Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

X Kills Nitter And Xcancel, The Last Ways To Read Tweets Without Elon Watching

21 minutes ago

Kalshi Says It’s a Prediction Market. The 9th Circuit Says It’s Gambling.

22 minutes ago

Bitcoin enters ‘Rektember’ as rate-hike risk combines with seasonality to threaten rally

49 minutes ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Tuesday, September 1
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»News»Media & Culture»Jeffrey Epstein: Trump ‘Spent Hours At My House’ With Victim
Media & Culture

Jeffrey Epstein: Trump ‘Spent Hours At My House’ With Victim

News RoomBy News Room10 months agoNo Comments5 Mins Read3 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
Jeffrey Epstein: Trump ‘Spent Hours At My House’ With Victim
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

The case of Jeffrey Epstein just won’t go away, much to President Donald Trump’s chagrin. “For years, it’s Epstein, over and over again,” Trump complained in a July 2025 social media rant, calling the deceased pedophile “a guy who never dies.” And indeed, the more information comes out through congressional investigations and journalistic leaks, the worse it looks for Trump.

On Wednesday, the House Oversight Committee released three emails from Epstein’s inbox discussing Trump. In 2011, Epstein wrote to his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, that a victim “spent hours at my house with” Trump. (White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt named the victim as the late Virginia Giuffre in a statement denouncing the email release.) In 2019, Epstein wrote to journalist Michael Wolff that Trump “asked me to resign,” apparently from Trump’s club, Mar-a-Lago. “[O]f course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop,” Epstein added.

Maxwell told administration lawyers in an August 2025 jailhouse interview that she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way” and that Trump “was a gentleman in all respects.” She plans to apply for Trump to commute her sentence.

The third email is a back-and-forth conversation between Epstein and Wolff from 2015, discussing then-candidate Trump’s upcoming interview with CNN. Wolff told Epstein that Trump was going to be asked about their relationship, and Epstein asked Wolff to “craft an answer” for Trump. Wolff suggested that letting Trump deny their relationship in public would give Epstein leverage.

“If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency,” Wolff wrote. “You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt.” CNN didn’t end up asking Trump the question, according to The New York Times.

The emails don’t implicate Trump directly in any sexual abuse, and the 2019 message about Maxwell actually backs up Trump’s claim that he kicked Epstein out of his club for poaching employees. But the emails do suggest that Trump knew a lot more about Epstein than he let on—and that he has something to hide about their relationship.

In September 2025, the House Oversight Committee released a sexually suggestive letter from Trump to Epstein talking about their “wonderful secret.” It was part of a 2003 birthday book full of letters to Epstein, including a note from former President Bill Clinton, a close Epstein associate.

And it isn’t just American politicians who are facing questions about their relationship with Epstein. In August 2025, Reason reported on a trove of leaked emails between Epstein and his business partner, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

The emails revealed that Epstein had been in contact with Britain’s former Prince Andrew much longer than acknowledged—the prince was stripped of his titles last month over the scandal—and that Epstein and Barak had been trying to get into the surveillance business in America, Russia, and Israel together.

Building on those email leaks and the House Oversight Committee documents, Drop Site News revealed last month that Barak used Epstein’s business ties for secret diplomatic talks with Russia about the future of Syria, as well as other international ventures. On Tuesday, Drop Site News reported that Barak’s chief of staff had stayed at Epstein’s apartment for weeks at a time.

Epstein was arrested for sexually exploiting minors in 2006 and given a plea deal that allowed him to spend only a year in jail. After victim lawsuits and press coverage started to mount, authorities reopened the sex trafficking case against Epstein in 2019. He died in custody a month later. At the time, it looked like the case would die with him; Epstein’s name was transformed into a conspiracy theorist punchline.

But during the 2024 campaign, Trump offhandedly agreed to open up the government’s files on Epstein, a campaign promise he would come to regret. In February 2025, the department announced that it was releasing “The Epstein Files: Phase 1,” only to publish a set of already public documents. Shortly after, the Department of Justice informed Trump that his name appeared several times in Epstein’s case file, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The Department of Justice then declared that there was actually nothing more to see in July 2025. “You got a lot of people that could be mentioned in those files that don’t deserve to be,” Trump told reporters in August 2025, insisting that he is “in support of keeping it totally open” anyways.

Democrats had been reluctant to push too hard on Trump’s relationship with Epstein during the 2016 and 2020 elections, perhaps because some of them also had ties to Epstein. In fact, two Democratic candidates in 2020 attacked Trump for entertaining “conspiracy theories” about Epstein.

After Trump made it clear that he didn’t want the files opened, however, Democrats seized on the Epstein case. The House Oversight Committee demanded documents from the Department of Justice and Epstein’s estate, including the birthday book, whose existence was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, Reps. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D–Calif.) have been pushing—against the will of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R–La.)—for a full release of the Department of Justice files on Epstein. Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D–Ariz.) says that she will sign Massie and Khanna’s discharge petition after being sworn in on Wednesday afternoon, forcing a vote next month.

Johnson has tried to use the House Oversight Committee investigation to preempt Massie and Khanna’s proposal. “The bipartisan House oversight committee is already accomplishing what the discharge petition, that gambit, sought, and much more,” Johnson told reporters last month.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Media & Culture

X Kills Nitter And Xcancel, The Last Ways To Read Tweets Without Elon Watching

21 minutes ago
Media & Culture

Kalshi Says It’s a Prediction Market. The 9th Circuit Says It’s Gambling.

22 minutes ago
Cryptocurrency & Free Speech Finance

Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest Buys $37 Million in Bitcoin and Payments Firm Block

56 minutes ago
Media & Culture

Free Speech Unmuted: The Process Is The Punishment: ABC v. FCC with Stuart Benjamin

1 hour ago
Cryptocurrency & Free Speech Finance

X Data Breach? Users Are Getting Flooded With Password Reset Emails Nobody Requested

2 hours ago
Media & Culture

2,400 Baseball Games for the Price of 1

2 hours ago
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Editors Picks

Kalshi Says It’s a Prediction Market. The 9th Circuit Says It’s Gambling.

22 minutes ago

Bitcoin enters ‘Rektember’ as rate-hike risk combines with seasonality to threaten rally

49 minutes ago

SEC Proposes New Standards for US Transfer Agents

55 minutes ago

Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest Buys $37 Million in Bitcoin and Payments Firm Block

56 minutes ago
Latest Posts

Free Speech Unmuted: The Process Is The Punishment: ABC v. FCC with Stuart Benjamin

1 hour ago

Guidance on public photography should be shared with everyone in the UK not just asylum seekers. Photo: Getty Images for Unsplash+ Asylum seekers in the UK are being misled by the Home Office over laws about photographing people in public places and are being threatened that their asylum claims might be refused and could be kicked out of the country. On 19 August, the Home Office issued a poster entitled “Do not photograph or film people in public” as part of a series of guidance over consequences of behaviour for those seeking asylum. The poster is part of a nine-page booklet that aims to help asylum seekers understand what is expected of them when living in the UK and covers issues such as sexual consent and domestic abuse. The release of the booklet is controversial because the guidance it contains applies to everyone in the UK and not just asylum seekers. Its publication now could be seen as a politically motivated sop to those who want to crack down on all immigration, even though Britain is legally bound to admit genuine refugees. In the introduction, the Home Office says, “We understand that coming to a new country can be difficult, and that laws and customs here may be different from your home country.” The poster says, “In the UK, you should not take pictures or videos of someone without their permission. This includes taking pictures or videos in public spaces, like streets of parks, or in private spaces, like at home.” However, the poster is misleading. There is a common misconception that photographing people in public places without their consent is illegal. It is not. There are some situations where there are restrictions, for example where photography is restricted by law, such as outside military facilities where photography is prohibited because of national security concerns. Photography is also not permitted where an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as in the changing room of a clothes shop. Many commercial, privately owned spaces also have rules regarding photography. Sheffield’s Meadowhall shopping centre, for example, says filming and photography is not permitted unless authorised. Where there are no restrictions, consent is not required by law but many legitimate street photographers follow codes of conduct where they might seek consent. The Royal Society of Photographers, for example, recommends that “particular care should be taken when photographing children and vulnerable people, with consideration given to consent, safeguarding, privacy and the potential impact of making or sharing an image”. It adds, “Photographers should also consider how images of identifiable people are subsequently used, especially where their use could imply endorsement or raise concerns about commercial exploitation.” Repeated photography of a person without their consent could be illegal if it crosses into harassing behaviour that is likely to cause alarm or intimidation. This is banned by the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Photographers must also not share pictures of a sexual nature, for example upskirting, without the subject’s permission. This is banned under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. When asked about the poster, a Home Office spokesperson said: “We expect everyone who comes to the UK to abide by our laws. If they do not, they will face consequences, including the refusal of their asylum claim and removal from the UK.” They added, “These resources were produced for asylum seekers so there can be no possible misunderstanding of what we expect. The poster is designed to communicate two separate messages: Firstly, that individuals should not take photographs of others without their consent. Secondly, that sharing photographs or videos of a sexual nature without someone’s permission is a serious criminal offence.” There are subtle indications that the Home Office knew that what it was publishing was incorrect. Looking at the poster closely, it appears that the word “should” has been added later, suggesting that it previously said “must” – the font used is subtly different (see below). The information contained in a new Home Office poster is incorrect The Home Office did not respond to our request for comment when we asked about this. The spokeperson said of the poster, “It does not suggest that you can go to prison for taking someone’s photo in public.” There are nuances of English grammar at play here. One person who commented on the BPPA’s statement on Instagram said, “It doesn’t say there’s a legal requirement not to? It says you shouldn’t which to be quite frank is good, if simplified, advice for asylum speakers for whom English is not a first language.” However the heading of the poster is unequivocal. It says, “Do not”. Anyone, even those using English as a second language, would be unlikely to misconstrue that. The original wording still appears to be on the Home Office website. In the booklet’s introduction it says: “In the UK, we respect people’s privacy. This means you must not take photographs or videos of someone without their consent.” (emphasis mine). Photographers and photojournalists and their unions have been quick to call on the Home Office to clarify the poster. The British Press Photographers’ Association (BPPA) has commented on the document. It said, “Recently issued Home Office guidance that states permission is needed to photograph people in public is incorrect and harmful. There is no legal requirement to seek permission when photographing in public. The BPPA hopes an immediate correction will be issued.” Séamus Dooley, NUJ assistant general secretary, said: “This communication not only runs the risk of misleading asylum seekers, it could also have serious consequences for our members – particularly photographers and videographers who regularly carry out their work in public places. It also spreads public confusion that could serve to inhibit public interest journalism. Press photographers and other lens-based journalists perform a legitimate and important function in reporting and recording events in public spaces. “The union is very concerned that the spread of inaccurate information around the right to photograph and film people in public without permission could expose our members to increased hostility and harassment as well as wrongful accusations of criminality and unjustifiable stops by the police. This would undermine journalists’ right to report and the public’s right to know. READ MORE

2 hours ago

Robinhood's new crypto network is printing cash, and it's sending Arbitrum's token soaring

2 hours ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

X Kills Nitter And Xcancel, The Last Ways To Read Tweets Without Elon Watching

21 minutes ago

Kalshi Says It’s a Prediction Market. The 9th Circuit Says It’s Gambling.

22 minutes ago

Bitcoin enters ‘Rektember’ as rate-hike risk combines with seasonality to threaten rally

49 minutes ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.