Epstein Files are Chum in the Water for Media Sharks and gossip mongers
Since the release of the files, Epstein stories have been spreading faster and farther afield than the Covid 19 virus. And it is not only the media that has gone into a feeding frenzy. So have the social media scribes and that portion of the public that salaciously dwells on scandal and conspiracy theories. The court of public opinion is in full session with all the dangers of false accusations, guilt by association and rushes to judgment – those things a court of law does not allow.
One of my obsessive critics is a good example of what is wrong when speculation and innuendoes are spread as facts. In response to an earlier commentary on the impact of the Epstein File releases, Frank Danger, as he likes to be known, offered up one of his characteristically frequent long boring rants. He said:
I’m sorry but are you (this writer) defending Epstein and the men he associated with? Why are you trying to uphold the reputation of men who consorted with a pedo who created over 1,000 victims, most of who want to see this information (sic).
As with those who wallow in rumors, gossip and scandal — and respond with hyperbolic mendacious rants — Frank Danger creates his own straw man reality. Nothing in the graph above is remotely true. I do not defend those criminally involved. However, many of those named were not “consorting” with Epstein, as Frank Danger unfairly implies. They all had different relationships with Epstein – but nothing criminal has been yet revealed about any of them.
Not sure where Frank Danger got the number of victims, but he is telling a fib when he says that most of 1000 victims “want to see this information” Virtually all the media reports about the victims offer up interviews with only a handful of victims. The vast majority of them have remained in the shadow — and many of them have said they did not want the files revealed. They did not want the bandage ripped off the wound.
My commentary was not a defense argument for any person engaged in Epstein’s criminal activities. They should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. We can all agree on that. In fact, that is exactly what happened. L’Affaire Epstein was investigated intensively over many years by two Departments of Justice – one under President Biden and one under President Trump. They both drew the same conclusion. There was no further evidence (not gossip) that would lead to additional indictments and conviction. That does not mean there are not others guilty, but courts of law demand hard evidence. That is why the court of public opinion is not a good conduit to justice. Quite the opposite. It is the judiciary of the mob.
For sure, lots of folks in the files do not look good. We may see them as reprobates. Their relationships with Epstein are embarrassing, to say the least. Many of those named have had close dealings with Epstein, but many seem to have been involved in normal or more casual dealings – business and social. Photos with Epstein mean nothing. He was a socialite who traveled in the company of the rich and famous.
The point of my earlier commentary was that the Justice Department should have maintained its tradition of not revealing information about folks who are not targets of criminal investigation. It is a policy that protects innocent parties from the kind of concocted scandal we are witnessing today. The longstanding prosecutorial policy is designed to shield innocent people from folks like Frank Danger, who engage in malicious gossip and slander to score political points.
Under American jurisprudence, people are to be assumed innocent of crimes until proven otherwise in a court of law. Frank Danger does the opposite. He presumes guilt and makes unfair and untrue accusations by speculation and innuendo.
Associating with Epstein is not a crime. Visiting his home or Island – of flying on his plane – are not crimes. Even being involved sexually with “Epstein’s women” is not a crime unless they are underage. Poor morals, perhaps, bad morals but not criminal. The crime of pedophilia occurs when the sex involves girls (or boys) who are underaged. That is the crime that can be – and should be — prosecuted when there is the evidence to sustain an indictment and trial.
For sure, some of the people named invite heightened suspicion – Prince Andrew and Bill Gates, as two examples. They were seen or photographed with Epstein’s underage girls. Unfortunately, suspicion is not evidence – even in those cases.
The Frank Danger types ignore American justice and common decency. They fall back on unwarranted certainty – often saying “everybody knows …. to bolster their unsubstantiated claims. They engage in scurrilous accusations without evidence – even in the face of determinations by multiple federal prosecutors that there is no sufficient evidence to bring additional indictments. If such evidence is found … good. Let the wheels of justice grind. Let the chips fall where they may. Let the guilty be punished.
But the fact of the matter is that not one of the scores of names being tossed around in the press has been proven to be complicit in any illegal activities associated with Epstein. At least not so far. We may see them as sleazebags in some cases, but that is not criminal. As one left-wing guest on MS NOW noted, ‘The Justice Department is not in the business of embarrassing people.” Well …. it is now.
My commentary was about devotion to the law – not the type of political vigilantism that folks like Frank Danger promote.
So, there ‘tis.
I will respond to Larry’s specific comments shortly, there is a lot to digress here, but I digest :>) I welcome the chance to respond to his short, boring piece using me as his foil.
FIRST: All that is wanted here, apparently even Trump wants it, he voted for it, is some level of closure for the survivors. As Bondi said, Trump signed the law to free the Epstein files, they are gung-ho to nap pedo’s wherever they are. Trump just has issues with actions matching his words. Yesterday, we saw Pedophile Protector Pam Bondi, lie, obfuscate, divert with childish taunts, divert from answers instead wandering into other issues, questioners backgrounds, while totally ignoring survivors in the room, just feet from her, begging the DOJ to talk with them making anyone with a brain wonder: what are Trump/Bondi hiding? Almost every move Bondi has made looks like coverup. When asked how many rich white men have been investigated, indicted, etc., she responded that we should be focusing on the Dow’s highs.
Larry is similar in his defense of the indefensible. The law is on the books. Free the files. Redact by law. You are in violation of the law. Defending such violations is tantamount to not supporting the rule of law.
Bondi often referred to the fact that folks in the past, like Garland, dropped the ball excusing her coverup and failures of what she owns now. The case is open, and Bondi seems hell bent to sweep it under the rug as did her predecessors. Bondi cannot blame the past for her current failure. If anything, it provided a great opportunity to prove how better she is.
Bondi illegally fails to release the files. When she releases some files, does not redact the survivor’s personal information and redacts most of the rich, white men. Trump is mentioned 1 million times; his family members are in there too, all redacted. Internationally, the files have caused people to step down from power in a few countries, none in America even as Lutnick lies through his teeth about it, no issue from this administration. What is Bondi hiding? A few days ago, two days before the hearing, DOJ let Congress see unredacted files. There were four, terminals using different passwords for each Congress member. Really? How many billions in funding for ICE and all Bondi can find is four terminals for all of Congress? It appears that DOJ was tracking the PC activity to know exactly what each member was looking at before Bondi’s reality-show defense in front of Congress. She had the tracking in her burn book. And you all get upset over phone call records, not taping the call, just the call record, as you appear to track every mouse click for every Congress member looking at the unredacted files: and then you use the data to push back in your House appearance. And the supposed unredacted Epstein files for Congress were still REDACTED.
Folks, this is not going to end until all the files come into the light, redacted by law not by personal pleasure to protect potential pedophiles.
Larry-Joe tells us Trump called PBPD police chief in July of 2006 “to tell him that Epstein’s activities with teenaged girls were well known in both New York and Palm Beach.” “Thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this,” the police chief said Trump told him in 2006. Trump has also claimed he kicked Epstein out of Mar A Largo around 2003 or 2004, after accusing him of poaching staff, not what he says in 2006 everyone knew. Teen-aged girls, meh. Poaching staff: you’re out of here. According to club records, the actual ban was in 2007, a whole year after Trump called PBPD: what’s up with that? Certainly not urgency or certainty. From the story, and a fact Joe left out, in 2019, Trump said: “No, I had no idea. I had no idea,” about Epstein’s activities. So which is it: pedophilia, staff poaching, or no idea? Today, Trump’s FBI said: “We are not aware of any corroborating evidence that the President contacted law enforcement 20 years ago” as in the PBPD did not call the FBI. Neither did Trump. What’s up with that? For Maxwell, Trump in July 2020, said, “I just wish her well, frankly.” And later his lawyer gave her Club Fed. Sound like a coverup?
In 2008, Epstein was convicted in a FL sweetheart deal for 13 months with a work release by a prosecutor, Alexander Acosta who somehow becomes Trump’s Secretary of Labor for his efforts. Payback? Coverup? The plea bargain was a secret deal. The work release lets him out every day. Bear in mind that the investigation started in 2005, Trump said nothing even though he, and everyone according to Trump, apparently knew, he kicked Epstein out of Mar A Largo but did not go to the authorities with what he, and everyone, knew. In 2019, Epstein dies in jail on Trump’s watch.
And everyone, from 2005 to today, in the Federal Government, have done what Bondi did in public yesterday: turned their backs on the survivors.
I think it’s time to give it up Pam, stop being a Pedophile Protector, let the sunshine in and release the files, redacted correctly, and let the chips fall where they may in investigating each willing survivor, and even with your actions to chill them out, there are many. Truth seekers will not let this go, nor should they. There’s a thousand survivors out there looking for closure and not one rich white man has been indicted for any of those 1,000 victims. If you show some backbone and support the victims, there will be more survivors to help. And investigate each of the men to prove who is culpable and who is not. The innocent men will appreciate this as will the survivors and most of America. Bondi has a choice and, so far, she has chosen badly. IMO, she could turn this around by letting the sunshine in and then pursuing all leads to wherever they go as the Protector of Survivors, the one who did what Biden, Obama, and Bush swept under the rug. Hard to fathom why not make that choice unless: coverup.
My comments (in parens) and sorry for the length which Larry deems as “characteristically frequent long boring rants.”
Since the release of the files, Epstein stories have been spreading faster and farther afield than the Covid 19 virus. (always good to lead with a covid joke: how many dead was that, wink-wink-nudge-nudge. Starts in bad taste and goes downhill).
Frank Danger, as he likes to be known, offered up one of his characteristically frequent long boring rants. (don’t be a douche). He said: I’m sorry but are you (this writer) defending Epstein and the men he associated with? Why are you trying to uphold the reputation of men who consorted with a pedo who created over 1,000 victims, most of who want to see this information (sic). (seems like a fair question given Larry’s defense of hiding the Epstein files from the public.)
As with those who wallow in rumors, gossip and scandal — and respond with hyperbolic mendacious rants — Frank Danger creates his own straw man reality. Nothing in the graph above is remotely true. (In a memo in July 2025, the FBI said its review of the files found that Epstein’s victims numbered more than 1,000. BUSTED) I do not defend those criminally involved. (Your denial the survivors exist is defending the culprits. Remember, it was Trump who said: “everybody knows he’s evil,” so you want to hide those who associate with evil even though all of them knew it? Let’s see them in the light of day and not hide them as you want to do).
(I asked the simple question: are you defending, you say no, and then you defend.)
However, many of those named were not “consorting” with Epstein, as Frank Danger unfairly implies. (this may or may not be not true; how do you know who consorted and what consorting even means? It means to habitually associate with (someone), typically with the disapproval of others. (like is Lutnick having a family meal with Epstein consorting or not consorting? Habitually since he met at least three times. You just can’t know what level of consorting going on until the files are free. And if they do not go free, then Lutnick’s lies stand as the truth.) They all had different relationships with Epstein – but nothing criminal has been yet revealed about any of them. (Larry, we don’t even know who they are, much less, what they were consorting about. Are you actually saying don’t look, don’t tell, no see, must be innocent? And all the folks resigning, quitting, running away — must be innocent?).
Not sure where Frank Danger got the number of victims, but he is telling a fib when he says that most of 1000 victims “want to see this information” (. (In a memo in July 2025, the FBI said its review of the files found that Epstein’s victims numbered more than 1,000. I think it’s in the files, but there is a memo. DOJ’s case was for dozens, not a handful.)
Virtually all the media reports about the victims offer up interviews with only a handful of victims. (are you really saying only a handful interviewed and therefore more do not exist? Really? DOJ has dozens in their case. FBI has a memo noting over 1,000. Why are you defending the indefensible? And most speaking out want to see the files, and they all SAY they are speaking for the silent majority.) The vast majority of them have remained in the shadow — and many of them have said they did not want the files revealed. (With guys like you, I can understand avoiding the limelight. But prove it, especially against the handful that are vocal. You just made that up, you do not really know). They did not want the bandage ripped off the wound. (Prove it, you don’t know this to be true. On one hand you say they don’t exist, but if they do, they don’t want to have the files revealed. Again, who are you defending?).
My commentary was not a defense argument for any person engaged in Epstein’s criminal activities. (You just say the survivors do not exist in great numbers. YOU say by shielding the files, by redacting the men’s names, by your tacit agreement that’s a good thing, I say you most certainly look like you are defending pedo’s). They should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. We can all agree on that. In fact, that is exactly what happened. L’Affaire Epstein (excuse me — first the covid joke and then L’Affaire Epstein? This is not a fucking joke, this is no time to be cutesy, this is a incredibly large sex trafficking group of underage women; one girl may have been nine. What’s your next defense, “she’s a very mature nine?) was investigated intensively over many years by two Departments of Justice – one under President Biden and one under President Trump. They both drew the same conclusion. There was no further evidence (not gossip) that would lead to additional indictments and conviction. That does not mean there are not others guilty, but courts of law demand hard evidence. That is why the court of public opinion is not a good conduit to justice. (then why put the Guthrie masked villain picture to the public? He might be innocent. Why perp walk Comey? He is innocent. You guys are the bandleaders for trying people on FOX, on TUCKER, and right here. Give it a rest. If Bill Gates did it with Epstein, he probably did it with someone else so let’s make it public and see if anyone comes forward, just like the Guthrie masked guy.). Quite the opposite. It is the judiciary of the mob. (oh please Madam, you kvetch too much. Just free the files and lets the factual chips fall where they may. We admit Bush, Obama, Biden and Trump DOJs failed; is that the rationale for your failure in the face of the law you are breaking as I type. It’s your time, Trump 2.0 time, your turn, your promise, your commitment, so, free the files, don’t bury them again. It’s THE LAW. Remember, you honor the rule of law, except in this case it seems. For some reason it seems and all your caterwauling just digs your denial in deeper).
EDIT TIME SINCE HORIST REPEATS HIMSELF WHEN UNDER STRESS, REPEATS HIMSELF WHEN UNDER STRESS:
The Frank Danger types (illogical stereotyping and generalization without prior evidence) ignore American justice and common decency. They fall back on unwarranted certainty – often saying “everybody knows …. to bolster their unsubstantiated claims. (except for quoting Trump, where did I say “everybody knows? Just because I say follow the law, free the files, redact by law — Larry is against the guy who wants to honor the law and instead he wants to protect rich, white, men, who consorting with Epstein. He does not even want you to see their names.)
They engage in scurrilous accusations without evidence – even in the face of determinations by multiple federal prosecutors that there is no sufficient evidence to bring additional indictments. If such evidence is found … good. Let the wheels of justice grind. Let the chips fall where they may. Let the guilty be punished. (Bondi refused to even acknowledge the survivors and has met with none of them. Given the failure of DOJ during Bush, Obama, Biden, Trump and now Trump again, who promised more, the law says free the files, redact by law, and either you are for the rule of law, or you are a Larry.)
(I am truly sorry some of these guys may get a little muddy from the public dragging. They are rich, I suggest a good PR firm and get ahead of it with your story. Or quit and step down as many have already done.)
But the fact of the matter is that not one of the scores of names being tossed around in the press has been proven to be complicit in any illegal activities associated with Epstein. (So, don’t’ follow the law and free the files because Larry does not want to hurt rich guys hanging with Epstein (no pun intended)). At least not so far. We may see them as sleazebags in some cases, but that is not criminal. As one left-wing guest on MS NOW noted, ‘The Justice Department is not in the business of embarrassing people.” Well …. it is now.
My commentary was about devotion to the law – not the type of political vigilantism that folks like Frank Danger promote. (good, so free the files, redacted according to law —- THAT IS THE LAW YOU CLAIM DEVOTION TOO. TRUMP SIGNED THE LAW —- ARE YOU BLAMING TRUMP OF ALL MY TRANSGRESSIONS IN WANTING TO HONOR AND FOLLOW THE LAW TO FREE THE FILES?)