By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During a recent interview on CNN’s State of the Union, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche reacted defensively when questioned about President Trump’s appearance in newly released Epstein files. Blanche accused anchor Dana Bash of being unfair, emphasizing that the focus should not be solely on Trump, but rather on the multitude of individuals mentioned in the documents. He explained that many claims within the files were unsubstantiated, anonymous, or lacked credibility, and therefore were difficult to investigate. Despite announcing the DOJ’s review of the Epstein files as “completed,” Blanche repeatedly insisted the focus on Trump was inappropriate.
Read the original article here
The DOJ goon, or rather, Todd Blanche, Trump’s lawyer, seems to have lost his cool when confronted with the reality of the Epstein files and Trump’s involvement. It’s hard to ignore the defensiveness, the whines about “fairness” when the situation itself is far from it. It’s a classic case of seeing someone’s true colors when they’re put on the spot.
What’s fascinating, or perhaps more accurately, infuriating, is the immediate shift to a “poor me” narrative. Dana Bash, the CNN host, simply mentioned new documents naming Trump, and the defense attorney’s response was a petulant, “that’s not fair.” Really? What’s unfair about pointing out what appears to be a direct link to a scandal involving underage sex trafficking? The irony is almost palpable. These are the same people who, for years, have been accused of being unfair, of taking advantage of any situation to suit their means.
It’s pretty clear that Blanche’s reaction is less about fairness and more about damage control. He’s tasked with defending a man whose history is already checkered, whose actions and associations have raised eyebrows for years. The Epstein files, like it or not, add another layer of complexity to that already intricate picture. To then claim it’s unfair to even mention Trump’s name in this context is…well, it’s a bit rich.
The comments about the lack of pushback are spot on. It is infuriating, but at the same time, it can be expected. And, the “whataboutism” is a common deflection tactic. The defense becomes, “Well, there are other names in the files!” as if the presence of others somehow absolves Trump of potential involvement. This is, of course, a logical fallacy. It completely misses the point. The issue isn’t whether other people are involved, the issue is that the former president’s name is in the files. And what exactly is his involvement?
The underlying sentiment is, of course, that we, as a society, are being asked to turn a blind eye. To accept that a sitting president (and in this case, a former one) is held to a lower standard. The double standard is blatant, it’s galling. We’re supposed to believe that it’s unfair to focus on Trump. But as the comments correctly note, if Obama, Schumer, or Pelosi were in these files, the focus would be entirely on them.
The Epstein files, whatever the specifics, represent a moment of reckoning. It exposes the connections, the circles, and the potential for a powerful figure to be implicated in something as horrific as child sex trafficking. When that figure is someone who has held the highest office in the land, the narrative shifts, the defenses go up, and the cries of “unfairness” are heard.
The focus on “there are other people in the files” ignores the simple fact that Trump was the former president. The position alone brings scrutiny, and the public has every right to examine anything related to him. When the media does its job, and the spotlight shines on potentially questionable actions or associations, and the first response is not a detailed, truthful explanation, but a claim of being treated unfairly, then, yes, alarm bells should be ringing. The truth will eventually come out, and no amount of whining or deflection will change that.
Todd Blanche’s defensiveness should be seen as a sign of something that isn’t supposed to be ignored. He’s in a tough spot, and his reaction is telling.