‘More Bulls—t’: Trump Tries to Dodge Epstein Questions by Dragging the Clintons — and Ends Up Digging Himself into a Deeper Hole with Wild Claim
As fresh Epstein documents circulate and familiar names resurface, President Donald Trump has moved quickly to get out in front of the story, not with answers, but with questionable declarations of innocence.
The timing is telling. The newly released records don’t close the book on Trump’s proximity to Jeffrey Epstein; they reopen it, placing his name throughout the files with a frequency that stands out even among powerful peers.
There has been no ruling, no finding, no official determination clearing Trump of anything related to Epstein. Yet as the disclosures continue to entangle influential figures across the globe, Trump has chosen to issue his own verdict, insisting, loudly and repeatedly, that he has been “totally exonerated.”
On Monday, Trump again declared he has absolutely no connection to Jeffrey Epstein and insisted the matter is closed, despite extensive redactions in the files that some lawmakers say point to a cover-up.
“I have nothing to hide. I have been exonerated. I have nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. I have been totally exonerated on Epstein,” Trump told reporters during a press gaggle aboard Air Force One.
Trump asked about Hillary Clinton’s claim that she and her husband were being dragged into the Epstein scandal to divert attention from his involvement.
Clinton reiterated that over the weekend, describing the documents as disturbing and incomplete.
“It is something that needs to be totally transparent,” Clinton said during a panel at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday. “I’ve called for many, many years for everything to be put out there so people can not only see what’s in them but also, if appropriate, hold people accountable. We’ll see what happens.”
Despite Trump’s insistence, newly surfaced material in the Epstein files shows that the FBI interviewed a victim who accused Trump of sexual assault, undercutting Attorney General Pam Bondi’s recent claim that the Justice Department had no such evidence.
According to independent journalist Roger Sollenberger, agents deemed the woman a “credible accuser,” though the outcome of the inquiry remains unclear. A woman with matching identifying details later sued Epstein’s estate and secured a settlement in 2021.
The allegations appear in an internal Justice Department slideshow cataloguing Epstein-related investigations, where Trump is listed alongside two accusations. One describes a violent sexual assault when the accuser was between 13 and 15 years old; another recounts Trump agreeing with Epstein’s remark that a 14-year-old girl was “a good one,” testimony the department later relied on to convict Ghislaine Maxwell.
Although Trump is referenced tens of thousands of times across the files, the White House has continued to deny wrongdoing, even as Rep. Ted Lieu accused Bondi of lying under oath over claims that no underage girls were present at events Trump attended.
Online, Trump’s contradictions sparked outrage, with critics saying his claims didn’t add up when weighed against the facts that have been released.
One widely shared response cut straight to the point: “Only he hasn’t been totally exonerated. Not in the slightest. His name appears in the files over 1 million times, according to Raskin. He’s being protected by evil, otherwise known as Pam Bondi.”
Critics said the president was trying to settle the matter by assertion rather than evidence — a tactic straight out of Trump’s playbook.
“‘I have nothing to hide’ is always funniest when said immediately after the thing everyone is looking at. The Epstein files are dropping receipts and he’s out here speed-running denial like it’s a sport,” one post said.
Another voice zeroed in on the contradiction at the heart of Trump’s argument: “Trump: Epstein is a liar and the files are a hoax. Also Trump: the files exonerated me, it’s proof.”
Still another dismissed the entire exercise as political theater untethered from reality: “Magical thinking + propaganda = more bulls–t.”
The renewed attention comes as Bondi announced that the Justice Department has released what she described as “all” of the Epstein files, saying the agency has fulfilled its obligations under the Epstein Transparency Act. However, more controversy has since erupted over what was released and how. Critics note that more than 3 million documents have yet to be released, based on figures the DOJ cited in recent weeks.
Bondi’s letter to Congress included a list of roughly 300 prominent individuals whose names appear somewhere in the Epstein files. The list spans politicians, business leaders, and cultural figures the department classifies as “politically exposed persons.”
Critics say the presentation blurs crucial distinctions, lumping together people with documented ties to Epstein and others whose names appear without any evidence linking them to the late sex offender.
The confusion was compounded by the ridiculous inclusion of long-dead cultural icons such as Elvis Presley, Princess Diana, Marilyn Monroe and Kurt Cobain. Their presence in the files, critics argue, muddies the waters by failing to distinguish between a passing mention and an actual association.
The backlash has not been confined to Democrats. Republican Representative Thomas Massie said he no longer has confidence in Bondi’s leadership, citing what he described as a lack of accountability and transparency at the Justice Department.
The broader fallout from the Epstein disclosures continues to ripple outward. Prince Andrew previously lost his royal title over his connections to Epstein. Goldman Sachs’ top lawyer, Kathy Ruemmler, resigned after scrutiny of her past communications with him. Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Committee chairman Casey Wasserman announced he is selling his talent agency following reports that his name is in the files.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is facing bipartisan calls to resign after emails surfaced showing he once planned a family trip to Epstein’s private island in 2012.
As Trump insists he has been “totally exonerated,” others are calling for less political spin and more transparency, even if accountability never reaches the White House.