Words & Phrase We Could Do Without

The Epstein scandal...er...Trump coverup scandal

Last week, the “Epstein scandal” took center stage once again. But that terminology is such an antiseptic way to describe the fallout from a pedophile ring that victimized hundreds of children and Donald Trump’s gob-smacking efforts to cover up the extent of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. Moreover, the present scandal is not about Epstein, but rather about other men who may be named in the documents, the financial institutions that enabled Epstein, and most of all, Trump’s role in perpetuating the conspiracy of silence and non-accountability.

After three especially incriminating emails were released last week, Trump’s refusal to come clean by immediately releasing all documents—and the House Republicans willingness to condone a cover-up—reminded Americans how thoroughly Trump has corrupted the normal operation of government. “The emails were turned over to the committee in response to a set of subpoenas Democrats effectively forced Republicans to issue for files related to Mr. Epstein,” the New York Times reported. “So far, the Justice Department has provided the panel with little that was not already public. Democrats and a few Republicans have been pressing for a far broader set of disclosures from the administration’s Epstein investigation, a move that Mr. Trump and G.O.P. leaders in Congress vehemently oppose.” In other words, Trump’s cover-up continues with the full acquiescence of the MAGA flunkies in Congress.

Julie K. Brown, the Miami Herald reporter who spent years investigating Epstein and the lack of robust investigation of his far-flung criminal enterprise, has remarked that even she was surprised by how frequently Trump’s name came up in the trove of documents. She and her fellow Miami Herald reporters recounted, “Trump and his acolytes promised transparency of Epstein’s crimes and his accomplices, and said he would release all the government files on the various investigations conducted over the years prior to his election. However, shortly after he was elected, Trump’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, and his FBI director, Kash Patel, abruptly changed their minds – effectively closing the files.” The coverup was in full swing. Should we believe Bondi that the documents reveal no “credible” evidence of other crimes? What about other people’s (e.g., her boss’s) knowledge of crimes?

Brown has also zeroed in on the regime’s bizarre treatment of the convicted sex offender. “What does she know? Who is she talking to? Why is she getting this?” Brown said in a recent interview. “As journalists, we try to find patterns and things that try to tie things together. And one of the things that ties this together are some of these leaks—by the way, the majority of which happened when she got transferred to this Club Fed.”

The list of questions grows by the day:

• How much did Trump know about Epstein and Maxwell’s criminality?

• When did he know it?

• How much time did he spend at the Epstein property?

• Why did he hire in the first term the former U.S. attorney Alex Acosta, who delivered the slap on the wrist to Epstein, for the secretary of labor job?

• Why did Attorney General Pam Bondi say there was nothing to release?

• What did she tell Trump about his name appearing in the documents?

• What instructions has Trump given the Justice Department about handling/release of the documents?

• Why did Deputy Attorney Todd Blanche conduct a softball interview with Maxwell, and was he being truthful when he denied having the recently released and highly incriminating emails in advance of that interview?

• Why has Maxwell has been getting VIP treatment?

• Did Maxwell lie in that interview, and if so, will she be prosecuted?

• Did Trump spend “hours” with one of the child victims, and if so, what went on?

• Why has Trump told different accounts about the end of his relationship with Epstein? Why is there a discrepancy with the released documents?

• Why are MAGA House Republicans resisting release of the documents?

• Will Senate Republicans join the conspiracy of silence?

• Why did Trump pull Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Col.) into the Situation Roome to strongarm her about signing onto the discharge petition?

On Friday, Trump “demanded that the Justice Department investigate a list of powerful men mentioned in the emails, his own name was nowhere to be seen — he had singled out only Democrats.” That panicked, poorly reasoned response only underscores the depth of his corruption.

Democrats are more than happy to see everyone investigated. Moreover, Trump’s refusal to name Republicans only underscores his desperation to protect himself and his “side,” and of course underscores his pattern of vindictive investigations and prosecutions.

The New York Times was bluntly unimpressed with Trump’s transparent dodge. “Mr. Trump’s response to this week’s Epstein revelations was the reprise of a deflective tactic he has often deployed in instances of crisis: When the spotlight begins to burn, Mr. Trump deflects, points fingers or changes the conversation. He even tries to pull his adversaries, often one of the Clintons, into the scene with him—then he exits stage right.”

The mere whiff of any association of a president with a pedophile ring, let alone refusal to come clean on all documents regarding that association, would in any normal administration unleash at the very least a firestorm from the press, demands for a special counsel (who trusts Bondi or anyone she handpicks to ensure all documents are released?), and cries for Bondi to resign. If Trump has lied about his association with Epstein, ordered Blanche to try to silence Maxwell or cut a deal with her, or instructed the Justice Department to withhold documents from congressional demands, shouldn’t that be grounds for impeachment?

The House is likely to vote (with dozens of Republicans in favor) on the discharge petition to release the documents. Then the scene shifts to the Senate. What possible excuse could there be for not bringing it to the floor? Until Majority Leader John Thune does so, Senate Democrats should hold the floor for as long as they can, perhaps reading into the record all 20,000 or so documents dumped last week. Certainly, those interested in full disclosure and justice for the victims will force Republicans take the vote, and hold them accountable if they continue the coverup.

This is why “Epstein scandal” is an entirely inapt description of what we are facing. The shorthand minimizes the underlying, horrific criminal enterprise, airbrushing out the victims and their quest for justice. It shields Trump, Bondi, and the entire Justice Department from the appropriate level of scrutiny. And it lessens pressure on congressional Republicans to distance themselves from this travesty and conduct a full investigation. Worst of all, it treats Trump as a bystander.

We should stop using the euphemism for an unspeakable crime and its vile, corrupt cover-up. This is the Trump pedophile document coverup.