Melania Trump Desperately Tries to Distance Herself From Epstein

On Thursday, Melania Trump tried to deny having any connections to Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes, but the internet quickly produced receipts.

The first lady said in prepared remarks at the White House that the first time she met the sex criminal was in 2000 at an event she and Donald Trump had attended together, and that she had no knowledge of his crimes at the time. She also denied being a witness to any of them.

“Numerous fake images and statements about Epstein and me have been percolating on social media for years now,” she said. “Be cautious about what you believe. These images and stories are completely false. I am not a witness or a named witness in connection with any of Epstein’s crimes.”

Melania also called on Congress to hold a public hearing for all of Epstein’s victims in her remarks, a surprising move given the allegations against her husband in the Epstein files.

Why would Melania Trump say all of this now, out of the blue? Some on social media are speculating that she is trying to get ahead of a major upcoming revelation connecting her to Epstein. In February, several unredacted emails were released from the government’s Epstein archive showing that Melania was in frequent contact with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime criminal associate.

Commentators on X quickly posted one of those emails on Thursday in which Melania compliments Maxwell, as well as an often-circulated photo of Donald, Melania, Epstein, and Maxwell together at a party.

Melania’s remarks will likely draw more attention to the Epstein files, which had been pushed out of the news cycle thanks to the war with Iran. One wonders what the president thinks about her remarks, and whether they are by design.

First lady Melania Trump on Thursday called on Congress to hold a public hearing for all the women victimized by sex predator Jeffrey Epstein—a surprising development given her husband’s proximity to Epstein and the allegations against him within the files.

“I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors, give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress with the power of sworn testimony,” she said. “Each and every woman should have her day to tell her story in public, if she wishes, and then her testimony should be permanently entered into the congressional record.”

The first lady made the statement during a televised White House announcement on Thursday, most of which she used to reject any rumors or assertions that she had any relationship with Epstein or his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

“I have never been friends with Epstein. Donald and I were invited to the same parties as Epstein from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach,” she said. “To be clear, I never had a relationship with Epstein or his accomplice, Maxwell.”

The Trump administration is fighting to make the executive branch even more secretive.

A 52-page memorandum from the Justice Department reveals that the agency is putting up a fight against the Presidential Records Act. The department’s Office of Legal Counsel argued on April 1 that the 1978 law, which was passed in direct response to the fallout of Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal, is actually “unconstitutional.”

The office further claimed that the congressionally passed act “exceeds” the legislative branch’s powers and “aggrandizes” Congress “at the expense of the constitutional independence and autonomy of the Executive.”

In doing this, the DOJ is trying to keep the president’s records private—rather than public, as mandated by the country’s representatives nearly 50 years ago.

The DOJ’s position already faces several legal challenges. Days after the memorandum was released, the nonpartisan watchdog organization American Oversight joined with the American Historical Association to sue a couple dozen figures within the Trump administration. In a 46-page legal complaint, the two nonprofits argued that the Oval Office was attempting to nullify and supersede the constitutional authorities of the other branches of government, and trod over the separation of powers.

“In the Administration’s view, the records of the official activities of the President and nearly 1,000 White House employees—generated using taxpayer funds, on government property, regarding official government business—belong to the President personally, and not to the American people,” the complaint reads. “Government for the people, by the people, and of the people this is not.”

Donald Trump has expressed little to no respect for the laws and regulations that bind him to public accountability. At the end of his first presidency, Trump allegedly broke seven laws by retaining hundreds of classified documents. He was charged with 37 felony counts in 2023 as a result, making him the first president to be criminally charged. Trump-appointed federal Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the charges the following year, arguing that special counsel Jack Smith, the man appointed to investigate and prosecute the case, had not been properly installed.

The president has also not shown any interest in offering the public an inside view into the maneuverings of his administration, even retroactively. Trump’s presidential library is expected to be a glass skyscraper, operating as more of a hotel rather than anything close to a facility dedicated to learning.

Renderings of the building posted to Trump’s Truth Social late last month included a red, white, and blue needle on top, a U.S. flag hanging down the side, and a gargantuan plane on the first floor that resembles the super-luxury jumbo jet Qatar gifted him last year.

Donald Trump’s solution to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continuing to bomb Lebanon, and thus threatening to upend the entire ceasefire with Iran, is to ask him to tone it down.

Trump spoke to Netanyahu on the phone Wednesday, a senior administration official told NBC News, and told him to pull back. Trump later told the network in an interview Thursday that Israel would be “scaling back” its attacks on Lebanon.

“I spoke with Bibi and he’s going to low-key it. I just think we have to be sort of a little more low-key,” Trump said.

What that means is anyone’s guess. Lebanon was supposed to be included in the 10-point ceasefire deal, according to Iran and mediator Pakistan. Netanyahu said Wednesday that he “insisted that the temporary ceasefire with Iran not include Hezbollah, and we continue to strike them forcefully,” and following more bombs on Thursday, claimed his government is ready to negotiate directly with the Lebanese government (but not till next week).

These negotiations, Al Jazeera reports, are the result of U.S. pressure. The Trump administration is requesting a pause on Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon to help negotiations with Iran. But Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Thursday that “the war will not be stopped,” even after Netanyahu’s announcement of negotiations with Lebanon.

Israeli strikes killed over 300 people in southern Lebanon Wednesday, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry, with over 1,000 wounded. At least seven people were killed in the southern Lebanese town of Abbassiyeh on Thursday. Democrats and leaders around the world have condemned Israel’s continued attacks on Lebanon. Is Trump really going to let Netanyahu just “low-key it” and wait to see what happens next?

A Democratic National Committee panel on Thursday killed a resolution condemning the “growing influence” of dark money groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC—even as an overwhelming majority of Democrat voters have an unfavorable view of the country that has committed genocide in Gaza, started a war in Iran, and continues to bomb civilians in Lebanon.

“The use of massive outside spending to support or oppose candidates based on their positions regarding international conflicts or foreign governments raises concerns about undue influence over democratic debate and policymaking, potentially constraining elected officials’ ability to represent the views of their constituents,” read the nonbinding resolution.

At least two potential 2028 Democratic nominees may have played a role in killing the resolution, with one DNC member telling Politico they received direct calls from the presidential hopefuls expressing concern about the resolution.

The DNC resolutions committee also punted on two other resolutions on recognizing a Palestinian state and conditioning military aid to Israel.

It’s clear that the Democratic establishment is not ready to let go of AIPAC, even as Israel’s genocide on Gaza and influence on American politics has become perhaps the defining progressive issue of this era. AIPAC wouldn’t be spending millions of dollars every year trying to oust progressive Democrats if that wasn’t the case. And while public opinion continues to shift sharply against it, party leadership continues to squirm and offer nonanswers when confronted with that reality.