Let’s talk about credibility. Does someone convicted of sex trafficking minors have any?
Imagine this scenario: a person serving a lengthy prison sentence for sex trafficking minors—who was also the accomplice and co-conspirator of the notorious rapist and sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein—suddenly offers up information to the Deputy Attorney General of the United States. That information, somehow, exonerates Donald Trump by claiming he knew nothing about Epstein’s crimes. They were just golf buddies, the story goes. They liked to party. That’s it.
Now imagine that person receives a reduced sentence—or even, incomprehensibly, a pardon.
This isn’t just about credibility anymore. It raises serious questions about the motives of those at the highest levels of the Department of Justice, and especially about Donald himself, the man still at the center of this scandal. A man who seems to believe that using a convicted sex trafficker to clear his name will somehow work.
Donald wants to make the Epstein scandal disappear. And since it won’t, he seems to think fleeing the country will do the trick. It’s a toddler-level grasp of reality: if I can’t see it, it doesn’t exist.
But even thousands of miles away in Scotland—a country that loathes him—the scandal followed. One of the first questions he faced upon landing was whether he planned to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime partner and now-convicted criminal.
Rather than answer directly, Donald deflected.
“I really have nothing to say about it. She is being talked to by a very smart man, by a very good man, Todd Blanche. I don’t know anything about the conversation. I haven’t really been following it. A lot of people are asking me about pardons. Obviously, this is no time to be talking about pardons. But a lot of people have asked. This is just not the time. Todd will come back with whatever he’s got.”
He continued:
“You’re making a very big thing over something that’s not a big thing. Talk about Clinton. Talk about the former president of Harvard. Talk about all his friends. Talk about the hedge fund guys. Don’t talk about Trump. What you should be talking about is the fact that we have the greatest six months in the history of a presidency.”
If by “greatest” he means “most horrifying,” then yes, that tracks. And when Donald says “according to a lot of people,” he likely means the voices in his head.
As a side note: if Donald ever calls you “smart and good,” you might want to reevaluate your life.
He insists he knows nothing about the conversations between his loyalist Todd Blanche and Ghislaine Maxwell. Just like we’re expected to believe that Attorney General Pam Bondi never told him, back in May, that his name appears several times in the Epstein files.
When asked directly if he’d been briefed, Donald responded plainly:
“No, I was never, never briefed.”
Sure, Donald. Because you’re such a pillar of truth.
In reality, he’s been lying to the public for months—and to his supporters for over a decade—about his role in all of this. The truth, according to the Attorney General, is that Donald’s name appears several times in the Epstein files. He was told. He knows.
And yet, Donald is now reportedly considering a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell. Her lawyers certainly think so.
The Deputy Attorney General personally met with Maxwell in prison—an unprecedented move. Her lawyer, David Marcus, briefed the press on the meeting, stating:
“Ghislaine answered every single question asked of her over the last day and a half. She answered those questions honestly, truthfully, to the best of her ability. She never refused to answer a question. This was the first opportunity she’s ever been given to answer questions about what happened. So the truth will come out about Mr. Epstein. She’s the one answering those questions.”
He added:
“President Trump is the ultimate dealmaker. He knows a promise made by the government should bind the government. We’re hoping the Supreme Court agrees that when the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida promised no potential co-conspirators would be prosecuted, that bound the Southern District of New York too.”
That line—“ultimate dealmaker”—is the tell. It signals a strategy. Maxwell’s team is banking on Donald’s desperation and transactional nature to secure a get-out-of-jail card for her, despite the gravity of her crimes.
Let’s dispel a dangerous narrative: this was not the first opportunity Ghislaine Maxwell had to cooperate. She had been questioned multiple times. Prosecutors likely offered her deals to flip on Epstein, her partner in crime. She refused. She had a full trial, the right to call witnesses, and the opportunity to testify in her own defense. She declined.
This is not new territory for her.
Meanwhile, Maxwell continues to appeal her sentence to the U.S. Supreme Court—an odd move, given the nature of the case. But with a corrupt, illegitimate supermajority on the bench, anything is possible.
On his way to Scotland, Donald reminded the press that he can pardon Maxwell if he wants to—which makes his earlier claim that “this isn’t the time to talk about pardons” sound even more hollow.
One has to wonder what sort of deal might be on the table between Donald, the DOJ, and Maxwell—if clearing Donald’s name is the exchange for her freedom.
And if that happens, there will be no credibility left. It will amount to a confession.
We’re in a moment where QAnon conspiracists and MAGA followers—who once demanded that Donald expose Epstein’s supposed Democratic enablers—are now watching their man inch closer to pardoning a convicted sex trafficker in the hope that she’ll help him save face.
The hypocrisy is staggering.
Are Republicans going to hold him accountable? A few have called on Donald to release the Epstein files, but a critical mass remains silent.
Interestingly, we saw this week that Republican pressure can work. After withholding $5.5 billion in education funds, Donald was forced to release them after ten Senate Republicans—led by Mitch McConnell and Jim Justice—signed a public letter urging him to act.
That money includes $2 billion for teacher training and recruitment, especially in low-income areas, plus funding for arts, music, and English-language support for children of migrant farm workers. The very reasons Donald and his allies probably considered it “wasteful.”
But the backlash was growing, and Donald caved. Because he always caves.
As Donald spirals, his anger needs an outlet. That’s where Mayor Eric Adams comes in.
The Justice Department is now suing New York City, accusing it of releasing undocumented immigrants with criminal records by refusing to cooperate with ICE.
NBC New York reported:
“The suit claims the city’s Department of Correction released one of the men despite an ICE detainer. The Justice Department alleges the city enabled the release of undocumented immigrants with criminal records by declining detainer requests and barring ICE from Rikers Island.”
This comes as Donald turns on Adams—despite their previous alignment. The New York Times noted:
“Mr. Adams, a Democrat, had for months publicly aligned himself with Donald on immigration, even lobbying the federal government to drop corruption charges against him. That partnership soured this week when Trump’s top immigration officials criticized Adams and the city’s sanctuary laws.”
Adams is now under fire from all sides. New Yorkers are furious over his ties to Donald. The Trump regime paints him as soft on crime. And immigration advocates see the DOJ’s lawsuit as a direct attack on human rights and local control.
Adams, who is running for re-election without his party’s support, is a man without a base. His alliance with Donald may have bought him short-term protection, but it’s destroyed his long-term credibility.
We need a mayor who is independent, accountable, and committed to protecting New York as a sanctuary city. Adams has failed that test.
Now he’s stuck: continue doing Donald’s bidding and tank his re-election bid—or stand up for New Yorkers and do what’s right. Either way, his political future is finished. But one path is at least respectable.
And these days, that counts for something.
