How Does QAnon Fit into the Epstein Case?

Ezra Klein did a long interview with Will Sommer about why Donald Trump can't put the Epstein case to bed. It is very interesting. The short answer is: QAnon.

QAnon has a theory of the world: Corrupt pedophilic elites control everything. Remember "Pizzagate"? That's the wild lie that Democrats were running a child sex ring from a pizza restaurant in D.C. It ran amok in right-wing media for years (the rumor, not the child sex ring). QAnon believers still think that the (Democratic) elites are still in control and still are pedophiles. They believe, with a religious ferocity, that Jeffrey Epstein was central to it.

They also believe that all politicians save one are crooked and are part of the conspiracy. The only one who is not corrupt and who is honest with them is Donald J. Trump. Yes, he has flaws, like grabbing women by the pu**y and lying a lot, but he is the only person in politics they can trust. No one is perfect. They know that. But he was sent to D.C. (optionally by God) to clean out the swamp/Augean Stables. His main task is not to deport people or impose tariffs (although those are fine hobbies), but to break open the giant conspiracy holding the pedophilic elites together.

In their worldview, evil, ranging from not having a job to your wife having cancer to your rent being too high, is due to the power of these corrupt pedophiles. Wars are also due to them. Some believers also think the elite murder children to use their blood in their satanic rituals. They also see people wearing red shoes as a declaration that they are insiders who do this. In their view, if only a handful of these evil pedophiles could be arrested and executed, the world would be set right.

In this theology, there is a thing called "the storm," when everything would come together. Trump will then arrest all the elite pedophiles in Hollywood, in banking, and in the Democratic Party and snuff them out. They really believe this. Ashli Babbitt, who died on Jan. 6, thought the storm was here and now and she wanted to be part of it. People believe this. Of course, people in some religions believe a lot of stuff that is also strange.

QAnon started on an esoteric message board on the Internet, slowly spread to social media, and then went almost mainstream. Millions of people have swallowed the Kool-Aid. It all makes sense to them.

Trump understood this. He is rational enough not to believe a word of the crazy story, but cunning enough to realize that millions of his supporters bought into it hook, line, and sinker. During the campaign, he tantalized them with promises to find and arrest all of the pedophiles. He knew he couldn't do that, but he had an election to win and if promises like this would win votes, then he would say what he had to say. He was planning to forget the whole thing after the election and assumed they would, too.

Trump started off great by appointing people like FBI Director Kash Patel, and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino, who are major conspiracy theorists themselves. The QAnon types were delirious with joy. Finally, someone in power was going to spill the beans and bring justice to all the corrupt pedophiles.

The QAnon types naturally assumed Epstein was part of the cabal. After all, how could a powerful, rich (Jewish) pedophile not be part of it? When he was arrested, it looked like Trump was on the right trail. When Bondi said she had the client list on her desk, they expected it would be public in a week and the arrests would start.

That's when everything went off the rails. Suddenly Trump, Bondi and others said there was no list, no cabal, no one was going to be arrested, and please forget the whole thing. The QAnon folks went apoplectic. Trump was sent to expose the pedophilic cabal, and now he is saying there was a lone gunman, it's all over, and let's move on. He was saying their entire mythology, everything they believed in, was a fable and they should just forget everything. This is on the same order as Pope Leo announcing that he checked the Vatican files, learned that Jesus never existed, the whole story was made up out of thin air by Mark in 60 A.D., and let's move on now.

Needless to say, the QAnon folks, who now include a lot of MAGA people, have no intention whatsoever of just letting this drop and moving on. They KNOW there is a pedophilic cabal and now Trump is hiding it? The one person in the whole world who could expose and break it has switched teams? There will be no storm? That shook them to their very foundations and they were not about to forgive and forget. And the more Trump appeared to be stalling and hiding stuff, the worse it became. This story is not going to go gentle into that good night. (V)

Nine Questions about Epstein that Need Answering

Barry Levine, who has covered Jeffrey Epstein for decades and wrote a book about him, now wrote an op-ed in The New York Times asking nine questions about Epstein that he wants answered. They sound like good questions to us. Here is a brief summary of them:

• Where did his money come from? When Epstein died, under what now seem like mysterious circumstances, with so-called "raw surveillance video" containing metadata indicating that it was edited by Adobe Premiere Pro with a key minute missing, his estate was worth $600 million. How did he make his money? Usually people with that much money either founded a startup or were CEO of a big company. He did neither. But there were thousands of wires totalling $1 billion to his bank account. Who sent them and why? This should be easy for the feds to check out—if they want to.
  
  
• Was Epstein a spy? The first time Epstein was arrested, he got a real sweetheart deal from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Rene Alexander Acosta. When asked about this, Acosta said: "I was told Mr. Epstein 'belonged to Intelligence' and I should leave him alone." So that is what he did. Acosta later became secretary of labor in Trump v1.0. Was Epstein really a spy? If not, who told Acosta to leave Epstein alone and why? Was the cabinet appointment related to this?
  
  
• Is Trump in the Epstein Files? In May, Pam Bondi told Donald Trump that he was in the Epstein files. Various reports have said that FBI agents have been working day and night to remove the documents mentioning Trump from the files. How much of this is true? Was Trump in the files and what was he doing there?
  
  
• What about Bill Clinton? Epstein palled around with a lot of famous people. Epstein's little black book had 21 different phone numbers for Bill Clinton in it. Did Clinton party with Epstein? If not, what was the nature of their relationship?
  
  
• Who were Epstein's "clients?" Prince Andrew (a.k.a. "Randy Andy") is suspected of partying with Epstein on his island. Were there more? Who were they? Were there frequent flyers? Who were they?
  
  
• Who else helped Epstein? Everyone knows about Ghislaine Maxwell and how she aided and abetted Epstein. Did he have other helpers? French "modeling scout" Jean-Luc Brunel was an associate of Epstein. What was his role? Unfortunately, no one can ask him now because he died in prison mysteriously in Paris in 2022 while awaiting trial for rape. How strange. This seems like a good lead for some ambitious French reporter.
  
  
• What was in Epstein's safe? When the FBI raided Epstein's houses, they found so much stuff that the index ran to three pages. There were 40 computers and electronic devices, 26 hard disks, at least 70 CDs, and six recording devices. A court filing said there are thousands of compact discs. A detailed listing of everything the FBI found would be nice to release.
  
  
• What's on the videos? Why can't the videos be released? If there are salacious videos, there is software available to blur out the faces of innocent victims so the videos can be released. Google maps has been doing this for 15 years. Surely Google would be willing to share its blurring software with the FBI if asked politely.
  
  
• What is in Epstein's autopsy report? The autopsy was performed by Kristin Roman, a forensic pathologist under supervision of the New York medical examiner. What's in it? Why not make the full report public? Were there DNA tests on the bedsheet Epstein used to hang himself? Was there any DNA from someone other than Epstein on the sheets? Did Roman or anyone else ask prisoners in adjoining cells if they heard or saw anything unusual?
  

Inquiring minds want to know. In fact, much of the country wants to know, and all we are getting is stonewalling. Maybe it will work as well as it worked for Richard Nixon. We'll see. We don't expect the government to help much, but investigative reporters might find some stuff if they dig enough. (V)

2028 Republican Candidates Are Split over Epstein Files

As we note above, the strange case of Jeffrey Epstein is probably not going away anytime soon. It might even stretch into 2027, when the presidential primary debates will begin. The more stonewalling there is, the longer the story will live.

Some potential Republican candidates are already staking out positions on Epstein. Will they support Donald Trump and say: "Nothing to see here, move on"? Or will they support the base and demand full transparency (in the expectations that many Democrats will be implicated)? One thing that seems likely is that potential candidates who want everything out there are not in the Epstein files themselves.

Of course, taking a position now is playing with fire, because new information might come out that could make a well-entrenched position look terrible. For example, "Nothing to see here" could look very bad if a dozen congressional Republicans and multiple dozen Republican donors were later shown on video to be committing rape of teenagers, live and in color.

So far, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Josh Hawley (R-MO), and Rand Paul (R-KY) are with the base and demanding that everything related to Epstein be released. Cruz is planning a retreat with donors next month and has his own podcast and radio show. Hawley has taken a number of high-profile positions of late, including banning stock trading by the president, vice president, and members of Congress. Paul just visited South Carolina and will soon visit New Hampshire.

On the other hand, J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem are 100% in with Trump and support the "nothing to see here" view. Some other possible candidates, including Govs. Brian Kemp (R-GA), Glenn Youngkin (R-VA) and Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R-AR) are trying to keep out of it, for the moment.

All of them are probably aware that polls are showing that almost 80% of Trump voters want to get to the bottom of this and want everything out there. They are not thinking this through at all, since it is very likely that some Republicans, possibly including their hero, are in deep trouble here. Also, 52% of Trump voters think the government is covering up stuff. Nonpoliticians who support Trump, including Mike Cernovich, Mike Lindell, Joe Rogan, Andrew Schultz and Steve Bannon, are attacking Trump for not releasing everything. This puts them in alignment with the base, but in opposition to Trump. (V)

Democrats Are Also Thinking about 2028

Republicans aren't the only ones thinking about 2028 already. Democratic POTUS wannabes aren't forced to take sides on Epstein. All of them want complete transparency and full disclosure. If that implicates Bill Clinton, well, he should have picked his friends with more care and that is his problem.

What they are busy with, since they don't have to agonize over Epstein, is more conventional campaign stuff. And that leaves a paper trail that reporters can follow. In particular, filings with the Federal Election Commission are the mother lode here.

Every presidential aspirant understands that the number one thing to do now is be seen as a team player. Specifically, that means doing everything you can to help the Democrats win the House and Senate next year. That means raising and spending money to help Democrats and stumping in states and districts that are in play. Pete Buttigieg is leading the fundraising so far, with $1.6 million banked this year. He is using this, in part, to pay a small staff. Democratic governors are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars ballpark. All the super PACs cover campaign travel expenses. Super PACs can pay for polling of any kind.

Much of the money has been spent raising more money. For example, Govs. Andy Beshear (D-KY) and Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) have spent money to buy donor lists, generally a good investment early on. Initially the messages sent out encourage donors to give to the DNC, DSCC, DCCC or individual Democratic candidates, but the messages also raise the sender's profile. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is already using his own extensive list of (large) donors to raise money for other Democrats. This buys goodwill and possibly endorsements down the road.

All the expected contenders have created super PACs. Most are growing their digital presence. Less-well-known governors are running ads nationally. Some are hitting the campaign trail. Beshear, for example, recently held a rally in South Carolina, an early state in the South, and not too far from his home state.

Likely candidates who have to face reelection in 2026, like Govs. Josh Shapiro (D-PA) and Wes Moore (D-MD), are focusing on their reelections first, of course. Taking reelection for granted is something that voters really don't like. Nevertheless, going to other states to raise money for your own reelection is fine and has the added benefit of meeting (important) players there. (V)

Republicans Are Crushing Democrats on Money

The money race for 2026 and 2028 is already in full swing. It's early, and there is plenty of time for things to change, but so far Republicans are way ahead of the Democrats. The main Republican super PAC, MAGA, Inc., collected $177 million in the first half of 2025, largely from the crypto-industrial complex. The crypto folks have been well rewarded for their efforts, among other things with the creation of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and U.S. Digital Asset Junkpile. As far as (V) knows, the Dutch government never had a strategic tulip reserve in the 1630s. Silly government. In contrast, the analogous Democratic super PAC, Future Forward, has $2,826.08 on hand and is still paying back money it accepted in 2022 from crypto executives swindlers now in prison.

Downballot, it is just as bad. The Congressional Leadership Fund, which supports House Republicans, has $11 million more on hand than the Democrats' fund. On the Senate side, the Republicans' Senate Leadership Fund has $16 million more than the Democrats' super PAC has, and the Democrats also have a $21 million debt left over from 2024, when the Democrats went all out to hold the Senate and still lost four seats, even though they got 1.5 million more votes than the Republicans.

Of course, if the midterms end up being a referendum on whether democracy is worth saving, big Democratic megadonors could yet step up to the plate. Still, rich people and corporations generally get a better deal from Republicans than from Democrats, so they tend to support Republicans. Democrats get more support from small donors, but small donors don't usually pay much attention to midterms, and certainly not this far out. Also, any administration can give up valuable favors to potential donors in return for moolah and this one is doing that in spades. Cagey donors could try to build some goodwill with a future Democratic administration by ponying up some cash now, but donors' time horizon is the next election, at most. (V)

China Won't Roll over and Beg Like the E.U.

Donald Trump is on a winning streak, of sorts. He got the deals he wanted with the U.K., Japan, the E.U., and several less important trading partners. But the big one has eluded him so far: China. Making a deal with China will be much more difficult than the others.

For starters, Chinese President Xi Jinping doesn't have to worry about elections next year (or any year) and can impose more pain on his people than Trump can get away with. He also has many valuable cards to play and he knows how to play them. America needs the rare earth elements China has and Xi can decide to sell or not sell them as he pleases. Not selling them has huge consequences for many American companies and industries and there is no short-term fix.

Additionally, China manufactures a huge number of parts used in jet engines, satellites, smartphones and a vast number of other products. Taxing the export of these things to compensate for damage done by tariffs would be easy.

Although China exports more to America ($450 billion) than it imports ($150 billion), those imports are heavily weighted toward agricultural products produced by Trump's base. Brazil and other countries also can grow soybeans. Long-term contracts to import millions of tons of soybeans from Brazil would very much upset Trump's base and Xi knows this.

Another big advantage that Xi has over European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen is that he doesn't have to sell his strategy or results to 27 other leaders. What he says, goes. This gives him far more power than von der Leyen has.

Trump is thinking of visiting China to meet one-on-one with Xi and show off his deal-making skills. That will never work. First of all, Trump doesn't understand any of the details of trade and doesn't want to be briefed by experts who do. Xi is fully prepared to spend hours talking with his experts and having them produce summaries of what he needs to know. Also, his style is completely different from Trump's. He wants his experts to negotiate with America's team of experts and then when his experts have what they consider the best possible deal for China, to submit it to him for a yes or no decision. He would never agree on the spot to some crazy proposal Trump throws at him during a meeting. He would want Chinese experts to put it under a microscope first. If Trump thinks he can pull the wool over Xi's eyes, he is in for a surprise. The best Trump could hope for in a meeting is a vague agreement to conduct trade in a way beneficial to both countries, without going into any details. If Trump threatens and actually imposes a high tariff, Xi will block the export of materials and parts, forcing American companies that need them to shut down, possibly bringing on a recession.

Of course, it is still possible that the current low-level negotiations going on will produce a deal of some kind, and then Trump can go to China to sign it with a flourish and claim victory. But it won't be a one-sided deal like the one with the E.U. Well, unless it is one-sided against the U.S. (V)

The Senate Is Gone

At least for August. Just before the Senate closed up shop for the traditional August recess, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) made a deal with Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to approve some nominees, but not all of them. Among others, former Fox News host Jeanine Pirro was confirmed as U.S. attorney for D.C., despite numerous former U.S. attorneys and judges saying she is totally unfit for the position. Pirro, a former county D.A., understands that her mission is to prosecute and persecute Trump's enemies. Many other nominees will have to wait until September.

The minority doesn't have the power to block nominees, but it does have the power to slow down the process. This has angered Donald Trump repeatedly. He wants his nominees confirmed immediately. Thune has contemplated "going nuclear"—that is, stripping away the minority's last little bit of power other than the filibuster to placate Trump. On the other hand, he has been around long enough to know that some day the shoe may be on the other foot, and a Democratic Senate may ram through the appointments of a Democratic president, 51-50 if need be. Trump doesn't care about what happens after Jan. 20, 2029. Thune (64) definitely does. (V)

Is Texas about to Execute a Dummymander?

In 2020, after the new census data came in, Republicans in the Texas legislature had a choice to make when gerrymandering their congressional districts. They could either protect all of their incumbents or be aggressive and try to win new seats. They were conservative (it's Texas, after all) and opted to protect their incumbents. It was a good decision and none of them have been ousted by Democrats.

Now Donald Trump comes along and tells them he wants the other plan: Be aggressive and try to win five more House seats. They said "Yes, sir!" and drew a new map, to some extent against their will and better judgment. Most of the mainstream media has settled on the narrative that Republicans just picked up five House seats.

Not so fast. Four of the five districts that the gerrymanderers modified are now majority Latino. That choice was made because in 2024, Trump's support among Latinos was 55%. What could go wrong? Well, if the Texas Republicans had been paying attention in class when they took Gerrymandering 101, they would have known that you are supposed to fill the districts you want to win with reliable voters. It is far from clear that Latinos are reliable Republicans. It is definitely true that many Latino men see Trump as very macho and they like him personally. That doesn't necessarily mean they like other Republicans.

Also, the situation now may be quite different from Nov. 2024. Many Latinos are souring on Trump on account of the deportations and tariffs. When Latinos in South Texas see ICE swooping in and arresting their family members, friends, and coworkers and locking them up without a trial, that doesn't generate a lot of love for either Trump or the Republican Party.

In addition, trade with Mexico is very important in South Texas. A lot of business and jobs depend on it and it has been badly disrupted. People are losing their jobs on account of the tariffs. Again, that doesn't generate a lot of love for the administration.

Polling shows that Latinos are souring on Trump nationwide. A CBS/YouGov poll has Trump's approval among Latinos nationwide at 32%. An Emerson College poll puts it at 38%. A Fox News poll has it at 42%. An Economist/YouGov poll says it is 31%. Finally, a University of Texas poll puts the number at 38%. Averaging these we get 36%. This is 19 points lower than the 2024 exit polls. And Trump's approval in Texas is probably worse than it is nationally because Texas has been hard hit by both deportations and the economic fallout from the tariffs. Oh, and Trump's lack of interest in helping Texans hit by the recent floods there probably didn't win friends and influence people.

The consequence of stuffing so many Latinos into four of the five new districts is that these are not only not guaranteed wins for the Republicans, but they could lose them all. Assuming Democrats are smart (not always the case), they will nominate local Latinos—say, state senators, state representatives, or mayors—and flog deportations and tariffs day and night. As a result, there is a good chance that the Republicans do not pick up five seats.

And it could even be worse. The new map moves Democrats into other districts. In a blue wave, previously safe incumbent Republicans could find themselves in highly competitive races. The moral of the story is that when gerrymandering a map, be really careful about basing your assumptions about how a precinct will go on only one election. Using long-term data about the nature of the electorate is a much better strategy.

Latino Republican politicians are aware of the problem. They are hearing from Latino constituents and it is not good. They are starting to do the unthinkable: advocate for (some) undocumented immigrants, namely people brought to the U.S. as children. Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) now supports a path to citizenship, not deportation, for these dreamers. This is heresy and exactly the opposite of what Trump wants. She said: "The eyes of history are upon us. Some of the most shameful moments in our past as a country relate to how we have treated immigrants who are not criminals. And we are in one of those moments." On the other hand, she talks big but did vote for the bill that gave ICE another $75 billion to round up immigrants.

We may have to wait a bit for the gerrymander/dummymander to actually happen. To pass the bill, a quorum is needed. If all the Republicans and none of the Democrats in the state House show up, there is no quorum and the bill can't be voted on. If the Democrats in the Texas House just stay home, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) said he will send the state police to arrest them and bring them to the House and lock them in.

So what are the Democrats doing? They have decamped to Illinois, as guests of Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL). The Texas state police have no authority to arrest anyone there and Pritzker is going to feed any requests for extradition into the nearest paper shredder (or e-mail shredder, if need be). As long as they stay there, the bill can't pass, but they probably can't realistically stay there until Nov. 2026. Sooner or later they will have to come back, but this stunt does make the redistricting national news, for what that is worth. It may also encourage California, New Jersey and New York to take countermeasures. (V)

Fed Governor Resigns

Donald Trump desperately wants the Fed to lower interest rates because: (1) He is still in the real estate industry and that industry lives or dies on interest rates, and (2) He knows he ran up the federal debt big time and wants to reduce the interest paid on it. He may or may not know that low interest rates stimulate inflation, which voters really, really, do not like. Be that as it may, he still wants the Fed to cut interest rates.

Trump has toyed with firing Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, his own nominee, even though the legality of that is questionable. According to the law, presidents can fire Fed members only for cause, and disagreeing about interest rates is not a cause. At the moment, Trump seems less likely to do that than he was a month ago. Nevertheless, last week he got a lucky break. One of the fed governors, Adrianna Kugler, a Joe Biden appointee, resigned a little bit early. Her term was due to expire Jan. 31, 2026, but she is out now, giving Trump an early appointment. She was the first Latina on the Board. She didn't explain why she left early, but she is returning to Georgetown University, from whence she came, as a professor. She might have simply wanted to start in the fall semester. Here is the current composition of the Board:

Name	Appointed by	Term ends	Function
Jerome Powell	Donald Trump	Jan. 31, 2028	Chairman
Philip Jefferson	Joe Biden	Jan. 31, 2036	Vice chairman
Michelle Bowman	Donald Trump	Jan. 31, 2034	Vice chair for supervision
Michael Barr	Joe Biden	Jan. 31, 2032	Member
Lisa Cook	Joe Biden	Jan. 31, 2038	Member
Christopher Waller	Donald Trump	Jan. 31, 2030	Member
(Vacant)	Donald Trump	Jan. 31, 2026	Member

When Trump fills Kugler's slot, Republican appointees will have a majority, something they didn't have until Kugler, a Joe Biden appointee, left. Could this presage a move to lower interest rates? Maybe yes and maybe no. If Powell is against it, the votes won't be there. If Powell is for it, the votes will be there. But one of the Fed's missions is keeping inflation in check. Since terms are long (14 years), Board members tend not to be easily pressured by presidents. That said, this president is extraordinarily good at bending almost everyone to his will. When a majority of the governors are "his" people, the task is much easier. (V)

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Is Forced to Shut Down

One thing that all authoritarians do is control the flow of information to the public. They do not want people to hear about their failures or any information that contradicts their stories and "facts." Donald Trump has fully internalized this. He has sued multiple media companies and gotten them to pay him protection money so they can continue to exist.

He is using a different tactic to try to silence NPR and PBS. They get a substantial amount of their income from the nonprofit, government-financed Corporation for Public Broadcasting. So he made sure the rescissions Republicans rammed through last month eliminated all of its funding. On Friday, it announced that it will have to shut down for lack of funds. As George W. Bush would have said: "Mission Accomplished!"

As an aside, speaking of George W. Bush, where is he? He is very much still alive. Does he approve of what Donald Trump is doing on many fronts? He is one of the few people whose opinions still matter to a lot of Republicans. If he were to come out and make a clear statement that what Trump is doing is an affront to everything the Republican Party has stood for these past 171 years, it would make quite an impact. But he is as quiet as a mouse (the kind with no buttons).

The impact of the CPB shutting down will be felt the hardest in rural areas—you know, the places where Trump voters live. The CPB doesn't broadcast on its own, but it gives money to local NPR and PBS stations. For rural ones, the CPB money is often a large part of their budget, without which they can't make ends meet. Urban NPR and PBS stations can broadcast pleas for help in the form "The Trump administration is trying to shut us down. If you value our content, please become a subscriber or make a one-time donation. Without you we can't exist." There are enough wealthy listeners and viewers in urban areas who could pony up and keep the stations alive, but that is less true in rural areas. So Trump voters will have to depend more on Fox News for their information. Trump probably doesn't mind this so much. (V)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger