Unproven: Musk’s Claim That Trump Was Tied to Epstein’s Island, By Chris Knight (Florida)
The claim that Donald Trump was involved in Jeffrey Epstein's illicit activities, particularly tied to his notorious "Paedo Island" (Little St. James), has resurfaced periodically, most recently fuelled by Elon Musk's June 2025 social media posts. Musk, amid a public feud with Trump over the "One Big Beautiful Bill," shared a 1992 video of Trump and Epstein at a Mar-a-Lago party with NFL cheerleaders, insinuating a deeper connection. This sparked a firestorm, but a closer look, bolstered by Attorney David Schoen's recent statements, suggests these allegations against Trump are shaky at best. Schoen's testimony, combined with other evidence, paints a picture that undermines Musk's claims and points to a lack of credible proof tying Trump to Epstein's crimes.
On June 5, 2025, Attorney David Schoen, who represented Epstein in the nine days before his death in August 2019, went public with a striking revelation. Schoen stated on X, "I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that [Epstein] had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!" He doubled down by retweeting Roger Stone, adding, "I can tell you unequivocally as someone who would know that President Trump never did anything wrong with Jeffrey Epstein." This is significant because Schoen, as Epstein's defence attorney, would have been privy to sensitive discussions about Epstein's network, especially given the timing, days before Epstein's death. If Epstein had incriminating evidence on Trump, it's reasonable to assume he'd have shared it with his lawyer, particularly under pressure to leverage information for a lighter sentence.
The absence of such evidence aligns with a broader point: if Trump were deeply entangled in Epstein's crimes, the deep state would likely have weaponised it long ago. The Russia collusion narrative, which dominated headlines from 2016 to 2019, was heavily pushed despite thin evidence, culminating in the Mueller Report's failure to establish collusion. If concrete proof of Trump's involvement with Epstein existed, it would have been a far more potent weapon than the Russia allegations, which Schoen's statement implicitly supports. The lack of leaks, despite Epstein's high-profile connections and the intense scrutiny on Trump, suggests there's little to nothing there. As The Gateway Pundit noted, "If Trump was involved in the Epstein scandal the deep state would have leaked it all over the internet years ago."
Further bolstering this defence is testimony from Virginia Giuffre, a key Epstein victim. Inunsealed court documents from January 2024, Giuffre explicitly stated, when asked if Trump was a witness to the sexual abuse of minors, "I don't think Donald Trump participated in anything." Giuffre, who accused high-profile figures, had no such allegations against Trump. Her statement carries weight, as she was central to exposing Epstein's network and had no incentive to shield Trump. Additionally, reports indicate Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after inappropriate behaviour, further distancing himself from Epstein's circle.
Musk's accusations, by contrast, lean on a 1992 video that's been public for years and shows nothing more than a social interaction at a party, hardly evidence of criminality. Musk's motives appear tied to his public spat with Trump over policy disagreements, not new revelations. A January 2025 claim from Epstein's former cellmate, Nicholas Tartaglione, adds context: federal prosecutors allegedly pressured Epstein to fabricate dirt on Trump for a lenient plea deal, to which Epstein reportedly said, "I don't know anything." This suggests authorities were fishing for anti-Trump material but came up empty, reinforcing Schoen's account.
Sceptics might point to Trump's past association with Epstein, both moved in similar elite circles in the 1990s and early 2000s, or his 2002 quote calling Epstein a "terrific guy." But social overlap among the wealthy isn't evidence of complicity, and Trump's later actions, like banning Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, suggest a falling out. The Epstein files, partially released in February 2025 under Attorney General Pam Bondi, have yet to implicate Trump, despite thousands of pages still under review. If damning evidence existed, the intense political opposition to Trump would likely have surfaced it by now, especially given the DOJ's efforts to release documents transparently.
The Russia collusion saga, a fabricated scandal, serves as a useful comparison. If the deep state could sustain a years-long investigation based on unverified claims like the Steele dossier, a verifiable Epstein connection would have been a far more devastating tool. Its absence, coupled with Schoen's direct testimony and Giuffre's exoneration, makes Musk's insinuations look more like a political jab than a substantiated claim.
That said, the Epstein case is murky, and conspiracy theories, about his death, missing files, or elite cover-ups, persist. Some, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, argue key evidence may have been destroyed, which could explain why no smoking gun has emerged against anyone, including Trump. But the burden of proof lies with accusers, and Musk's reliance on old footage doesn't meet it.
In short, Schoen's firsthand account, Giuffre's testimony, and the absence of leaks despite intense scrutiny make it unlikely Trump was involved in Epstein's crimes on Little St. James or elsewhere. Musk's claims, lacking new evidence, appear more as a feud-driven distraction than a credible accusation.
Chris Cuomo's June 5, 2025, NewsNation segment adds a further complexity, suggesting Trump's silence signals a billion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Musk. Cuomo's theory hinges on defamation law. For Trump, a public figure, to win, he must prove Musk's statement was false, published, made with actual malice (knowing falsity or reckless disregard), and caused harm. Musk's posts, shared with 217.5 million X followers, meet the publication and harm criteria, given the gravity of implying paedophilia. Schoen's and Giuffre's statements, plus the lack of leaks, strongly suggest falsity. Actual malice is tougher but plausible: Musk's DOGE role and White House access imply he should verify claims, and his history of engaging controversial X posts suggests recklessness. Cuomo notes that if Musk has Epstein files and withheld them, it's "fraud"; if he doesn't, the accusation is reckless.
A billion-dollar suit is ambitious but not impossible. Trump's $20 billion CBS News lawsuit shows his appetite for big claims. The $965 million Alex Jones Sandy Hook case sets a precedent for large awards when harm is severe. Musk's accusation could justify significant damages, given Trump's public status and X's reach. However, courts rarely award billions, and Musk's 2019 "pedo guy" win shows he can frame posts as non-literal. Trump's silence is strategic, awaiting discovery to force Musk to produce evidence or retract.
Challenges include Musk potentially having unreleased files (though unlikely, given current evidence) and the high bar for public figure defamation. The feud's political context might frame Musk's posts as hyperbole. Still, Schoen's testimony, Giuffre's exoneration, and the absence of leaks make the lawsuit plausible, with a substantial, if not billion-dollar, award possible if Trump proves malice.
"On Thursday evening, Attorney David Schoen went public and revealed what Jeffrey Epstein told him about Donald Trump before his death in August 2019.
According to Schoen, who led Epstein's defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died.
Schoen says, "I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!"
Schoen then followed up that tweet on X with a retweet of Roger Stone, adding, "I can tell you unequivocally as someone who would know that President Trump never did anything wrong with Jeffrey Epstein."
This makes complete sense. If Trump's was involved in the Epstein scandal the deep state would have leaked it all over the internet years ago."
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/06/chris-cuomo-has-bombshell-theory-why-trump-is/
Comments