Trump administration officials are perplexed, as many people are, by House Speaker Mike Johnson’s claims that Donald Trump was an FBI informant in the case against Jeffrey Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges he sexually abused and trafficked scores of underage girls. The president and Epstein had a well-documented friendship.
So I saw a pretty believable breakdown that would absolutely explain this. It’s basically because they had a messy falling out over Trump being a spoiled brat. The timeline is as follows.
The inciting incident was Epstein putting in what he thought was a winning bid on a new mansion. Confident in his bid he then showed the property off to his good buddy Trump and asked some advice on some renovations he was planning. Trump then went to his Russian buddies, got a “loan” and put in a higher bid on the property ultimately winning it. This pissed Epstein off who was further confused because he knew Trump had been having financial problems and didn’t have enough money to cover the bid he put in. Six months later Trump sold the property to the same Russian who had given him the money in the first place for twice what Trump paid for it laundering millions of dollars in the process. Epstein correctly realized that Trump just used his property that he swiped from him to launder Russian money which pissed him off even more. Enraged he called Trump and threatened to expose the money laundering. In retaliation Trump then informed the FBI about what Epstein had been up to on his island which is what ultimately led to his arrest. Whether Trump and/or the Russians then silenced Epstein and whether that was about Trumps participation in Epstein’s crimes or about the money laundering who knows, but it definitely makes some pieces fit.
Edit: Dug up the video the claim was made in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTz6X5Bh_lw
If that was remotely true, Trump would have been claiming responsibility for Epstein’s arrest from day 1. It’s simply not true in the slightest. It’s a complete, wholecloth fabrication. A 100% lie.
Yeah, enigma or no he would not keep it as his wonderful secret every day.
Both blacmailers that is the secret, ratfuckers being ratfucked by ratfuckers controlled by foreign intelligence operations.
Is there evidence behind this narrative or is it speculation?
It’s pulled from where the sun don’t shine.
I heard about it on a youtube video a few days ago, but if I recall the claims are coming from the author of a book. I think it was a biography of Trump, but it’s been a little while and that detail was only briefly mentioned. I don’t think there was anything concrete in terms of evidence, but the source did have a connection to both Trump and Epstein in that he interviewed them as part of his work. This wouldn’t be the first time an interviewer claimed something that turned out to be false such as the sports writer that claimed Trump Jr. told him they got all the financing they need from Russia and so don’t need US banks, but there’s also not any reason to particularly doubt the claims either.
dude i know when we’re talking about this subject like this we’re at tertiary bullshit rumors already but like do you have the video or the book because either would be a better diving off point than googling [krasnov epstein (condensing your paragraph i’ve not finished my tea) russian money laundering arrest bullshit krasnov’s fault]
It took some digging, but I found it, it’s this video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTz6X5Bh_lw The relevant part is around the 12:30 mark and it’s an interview with a guy named Michael Wolff.
Thank you. I haven’t had time or headspace to watch or research this yet but it’s something interesting and the name Michael Wolff rings a bell as a credible guy.
It is damage control by prez’s allies. Not true.
How would it be damage control? How exactly does claiming Trump was laundering money for Russia (in part because he was relatively speaking broke at the time) without actually denying in any way his close relationship with Epstein do anything positive for Trump? It’s not like in this scenario he turned Epstein in out of the goodness of his heart or concern for the victims, it was a calculated attempt to silence him before he spilled his secrets.
I could see a variety of arguments for why this might not be true but “damage control” doesn’t make any sense at all. Being the guy that tipped off the cops about Epstein isn’t that much of a feather in his cap to offset all the crimes it implicated him in.
It suggests he turned in Epstein which he did not, the only one responsible for Epstein finally getting popped is the Miami Herald and the victims.
As if the FBI was looking for informants on this guy. They were fucking in on it, as the CIA must have been in on this Honeypot operation ensnaring our own politicians and business leaders to a foreign intelligence agency. In on it through action or inaction.
They went out of their way not to see.
You didn’t actually answer the question and just repeated yourself. How does implicating Trump in a new set of crimes without absolving him of the existing ones qualify as damage control?
Setting that aside, the second paragraph basically has nothing to do with the rest of this, that’s an entirely different claim. Your argument is basically that the CIA and FBI knew about all of this and were in fact involved in it. That the only reason Epstein was eventually arrested was because the Miami Herald made too much noise for them to sweep it under the rug. That may or may not be true, but doesn’t necessarily invalidate the claim that Trump told the cops in an attempt to silence Epstein.
There are a bunch of different angles you could come at this, but damage control by Trumps allies doesn’t make a bit of sense. Damage control by foreign agents, maybe, although how sacrificing Trump provides any benefit to them I can’t see. The only person I see getting any possible benefit in this scenario is the author making the claim and that’s mostly just in exposure, literally everyone else involved comes off worse. It exposes Trump as a Russian agent, implicates him just as much if not more in Epstein’s crimes, and paints his turning on Epstein as a self serving attempt to save his own skin. Nothing at all about this situation makes things better for Trump.
The FBI was going out of their way not to see this Epstein thing they weren’t looking for informants.
And they would have already known and been ignoring it purposefully.
It makes the president look better as if he informed on the guy doing the exact same thing he does himself, blackmail other people.
It is their wonderful secret they’re such enigmas. I do not see what there is not to understand here.
It is bs that he informed on epstein, and he would have already told us this if it was true. They would have spun him into quite the hero if they could back it up in the slightest and twist it.
The only reason Epstein went down was because the Miami Herald dogged them for years and years with the help of some of the victims.
OK, in isolation saying it makes him look better if he informed on Epstein is true, but that ignores the larger story where the reason he did that was because of all the crimes he (being Trump) was committing. The rest of this is plausible, the thing I’m saying makes no sense is that this is somehow a pro-Trump move. This is like saying that you blew up a hospital with thousands of people in it because there was a serial killer in it as well. Sure it might slightly reduce how bad it makes him look, but it still makes him look worse than he currently does.
There’s also the fact that Trump is currently doing literally anything he can think of to get people talking about literally anything but Epstein. The very last thing he’d want is to bring him up again even if it was somehow supposed to make him look better.
Seeing as Speaker Johnson is now pushing this narrative that he was an FBI informant on Epstein, it seems like they are trying that line out, and his surrogates and or Allies have been pushing that for a couple months.
If that was the case in any way shape or form they would have already pulled it out and painted him as the Great Hero. No matter the real story, if he informed on Epstein in any way shape or form they would have went public a long time ago taking sole credit for taking him down and such.
The Narrative also takes away the real credit which is due solely to the Miami Herald and the victims that followed him for years and years. That kept pushing even after the feds bailed him out with that sweetheart deal.
This kind of shows how casually they thought about being pedophiles.