U.S. Rep. Goldman reveals unredacted Epstein file that blows up Trump's story of ending his friendship with infamous pedophile, raising questions about AG Bondi

(Facebook)

Donald Trump's No. 1 story to counter signs that he was close with the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein has been that their relationship fractured in later years.  A Democrat in the U.S. House, however, has uncovered a document in the Department of Justice (DOJ) Epstein files that blows up Trump's story. In what surely will be a shock to many non-MAGAs, it now appears that Trump lied about his Epstein connection.

Hafiz Rashid, of The New Republic (TNR) has the story under the headline "Democrat Reveals Epstein File That Blows Huge Hole in Trump's story; Democratic Representative Dan Goldman reveals a previously redacted email that contradicts Trump's story on how he stopped being friends with the sexual predator." Writes Rashid:

Democratic Representative Dan Goldman (D-NY) revealed an unredacted document from the government’s Jeffrey Epstein files on the House floor Wednesday, saying that it directly contradicts Donald Trump’s account of his relationship with the billionaire sex offender.

The document is an October 2009 email containing information about a conversation between one of Epstein’s attorneys, Jack Goldberger, and an attorney for Trump, Alan Garten. The email was initially released to the public in redacted form. In the unredacted version, as Goldman highlighted, Goldberger wrote that Garten said Epstein was never asked to leave Trump’s Mar-a-Lago country club in Florida as he was not a member, but may have been a guest.

This directly contradicts Trump’s claim that he kicked Epstein out of the resort in 2004 due to his poaching of Mar-a-Lago employees. Goldman claimed that the document was being deliberately withheld by the Department of Justice, violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) that Trump signed into law in November.

Is this another example of Attorney General Pam Bondi acting as Trump's personal attorney, trying to protect him at all costs? That question certainly has to be asked, Rashid writes:

“This document here was redacted to the public. It was unredacted to Congress and it completely disputes everything that Donald Trump has said about Jeffrey Epstein,” Goldman said, displaying a blown-up poster of the email. “Now, why is this important? Because if the attorney general is covering up this information that she then reveals to Congress, what else is she covering up about Donald Trump’s involvement in the Epstein files?”

Put another way: How much public information under the EFTA has been kept from the public? The pressure on Bondi, who is catching heat for her bumbling performance as Trump's AG, likely will grow soon, Rashid writes:

Bondi is already under fire for allegedly mismanaging the release of the Epstein files, and has been subpoenaed by the Republican-led House Oversight Committee to appear for a deposition April 14. This latest revelation is only going to make her seem more guilty of slow-walking and covering up damning information about Trump and Epstein.

Joe Kent, U.S. counterterrorism chief, resigns over Iran war, claiming Israel duped Donald Trump into an attack on a nation that posed no imminent threat

(Yeni Safak, Facebook)

A prominent member of Donald Trump's counterterrorism team resigned yesterday over the Iran War, saying it was another example of Israel and its powerful lobby drawing the U.S. into an unjustified war in the Middle East. Joe Kent, who was head of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), said his resignation was partly personal, driven by memories of his wife Shannon's death by an ISIS suicide bomber. 

In his resignation letter, Kent essentially said Israel had duped Trump into attacking Iran and that the Israeli government had a history of using its influence to prompt U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts. Chris Lefkow examines those issues and more in a jointly published article at AFP (Agence France-Presse) and SFWeekly. Lefkow writes:

A senior US counterterrorism official resigned on Tuesday to protest the US-Israeli war against Iran and said the Islamic Republic posed no imminent threat to the United States.

"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran," Joseph Kent, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), said in his resignation letter to President Donald Trump.

Kent -- a former member of the Green Beret special forces who served multiple combat tours -- said "Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby."

Kent is not the only member of his immediate family to put their life on the line in combat, Lefkow notes:

Kent's wife, Shannon, also served in the US military and was killed in a suicide bombing in Syria in 2019.

"As a Gold Star husband who lost my beloved wife Shannon in a war manufactured by Israel, I cannot support sending the next generation off to fight and die in a war that serves no benefit to the American people nor justifies the cost of American lives," Kent wrote.

Kent suggests the seeds for the current Iran war were planted by a joint Israel-U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear facilities in June 2025. Lefkow writes:

As head of the NCTC, Kent worked under Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, analyzing and coordinating the US response to terrorist threats and serving as the principal counterterrorism adviser to the president.

"Until June of 2025, you understood that the wars in the Middle East were a trap that robbed America of the precious lives of our patriots and depleted the wealth and prosperity of our nation," Kent said in his letter to Trump, which he posted on X.

Kent accused "high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media" with engaging in a misinformation campaign that "sowed pro-war sentiments to encourage a war with Iran."

"This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that you should strike now," he said.

"This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war," Kent said.

"I cannot support sending the next generation off to fight and die in a war that serves no benefit to the American people nor justifies the cost of American lives," he added.

Senator Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said Kent's "record is deeply troubling." 

"But on this point, he is right: there was no credible evidence of an imminent threat from Iran that would justify rushing the United States into another war of choice in the Middle East," Warner said.

Kent ran twice unsuccessfully -- in 2022 and 2024 -- as a Trump-endorsed Republican for a seat in the US House of Representatives from Washington state. 

Word of Kent's resignation drew heavy pushback from White House officials, Lefkow reports:

Kent, 45, who was appointed to head the NCTC by Trump, is the first senior US official to resign from his administration to protest the war against Iran.

Trump, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, accused Kent of being "very weak on security" and said it's a "good thing that he's out."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt pushed back against what she called "false claims" in Kent's resignation letter, calling "insulting and laughable" the suggestion that the decision to go to war was made "based on the influence of others."

"As President Trump has clearly and explicitly stated, he had strong and compelling evidence that Iran was going to attack the United States first," Leavitt said. 

"President Trump ultimately made the determination that a joint attack with Israel would greatly reduce the risk to American lives that would come from a first strike by the terrorist Iranian regime and address this imminent threat to America's national security interests," she said.

Trump blasts U.S. Supreme Court as "inept and embarrassing" even though its dubious rulings have kept him in the White House and likely out of prison

(Facebook)

Donald Trump's ignorance of, and contempt for, the rule of law is so blatant that we have written more than a dozen posts on the topic. Perhaps our most direct attack on Trump's cluelessness regarding a subject that should be of at least mild interest to a president came under the headline "Donald Trump proves that he is ignorant of the Constitution, and the rule of law in general, probably because he doesn't plan to abide by the law anyway After learning of Trump's Sunday night rant on Truth Social, focusing heavily on his unhappiness with the U.S. Supreme Court, I could not understand how Trump refuses to accept that we are "a government of laws, not of men," as stated by Founding Father John Adams in 1780.

As might be expected from a president who has shown inclinations toward being a dictator, Trump seems to see the U.S. as a nation of "one man" -- and that is Donald J. Trump. The president's malignant narcissism was on vivid display as he seems to suggest that he -- and he, alone -- should be the one to determine what is lawful and what is not in the United States. Politico's Kyle Cheney provides a rundown of Trump's most recent grievances, with special emphasis on the nation's highest court. Under the headline "Trump is losing one battle after another. Cue the posts," Cheney writes:

President Donald Trump is increasingly at the mercy of forces he unleashed but can’t control — so he’s taking aim at the umpires.

Gas prices surging. Unemployment climbing. War with Iran threatening to engulf his presidency. The fracturing of his political coalition. The collapse of his signature trade-negotiations-by-tariff strategy. Relentless scrutiny of the Epstein files. A public backlash to his agenda that could swamp Republicans in the midterms. Failure after failure to criminalize the conduct of his political adversaries. 

So it was, in a fit of Sunday night fury that set Washington’s armchair psychoanalysts ablaze, that the president channeled his rage at the few functioning checks on his power: the media, independent regulators and — most pointedly — the federal judiciary.

Trump’s Sunday night outburst took on all of them, but it was most notable for how he cast the Supreme Court — one that has staved off the destruction of his agenda and even his own criminal prosecution — as “a weaponized, and unjust Political Organization.”

Of Trump's many unattractive qualities, Cheney spotlights one that is particularly grating -- his inability to show gratitude toward anyone, even those who have cut him one favor after another, as the SCOTUS conservative majority has done. The high court gifted Trump a form of immunity that has no basis in legal precedent. It even allowed Trump to remain on the presidential ballot when the Constitution demanded he be excluded due to his status as an insurrectionist. 

In short, Trump likely would be in prison, not the White House, if SCOTUS had not ruled unlawfully in his favor. Is Trump grateful for the justices bailing him out? Not in the least, based on the following from Cheney's report:

“This completely inept and embarrassing Court was not what the Supreme Court of the United States was set up by our wonderful Founders to be,” the president blared on Truth Social. “They are hurting our Country, and will continue to do so.”

It was a remarkable attack. Until the Feb. 20 tariff ruling, the Trump administration had been touting its winning streak at the Supreme Court. The justices have salvaged Trump’s broadest efforts to end legal protections for hundreds of thousands of noncitizens in the United States, allowed him to assert unprecedented control of once-independent agencies and unilaterally slash congressionally authorized spending.

The court, as Trump knows, is arguably responsible for his return to power in the first place: The justices blocked an effort by some blue states to keep Trump off the 2024 ballot by labeling him an insurrectionist responsible for the Jan. 6, 2021,  attack on the Capitol. And the court’s decision to adopt a sweeping view of presidential immunity helped stave off special counsel Jack Smith’s most potent criminal case against Trump.

But to Trump, that’s ancient history.

I would quibble with only one word in Cheney's analysis. The U.S. Supreme Court is not "arguably" responsible for Trump's return to power; it is "absolutely" responsible  for giving us the most corrupt and dysfunctional government in U.S. history. But Trump was not finished roasting his benefactors in the Sunday night tirade.  Cheney writes:

The core of the attack is the frustration that Trump often exhibits when he brushes up against the limits of his power. He spent Sunday lashing out at the news media, cheering on FCC Chair Brendan Carr’s threat to revoke broadcast licenses for stations that report unfavorably on the war in Iran, and lamenting his inability to control the independent Federal Reserve’s interest rate decisions.

Trump describes the high court’s recent rejection of his unfettered ability to levy tariffs against American trading partners as a deeply personal affront — one that contradicted the ethos of his entire decade in public life.

Many online commenters have described Trump as an overgrown toddler. And the Sunday rant is an example of such behavior. He can dish out insults with impunity, but he can't handle it when he does not get his way. That kind of immature leadership can shake a democracy to its foundations. From the Politico report: 

Since the stinging tariffs decision last month, Trump has seemed fixated on the ruling, weighing in against the high court every few days.

“Our Country was unnecessarily RANSACKED by the United States Supreme Court,” he wrote Sunday.

When asked for comment, a spokesperson for the White House referred POLITICO to Trump’s posts.

Trump’s bristling anger over the tariffs decision is akin to the umbrage he felt after the justices rejected his last-ditch courtroom bid to overturn the 2020 election.

Unsurprisingly, both of those cases featured in Trump’s post, are adorned by false claims about what the justices actually decided in each one. They did not, in fact, bless Trump’s alternate scheme to re-issue tariffs. And they did not, six years ago, tell Trump he lacked standing to challenge the 2020 election results.

Trump's approval ratings have been in decline, possibly hurting his party's chances in the 2026 midterms, but the president is unlikely to take the blame for any of that. Cheney writes:

“All I can do, as President, is call them out for their bad behavior!” Trump lamented of the co-equal branch. He even acknowledged his vent session could be a strategic blunder: “This statement about the United States Supreme Court will cause me nothing but problems in the future, but I feel it is my obligation to speak the TRUTH.”

That admission comes as Trump has appeared powerless at times to shape the fallout of his own decisions — even though they may control his, and his party’s, fate. The war in Iran has rattled markets and sent gas prices surging, while Americans have largely looked askance at the prospect of a prolonged military conflict that has already claimed the lives of several American service members.

His effort to suppress interest in the sex trafficking operation run by late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein went largely ignored and has drawn extensive international attention and an expansive review by Congress — rare pushback by the GOP-controlled House against Trump’s own appointees.

Meanwhile, Trump’s MAGA coalition appears to be splintering over the war in Iran, with factions accusing each other of being shills for foreign governments or even criticizing Trump for falling victim to interventionist forces in Washington.

Some of Trump’s most visible loyalists have broken with him in recent days, prompting Trump to declare, “THEY ARE NOT MAGA, I AM.” Trump’s push for Republicans to rewrite election rules and redraw political boundaries to maximize their chances in the midterms are both faltering. Poll numbers reveal dissatisfaction with the economy and a backlash to Trump’s mass deportation efforts.

And Trump’s Justice Department has failed in its efforts to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James and six Democratic lawmakers who filmed a video encouraging members of the military to disregard unlawful orders. And on Friday, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg capped that losing streak with an exclamation point: tossing out a grand jury subpoena aimed at Fed Chair Jerome Powell.

The Obama-appointed chief of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.,  delivered a memorable rebuke of the administration’s pursuit of that criminal probe in what he concluded was an effort to harass and punish Powell for refusing to bend to Trump’s demand that he lower interest rates quicker. 

To be upbraided by an Obama appointee was almost more than Trump could bear. It prompted him to suggest that Boasberg should be subjected to some form of punishment, even though the president has no authority over matters of judicial discipline. Cheney writes:

Trump’s personal vendetta against Boasberg began behind closed doors in 2023, when the newly minted chief blessed special counsel Jack Smith’s efforts to compel testimony from a raft of high-profile Trump aides. But it deepened when Boasberg attempted to halt the abrupt deportation of 137 Venezuelan men Trump accused of being gang members.

That history was palpable as Trump — in an encore to his initial Sunday night post — uncorked a long list of adjectives to demean the Obama-appointed judge: wacky, nasty, crooked, totally out of control, flagrant, extreme. “Exactly what Judges should not be!” he added.

“A man who suffers from the highest level of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), and has been ‘after’ my people, and me, for years,” Trump wrote, calling for Boasberg and other judges to “suffer serious disciplinary action.”

A hacker broke into the FBI's stash of Epstein files three years ago, and the story is just now surfacing, raising questions about national security under Trump

(Tony Michaels, Instagram)

A hacker broke into FBI riles related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and with the name of U.S. President Donald Trump mentioned an estimated 38,000 times in the files, implications of the hack could be profound. 

The hack occurred three years ago, but the incident just began to receive widespread media attention last week. The FBI describes the hack as "isolated" and says it has "rectified" the network. One of the most detailed accounts we have seen so far comes from Reuters and is dated last Wednesday (3/11/26). Under the headline "Exclusive: Foreign hacker in 2023 compromised Epstein files held by FBI, source and documents show," Raphael Satter writes:

A foreign hacker compromised files relating to the FBI’s investigation of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a digital break-in at the bureau’s New York Field Office three years ago, according to ​a source familiar with the matter and recently published Justice Department documents reviewed by Reuters.

The details of who accessed a server at the FBI’s New York Field Office, ‌including the allegation that a foreign hacker was involved, are being reported here for the first time.

In a statement, the FBI said what it described as a "cyber incident" was "an isolated one."

"The FBI restricted access to the malicious actor and rectified the network. The investigation remains ongoing, so we do not have further comments to provide at this time."

While the FBI's official statement is somewhat comforting, many questions remain: For example, how much information was accessed, and how might the hacker(s) use it? Also, this happened on the watch of Donald Trump's Department of Justice, headed by Pam Bondi (who has acted essentially as Trump's personal attorney, rather than as an objective seeker of justice), so what issues does that raise? The Reuters report addresses those questions and more:

Although the source said the intrusion appeared to have been carried out by a cybercriminal rather than a foreign government, ​the incident underscores the files' potential intelligence value, one academic said. The legally mandated publication of U.S. Justice Department documents has exposed the dead financier's ties to prominent people in politics, finance, academia, and business, ​triggering investigations in numerous countries around the world.

“Who wouldn’t be going after the Epstein files if you’re the Russians or somebody interested in kompromat?” said ⁠Jon Lindsay, who researches the role of emerging technology in global security at Georgia Tech. “If foreign intelligence agencies are not thinking seriously about the Epstein files as a target, then ​I would be shocked.”

The breach was reported contemporaneously by CNN and Reuters on February 17; the connection to Epstein materials was made by the French magazine Marianne.

Epstein, a longtime associate of President Donald Trump, ​pleaded guilty in 2008 to prostitution charges, including soliciting an underage girl. He was found hanged in his jail cell in 2019, in what was ruled a suicide, after being arrested again on federal charges of sex trafficking of minors.

There is Trump's name again, along with a reference to his longstanding friendship with perhaps the best-known pedophile in world history. In fact, Jeff Tiedrich, at the "Everyone is entitled to my own opinion" Substack page, refers almost daily to Epstein, from Trump's perspective, as "my dead pedo bestie." If you already didn't feel squeamish about the Epstein-Trump connection, you probably will when you learn more about the hack. Speaking of which, here is more from Raphael Satter:

The hack occurred after a server at the Child Exploitation Forensic Lab in the FBI’s New York Field Office was inadvertently left vulnerable by Special Agent Aaron Spivack, who was trying to navigate the bureau’s complex ​procedures for handling digital evidence, according to the source and the documents.

A timeline written by Spivack and included in the large cache of Epstein documents released earlier this year said the break-in happened ​on February 12, 2023. It was discovered the following day when Spivack turned on his computer and discovered a text file warning him that his network had been compromised, according to that document.

Further investigation turned up traces ‌of unusual activity ⁠on the server, the document said, adding that the activity "included combing through certain files pertaining to the Epstein investigation.”

You might want to keep that name Aaron Spivack in mind. He already is a central figure in this story, and his role might only get bigger. Reuters has more:

The timeline does not say which specific files were accessed, whether the hacker downloaded the data, or who the hacker was. Reuters could not establish what, if any, overlap the affected data had with the Epstein documents published earlier this year or the files that remain under wraps. 

Spivack, whose name appears elsewhere in the Epstein files, did not return repeated messages seeking comment. Reuters was unable to reach the man identified in the documents as Spivack’s lawyer, Richard J. Roberson, Jr. Seven FBI ​agents identified in the documents as being involved ​in the investigation into the incident did ⁠not return messages.

Spivack already appears to be taking a defensive posture to questions about the data breach, Satter reports:

In his statement to FBI investigators examining whether he was responsible for the breach, Spivack said he was being made "a scapegoat for the intrusion" and that conflicting bureau policies and faulty guidance around information technology were to blame. Reuters could not establish the result ​of the bureau's internal investigation.

The person familiar with the breach said the intrusion was carried out by a foreign hacker who did not appear ​to realize they had penetrated ⁠a law enforcement server. The hacker expressed disgust at the presence of child abuse images on the device and left a message threatening to turn its owner over to the FBI, the person said.

The source said bureau officials defused the situation by convincing the hacker that they actually were the FBI, in part by having the hacker join a video chat where they flashed their law enforcement credentials in front ⁠of a web ​camera.

Reuters could not determine - and the source said they did not know - who the hacker was, what country they ​were operating from, what they did with the material accessed, or whether any effort was made to identify or punish them for breaking into the FBI’s server.

Many of the Justice Department's documents have been heavily redacted and others have been kept ​secret altogether despite a law mandating their full release last year. The Trump administration says it is withholding material that could compromise victims’ identities or jeopardize ongoing investigations. 

This is a classic example of a story that raises more questions than it answers. But the number of press accounts on the hack is growing, and we intend to be in the middle of the effort to shine light on the latest unsavory chapter in the Epstein-Trump saga. We invite you to stay tuned.