Revelations continue to surface from the giant Epstein files data dump, so let’s do a roundup of some of the more interesting bits.
Mar-A-Lago is a mixture of everyone. DONALD TRUMP told [blacked out] that he threw EPSTEIN out of his club. TRUMP called the PBPD to tell him “thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this”. TRUMP told him people in New York knew EPSTEIN was disgusting. TRUMP said [GHISLAINE] MAXWELL was EPSTEIN’s operative, “she is evil and to focus on her”. TRUMP told [blacked out] that he was around EPSTEIN once when teenagers were present and TRUMP “got the hell out of there”. TRUMP was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating EPSTEIN.
Snip.
Trump’s comment came in direct response to reporters asking if he had any knowledge that Epstein had molested girls. He was denying awareness of Epstein’s crimes or the allegations of molestation/sex trafficking that surfaced prominently around Epstein’s 2019 arrest.
Nowhere in this FBI interview does it indicate he had specific knowledge of the criminal molestation, sexual abuse, or trafficking details that later emerged in the full Epstein investigation or his 2008 plea deal. It’s Trump saying he had heard from others about “disgusting” behavior and how he was so creeped out that he had to remove Epstein from his club.
Countless people in Palm Beach social circles noticed Epstein had a pattern of questionable behavior with young women, without having direct evidence or knowledge of the felony-level crimes. Good try, media.
“Nothing within the FBI report even alludes to Trump knowing about Epstein and Maxwell’s crimes. Sometimes your gut tells you something is off about people.”
You know Democrats and their MSM familiars must be gnashing their teeth as their Great White Whale swims away again…
Valeria Chomsky, the wife of Noam Chomsky, issued a statement about their longtime friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. Noam Chomsky, 97, suffered a massive stroke in 2023 and is unable to speak.
Noam and I have felt a profound weight regarding the unresolved questions surrounding our past interactions with Epstein. We do not wish to leave this chapter shrouded in ambiguity.
Throughout his life, Noam has insisted that intellectuals have a responsibility to speak the truth and expose lies — especially when those truths are uncomfortable to themselves.
As is widely known, one of Noam’s characteristics is to believe in the good faith of people. Noam’s overly trusted nature, in this specific case, led to severe poor judgment on both our parts.
Ah. Another brilliant and successful expert in human behavior who hung around Epstein at length and just never noticed anything unusual or suspicious about him. It’s amazing how often those keen, long-honed skills at reading people just disappeared once Epstein entered a room. Valeria Chomsky continues:
Noam and I were introduced to Epstein at the same time, during one of Noam’s professional events in 2015, when Epstein’s 2008 conviction in the State of Florida was known by very few people, while most of the public – including Noam and I – was unaware of it. That only changed after the November 2018 report by Miami Herald.
A reminder: That conviction was for “felony solicitation of prostitution and, pursuant to the NPA, to a criminal information charging him with procurement of minors to engage in prostitution.” It was public record and covered in the Palm Beach newspapers.
We had lunch, at Epstein’s ranch, once, in connection with a professional event; we attended dinners at his townhouse in Manhattan and stayed a few times in an apartment he offered when we visited New York City. We also visited Epstein’s Paris apartment one afternoon for the occasion of a work trip. In all cases, these visits were related to Noam’s professional commitments. We never went to his island or knew about anything that happened there.
We attended social meetings, lunches, and dinners where Epstein was present and academic matters were discussed. We never witnessed any inappropriate, criminal, or reproachable behavior from Epstein or others. At no time did we see children or underage individuals present.
Here’s the biggest and most prominent problem with Valeria Chomsky’s “we just had no idea” excuse. Several months after the Miami Herald published the series, on February 23, 2019, Epstein emailed Chomsky looking for advice on how to handle his bad press.
In a response purportedly from Chomsky, the famed linguistics professor advised Epstein “the best way to proceed is to ignore it” and “not to react unless directly questioned.”
Chomsky drew parallels to his own experience with “hysterical accusations of all sorts,” writing, “I pay no attention, unless I’m approached for a comment on a specific matter.”
“What the vultures dearly want is a public response, which then provides a public opening for an onslaught of venomous attacks, many from just publicity seekers or cranks of all sorts,” the email said. “That’s particularly true now with the hysteria that has developed about abuse of women, which has reached the point that even questioning a charge is a crime worse than murder.”
Does that sound like a man who’s deeply concerned about what Epstein may have done?
But Valeria Chomsky insists that message is being taken out of context.
Noam’s email to Epstein, in which Epstein sought advice about the press, should be read in context. Epstein had claimed to Noam that he [Epstein] was being unfairly persecuted, and Noam spoke from his own experience in political controversies with the media. Epstein created a manipulative narrative about his case, which Noam, in good faith, believed in. It is now clear that it was all orchestrated, having as, at least, one of Epstein’s intentions to try to have someone like Noam repairing Epstein’s reputation by association.
Noam’s criticism was never directed at the women’s movement; on the contrary, he has always supported gender equity and women’s rights.
Oh, shut up. You don’t get to send a message to Epstein reassuring him that “hysteria that has developed about abuse of women, which has reached the point that even questioning a charge is a crime worse than murder” and then turn around and tout yourself as a feminist.
But there’s more. Back in 2023, Noam Chomsky confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that he received a March 2018 transfer of roughly $270,000 from an Epstein-linked account. That too was just an innocent favor, Valeria Chomsky insists.
Regarding the reported transfer of approximately $270,000, I must clarify that these were entirely Noam’s own funds. At the time, Noam had identified inconsistencies in his retirement resources that threatened his economic independence and caused him great distress. Epstein offered technical assistance to resolve this specific situation. On this matter, Epstein acted accordingly, recovering the funds for Noam, in a display of help and very likely as part of a machination to gain greater access to Noam. Epstein acted solely as a financial advisor for this specific matter. To the best of my knowledge, Epstein never had access to our bank or investment accounts.
Now, keep in mind, for just about all his intellectual career, Noam Chomsky has been a furious critic of American capitalism (“a grotesque catastrophe”), the wealthy elites of the U.S., and corporate influence over politics. He has written, “in this world there happen to be huge concentrations of private power that are as close to tyranny and as close to totalitarian as anything humans have devised… The corporations are just as totalitarian as Bolshevism and fascism.”
Recall that Epstein ran a financial management firm that catered to billionaire clients.
Let yea who has never had a convicted pedophile wire $270,000 into their account cast the first stone.

Top donors to Wisconsin politicians are mentioned in the latest release of files related to investigations into pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, including top Democratic donor Reid Hoffman, who appears in the documents more than 2,500 times.
Hoffman, a venture capitalist and co-founder of LinkedIn, has donated $15 million to the state Democratic Party since 2019, contributions that include a recent pair of donations totaling $275,000, state campaign records show.
Hoffman was among those who visited Epstein’s private Caribbean island called Little St. James in 2014, six years after the American financier pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution of a minor and registered as a sex offender, according to reporting by the Wall Street Journal.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel first reported the Democratic donor’s ties in 2023. Hoffman has not lived in Wisconsin, but the Silicon Valley billionaire has dedicated his spending in part because of Wisconsin’s battleground political dynamic.
The new batch of documents show scheduled meetings between Hoffman and Epstein between 2013 and 2018.
At one point in 2015, Epstein invited Hoffman to visit him to “play.” In 2014, Hoffman told Epstein he had sent gifts to his New York home that included ice cream for Epstein to try or “for the girls.”
What girls might these be, one wonders…
I don’t have a team of researchers like The New York Times to review the Epstein files, but I have flipped through them and found a couple things that you won’t read in the Times — and you definitely won’t see on MS-NOW.
Criminal defense lawyer David Schoen sent an informative email to Epstein, saying no one would ever take the Russia investigation seriously because special counsel Robert Mueller had selected a legal team that was a “murderer’s row of the worst.”
Schoen’s case-in-chief was Andrew Weissmann, frequent Times opinion writer (Title of actual column: “A Former Prosecutor on the ‘Incredibly Strong Case’ Against Trump”). He appears so frequently on MS-NOW, he has a cot and toothbrush under Lawrence O’Donnell’s desk.
Weissmann, Schoen said, was known in the U.S. attorney’s office as “The Pathological liar,” because he “literally would withhold exculpatory evidence throughout the case.” When defense counsel complained, Weissman waited until the guy “went to the bathroom or lunch, stick the documents under other [papers] on his table, and tell the judge the lawyer had it all along.” He did this even in murder cases, which Schoen knew because, “his rats have come to me to admit their role in it.”
If true, this is a Brady violation, about as bad as it gets.
The Times has frequently discussed the rule, saying it ought to be “obvious,” to “prosecutors with any sense of fairness” that they have to “inform a defendant’s lawyer of evidence that could be favorable to the defendant’s case.” The paper complains about the “near complete lack of punishment for prosecutors who flout the rule.”
Democrats are demanding that ICE agents be stripped of their qualified immunity? Federal prosecutors like Weissmann have absolute, blanket immunity for their actions.
Schoen noted that Weissmann’s unsavory tactics “ruined” some of the biggest criminal cases ever tried. For example, he led the federal prosecution of Arthur Andersen LLP, a major player in the Enron scandal. But because of his extreme overreach on jury instructions (agreed to by the pliant judge) the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the conviction.
In terms of Weissmann’s appearance of fairness, Schoen said Weissmann is a “Trump hater and Clinton sycophant.”
Saying he could “go on and on,” Schoen singled out only two other Trump/Russia investigators with personal and political baggage: Jeannie Rhee, who “was actually Clinton’s lawyer in the email investigation,” and Greg Andres, “100% in the pro-Clinton, anti-Trump camp.”
Snip.
The media may want to ignore Barry Krischer, but the Epstein files don’t.
Palm Beach’s Democratic district attorney, Krischer spent years going after Rush Limbaugh for pain pills — raiding drugstores, seizing records, and leaking to the press — before finally dropping all charges. But when the Palm Beach police handed him a child sex ring implicating Epstein, a major Democratic donor, Krischer intentionally tanked the case.
There was no excusing it: The police’s meticulous investigation gave us pretty much everything we know today about Epstein’s crimes. The media have raged against U.S. attorney Alex Acosta for his sweetheart plea deal with Epstein a few years later, solely because he was Trump’s first Secretary of Labor. Krischer makes Acosta look like Elliot Ness.
Instead of locking up Epstein and putting an end to his sexual predations on young girls back in 2006, Krischer’s office treated the girls as if they were the ones on trial. Prosecutor Lanna Belohlavek accused the teens of prostitution, asking them, “You’re aware that you committed a crime?” She also grilled them about their drug and alcohol use, body piercings and posts on MySpace.
After a presentation like that, the grand jury ended up charging Epstein with only one count of soliciting prostitution. Krischer released him on bond. No prison sentence, no fine — and no ankle monitor to get in the way of massages.
One of Epstein’s semi-literate emails gives us some insight into Krischer’s thinking. Reporting a conversation between the Democratic prosecutor and the Democratic former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Epstein says Krisher believed that “what i did was barely crimianl but basically inapporritate,,, “ [spelling in original].
Perhaps this was merely Epstein’s self-flattering version of the conversation. Except we know what Krischer did. Back pain pills: Bigger than the Manson murders! Raping 14 year-olds: Basically “inapporritate”
(Hat tip: Director Blue.)
- Shrimp
- Tuna
- Pizza
- Grape soda
And they watch the Asmongold jerky clip as well.
“There’s not enough evidence to say that this is a satanist network or that this is a child eating network.”
“That’s very restrained of you.”
“Yes. And I’m willing to accept that they might be all of these things.”
“Epstein is messaging [I assume Peter] Mandelson saying, quote, I love the torture video. It’s [hard] to think of a good context for that.”
They also note how a journalist who dismissed “Pizzagate” as a “right wing conspiracy” later went to prison for child rape.
I don’t know what to make of this, but the possibilities range from dark to very, very, very dark…