By John Q. Hosedrinker 
According to a declassified FBI interview, Donald Trump told a police chief in October 2019 that “everyone has known he’s been doing this,” referring to Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes. This statement directly contradicts Trump’s public claims during his presidency that he had “no idea” about Epstein’s actions. The interview further details Trump’s characterization of Ghislaine Maxwell as Epstein’s “evil operative” and recounts Trump’s account of leaving a social gathering when teenagers were present and having previously banned Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago club.
Read the original article here
A recent development has brought a particular telephone call made by Donald Trump in 2006 into sharp focus, according to an FBI report. This call, placed to the then-Palm Beach police chief Michael Reiter, allegedly occurred around the time Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal sex charges became public. Trump’s reported conversation with the chief involved him stating that Epstein’s involvement with teenaged girls was widely known in both New York and Palm Beach.
This revelation is significant because it directly contradicts Trump’s past public statements and testimony regarding his relationship with Epstein. For years, Trump has sought to distance himself from the convicted sex offender, often portraying a casual acquaintance or even a rift in their association. The narrative that Trump claims to have thrown Epstein out of his Mar-a-Lago club and that he once left a situation because teenagers were present, while publicly stated, is now being re-examined in light of this reported call.
The content of the 2006 call, as suggested by the report, appears to paint a picture of Trump being aware of Epstein’s activities and, crucially, communicating this knowledge to law enforcement. This action, if accurate, moves beyond mere acquaintance and suggests an awareness of and potential concern about Epstein’s illicit behavior. The reported words attributed to Trump, such as “Thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this,” seem to indicate a desire to align himself with the law enforcement effort and distance himself from Epstein’s actions.
However, a critical point raised by the context of this reported call is the timing. It’s noted that Trump allegedly made this call *after* Epstein had already been charged and his crimes were publicly disclosed. This timing has led to interpretations that the call was not a proactive denouncement or an attempt to prevent further harm, but rather a defensive maneuver. The implication is that Trump was attempting to preemptively shield himself by appearing to be a concerned citizen or even an informant, once the scandal was already in the public domain and Epstein’s notoriety was at its peak.
Adding another layer of complexity, some discussions have surfaced referencing earlier FBI files where Epstein allegedly referred to Trump as “the dog that didn’t bark,” a phrase that could be interpreted as implying Trump was not speaking out against Epstein. This contrasts with the narrative that the 2006 call positions Trump as someone who did, in fact, report Epstein’s activities to the authorities, albeit after the fact. The discrepancy between these characterizations fuels skepticism about the true nature of Trump’s involvement and his motivations.
Furthermore, there are differing accounts and skepticism surrounding the existence and corroboration of this specific report. While some interpret the FBI report as definitive proof of Trump’s awareness and communication with law enforcement, others point to FBI officials who have reportedly denied awareness of any corroborating evidence for Trump contacting law enforcement about Epstein around that time. This divergence in information creates uncertainty and raises questions about the reliability and completeness of the available details.
The conversation surrounding this 2006 call has also brought renewed attention to Trump’s past statements regarding women and age, with some recalling past interviews where he discussed his preferences in a way that many found problematic. This historical context, combined with the current revelations, has led some to believe that the reported 2006 call is part of a pattern of behavior where Trump may have been aware of Epstein’s illegal activities and acted only when it suited his own self-preservation. The idea that he might have been a willing participant until the risk of exposure became too high, at which point he “threw his pal under the bus,” is a recurring theme in these discussions.
Ultimately, the FBI report detailing Donald Trump’s alleged 2006 call to a police chief about Jeffrey Epstein has ignited a firestorm of debate. It has forced a re-evaluation of Trump’s public statements, his relationship with Epstein, and his motivations. Whether this call is seen as a genuine attempt to address wrongdoing or a calculated move to protect his image, the report has undeniably added a significant and controversial chapter to the ongoing public discourse surrounding both Trump and the enduring legacy of Jeffrey Epstein. The differing interpretations and the lingering questions about corroboration suggest that this is a story that will continue to be scrutinized.