White House slams House Democrats' 'bad-faith' Epstein document release about Trump

[ziggy]

The White House is firing back after House Democrats released a set of documents Wednesday, detailing previously undisclosed communications from Jeffrey Epstein about President Donald Trump.

"The Democrats selectively leaked emails to the liberal media to create a fake narrative to smear President Trump," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

In a 2011 email to his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein said Trump had spent a prolonged time at his house with a "victim."

"I want you to realize that that dog that hasn't barked is Trump. VICTIM spent hours at my house with him, has never once been mentioned," Epstein wrote.

Democrats pointed to the message as evidence that Trump had previously had a more intimate relationship with the disgraced financier than he has been willing to admit.

"The more Donald Trump tries to cover up the Epstein files, the more we uncover. These latest emails and correspondence raise glaring questions about what else the White House is hiding and the nature of the relationship between Epstein and the president," Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., said.

"The Department of Justice must fully release the Epstein files to the public immediately. The Oversight Committee will continue pushing for answers and will not stop until we get justice for the victims," he added.

Garcia is the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee.

Leavitt dismissed the document release as a distraction from the government being on the brink of reopening after the lengthiest shutdown in history.

"The ‘unnamed victim’ referenced in these emails is the late Virginia Giuffre, who repeatedly said President Trump was not involved in any wrongdoing whatsoever and ‘couldn’t have been friendlier’ to her in their limited interactions," she said. "The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club decades ago for being a creep to his female employees, including Giuffre."

"These stories are nothing more than bad-faith efforts to distract from President Trump’s historic accomplishments, and any American with common sense sees right through this hoax and clear distraction from the government opening back up again," she said.

Republicans reacting to the new communications also called them an incomplete portrayal of Trump’s role in the Epstein investigations.

"Democrats continue to carelessly cherry-pick documents to generate clickbait that is not grounded in the facts," a spokesperson for the committee Republicans said.

"The Epstein Estate has produced over 20,000 pages of documents on Thursday, yet Democrats are once again intentionally withholding records that name Democrat officials. Democrats should stop politicizing this investigation and focus on delivering transparency, accountability and justice for the survivors."

White House slams Dems' 'bad-faith' Epstein doc release as demand for files intensifies

The White House fired back after correspondence from Jeffrey Epstein about President Donald Trump was released by House Democrats on Wednesday

www.foxnews.com

 

[Diogenes]

Interesting. Think this might be a distraction from to the impending Jean Carroll case judicial review?

The "impending judicial review" refers to President Trump's November 10, 2025, petition to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking a writ of certiorari to overturn the $5 million verdict in Carroll I.

President Trump has not yet petitioned the Supreme Court on Carroll II, though observers anticipate a similar move soon, as the cases share evidentiary overlaps.

The Justice Department filed an amicus brief supporting review on the narrow issue of whether presidential immunity extends to civil damages for official acts, though it does not endorse overturning the verdict outright.

President Trump's 33-page petition argues that the allegations are "facially implausible" and "politically motivated," propped up by "indefensible evidentiary rulings" that violated federal rules against propensity evidence (proof of a defendant's character to show action in accordance with that character).

Specifically, it challenges:

• Admission of irrelevant and prejudicial testimony from two other women (Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff) alleging similar sexual misconduct by President Trump.
• Playing of the 2016 "Access Hollywood" tape, as inflammatory character evidence.
• Restrictions on President Trump's defense, including limits on questioning Carroll about her motives, her dress's lack of DNA evidence, and her connections to Democrat political donors like Reid Hoffman.

The petition emphasizes the lack of corroboration—no eyewitnesses, video, police report, or physical evidence—and accuses Carroll of delaying her claim for over 20 years to inflict maximum political harm after President Trump's 2016 election.

President Trump's legal team cites the case as part of "liberal lawfare" and seeks Supreme Court intervention to resolve circuit splits on evidentiary standards in civil cases, potentially affecting both Carroll verdicts if successful.

Carroll's legal team, led by Roberta Kaplan, has until mid-December 2025 to file an opposition brief. They previously claimed in September that the case presents no substantial legal questions warranting Supreme Court review.

The Court requires four justices to grant certiorari (agree to hear the case).

The Court might view the evidentiary and immunity angles favorably.y

If the Supreme Court grants review, oral arguments could occur in fall 2026, with a decision by mid-2027.

A reversal could vacate the $5 million judgment and order a new trial, endangering the $83.3 million award due to shared facts.

Carroll would likely collect nothing until resolution, as funds remain in escrow.

This review could test the boundaries of evidence in #MeToo-era suits. It underscores tensions between accountability for private conduct and safeguards against political prosecutions.