MAGA Rep Gives Scummiest Defense of Trump’s Friendship With Epstein

There’s nothing wrong with being friends with child sex traffickers, according to Representative Tim Burchett.

Speaking with Fox News on Thursday, the Tennessee Republican tried to brush off Donald Trump’s reportedly cozy relationship with notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein by offering his own slimy admission.

“They knew each other, they ran in the same circles,” Burchett told the network. “It’s just like me, I know a lot of dirtbags myself.”

Trump’s allies have been working overtime to explain away the MAGA leader’s various ties to Epstein, as pressure mounts within his base to make public the records pertaining to the government investigation into Epstein and his sex-trafficking empire.

Trump has a well-documented history with the New York financier. Prior to his death, Epstein described himself as one of Trump’s “closest friends.” The socialites were named and photographed together several times, Trump allegedly penned a salacious letter to Epstein for the pedophile’s 50th birthday, the real estate mogul reportedly flew on Epstein’s jets between Palm Beach and New York at least seven times, and the first time that Trump slept with his now-wife Melania was reportedly aboard Epstein’s plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

In a 2002 New York magazine profile of Epstein, Trump said he knew Epstein for 15 years and referred to him as a “terrific guy.”

“It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” Trump said at the time.

Earlier this month, Burchett offered more convenient cover for the Trump administration after the Justice Department directly contradicted its leader, Attorney General Pam Bondi, on the existence of Epstein’s supposed “client list.” Speaking with NewsNation, Burchett said that he believed the client list was “destroyed” by the Biden administration and no longer existed.

When pressed why Bondi would not have said so if that was the case, Burchett responded that it was because “she doesn’t have any proof of it.”

Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin just admitted that congressional Republicans are voting against efforts to release the Epstein files in full because they’re trying to give President Trump “cover.”

On Thursday, Mullin and Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego each put forth a resolution on the Epstein files that they claimed was transparent. While Gallego called for the DOJ to release all files in full without caveat, Mullin called on the department to release “all credible information” related specifically to Epstein’s sealed legal proceedings. 

“I’m sure this would be handled just like any other thing [the Democrats] have tried to go after like the baseless impeachments. Or the bases—baseless special counsels. Or the unbelievable amount of charges they tried to file against the president,” Mullin said while objecting to Gallego’s resolution. “I’m sure this would be handled the exact same way. What we’re simply wanting to do here, is give [Trump] cover.”

What exactly do Trump and his administration need cover for? And what is the current GOP obsession with disqualifying Democrats’ calls for an investigation into Epstein on the grounds that former President Biden didn’t do it? That is a weak, lazy argument. Trump was also a former president, and Epstein killed himself during his first term.  

Mullin dismissed Gallego’s resolution on the basis of it being political theater. But it remains unclear just what about it is so theatrical. Gallego’s resolution attempted to get answers on a case that the Republican Party has absolutely bungled. Trump and his Cabinet broke a massive promise on these files, and it’s no wonder his base is angry. But Mullin is using technicalities and old excuses to prolong the process and provide cover for his dear leader. 

“All of us want transparency. We want to know actually what happened, the American people want to know what’s happened, but what [Senator Gallego’s] resolution does, is it actually is a blurred line between the separation of powers,” Mullin said. “When we start dictating to the Department of Justice what they can and can’t do, there’s a clear separation of power. We’re the legislative branch. That’s what we do. We make laws. We can’t dictate other branches on what they must and how they must do their job.…  A.G. Bondi, and the president has both already called on the judges to release this information. 

“What my resolution is simply saying, is we agree with the president, we agree with A.G. Bondi, on the judges and calling upon the judges to release it,” Mullins concluded. 

Gallego responded. 

“Let me explain to the American people what just happened. My colleague from Oklahoma refused to join me in calling on the DOJ to release all the Epstein files. Instead he offered his own resolution calling on the courts to unseal the records. When I asked if we did both, which I am asking to do both—I wanna call for transparency, and of course we could ask the Justice Department and the courts—he’s also gonna object.” 

This same conflict occurred a week ago, when Mullin also chalked Gallego’s efforts up to theater. 

In an apparent effort to get out ahead of Ghislaine Maxwell’s testimony, Donald Trump’s media allies have decided to saddle up beside the prolific sex trafficker.

The Justice Department is reportedly meeting with Maxwell on Thursday and Friday, ahead of her scheduled deposition with the House Oversight Committee on August 11. The interviews follow weeks of mounting pressure on Trump from his base, who have clamored for more transparency regarding the Epstein files after the Justice Department contradicted prior statements from Attorney General Pam Bondi on the existence of Jeffrey Epstein’s supposed client list.

Offering Maxwell as fodder to Trump’s hungry followers is a fascinating carrot-and-stick option to alleviate some of that tension, but convincing her to talk would almost certainly require some kind of deal—an option that pro-Trump conservative media networks started to imagine this week.

On Monday, Newsmax host Greg Kelly had already started to dabble in the new media line, suggesting on air that Maxwell didn’t deserve her 20-year prison sentence and openly embracing the idea that the Epstein associate could be wrongly convicted.

“And then he’s got that girlfriend, Ghislaine—Ghislaine Maxwell,” Kelly said. “Right? She’s in jail right now for, like, 40 years or something crazy.” Maxwell is eligible for release in July 2037.

“And maybe she deserves it. Maybe she doesn’t. Again, not a very popular thing, but we’ll take a look,” Kelly told his viewers, even questioning if the child sex abuser had been legally tried in court. (She was.)

“She just might be a victim. She just might be,” Kelly said.

“How do you defend yourself?” he continued. “This is in the height of #MeToo. Does that sound right? Does that sound—maybe it’s legal.”

The 56-year-old former Fox & Friends co-host, who was investigated in 2012 on his own rape charges, also aired a clip of former Epstein attorney Alan Dershowitz, who claimed that Maxwell “shouldn’t be” behind bars.

“She is really serving Jeffrey Epstein’s sentence after he committed suicide,” Dershowitz said. “There was no one else to prosecute … so they went after her, and they sentenced her to a sentence that would have been appropriate for Epstein but not at all appropriate for her.”

Maxwell was sentenced in 2022 for playing an active role in Epstein’s crimes, identifying and grooming vulnerable young women while normalizing their abuse as Epstein’s longtime girlfriend and associate.

“She deserves to be out,” Dershowitz said, which Kelly repeated to his viewers.

But Kelly wasn’t the only conservative personality who had bought into the unsavory angle. Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk—who capitulated to Trump last week when the MAGA leader ordered Kirk to stop discussing the matter as it riled his base—claimed that deposing Maxwell was “definitely” something that is “worthy of praise” and “encouragement.”

“Maybe she wants immunity, maybe she wants some sort of protection, I don’t know,” Charlie Kirk said on his show Tuesday. “We just want the truth.… Some people say, ‘Can we trust Ghislaine Maxwell?’ Probably, but also probably not.”

But not everyone on the right has bought in. Laura Loomer claimed last week that it wouldn’t be long “before some lobbyists try to cook up a possible pardon campaign” for the imprisoned sex offender. And Whitney Webb similarly warned that the Trump administration’s renewed interest in Maxwell was suspicious, claiming that scapegoating the Epstein associate would be the perfect way “to both avoid releasing the bulk of Epstein documents still held by the government and still seem like they are pursuing ‘justice’ in the case.”

“This could also pave the way for the ‘Pardon Ghislaine’ movement,” Webb, a prominent conspiracy theorist, wrote on X Tuesday, theorizing that Maxwell would only unveil the names she’s instructed to so that she doesn’t end up like Epstein.

Meanwhile, Trump was almost undoubtedly in Epstein’s universe. On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Justice Department had notified Trump in May that his name appeared several times in the Epstein files.

Prior to his death, Epstein described himself as one of Trump’s “closest friends.” The socialites were named and photographed together several times, Trump allegedly penned a salacious letter to Epstein for the pedophile’s 50th birthday, the real estate mogul reportedly flew on Epstein’s jets between Palm Beach and New York at least seven times, and the first time that Trump slept with his now-wife Melania was reportedly aboard Epstein’s plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

In a 2002 New York magazine profile of Epstein, Trump said he had known Epstein for 15 years and referred to him as a “terrific guy.”

“It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” Trump said at the time.

South Park’s latest episode parodied Donald Trump as a vain, thin-skinned bully. In a splenetic statement responding to the portrayal, the White House did nothing to dispel that description.

White House assistant press secretary Taylor Rogers on Thursday bashed the show and the political left in statements to Entertainment Weekly and other outlets.

“The Left’s hypocrisy truly has no end—for years, they have come after South Park for what they labeled as ‘offense’ content, but suddenly they are praising the show,” Rogers wrote. “Just like the creators of South Park, the Left has no authentic or original content, which is why their popularity continues to hit record lows. This show hasn’t been relevant for over 20 years and is hanging on by a thread with uninspired ideas in a desperate attempt for attention.”

The offending cartoon episode ridiculed Trump’s personality, as well as his failures and iniquities since taking office. Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone also took aim at the show’s own parent company, Paramount, for its two capitulations to Trump: canceling The Late Show With Stephen Colbert and settling with Trump over 60 Minutes’s editing of its 2024 interview with Kamala Harris.

Stone and Parker also delivered some lower blows, depicting Trump with a “teeny-tiny” penis and portraying the president literally in bed with Satan (a recurring character on the show).

“President Trump has delivered on more promises in just six months than any other president in our country’s history—and no fourth-rate show can derail President Trump’s hot streak,” Rogers’s statement continued.

But, as the Trump administration has bungled the case of notorious sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein (another topic South Park parodied in its episode), Trump’s supposed “hot streak” already seems thoroughly derailed.

On Thursday, The Wall Street Journal revealed that Trump’s Justice Department in May informed the president that his name appears repeatedly in the Epstein files. (After that notice, the DOJ announced it would not release additional files and Trump deemed the case a “hoax,” deriding his supporters who remain interested in it.)

This is to say Trump’s White House already has much on its plate. But it’s apparently always willing to defend the ill-humored president’s honor at the drop of a hat, deepening the impression that he can’t take mockery in stride.

If you thought Tulsi Gabbard’s claims that Hillary Clinton was taking a “daily regimen of heavy tranquilizers” while she was secretary of state sounded a little dubious, you’d be right.

The national intelligence director parroted the conclusions of Russian spies at a White House press briefing Wednesday, saying that Moscow had seen evidence of Clinton’s “psycho-emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness.”

But what Gabbard didn’t seem to remember was that these same documents were reviewed and debunked by the FBI years ago, as pointed out Thursday by independent journalist Marcy Wheeler.

In 2018, the Department of Justice released the results of an FBI investigation into Clinton’s leaked emails and other related Russian intelligence reports that they had obtained. Parts of that report had remained classified until this month.

The FBI analysis finds that much of the Russian intelligence the bureau looked at was “objectively false,” and they never found the stolen documents on which the Russians’ conclusions were based. The 2018 report even says that it’s not clear “if such communications in fact existed.”

In Wednesday’s press conference, Gabbard quoted a different report from 2020—one conducted by the Republican-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that analyzed, in part, the DOJ’s 2018 report to assess the “manufactured Russia hoax.”

The House committee report plucked details from the Russian intelligence without acknowledging the context that the DOJ had already discovered: that what the Russian spies had written was just not true.

Alongside conspiracy theories about Clinton’s temperament and reliance on tranquilizers, Gabbard also said the report’s findings provided proof that former President Barack Obama had attempted a “coup” by alleging Russian interference in the 2016 election—interference that’s been verified by multiple other investigations, including one by then-Senator and fellow MAGA Republican Marco Rubio in 2020.

Obama’s office called the allegations “bizarre.”

Whether Gabbard’s uncritical repetition of Russian intelligence is a continuation of her sympathetic attitude toward Russia that members of her own party have described as “traitorous,” or just an attempt to distract from the Epstein chaos, we may never know. But we do know who we can thank for clearing up this conspiracy: Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, whose tireless work to declassify the 2018 report for his own ends has, in this case, worked in Clinton’s favor.

U.S. automakers are reporting that Trump’s trade deal with Japan is favoring Japanese automakers over them in yet another reneging on the president’s so-called “America First” agenda.

Trump initially announced a 25 percent tariff on all foreign car imports in April. But on Tuesday, he announced a trade deal that lowered tariffs to 15 percent for Japanese automobiles and car parts. Meanwhile, U.S. car companies still have to deal with the 50 percent tariffs Trump placed on the steel and aluminum they need to actually build their product.

“We need to review all the details of the agreement, but this is a deal that will charge lower tariffs on Japanese autos with no U.S. content,” said Matt Blunt of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis.

The United Auto Workers union has stated it is “deeply angered” by Trump’s deal with Japan.

“For decades, Japanese automakers have exploited open access to the U.S. market while failing to do right by American workers. Now, instead of addressing the problem, this deal gives them another break—at the expense of the very companies and workers that built the American auto industry into the global standard for good jobs and world-class products,” the statement read.

“A better deal would have held Japanese automakers to the same standards U.S. workers have fought for at GM, Ford, and Stellantis.… If this becomes the blueprint for trade with Europe or South Korea, it will be a major missed opportunity,” the UAW statement continued. “We need trade deals that raise standards—not reward the race to the bottom. This deal does the opposite.”

The president is folding to the countries he tried to strong-arm a few months ago, all while hurting domestic industry in the process. Trump plainly prioritizing Japanese cars over American ones is also likely to hurt working-class people who supported him in states like Wisconsin and Michigan, where auto manufacturing plays a crucial role in the economy.

Terry Gene Bollea, better known as Hulk Hogan, has died at 71. Audio obtained by TMZ revealed that the retired professional wrestler suffered cardiac arrest at his Florida home on Thursday morning.

His manager Chris Volo confirmed to NBC Los Angeles that he died in his home surrounded by loved ones.

Hogan will be remembered for his flamboyance in the wrestling ring—but Mr. America also made notable forays into politics and forever altered the media landscape.

Who could forget Hogan’s speech at the 2024 Republican National Convention?

“When they took a shot at my hero, and they tried to kill the next president of the United States,” Hogan said, tearing off his outer layers to reveal a Trump-Vance tank top. “Enough was enough, and I said, let Trumpamania run wild, brother. Let Trumpamania rule again. Let Trumpamania make America great again!”

Wrapping up the rousing speech, Hogan referenced one of his WWE catchphrases: “Whatcha gonna do when Donald Trump and all the Trumpamaniacs run wild on you, brother?” Trump then blew the wrestler a kiss.

Also during the 2024 campaign, the wrestler threatened to bodyslam Democratic nominee Kamala Harris and made fun of her biracial identity, asking, “Is Kamala a chameleon? Is she Indian?”

And of course, back before the Trump era of American politics was in full swing, Hogan helped take down Gawker Media. After the publication leaked a sex tape of Hogan and a friend’s wife, the wrestler, bankrolled by ring-wing billionaire Peter Thiel, sued Gawker for $100 million in damages. The lawsuit eventually ended in a settlement that tanked the publication, in a significant blow to the free press.

Hogan’s Gawker suit led to the public disclosure of a recording of the wrestler on a racist tirade, in which he freely used the n-word.

“I guess we’re all a little racist,” Hogan said in the video, taped in 2007, and used the n-word to discuss his suspicions about his daughter’s sex life.

The scandal led the WWE to fire and distance themselves from Hogan, who called the remarks “the biggest mistake of my life” and was reinstated into the Hall of Fame in 2018.

This story has been updated.

It seems the city that rose up to protect its neighbors from Immigration and Customs Enforcement is similarly protective of its protesters—especially when they’re being tried on trumped-up charges.

Donald Trump’s federal prosecutor in Los Angeles is struggling to get indictments for protesters arrested in anti-ICE demonstrations earlier this summer, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Grand jury indictments only require probable cause that a crime has been committed—a lower bar than the standard for a criminal conviction. And even so, out of the 38 felony cases filed by Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, only seven have resulted in indictments.

In a recent case, the grand jury refused to indict a protester accused of attacking federal law enforcement officials. And Trump’s prosecutor was not happy: The Times described “screaming” that was “audible” from outside the grand jury room coming from Essayli.

According to legal experts interviewed by the Times, it’s incredibly rare that a grand jury wouldn’t indict in cases like these—which indicates weak cases brought by an attorney whose goal may be to promote Trump’s anti-immigration agenda rather than go after real crime.

Meghan Blanco, a former federal prosecutor in L.A., said the cases are “not deserving of prosecution.” Some may have even been based on faulty intel from ICE agents, the supposed victims of the alleged crimes.

Either “what is being alleged isn’t a federal crime, or it simply did not happen,” she told the Times.

In June, thousands of Angelenos took to the streets to protest ICE raids that saw the federal anti-immigration officers arresting people attending mandatory check-ins at a federal building and snatching people from Home Depot. Though the protests were largely peaceful, some escalated as ICE and the Los Angeles Police Department used tear gas and “less-lethal” munitions on the crowd.

Community organizer and protester Ron Gochez said at the time that it was “brutal violence” but that “what they didn’t think was going to happen was that the people would resist.”

To the Times, former prosecutor Carley Palmer said that Essayli’s struggle to get his cases through was “a strong indication that the priorities of the prosecutor’s office are out of sync with the priorities of the general community.” Yet again, the Trump administration has likely underestimated L.A. residents’ appetite for resistance.

On Wednesday night, Senator Ted Cruz cast cold water on MAGA’s burning zeal to lock up former President Barack Obama for treason.

Joining Fox News’s Laura Ingraham, Cruz acknowledged that the chances Obama is prosecuted for treason are slim to none.

In recent days, Donald Trump’s White House released evidence it claimed proves a “treasonous conspiracy” by the Obama administration to rig the 2016 and 2020 elections. The so-called evidence claims that Obama manufactured intelligence about Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election “to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.”

The president has seized on the purported findings, calling Obama guilty of “treason” and saying, “It’s time to go after people.” Over the weekend, the president took to Truth Social to share memes about imprisoning Obama. Obama’s office has dismissed the allegations, suggesting they’re “a weak attempt at distraction” from the Epstein scandal.

Dashing MAGA dreams of Obama behind bars, Ingraham on Wednesday said, “He’s not going to be prosecuted for treason. It’s not going to happen.”

Though Cruz floated other plans to go after Obama officials, he agreed. “He’s not going to be prosecuted in all likelihood for treason.”

“At all,” Ingraham added.

Cruz cited not the weakness of Gabbard’s madcap accusations—which he called “very important, troubling new information”—but the fact that the Supreme Court greatly expanded the powers of the presidency in its 2024 decision in Trump v. United States, which, per Justice Sonia Sotomayor, makes the individual holding the highest office a “king above the law.”

Cruz’s point is similar to one made on Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, which reminded Trump that the Supreme Court’s ruling applies to all presidents, not just to himself.

“Leave aside the narrow definition of ‘treason’ in the Constitution,” wrote the Journal’s editorial board. “Has Mr. Trump so quickly forgotten his victory at the Supreme Court in Trump v. U.S.? The Justices held 6-3 that a President can’t be prosecuted for exercising ‘core constitutional powers,’ and he has ‘presumptive immunity’ for ‘official acts.’ This surely includes Mr. Obama’s supervision of spy agencies.”

The Treasury Department wants you to Venmo it to help with the $36.65 trillion national debt.

On Wednesday, NPR’s Jack Corbett pointed out that there was an option on Pay.gov, the Treasury’s online payment platform, where Americans could go to throw their Venmo dollars at the gargantuan national debt. You can also use PayPal. The page is titled “Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt.”

The Treasury has run this program for years, and people have donated $67.3 million since 1996, a minuscule amount of the total debt. But the options to use Venmo or PayPal are new.

This is an absolute joke. Leaders on both sides of the aisle harangue Americans every day about the specter of the national debt while throwing billions of dollars at funding the military, funding Israel’s military, and funding Trump’s brutal immigration campaign. To even create this option when the majority of the country is working/middle class appears deeply unserious and tone deaf.

And even if people were feeling generous, it would be virtually impossible to make a dent in the debt given its current size and the fact that it is set to keep growing, and fast.