Dem
47
GOP
53
We really did not want to write about the Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy story today. And, as late as 5:00 p.m. PT, it seemed we would be able to avoid it. But not so much, as it turns out. The news is a harsh mistress.
The Democrats are generally less willing to play dirty pool than the Republicans are, but that does not mean they are totally unwilling. The blue team has done the same analysis we did last week (not that this was particularly profound), and has concluded two things: (1) Whatever is in the Epstein documents likely implicates/semi-implicates Trump (or maybe some Republican close to him), and (2) the whole situation is driving a wedge into the MAGA base.
To that end, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) decided to get his (dirty) pool cue out yesterday, and to chalk it up and fire a shot in the Republicans' direction. During a meeting of the House Rules Committee, Khanna offered an amendment to the proceedings that would have required the publication of all files related to Epstein within 30 days. If Khanna had not won this particular race, another Democrat would have introduced a similar amendment; Rep. Mark Veasey (D-TX) already had his version ready to go, for example.
All the Democrats on the Rules Committee voted in support of Khanna, all of the Republicans on the Committee, save Ralph Norman (R-SC), voted against. So, the amendment failed. Still, Khanna presumably achieved what he wanted, putting the notion out there that the Democrats are in favor of full transparency, while House Republicans are aiding and abetting the "cover-up."
We have made the observation, many times, that if you make violence and a disregard for the rule of law a part of your political program, you risk losing control of that tendency, and becoming a target of violent lawbreakers yourself. It is not a coincidence that Trump has been the subject of at least two assassination attempts in the last year. Similarly, if you make conspiratorial thinking a part of your shtick, you can lose control of that, as well, and Trump apparently has.
Mind you, there was no good way to deal with this Epstein business, assuming it: (1) does not implicate Democrats and Democratic donors in pedophile sex trafficking and/or (2) it DOES implicate Trump or other Republicans in pedophile sex trafficking or some other offense. As soon as the White House decided and announced that it was not releasing anything (despite prior promises to do so), it was guaranteed to throw fuel on the fire. And the administration has done itself no favors by virtue of its inability to stick with a single story. At various times, for example, Trump himself has claimed that: (1) the files are real and were being buried by the "deep state"; (2) the files don't exist; and (3) the files exist, but are fabrications. Clearly, two of the three stories are lies. And that raises two excellent questions: (1) Which story is the truth? and (2) Why did you feel the need to lie?
The administration's strategy, at the moment, could not be more plain. They are taking the "nothing to see here,
please move on" approach,
kind of like
Frank Drebin in The Naked Gun:
Trump & Co. are leaning very hard on their enablers in the media to try to make this happen. For example, last week, Dinesh D'Souza could talk about nothing but the Epstein files. Yesterday, he told his audience that it was time to move on. Last week, Charlie Kirk could talk about nothing but the Epstein files. Yesterday, he announced that he is "done talking about Epstein for the time being." Last week, Laura Ingraham could talk about nothing but the Epstein files. Yesterday, she declared that conservative influencers need to stop "eating their own about Epstein." Perhaps readers sense a recurring theme here.
Will it work? Can Trump actually bury this? Certainly, the MAGA base has been willing to overlook many and varied other offenses that would have sunk any other politician. However, the QAnon faction of the MAGA movement (which is probably a majority, and is certainly the loudest faction) has spent over a decade deeply invested in two ideas: (1) the Democrats are pedophile sex traffickers (remember Pizzagate, etc.), and (2) Donald Trump is the knight in shining armor who will ride to the rescue and smash the pedophile-trafficking deep state. If the White House's current line ("There's no there, there") is true, then belief #1 is shattered. And if the White House's current line is false, then belief #2 is shattered. Oh, and if the documents somehow link Trump, and NOT Democrats, to pedophile sex trafficking, then both beliefs are shattered. The MAGA base is really good at resolving cognitive dissonance, and maybe they will find a way to do it again. But this is a particularly tough hill to climb and, thus far, over a week removed from the White House announcement, the base has done no dissonance resolution at all.
Whether or not MAGA is able to move on from Epsteinpot Dome, there is likely to be at least one head that rolls. Reportedly, "Attorney General" Pam Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino have been in an open state of warfare over the last week, with Bongino savaging Bondi for her handling of the Epstein files, and then spending the weekend pouting and threatening to quit. Washington is probably not big enough for both of them for much longer, and Trump has already sided with Bondi. So, it's a fair guess that the administration will be in the market for a new FBI Deputy Director sometime soon. Though the White House will have to work very hard if it wants to find someone as thoroughly unqualified for the job as Bongino was (and is). (Z)