By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick falsely claimed to have severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein in 2005, yet files reveal he later visited Epstein’s island with his family. Similarly, Dr. Mehmet Oz hosted Epstein for a party in 2016, years after Epstein was a registered sex offender. Despite increasing calls for their resignations and international precedents of officials being removed for Epstein connections, Lutnick and Oz, along with other government figures like Steve Bannon and Stephen Feinberg, have retained their positions within the Trump administration.
Read the original article here
New evidence has emerged that directly challenges a previous claim made by Pam Bondi regarding former President Donald Trump and his alleged connection to Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes. This new information, surfacing from a Department of Justice (DOJ) slideshow, suggests that the FBI interviewed an Epstein victim who specifically accused President Trump of assault. This revelation is significant because it contradicts statements previously made by Bondi, who had asserted that there was no evidence linking Trump to any wrongdoing involving Epstein.
The core of this new evidence lies in the testimony of an Epstein victim whose account was documented within internal DOJ files. This victim’s statement directly implicates Trump in an assault. Compounding the gravity of this accusation, the victim also reportedly stated that Trump agreed with Epstein that a 14-year-old victim was a “good one.” This particular detail is highlighted as carrying a different weight within the DOJ due to the victim’s established credibility; this same individual served as a key government witness in the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell.
This revelation calls into question the veracity of Pam Bondi’s prior statements. For Bondi to have publicly dismissed any allegations of Trump’s involvement with Epstein’s activities, especially when such detailed and credible accusations were apparently known to the FBI, raises serious concerns. The new evidence suggests a potential attempt to conceal or downplay crucial information, thereby protecting influential figures. It’s almost as if there’s a deliberate effort to distract from these disturbing revelations by pointing to unrelated economic indicators, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching new heights.
The implications for Bondi are substantial. If she made claims to the public or to investigators that were contradicted by evidence known to the government, it could potentially amount to perjury. The fact that the victim’s statement was used to secure a conviction against Maxwell lends significant weight to their testimony and, by extension, to their accusations against others. This suggests that Bondi’s prior denials or dismissals of Trump’s involvement were not based on a lack of information, but perhaps on a decision to ignore or suppress it.
Furthermore, the broader context of the Epstein scandal is one where many powerful individuals have been implicated. The fact that this particular accusation against Trump involves a victim who was a minor at the time and includes allegations of assault and a disturbing racialized comment about the victim’s perceived worth, makes it particularly egregious. The suggestion that this information was potentially suppressed or minimized by figures like Bondi raises a moral and ethical alarm.
The emergence of this evidence also highlights a pattern of behavior that many observers find concerning. The article implies that individuals within or aligned with the Trump administration have been selected based on their loyalty and willingness to defend the former president, even in the face of serious accusations. This suggests a systemic effort to protect Trump and his associates, regardless of the evidence.
The possibility that this new information could lead to further investigations into Trump and others connected to the Epstein network is a significant point of discussion. While some may focus on economic prosperity as a measure of success, this evidence points to a deeper societal rot that needs to be addressed. The fact that high-profile individuals worldwide have faced consequences for their alleged involvement in similar scandals, while in the United States, such accusations against a former president are met with denials and apparent cover-ups, is seen as particularly troubling.
The article suggests that this isn’t just about one individual, but about a larger network and a systemic unwillingness to hold powerful people accountable for their actions, especially when those actions involve the exploitation of vulnerable individuals. The hope is that this new evidence will compel a more thorough and honest investigation, moving beyond political expediency and toward a genuine pursuit of justice. The sheer volume of accusations leveled against Trump by numerous women over the years, coupled with this specific and credible accusation from an Epstein victim, creates a compelling narrative that demands a thorough examination.
Ultimately, the question remains: what will be the consequence of this new evidence? Will it lead to a reckoning for those involved in the alleged cover-up, including Pam Bondi? The article expresses a strong desire for accountability and suggests that the current administration and its supporters have a moral obligation to confront these allegations head-on, rather than dismiss them or distract from them. The public deserves to know the full truth about the extent of Trump’s involvement in the Epstein scandal and whether key figures actively worked to shield him from scrutiny.