Dem
47
GOP
53
Yesterday, a couple more people paid at least some sort of price for their dalliances with Jeffrey Epstein.
The first of those is the former U.K. Ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson. He had already lost his job and now, he has joined his buddy Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in being arrested. And while the Brits tend to play things very close to the vest (the Barbour jacket?) while criminal matters are pending, it appears that Mandelson faces the same charges that the former Prince does, namely misconduct in public office, due to having shared privileged financial information with Epstein. It's the old Al Capone story, we suppose—financial crimes are easier to prove because they leave a paper trail.
Also receiving at least some small measure of justice yesterday was now-former CBS contributor Dr. Peter Attia. Attia was a high-profile hire for CBS News' newly installed Minister of Information Bari Weiss, and she tried very hard to hold on to him as he was enmeshed in scandal. However, the e-mails that Attia exchanged with Epstein were just too problematic for him to continue (think "jokes" like "Pu**y is, indeed, low-carb. Still awaiting results on gluten content..."), and so he resigned yesterday. He's not headed to prison (at least, not yet), and he'll still have his medical career. But he won't be showing up as a medical expert on TV again anytime this millennium (except maybe on LindellTV).
There is also a race, of sorts, to see who will be the next person to pay the piper. The quack self-help guru
Deepak Chopra was yet another correspondent of Epstein's (how did this guy have time to keep up SO MANY e-mail
relationships?), and though he has claimed the relationship was innocent, CNN
published e-mails yesterday
in which Chopra told Epstein, on several occasions, to "bring your girls" while also encouraging the sex trafficker to use
an alias if necessary. Doesn't sound so innocent to us, or to anyone else who did not fall off the turnip truck in the
last 24 hours.
The only thing that may save Chopra is that he doesn't really have a job to be fired from, or to "voluntarily" resign from. He's not too likely to be invited onto these various cable channels as a guest anymore, and he may see his book sales decline, but he's almost 80 and he's made his money, so he might just be able to go gentle into that good night and escape any sort of meaningful consequences (beyond the de facto end of his career).
The other guy who is currently feeling the heat is Casey Wasserman. He is pretty famous in Los Angeles, and his offices are just half a mile from (Z)'s residence, so (Z) has had a front-row seat for his career for a very long time. And (Z)'s impression, now validated, was always that Wasserman is shady as hell. Anyhow, Wasserman's sexually loaded e-mails, which he exchanged with Ghislaine Maxwell, have already compelled him to announce he will sell the talent agency that bears his name. He had little choice in that, as many clients and many agents were on the verge of defecting. And now, pressure is mounting for him to resign as chair of the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles. Frankly, it's hard to see how he can possibly hold on to that job. The Olympics are supposed to be an opportunity for a city to put its very best foot forward, and it's not so easy to do that if the face of the city's efforts is a creep with close ties to the most notorious sex trafficker in recent memory.
There remains, of course, one place that is an Epstein-consequence-free zone, a fortress of solitude against any and all repercussions for having palled around with, and probably aided and abetted, a sexual predator. That, of course, would be the White House. Donald Trump is all over the Epstein files, and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick makes more than a few appearances (and in both cases, the evidence in the files makes clear that the two men lied about the length and depth of their relationships with the dead man).
We wrote last week that we are now convinced, based just on the information that is publicly available, that Donald Trump is guilty of felonious sexual acts as part of his association with Epstein. What we specifically meant by that is that if we were on a jury, and we were asked to vote, we would vote "guilty." There is, first of all, a pattern of behavior over and above the Epstein stuff. That's absolutely admissible in a court of law. And then, there is ample eyewitness testimony as to specific crimes committed as part of the Epstein "hive." From where we sit, it's beyond reasonable doubt, at this point.
That said, we do not believe Trump will ever face a jury. And we tend to doubt he'll face any other consequences, unless something comes out that is so bad, the Republicans in Congress simply cannot let it pass. What we do think is that a huge percentage of the voting public has reached the same conclusions we have, namely that Trump is hiding/guilty of something. And keep in mind that when people cast their ballots, there is no "reasonable doubt" standard.
A look at the recent polling on the Epstein fiasco tells the tale. Pollsters ask slightly different questions, but here's a rundown:
This presents the Democrats with at least three obvious things to harp on, over and over: (1) There is a cover-up going on, (2) rich people rarely face justice, and (3) victimized women rarely get justice. All three of those are potentially very powerful. And in case you doubt that the blue team is thinking this way, a bunch of representatives will each bring an Epstein victim as their guest to the State of the Union tonight.
The White House was obviously hoping this would go away, but there's no reason to think that will happen. As non-Trump administration personnel suffer various consequences, Epstein will be in the headlines over and over and over. It also doesn't help that the Department of Justice, in pretty apparent defiance of the law passed by Congress, has released as little as 2% of the total bulk of the files. Eventually, there are going to be angry members of Congress demanding more, or filing lawsuits to force compliance, or both.
Trump himself is not at all that much risk, of course, unless this really gets out of hand. He doesn't have to get elected again. But the 450 or so Republicans running for Congress this year are in something of a bind. If they don't speak out against Trump, they get tarred with a very unpleasant brush as an apologist or an enabler. If they do speak out, then they aggravate the President, and risk his wrath. We guess that the GOP politicians will try to focus on non-Trump-administration miscreants ("Damn that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor!"), at least until primary season is over. At that point, it could get very interesting. (Z)