This is about 12 minutes long, and if you take the time to watch and listen, you will learn a lot about the state of play regarding the Epstein files, the Epstein Transparency Act, and the claim by “Katie Johnson”—presumably a nom de plume—alleging that, back in 1994, when she was 13 years old, Trump allegedly forced young Ms. Johnson to perform oral sex at Epstein’s townhouse in Manhattan.
“Johnson” filed civil lawsuits against Trump in 2016 making these claims, but soon withdrew them. Was she pressured to abandon her claims, and, if so, how and by whom? We don’t know, although there are reports of “multiple death threats.”
Note that both the lawsuits and the withdrawals occurred during the 2016 campaign.
We do know she was interviewed by the FBI several times during the first Trump Administration, we know that a lot of the resulting documentation was not disclosed, even though it should have been disclosed, under the Epstein Transparency Act.
In the video, these and related issues are addressed by three heavyweights:
- Lisa Rubin, Yale Law graduate, former big-time corporate litigator, and currently a TV legal commentator,
- Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, and
- former Senator Claire McCaskill, who has a background in criminal prosecution.
Is There a Coverup Going On, and is the Coverup a Crime?
I would say yes, based on the facts laid out in the video, there’s pretty clearly a coverup going on—specifically, there appear to be multiple violations of the Epstein Transparency Act.
A violation of the Epstein Transparency Act is not ipso facto a federal crime. However, an intentional violation of the Epstein Transparency Act could well violate provisions of the federal criminal code, including obstruction of justice.
Would the Supreme Court Immunity Decision Bar Prosecution of Trump if he Ordered the Coverup?
Possibly, but not certainly. There would be a big legal pissing contest about whether he alleged coverup order was “private” or whether he was acting within his official capacity.
Would a Justice Department or FBI Official Who Knowingly Obeyed a Coverup Order Have Potential Criminal Exposure?
Yes, they would.
The Nuremberg Defense didn’t work at Nuremberg, and it wouldn’t work here.
If the Katie Johnson Papers are Being Covered Up, How Many Government Officials Know About the Coverup, and How Many of Those People Will Cheerfully Risk Incarceration to Protect Donald Trump?
You tell me.
The Epstein Transparency Act Aside, Under State Law, Does Trump Still Have Criminal or Civil Exposure for his Alleged Assault on Katie Johnson?
The alleged assault took place at Epstein’s townhouse in Manhattan. The cases brought against Trump in 2016 were dismissed “without prejudice.” A very preliminary look at relevant New York law indicates that, yes, Trump might well have such exposure. New York law is not generous to folks who commit sex crimes against children and try to get off on a legal technicality.
Was My Grandmother Right When She Said, “Oh, What a Tangled Web We Weave When First We Practice to Deceive”?
You bet she was.
Facing MAGA 