Epstein and Co. were trying to manipulate Google results and minimize unfavorable Epstein coverage
[REDACTED]:
Has all that vile publicity finally gone away for good or do the keep stirring the pot for more blackmail money every few months. Hope you are well. Just spent the weekend at David Koch's in palm beach. He had a lunch for 70. Including 9 acting republican governors, Pataki, Giuliani, trump, Wilbur ross, Was fascinating
Xoxo. Peggy
❤2
Mark Epstein sent a statement to Lead Stories on November 15, 2025, that he said was "to clarify a point that has been misinterpreted in public discussion." It read:
Ali Clark, a spokesperson for Mark Epstein, told The Advocate in an email that Bubba is:
Recently, emails from 2018 between my brother and me were made public. They were simply part of a humorous private exchange between two brothers and were never meant for public release or to be interpreted as serious remarks.
For the avoidance of doubt, the reference to 'Bubba' in this correspondence is not, in any way, a reference to former President Bill Clinton.
Any attempt to conflate that reference with President Clinton, or to read sweeping implications into them, misrepresents both the purpose and the tone of the original correspondence. I want to be absolutely clear on this point so that the public record is not distorted and so that speculation does not unfairly implicate people who are not actually being referenced in those communications.
Ali Clark, a spokesperson for Mark Epstein, told The Advocate in an email that Bubba is:
a private individual who is not a public figure.
❤2
The House Has Passed The Bill to Release The Epstein Files
1🍾3👀1
Speaker Johnson is urging the senate to amend the bill, citing that there may be “disclosure of non-credible allegations, creating new victims” among other claims.
Thomas Massie, the author of the bill, responded:
It is important to note that Massie’s bill does already include protection of victims’ privacy but states that no names associated with Epstein can be redacted in the investigative files for reasons of “[e]mbarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.”
Thomas Massie, the author of the bill, responded:
This is how @SpeakerJohnson plans to protect perverts who went to the rape island from embarrassment. Do not let the Senate add an amendment to avoid disclosing those rich and powerful men who have evaded justice for so many years. Is Johnson calling all victims “non-credible?”
It is important to note that Massie’s bill does already include protection of victims’ privacy but states that no names associated with Epstein can be redacted in the investigative files for reasons of “[e]mbarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.”
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
In an interview on NewsNation, Mark Epstein claimed:
I’ve been recently told the reason they’re going to be releasing these things, and the reason for the flip is that they’re sanitizing these files. There’s a facility in Winchester, Virginia where they’re scrubbing the files to take Republican names out. That’s what I was told by a pretty good source.
Jeffreys dead. So I don’t care of the implications of the files, that’s other people’s problems. My brother did not commit suicide… Who killed him. Who had him killed.
In 2016 I said this publicly before. Jeffrey told me that if he said what he knew about the candidates they’d have to cancel the election.
Jeffrey definitely had dirt on Trump.
(R-LA) Clay Higgins' response to voting NO on the Epstein Bill
I have been a principled “NO” on this bill from the beginning. What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today. It abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America. As written, this bill reveals and injures thousands of innocent people – witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members, etc. If enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal of criminal investigative files, released to a rabid media, will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. Not by my vote. The Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough investigation that has already released well over 60,000 pages of documents from the Epstein case. That effort will continue in a manner that provides all due protections for innocent Americans. If the Senate amends the bill to properly address privacy of victims and other Americans, who are named but not criminally implicated, then I will vote for that bill when it comes back to the House.
🤮7
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Senate unanimously agrees to send bill demanding Epstein file release to Trump's desk
🍾3
President Trump is prepared to sign the Epstein files bill as soon as it arrives at his desk, a White House official said.
Per the NYT
Senate GOP Leader John Thune says the House will transmit the bill tomorrow morning, after which the Senate will formally approve it and send it to President Trump’s desk.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
NEW: Speaker Johnson tells me he’s “deeply disappointed” the Senate approved the Epstein files bill without making changes.
He said he spoke to Trump about it tonight: “We both have concerns,” Johnson said.
I asked if Trump may veto it: “I’m not saying that. I don’t know.”
Tweet - Mychael Schnell
🤨2
The Senate has officially passed the bill forcing the Justice Department to release the Epstein files.
It is now on President Donald Trump’s desk, where he has said that he will sign it.
It is now on President Donald Trump’s desk, where he has said that he will sign it.
House Oversight Chair James Comer has subpoenaed J.P. Morgan and Deutsche Bank for Jeffrey Epstein’s financial records