THE KEY QUESTION ABOUT THE EPSTEIN ISSUE IS: WHAT IS THE ISSUE? Perhaps fearing that without constant reminders the public might lose interest in the Jeffrey Epstein matter, the Washington Post has conducted a text message poll of 1,089 people to ask “how closely are Americans following news about government files from the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, and what do they think about President Donald Trump’s handling of the issue.”
The Washington Post made the not-particularly-earthshaking discovery that a lot of people are paying “at least some” attention to the Epstein story, that most support releasing “all files” in the case, that they “suspect” the files will contain “embarrassing information about Trump, Democrats, and billionaires,” and that Democrats disapprove of Trump’s handling of the issue.
Here’s an important question that was not included in the Washington Post’s survey: What is the issue? It would be interesting if a reputable pollster asked an open-ended question along the lines of “What do you think Trump did in the Epstein affair?” Another interesting question would be to ask when Trump did whatever it is the respondents suspect him of doing.
The questions hint at the amorphousness of the Epstein matter. We know what Epstein did, at least his criminal acts. “From at least 2002 through at least 2005, Epstein enticed and recruited, and caused to be enticed and recruited, dozens of minor girls to visit his mansion in New York, and his estate in Palm Beach, Florida, to engage in sex acts with him, after which he would give the victims hundreds of dollars in cash,” says his 2019 federal indictment. “In order to maintain and increase his supply of victims, Epstein also paid certain victims to recruit additional underage girls whom he could similarly abuse. In this way, Epstein created a vast network of underage victims for him to sexually exploit, often on a daily basis, in locations including New York and Palm Beach.”
So what do we know about Epstein and Trump? We know that Trump met Epstein nearly 40 years ago — sometime in the late 1980s. We know that the two were friends in the 1990s. We know that Trump, who, as a flamboyant developer-turned-reality TV star, talked to the press a lot, spoke publicly about his friendship with Epstein.
We know that Trump, in 2002, said Epstein “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” We know that Trump flew on Epstein’s private jet seven times between 1993 and 1997, although there’s no evidence Trump ever visited Epstein’s notorious private island. And then we know that Trump and Epstein had a falling-out in 2004, when Trump apparently banned Epstein from coming to his Mar-a-Lago club. There are no known contacts between the two men after 2004. Two years later, in 2006, Epstein was indicted for the first time, in Florida.
We know that in 2019, when Epstein was indicted a second time, reporters asked then-President Trump, “Did you have any suspicions that he was molesting young women, underaged women?” and Trump answered, “No, I had no idea. I had no idea. I haven’t spoken to him in many, many years.” We also know that Trump said, after Epstein’s arrest, “I want a full investigation, and that’s what I absolutely am demanding.”
We don’t know of any evidence that Trump partook in Epstein’s misconduct. We also do not know of any evidence that Trump knew about Epstein’s criminality and did nothing about it. We have Trump’s denial on that. But what about Trump’s statement, to New York magazine, that Epstein liked women “on the younger side”? Make of it what you will, but it appears to have been said in the 50-year-old-man-who-has-a-25-year-old-girlfriend sense, and not in the Epstein criminal sense.
So it would be useful if pollsters asked people: Just what do you think Trump did that was wrong during those years he socialized with Epstein? And while the pollsters are at it, they can ask whether respondents believe it is possible to know definitively about events that took place so far in the past.
Sorry to engage in elementary math, but 1990 was 35 years ago. Which means the Trump-Epstein friendship began more than 35 years ago. And if the friendship was over in 2004, it ended 21 years ago.
The current frenzy suggests how far back in time the press will go in the effort to find something on Trump. For example, many partisans strongly supported the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, which was filed in 2022, over an alleged sexual assault that took place either 26 or 27 years earlier — the purported victim could not remember which it was.
Now, in the Epstein case, the accusations go back even further — 35 years. Obviously, anything that took place back then is beyond the statute of limitations. (In the Carroll case, the alleged events were beyond the statute, too, but the New York legislature had given sexual assault accusers one free year in which to accuse anybody of anything at any time, even if it allegedly took place decades earlier. That’s how Carroll got to take Trump to trial.) In any event, 20 or 25 or 30 or 35 years ago is a long time.
Back in the 1992 presidential campaign, many in the press got excited over reports that Bill Clinton had been involved in a suspicious real estate development called Whitewater back in 1978 — that is, 14 years earlier. Clinton called it “ancient history,” but due to some weird legal circumstances at the time, mainly the existence of a terrible law called the Independent Counsel Act, a long investigation ensued. (Through even weirder circumstances, it indirectly led to the investigation of the Lewinsky matter.)
Now, some of Trump’s adversaries would like to see an investigation into even more ancient history. You can see the political benefit. If there is enough political pressure, an inquiry can be started on the basis of very little evidence, and then, if you just keep investigating, you can never tell what might pop up.
That’s what Trump has to deal with. Yes, he should release all the Epstein files that can be legally released. But beyond that, he’ll be constantly trying to prove a negative, until Democrats and their allies in the media decide to move on to something else.