Connect with us

News

Epstein papers leave questions about what powerful men knew about his crimes

Published

on

Epstein papers leave questions about what powerful men knew about his crimes

Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were friendly with and traveled with Jeffrey Epstein during years when he allegedly victimized women. Both say they had no knowledge of Epstein’s behavior. One alleged victim says Epstein’s powerful acquaintances “had to be blind” not to know.

Ted Shaffrey/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ted Shaffrey/AP


Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were friendly with and traveled with Jeffrey Epstein during years when he allegedly victimized women. Both say they had no knowledge of Epstein’s behavior. One alleged victim says Epstein’s powerful acquaintances “had to be blind” not to know.

Ted Shaffrey/AP

The new trove of documents linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which was released by a federal court over the past two weeks, didn’t unmask any major public figures or include shocking revelations.

But the documents include claims from Epstein’s alleged victims who say prominent men who socialized with Epstein must have known what was going on and failed to blow the whistle — even if they didn’t engage in criminal behavior themselves.

Advertisement

“If you walked foot into Jeffrey Epstein’s house and you went in there and you continued to be an acquaintance of his then you would have to know what was going on there,” Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein’s alleged victims, testified in a newly revealed 2016 deposition.

“I would say the first time they came to [Epstein’s home] there is nude pictures everywhere. These are [photographs of] salacious acts of girls, young girls doing things to each other that would be considered child pornography,” she added.

Those named in the Epstein documents include former presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, former Maine Sen. George Mitchell, and Harvard professor and attorney Alan Dershowitz, among many others.

The fact that an individual is named or that they socialized with Epstein does not indicate wrongdoing. But the documents raise questions about who knew what about Epstein’s activity.

At one point in testimony made public for the first time, Giuffre said former President Bill Clinton was among the men aware of Epstein’s activity:

Advertisement

“Yes, he would be a witness because he knew what my purpose there was for Jeffrey and he visited Jeffrey’s island,” she said, adding that sexual activity involving girls was “something that Jeffrey Epstein wasn’t shy about admitting to people.”

Photographs have emerged of Clinton receiving a neck massage at an airport from a young woman who now describes herself as one of Epstein’s victims.

But in a 2019 statement, Clinton — who is named frequently in the documents — said he never visited Epstein’s private island in the Virgin Islands and “knew nothing about the terrible crimes Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to in Florida.”

Angel Ureña, a spokesman for Clinton, said it had been nearly 20 years since Clinton last had contact with Epstein and that the former president has never been accused of any wrongdoing.

In separate sworn depositions, alleged victim Sarah Ransome said Epstein was transparent about trafficking girls to visitors who came to his home in New York City and his private island in the Virgin Islands.

Advertisement

“There were various buildings around the island … like little shelter things, where him and his guests used to have sex with the girls, like beds set up for instant sexual entertainment,” Ransome said in 2017.

One of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims said young women were offered to guests for “instant sexual entertainment” at his property on Little St. James Island. The powerful men who socialized with Epstein say they had no idea sex trafficking occurred.

Gabriel Lopez Albarran/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Gabriel Lopez Albarran/AP


One of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims said young women were offered to guests for “instant sexual entertainment” at his property on Little St. James Island. The powerful men who socialized with Epstein say they had no idea sex trafficking occurred.

Gabriel Lopez Albarran/AP

“At his town house [in New York] I was also lent out by him to his friends and associates to have sex,” she alleged under oath.

At least one public figure, former President Donald Trump, has acknowledged in a 2002 interview being aware that Epstein “liked beautiful women…on the younger side.”

Advertisement

Trump, who is also named in the documents and acknowledged being friends with Epstein for “fifteen years” has said he did nothing wrong and knew nothing of Epstein’s criminal behavior.

“Did any of us know what was going on?”

Harvard Professor and prominent attorney, Alan Dershowitz, who represented Jeffrey Epstein, says he knew nothing about wrongdoing while the two were friends. “Did any of us know what was going on? I can’t vouch for other people. I can only tell you, I didn’t know.”

J. Scott Applewhite/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

J. Scott Applewhite/AP


Harvard Professor and prominent attorney, Alan Dershowitz, who represented Jeffrey Epstein, says he knew nothing about wrongdoing while the two were friends. “Did any of us know what was going on? I can’t vouch for other people. I can only tell you, I didn’t know.”

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

In an interview this week with NPR, Harvard law professor and attorney Alan Dershowitz, who was friends with Epstein and represented him, said Epstein kept his predatory behavior carefully closeted.

“Did any of us know what was going on? I can’t vouch for other people. I can only tell you, I didn’t know,” he said.

Advertisement

“That was shocking that could have happened without us knowing, without us seeing, because as you say there were so many people around them.”

Federal prosecutors now say Epstein, who worked for decades as a private financier for a secretive list of wealthy clients before taking his own life in a federal jail in 2019, operated sex-trafficking ring, which at times involved minors, from 1994 until at least 2004.

He allegedly developed a scheme to identify and exploit “dozens” of vulnerable girls and young women, some as young as 14 years old. His accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, is currently serving a 2o-year sentence for perpetrating what U.S. Attorney Damian Williams called “heinous crimes against children.”

Dershowitz, who denies any wrongdoing, acknowledges being close to Epstein from 1996 through 2008, describing visits to Epstein’s homes as well as phone conversations and meetings at social and professional gatherings.

He worked on the high-powered legal team that crafted a controversial deal in 2008 allowing Epstein avoid federal charges.

Advertisement

Epstein instead pleaded guilty to relatively minor state-level prostitution charges in Florida and was allowed to serve most of his 18-month sentence in a work-release program.

Dershowitz told NPR he now believes Epstein did engage in criminal, abusive behavior, and says their personal relationship ended after 2008. But he says he saw no red flags involving young women while they were socializing.

“One of my sons said, ‘Stay away from this guy, I don’t like him financially,” Dershowitz recalled, referring to the financial and consulting services Epstein provided to clients. “But nobody warned me about anything having to do with sex.”

“You would have to be blind not to know”

In 2016 testimony, revealed in the new documents, Giuffre offers a different narrative, saying under oath that Dershowitz was one of the powerful men present at social events where it was obvious that young women like herself were vulnerable.

Giuffre: The only thing I can say to that is that there were minors around and did Dershowitz know that Jeffrey Epstein was using these minors for sexual
purposes, yes, he did.

Advertisement

Q. How do you know that?

Giuffre: How do I know what he knew, because he was around Jeffrey Epstein so many times that you would have to be blind to not know what Jeffrey Epstein was doing.

Asked by NPR about those statements, Dershowitz described Giuffre as unreliable and said claims by her and Ransome that he had sexual encounters with them were false.

Dershowitz pointed to the fact Giuffre has since expressed uncertainty about her claims that she had met and had sex with him.

Asked more broadly by NPR how he and others could have missed signs Epstein and Maxwell were abusive to young women, Dershowitz said Epstein “kept his private life completely secret.”

Advertisement

“I regret having ever met him. I think it was the worst thing that ever happened in my life meeting him,” Dershowitz said.

Asked about his role as an attorney, helping Epstein avoid more serious federal criminal charges for trafficking underage girls, Dershowitz said he acted professionally:

“I don’t know how I could have done anything different. That’s just in my wheelhouse, what I do. I regret the outcome, of course, I regret having ever met him, but I can’t say I feel guilty about anything I did.”

After that deal was struck, Epstein, a registered sex offender, continued to live freely for years. According to an investigation published last month by The Wall Street Journal, he continued his practice of traveling to meetings with powerful men in the company of young women.

There’s no evidence that at any point any of the men who interacted with Epstein raised concerns about his behavior with authorities.

Advertisement

In 2019, after the Miami Herald published an expose about Epstein, he was finally arrested on federal sex trafficking charges. He took his own life in jail while awaiting trial.

News

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino says he will step down in January

Published

on

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino says he will step down in January

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino speaks during a news conference on an arrest of a suspect in the January 6th pipe bomb case at the Department of Justice on Dec. 4, 2025.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

FBI deputy director Dan Bongino said Wednesday he plans to step down from the bureau in January.

In a statement posted on X, Bongino thanked President Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel “for the opportunity to serve with purpose.”

Bongino was an unusual pick for the No. 2 post at the FBI, a critical job overseeing the bureau’s day-to-day affairs traditionally held by a career agent. Neither Bongino nor his boss, Patel, had any previous experience at the FBI.

Advertisement

Bongino did have previous law enforcement experience, as a police officer and later as a Secret Service agent, as well as a long history of vocal support for Trump.

Bongino made his name over the past decade as a pro-Trump, far-right podcaster who pushed conspiracy theories, including some involving the FBI. He had been critical of the bureau, embracing the narrative that it had been “weaponized” against conservatives and even calling its agents “thugs.”

His tenure at the bureau was at times tumultuous, including a clash with Justice Department leadership over the administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

But it also involved the arrest earlier this month of the man authorities say is responsible for placing two pipe bombs near the Democratic and Republican committee headquarters, hours before the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In an unusual arrangement, Bongino has had a co-deputy director since this summer when the Trump administration tapped Andrew Bailey, a former attorney general of Missouri, to serve alongside Bongino in the No. 2 job.

Advertisement

President Trump praised Bongino in brief remarks to reporters before he announced he was stepping down.”Dan did a great job,” Trump said. “I think he wants to go back to his show.”

Continue Reading

News

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

Published

on

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

new video loaded: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

transcript

transcript

Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

“What a [expletive] embarrassment.” “Look at this guy.” “What’s with all the fascists?” “The Lord is with you.” “Where’s the bad hombre? What did this guy do?” “He’s out here working to support his [expletive] family.” “Gestapo agents.” “Oh yeah, shake your head, tough guy.” “This is where you get the worst of the worst right here, hard-working builders.” “Crossing the border is not a crime. Coming illegally to the United States is not a crime, according to you.” “C’mon, get out of here.” “Take him to a different hospital.”

Advertisement
A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

By Ernesto Londoño, Jackeline Luna and Daniel Fetherston

December 17, 2025

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Published

on

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Journalists report outside BBC Broadcasting House in London. In a new lawsuit, President Trump is seeking $10 billion from the BBC for defamation.

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP

Not content with an apology and the resignation of two top BBC executives, President Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit Monday against the BBC in his continued strategy to take the press to court.

Beyond the legal attack on yet another media outlet, the litigation represents an audacious move against a national institution of a trusted ally. It hinges on an edit presented in a documentary of the president’s words on a fateful day. Oddly enough, it also hinges on the appeal of a niche streaming service to people in Florida, and the use of a technological innovation embraced by porn devotees.

A sloppy edit

At the heart of Trump’s case stands an episode of the BBC television documentary program Panorama that compresses comments Trump made to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before they laid siege to the U.S. Capitol.

Advertisement

The episode seamlessly links Trump’s call for people to walk up to the Capitol with his exhortation nearly 55 minutes later: “And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you don’t have a country anymore.”

Trump’s attorneys argue that the presentation gives viewers the impression that the president incited the violence that followed. They said his remarks had been doctored, not edited, and noted the omission of his statement that protesters would be “marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

As NPR and other news organizations have documented, many defendants in the Jan. 6 attack on Congress said they believed they had been explicitly urged by Trump to block the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump’s lawsuit calls the documentary “a false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump.”

The lawsuit alleges that the depiction was “fabricated” and aired “in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election to President Trump’s detriment.”

Advertisement

While the BBC has not filed a formal response to the lawsuit, the public broadcaster has reiterated that it will defend itself in court.

A Nov. 13 letter to Trump’s legal team on behalf of the BBC from Charles Tobin, a leading U.S. First Amendment attorney, argued that the broadcaster has demonstrated contrition by apologizing, withdrawing the broadcast, and accepting the executives’ resignations.

Tobin also noted, on behalf of the BBC, that Trump had already been indicted by a grand jury on four criminal counts stemming from his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, on the Capitol grounds.

The appeal of BritBox

For all the current consternation about the documentary, it didn’t get much attention at the time. The BBC aired the documentary twice on the eve of the 2024 elections — but never broadcast it directly in Florida.

That matters because the lawsuit was filed in Florida, where Trump alleges that the program was intended to discourage voters from voting for him.

Advertisement

Yet Tobin notes, Trump won Florida in 2024 by a “commanding 13-point margin, improving over his 2020 and 2016 performances in the state.”

Trump failed to make the case that Floridians were influenced by the documentary, Tobin wrote. He said the BBC did not broadcast the program in Florida through U.S. channels. (The BBC has distribution deals with PBS and NPR and their member stations for television and radio programs, respectively, but not to air Panorama.)

It was “geographically restricted” to U.K. viewers, Tobin wrote.

Hence the argument in Trump’s lawsuit that American viewers have other ways to watch it. The first is BritBox, a BBC streaming service that draws more on British mysteries set at seaside locales than BBC coverage of American politics.

Back in March, then-BBC Director General Tim Davie testified before the House of Commons that BritBox had more than 4 million subscribers in the U.S. (The BBC did not break down how many subscribers it has in Florida or how often Panorama documentaries are viewed by subscribers in the U.S. or the state, in response to questions posed by NPR for this story.)

Advertisement

“The Panorama Documentary was available to BritBox subscribers in Florida and was in fact viewed by these subscribers through BritBox and other means provided by the BBC,” Trump’s lawsuit states.

NPR searched for Panorama documentaries on the BritBox streaming service through the Amazon Prime platform, one of its primary distributors. The sole available episode dates from 2000. Trump does not mention podcasts. Panorama is streamed on BBC Sounds. Its episodes do not appear to be available in the U.S. on such mainstream podcast distributors in the U.S. such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Pocket Casts, according to a review by NPR.

Software that enables anonymous browsing – of porn

Another way Trump’s lawsuit suggests people in the U.S. could watch that particular episode of Panorama, if they were so inclined, is through a Virtual Private Network, or VPN.

Trump’s suit says millions of Florida citizens use VPNs to view content from foreign streamers that would otherwise be restricted. And the BBC iPlayer is among the most popular streaming services accessed by viewers using a VPN, Trump’s lawsuit asserts.

In response to questions from NPR, the BBC declined to break down figures for how many people in the U.S. access the BBC iPlayer through VPNs.

Advertisement

Demand for such software did shoot up in 2024 and early 2025. Yet, according to analysts — and even to materials cited by the president’s team in his own case — the reason appears to have less to do with foreign television shows and more to do with online pornography.

Under a new law, Florida began requiring age verification checks for visitors to pornographic websites, notes Paul Bischoff, editor of Comparitech, a site that reviews personal cybersecurity software.

“People use VPNs to get around those age verification and site blocks,” Bischoff says. “The reason is obvious.”

An article in the Tampa Free Press cited by Trump’s lawsuit to help propel the idea of a sharp growth of interest in the BBC actually undercuts the idea in its very first sentence – by focusing on that law.

“Demand for Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) has skyrocketed in Florida following the implementation of a new law requiring age verification for access to adult websites,” the first paragraph states. “This dramatic increase reflects a widespread effort by Floridians to bypass the restrictions and access adult content.”

Advertisement

Several legal observers anticipate possible settlement

Several First Amendment attorneys tell NPR they believe Trump’s lawsuit will result in a settlement of some kind, in part because there’s new precedent. In the past year, the parent companies of ABC News and CBS News have each paid $16 million to settle cases filed by Trump that many legal observers considered specious.

“The facts benefit Trump and defendants may be concerned about reputational harm,” says Carl Tobias, a professor of law at the University of Richmond who specializes in free speech issues. “The BBC also has admitted it could have done better and essentially apologized.”

Some of Trump’s previous lawsuits against the media have failed. He is currently also suing the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Des Moines Register and its former pollster, and the board of the Pulitzer Prize.

Continue Reading

Trending