The release of previously unseen emails linked to Jeffrey Epstein has once again stirred controversy, drawing attention from both the Democratic party and the media.
Critics of former President Donald Trump are particularly vocal, using these documents to emphasize their dedication to uncovering the full extent of the late financier’s actions and misdeeds. However, their selective emphasis on certain messages indicates a potential aim to gain political leverage.
For some, the pursuit of truth may not be the primary focus.
However, for others, including myself, the pursuit of truth remains paramount.
I have consistently advocated for complete transparency in the ongoing investigation into Epstein’s activities. From this perspective, the newly surfaced emails represent only a minor development, if not a potential distraction, in the quest for clarity and justice.
Moreover, several Epstein-related documents remain under judicial seal, and their release is essential for achieving true transparency.
I know that because I have seen them.
In 2014, I was falsely accused of sexual abuse by one of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Giuffre. I immediately demanded full disclosure of all the evidence and waived all privacy and privilege, knowing that full disclosure would prove my innocence, which it did.
I immediately demanded full disclosure of all the evidence and waived all privacy and privilege, knowing that full disclosure would prove my innocence, which it did
In 2014, I was falsely accused of sexual abuse by one of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Giuffre (pictured with her lawyer David Boies)
In my 2019 lawsuit with Giuffre, she – before she died in April – admitted that she may have confused me with someone else and may have misidentified me as one of her alleged abusers. She dropped all of her claims against me.
Accordingly, I know what these court documents and testimony contain. And even though I am not at liberty to disclose their contents, I can report, without violating any court order, that these sealed materials are likely to contain important information necessary for a complete and total revelation of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
But only judges – not the Justice Department, the Trump administration or Congress – are empowered to remove the seal so that the public can see the contents.
The public should demand the courts disclose everything, without limitation. Any person who believes such disclosure would be unfair to them could seek to redact their names or other identifying information, but the burden should be on them to justify non-disclosure. The presumption should always be in favor of transparency.
As this applies to the suggestions that President Trump may have been involved in misconduct with Epstein, I can report that nothing I have seen in my extensive investigation would support any such conclusion.
Attorneys David Boies and Bradley Edwards, who also conducted extensive investigations on behalf of the accusers have confirmed that President Trump was not involved. Edwards has said that no prominent people, other than those who have already been publicly accused are implicated.
Also among the material that is being withheld are the names of accusers. I, of course, have great sympathy for any victim of abuse, but these accusers are all often mistakenly referred to as ‘victims.’ By bestowing on them all the designation of ‘victim,’ it is assumed that they are all telling the whole truth. But I am aware of withheld material that raises the possibility that some of them are lying to collect money.
This withholding of the names of all the adult accusers, denies the accused the constitutional right to confront their accuser. It also denies the accused the right to discover material that might raise legitimate questions about the credibility of the accuser and the truth of the accusation.
A perfect example of this situation is a woman named Sarah Ransome, who at age 23 said she had tapes of President and Mrs. Clinton, President Trump and others having sex with underage girls and boys. She sent numerous emails to the New York Post detailing these allegations. Subsequently, she admitted she invented the tapes to draw attention to Epstein’s crimes.
As this applies to the suggestions that President Trump may have been involved in misconduct with Epstein, I can report that nothing I have seen in my extensive investigation would support any such conclusion
In this and other cases, full disclosure of all the material is essential to judging the credibility of the accuser. Withholding the impeaching material is a half-truth that denies due process to the falsely accused.
Selective disclosure, which is what has occurred up to now, is unfair to innocent people who may have been publicly accused without the release of information relevant to addressing the credibility of the accusers. It is also unfair to credible victims whose abusers should not be protected by non-disclosure.
Disclosing the whole truth is the best assurance of fairness to accused and accusers alike. It is also the only way to maximize confidence in the system. As long as some material is being withheld, without plausible explanation, skeptical members of the public, opportunistic politicians, journalists looking for stories and conspiracy theorists will assume that someone is hiding something to protect somebody.
It is in Trump’s interest and the interest of all who have been falsely implicated, that nothing be withheld, so that no one can claim a cover up. If anything is censored, there will always be the suspicion that prominent people are being protected and that the wealthy elitists are not only above the law, but beyond public accountability.
So let everything be disclosed. Let judges lift the censorship seals on depositions. There should be no secrets. There should be full transparency. Let the chips fall where they may. No one should be protected. No one should be denied due process. Everyone should know everything relevant to the Epstein saga.
