Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free
Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world
The Epstein files offer America the opposite of closure. They are the latest widening of a scandal that has become a leitmotif of our time — not only because half the material remains unreleased. A budding Vladimir Lenin, or Benito Mussolini, might see the files as kindling awaiting a revolutionary spark. On the basis that politics is downstream of culture, today’s public moral outrage will further corrode faith in US democracy. How can you throw the bums out when they span the system?
By that measure, Donald Trump is a short-term beneficiary of the latest 3mn or so page release. Though he, his wife and his Mar-a-Lago club are referred to 38,000 times, Trump is in sufficiently broad company that others are taking as much of the airtime. His pitch has always been that everybody has their hand in the proverbial till. In that respect, Trump can claim a diabolical kind of vindication. But his relief is likely to be fleeting. The pressure on Trump’s Department of Justice to release the rest of the files will be sustained.
Their most damning feature is the breadth of Epstein’s network. This includes the sitting US president and a previous one, big Wall Street figures, a network of Ivy League luminaries, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, foreign government officials, Democrats, Republicans, a Maga influencer, a far left scholar, British and Norwegian royals, wives and girlfriends of powerful men, government lawyers, heads of law firms, movie directors and endless celebrities. Epstein’s network is an MRI of the establishment.
The idea that anyone did not know about Epstein’s conviction as a sex abuser is absurd. Some people spurned his social approaches. Having been invited in 2010 to an Epstein dinner with Woody Allen and then Prince Andrew in New York, the magazine editor, Tina Brown, replied: “What the fuck is this . . .? The paedophile’s ball?” Brown’s reaction should have been everyone’s. So should that of Melinda Gates, the now ex-wife of Bill Gates, who stepped into Epstein’s home once and immediately regretted it. Alas, their reaction was all too rare. More common to anyone with the stomach to sample this trove, is that of the former Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, “I have never been more touched by a friends [sic] kindness . . .”, she wrote to Epstein.
Epstein’s most stupendous feat was to become a powerful New York insider after being registered as a sex offender. In 2012, four years after his conviction, Elon Musk asked Epstein for an invitation to the “wildest party on your island”. In 2013, Richard Branson requested Epstein to “bring your harem” the next time they met. A striking quality of these exchanges is that Epstein lets his correspondents state plainly what he keeps elliptical — the tone of one who deals in favours. Often they are as mundane as asking for an introduction, or his help in a son’s job placement. Donations and charities feature a lot.
In a self-valuing democracy, the only defensible stance is to call for the release of all remaining files. That Trump’s lawyers were selective in what they published is beyond doubt; they also broke their own promises, which included redacting victims’ names. Dozens of women’s names have been made public. Having failed to convict anyone other than Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s accomplice, the system has once again let the victims down. That protecting them was not a priority speaks volumes. Their renewed terror sheds light on a system that seems to have learned nothing from the Epstein scandal and forgotten nothing.
George Orwell wrote that “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts”. Though sub-literacy among the educated is no sin, it offers a window on their minds. It would be far harder to disclose lust or avarice after opening with, “Dear Sir,” or “Mr Epstein” than with “hey bro”. Likewise with “cuz” for because and “R U?” for are you. With their abbreviated slang, powerful figures in a hurry signal ethical decay.
Since prison for Epstein’s fellow abusers gets unlikelier over time, America’s deeper question is whether it can restore a culture of shame. Those who dealt with Epstein on money, tax or non-iniquitous connections are a far larger universe than his circle of alleged sexual abusers. Epstein’s ordinary buddies were his enablers, who abandoned shame. Exposure of such carelessness across every shade of elite is a big cultural event in US history. Those who claim to speak for the non-elites should be attuned to its scale.