% of users share 80% of fake news. Twelve accounts – known as the “disinformation dozen” – created most of the vaccine misinformation on Facebook during the pandemic.
(...)
The problem isn’t just the individual extremists, of course – it’s the platform design and algorithms that amplify their content.
IN response to Russell up thread. The books I read about Neanderthals attributed the care art to homo sapiens but scientific knowledge is always evolving! It is easier for me to believe that they did have religious art than to believe that their one and only ceremony was the apparent shrine built out of stalagmites.
Yes, I remember now that there were a few burials that indicated some ceremony.
There are also burials that indicated people eating other people, but that also can be done for ceremonial reasons.
I have a t-shirt from Live 8, bought from a dude on the street, now usually worn while mowing my lawn. I only attended on the periphery in Philadelphia. It was a hot day.
Being in the middle of however-many-thousands of people wasn't appealing. But it was still a lot of fun hanging out in nearby establishments and cooling off in the AC. That whole part of town was jumping.
One thing that made me apoplectic was watching coverage from London of the Pink Floyd reunion in a slacker bar, when MTV decided to break in midsong during Comfortably Numb so some 20-year-old nitwit could yammer on about nothing.
I wanted to throw my glass at the TV, but it wasn't the bar's fault.
I've just finished watching the CNN/BBC three part documentary about the 40th anniversary of Live Aid, whose two concerts (London and Philadelphia) took place 40 years ago today and were watched by something like 1.5/2 billion people. The first part (all of which was very familiar to me) was mainly about how it all began, and the single Band Aid brought out, which also led to We Are The World. The second part was about the Live Aid concerts, and how they were organised and what happened, which again I knew a lot about (and had watched the whole thing).
The third part was about Live8, which led to the cancellation by the G8 of African debt payments, and vastly increased international aid budgets. I knew comparatively little about it, and it was completely fascinating, particularly politically, seeing the interviews with George W Bush, Blair, Condoleeza Rice et al, as well as hearing some of the criticisms. For anyone not interested enough in watching the first two parts, I nevertheless strongly recommend the third. Here is a guest link to a piece in today's NYT about the anniversary, and the documentary: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/13/arts/music/live-aid-bob-geldof-anniversary.html?unlocked_article_code=1.WE8.c0_h.2CwG2nKJUmpQ&smid=url-share
On “Your Schadenfreude monitoring open thread”
The evidence could go missing, but to the people who have built influencer careers out of Epstein conspiracies, that would likely just fuel the fires of speculation.
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it.
And she doesn't even have to stash the evidence. A copy of the evidence would be just as good, maybe even better, for convincing the conspiracy theory enthusiasts that it's real. "The Elites destroyed the original. But we've gotten a copy out and we'll destroy them with it!"
Of course, the minute there's one copy out, there will be a dozen (hey, I said the first minute) variations splashing across the Internet. No doubt Trump will feature in at least some of them.
"
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it. Given all that we have seen from Trump in the past, the only way to protect yourself is to have leverage. If she were to get rid of it, she would have no leverage.
Yeah, good point. It's not as if all these "super loyal" toadies don't know what kind of scummy guy they are dealing with, and will act accordingly.
Time will (hopefully) tell, but currently my own bet would be that there is no real evidence that Trump personally took advantage of the opportunities offered by Epstein (have you all followed the recent case of Jes Staley and his exchange with Epstein? "That was fun. Say hi to Snow White for me" Epstein: "What character would you like next time?" Staley "Beauty and the Beast"), but maybe he is being pressured by another person who is in the files, and in a position to threaten him in some way. As I say, I hope we will find out some time.
"
Here's hoping. And here's also hoping that they don't find a way to just destroy any evidence that does exist....
At this point you have to assume that there are many people who have seen the evidence - some in the Biden administration, and some, possibly Patel and Bongino, in the Trump administration.
The evidence could go missing, but to the people who have built influencer careers out of Epstein conspiracies, that would likely just fuel the fires of speculation.
And if I were Bondi, I'd be sure to stash the evidence somewhere that Trump couldn't get to it, rather than destroying it. Given all that we have seen from Trump in the past, the only way to protect yourself is to have leverage. If she were to get rid of it, she would have no leverage.
"
this is a real fault line that could be a wedge issue. I'd et the infighting rage, and work to poke holes in the Trump cover story that there is nothing to be seen. All that is required is to remain skeptcally agnostic and ask questions. They'll do the rest themselves.
Here's hoping. And here's also hoping that they don't find a way to just destroy any evidence that does exist....
"
I think Trump simply believed that if he said that the evidence was not conclusive, his followers would rally around that. I think he's genuinely surprised that there are MAGA fanatics that are not following their cues.
The problem that he has, I think, is that there are two major MAGA factions (with some overlap - it's a continuum). There's the P2025 crowd that are in it for the Christian Nationalism and there's the QAnon crowd that are deeply invested in the "elite pedophile ring" narrative. The QAnon faction, and the people in the middle of the mix that are committed to both are all going to balk at Trump's avowals and assume that someone in the mix is a Deep State plant. My bet is that they land on Bondi for that, which would be fine for Trump so long as she doesn't keep an insurance copy to leak if he comes after her.
My other bet is that they are eventually going to land on the narrative that the Biden administration tampered with the evidence in some way that made it unreliable, and they will use that narrative everywhere that does not involve oaths and the risk of perjury charges.
But it's not going to simply go away, and it will take time and constant massaging to make the new narrative take hold.
I know that the mainstream Dem attitude is that all this conspiracy crap is bad and should not be encouraged, but this is a real fault line that could be a wedge issue. I'd et the infighting rage, and work to poke holes in the Trump cover story that there is nothing to be seen. All that is required is to remain skeptcally agnostic and ask questions. They'll do the rest themselves.
"
At a guess, there are a fair few powerful men who enjoyed what Epstein had to offer, from both parties. Trump is one of them.
It didn't occur to him before that a real investigation would be bad for him, because he's stupid and entitled.
He's now saying that any "credible" information should be released. "Credible" here means "not implicating Trump".
"
I agree it may not move the needle enough on the MAGA people, but still, every development shows Ubu has not understood how unhelpful so much of this is to him:
From 2 hours ago in the Guardian:
Trump doubles down on 'Epstein hoax' and says Republicans pursuing it are 'stupid people'.
The president then was asked what evidence he might have seen to change his stance on the Epstein case, which this morning he called a “hoax”.
Trump doubled down on his claim that it’s a “big hoax,” but did not provide evidence to support this claim. He also claimed the Epstein case was “started by the Democrats,” but again cited no evidence (though he did mention the Steele Dossier, a report on Trump’s 2016 campaign that alleged cooperation with Russia?).
“Some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into the net and try to do the Democrats’s work,” Trump said.
“They’re stupid people,” he continued to say about Republicans who believe there is more to be revealed about the Epstein case.
"
“It’s much easier to be angry at an immigrant than to wonder whether you’ve been lied to for the last eight years.”
I think this is where the Lewis goes wrong. They don't have to struggle with the idea that they've been lied to. They just have to maintain their outrage at the Elites for covering this up. Doesn't matter that Trump might have lied to them (ya think he might have?). All that matters is that they are heavily invested in the idea of a conspiracy to cover up massive Elite morality. And that now there is a chance to drag it into the open.
In the end, they're more wedded to their conspiracy beliefs than they are to Trump. And massively more so than to anybody else in his administration. Hence the immediate demands for Bondi's removal. I agree with hsh that his best course would be to just shut up about it. Let the ravening hordes focus of the rest of the administration, and throw them to the dogs as necessary. But he's probably incapable of that. His loss is the country's gain.
"
You know how AI is starting to run into this phenomenon, where it gets fed its own output, and over time the quality of what it generates keeps degrading?
Looks like people do that, too.
"
"But he seems to be intent on attacking his critics, even those within the MAGA-sphere."
Consciousness of guilt, I hear it's called.
"
One thing that could make this thing a lasting problem for L’ Orange is his own reaction to the current MAGA outrage. If he would just shut up about it, it would probably blow over. But he seems to be intent on attacking his critics, even those within the MAGA-sphere. We'll see.
"
hairshirthedonist: I would love to be wrong, but I think not. The blood-and-bone MAGAs are not (IMO) sentient in a traditional sense: they are outrage-tropists, who respond automatically to the Outrage du Jour. Doesn't matter if it directly contradicts yesterday's Outrage du Jour.
No object permanence, no problem!
"
The concluding paragraphs from the Guardian piece:
I hope he's wrong, but, after reading his words, I think he's right. How many times has tRump contradicted himself over the last 10 years?
It's quite a contradiction, though, to go from "This thing will implicate all the Dem pedos" to "The Dems made the whole thing up." Does it matter in the long run to MAGA/QAnon?
"
Just for the benefit of anyone coming to this in the future, the last three entries in the Plus ça change... thread are also on this topic.
Apologies to those here for not making it a thread initially. Unfortunately, I was on my phone and didn't have easy access to create a new thread. (Probably ought to fix that....)
On “Plus ça change…”
Well, clearly the Epstein files show that the suicide was faked: Epstein SURVIVED, Trump gave him a pardon and put him in the Witness Protection Program.
Epstein is now working in a truck-stop diner in Nebraska, along with Elvis.
Too bad there isn't a Weekly World News to report on this. Oh well.
"
I wonder, do they really have NOTHING? Otherwise I would have expected a highly redacted version giving the impression that only Dems and some GOPsters fallen from grace were on the list. Or something like the 'total exoneration' stuff as with the reports about the scandals of His Orangeness during his first term totally misrepresented by his henchcritters.
The current
a) nothing incriminating to see in those files and
b) it's all fabricated by Biden and Obama to incriminate His Orangeness
does not make sense even in the MAGAverse.
If the files were really as toxic as they made it look until recently, they should have known it and been prepared to distort it to their advantage and, if there was nothing, what would have stopped them to go on with insinuations and fakes:'The previous administrations tampered with the evidence, so no original files, but here is what we found out...'?
"
A somewhat different case of Plus ça change...:
One of the favorite obsessions of the MAGA-verse, for the past decade, has been the Epstein Files. Trump used it to smear his opponents. And to demonstrate how he was in sync with the common folks against the Elites. He regularly demanded that they be made public.
But then, Trump's Attorney General, after saying shortly after taking office that she had the file on her desk, announced that there was nothing there that warranted publication. And Trump posted various suggestions that it was old news and people should just move on.
No surprise: while a few cultists followed directions, a substantial majority are having none of it. They want to see those files. They are demanding to see them. (And, incidently, demanding that the AG be fired for not publishing them.)
A lot of us have wondered what would hit the MAGAts hard enough to wake them up. Which, we innocently assumed, was what would get them to abandon Trump. Lots of discussion of economic pain, loved ones dying for lack of medical care, other real stuff. Somehow nobody (that I saw) suggested that one of the conspiracy theories would turn around and bite him.
My guess is that, if they'd just published them, no matter how damning the contents the true believers would have come up with a conspiracy theory to explain it all away. SStereotypically,it's not the crime, it's the cover-up.
"
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-put-previous-misgivings-hit-trump-jeffrey-epstein-files-rcna218608
This makes me a little queasy, but maybe it's the sort of thing Democrats need to do right now.
"
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/jul/13/are-a-few-people-ruining-the-internet-for-the-rest-of-us
Neanderthals would never act this way.
"
Far fewer men self-identify as Neanderthal than the number of women claiming they're married to one...
"
IN response to Russell up thread. The books I read about Neanderthals attributed the care art to homo sapiens but scientific knowledge is always evolving! It is easier for me to believe that they did have religious art than to believe that their one and only ceremony was the apparent shrine built out of stalagmites.
Yes, I remember now that there were a few burials that indicated some ceremony.
There are also burials that indicated people eating other people, but that also can be done for ceremonial reasons.
On “An open thread on July 4th”
I have a t-shirt from Live 8, bought from a dude on the street, now usually worn while mowing my lawn. I only attended on the periphery in Philadelphia. It was a hot day.
Being in the middle of however-many-thousands of people wasn't appealing. But it was still a lot of fun hanging out in nearby establishments and cooling off in the AC. That whole part of town was jumping.
One thing that made me apoplectic was watching coverage from London of the Pink Floyd reunion in a slacker bar, when MTV decided to break in midsong during Comfortably Numb so some 20-year-old nitwit could yammer on about nothing.
I wanted to throw my glass at the TV, but it wasn't the bar's fault.
On “Like encountering stone age tribes in the Amazon”
I'm confident that 2 is, in fact, prime.
“This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.”
On “An open thread on July 4th”
I've just finished watching the CNN/BBC three part documentary about the 40th anniversary of Live Aid, whose two concerts (London and Philadelphia) took place 40 years ago today and were watched by something like 1.5/2 billion people. The first part (all of which was very familiar to me) was mainly about how it all began, and the single Band Aid brought out, which also led to We Are The World. The second part was about the Live Aid concerts, and how they were organised and what happened, which again I knew a lot about (and had watched the whole thing).
The third part was about Live8, which led to the cancellation by the G8 of African debt payments, and vastly increased international aid budgets. I knew comparatively little about it, and it was completely fascinating, particularly politically, seeing the interviews with George W Bush, Blair, Condoleeza Rice et al, as well as hearing some of the criticisms. For anyone not interested enough in watching the first two parts, I nevertheless strongly recommend the third. Here is a guest link to a piece in today's NYT about the anniversary, and the documentary:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/13/arts/music/live-aid-bob-geldof-anniversary.html?unlocked_article_code=1.WE8.c0_h.2CwG2nKJUmpQ&smid=url-share
On “Like encountering stone age tribes in the Amazon”
I'm confident that 2 is, in fact, prime.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.