New Epstein documents could damage Trump’s credibility, with emails alleging he knew about underage girls in the sex trafficking operation.
“I’VE known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys the social life,” President Donald Trump quoted in New York Magazine in 2002.
The latest development in the Jeffrey Epstein case is likely to see the release of new documents and emails, further intensifying the scrutiny of high-profile individuals alleged to be connected to Epstein and his paedophilic and sex trafficking activities.
The most prominent figure brought down to date by this long-running and still very much alive salacious scandal that shocked and titillated Americans as well as observers around the world is the former Prince Andrew of the British royal family. His brother King Charles finally acted in response to mounting public pressure following the posthumous publication of Virginia Giuffre’s memoir, in which she repeated her allegations of sexual abuse against Andrew, and the re-emergence of emails showing continued contact between Andrew and convicted sex offender Epstein even after Andrew claimed to have cut ties.
ALSO READ: Trump signs bill to release Epstein files
Opinion polls in Britain indicated overwhelming public support (around 90%) for Charles to take decisive action. There were also calls for parliamentary action, and protesters even heckled the King at a public event demanding answers about Andrew’s connections to Epstein.
Anti-monarchy campaign group Republic explored legal avenues for a private prosecution, highlighting a public desire for accountability. In response to the pressure, Charles initiated a formal process in late October, which removed all of his brother’s remaining titles, honours and privileges. It was a move which some supporters of the British royalty saw as necessary to head off further criticism that could doom the institution.
Andrew’s name first publicly appeared in the Epstein case in 2015, when he was identified in US court papers as part of a civil lawsuit against Epstein.
In the lawsuit, one of Epstein’s accusers, Virginia Giuffre (then known as Virginia Roberts), claimed that she was forced to have sex with the prince on three occasions when she was a minor. Since then, his detractors and some of the media have spared no effort in putting Andrew’s past and current activities in the spotlight and to question his claim to innocence and any involvement in the Epstein scandal.
Andrew’s fall from grace – 10 years later – may be likened to his having to undergo death by a thousand cuts. It was not a single sudden scandal that destroyed his public life but rather a series of damaging, cumulative actions and consequences over an extended period.
Each “cut” represented a distinct event or consequence that progressively eroded his reputation, status and relationship with the royal family and the public ,and ultimately brought him to a point of no return despite his vigorous claims of innocence and denial.
Death by a thousand cuts
Will the next prominent figure to fall be the US president? The most recently released emails and correspondence from Epstein’s files include alleged statements made by Epstein, such as one suggesting that Trump “knew about the girls” involved in his sex-trafficking ring.
Another exchange alleged that Trump “spent hours” with one victim at Epstein’s residence. These snippets have given new energy to Trump’s detractors, especially from the Democrats.
It is noteworthy that Epstein has been described by the judge who found him guilty in 2006 as being “the most infamous paedophile in American history”.
Critics of Trump – they are exceptionally wide-ranging and span the entire American political spectrum, going back to even before his first presidency – so far have not been able to bring him down.
Earlier sex-related cases involving Trump have also seen him emerge relatively unscathed in his political standing. They include two ongoing court cases as well as public accusations by two dozen women accusing him of various acts of sexual misconduct since the 1970s. Trump has consistently denied all these allegations.
In the two cases in which he was found guilty – the E. Jean Caroll sexual abuse and defamation civil case and the Stormy Daniels Hush-Money case involving criminal conviction – he has mounted legal challenges that are awaiting final resolution.
The latest forthcoming release may well provide the greatest danger to Trump’s public image and credibility in several ways:
- It confirms or reinforces suggestions that Trump had knowledge of or was associated with Epstein’s conduct involving minors. This would directly undermine his repeated denials and could severely damage his public image and credibility. Even without proof of criminal wrongdoing, the confirmed history of a relationship and association with a convicted sex trafficker like Epstein has created a persistent political and moral liability. The Republicans have been able to live with this but may find the coming disclosures too much of a burden to the party’s political standing by continuing to support Trump.
- The administration’s efforts to oppose or delay the full release of the Department of Justice’s (DoJ) Epstein files are being framed by opponents as a “cover-up” or “paedophile protection programme”. This has fuelled even more suspicion of multiple cover-ups, including Epstein’s suicide, and has drawn negative political attention, including among the ranks of the Republican faithful.
- The successful bipartisan effort to force a House vote on the file release demonstrates a significant point of vulnerability and potential fracture within the president’s own party on this issue. A successful vote would intensify scrutiny on the executive branch.
The biggest medium and long-term danger lies in the possibility that the fully released “Epstein files” could contain concrete information that substantiates the alleged claims or reveals other inappropriate conduct.
While the DoJ previously stated that their systematic review “did not expose any additional third-parties to allegations of illegal wrongdoing”, the political pressure for full transparency remains, which the Democrat Party will exploit fully in the period leading to the coming mid-term election.
In short, the immediate danger is a political fallout and damaged moral and character standing driven by the alleged contents of the emails and the controversy over transparency.
The deeper, unknown danger to the Trump presidency is what may be contained in the full set of DoJ files, which Congress is now poised to vote on releasing and which avid audiences, not only in the US but around the world, are agog over.
Lim Teck Ghee’s Another Take is aimed at demystifying social orthodoxy.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
