White House Denies Epstein Accuser's Claims About Meeting With Trump
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The White House has denied President Donald Trump once met a Jeffrey Epstein accuser in the late convicted sex offender's offices three decades ago.
"This is recycled, old fake news of the highest order that was already peddled more than 6 years, concocted by Democrats and the liberal media just like they did with the Russiagate scandal, which was just proven today," White House communications director Steven Cheung told Newsweek on Monday.
"The President was never in his office," Cheung said, referring to Epstein. "The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep."
Why It Matters
Trump's ties to Epstein, the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide behind bars while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges in 2019, have come under fresh scrutiny as his administration faces pressure from some of the president's own supporters to release the evidence about the investigation into Epstein.
A firestorm followed the Justice Department's July 6 announcement that it would not release any more evidence about the sex trafficking investigation into Epstein. The department said in a two-page memo that there was no client list of elites who participated in Epstein's trafficking of underage girls.
Trump had promised to release files related to Epstein while on the campaign trail last year. But the administration's handling of the case has angered many Trump supporters who believed the files would reveal a cover-up in the case to protect Epstein's wealthy and powerful friends. The backlash intensified after the Wall Street Journal reported last week on a sexually suggestive note that it said Trump sent Epstein for his 50th birthday. Trump has sued the newspaper and called the article "false, malicious, and defamatory."
Meanwhile, some Democratic lawmakers are calling for the release of all Epstein files, suggesting that this has not been done to protect powerful or influential individuals.
Trump has said Attorney General Pam Bondi had not told him whether his name was in the Epstein files. He slammed those calling for the government to release more information as "troublemakers" as he requested the Justice Department to release grand jury testimony related to Epstein.
President Donald Trump delivers remarks to Republican senators during a dinner in the State Dining Room of the White House on July 18, 2025, in Washington, DC.
President Donald Trump delivers remarks to Republican senators during a dinner in the State Dining Room of the White House on July 18, 2025, in Washington, DC.What To Know
According to the New York Times, Maria Farmer's account of meeting Trump—which she previously described to the newspaper in 2019—is an indication of how Trump may have been named in the unreleased files related to the Epstein investigation.
She worked for Epstein in 1995 and 1996, initially to acquire art and later to oversee the comings and goings of girls and celebrities at the entrance of his townhouse on Manhattan's Upper East Side, the newspaper reported.
Farmer told the Times that she reported being sexually assaulted by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted on charges she helped Epstein lure girls to be sexually abused, in the summer of 1996.
At the time, she said she had urged authorities to take a look at the people around Epstein, including Trump. She said the same when the FBI interviewed her about Epstein in 2006.
She said she had no evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Epstein's associates, but mentioned Trump's name on both occasions because of his apparent closeness to Epstein and the encounter she had with Trump.
Farmer said that Epstein had unexpectedly summoned her to his Manhattan office late one night in 1995. She arrived wearing running shorts.
She said that Trump arrived, stood over her and stared at her bare legs, making her feel afraid. Then Epstein walked in, and she recalled, said to Trump: "No, no. She's not here for you."
She said the men left the room, and she overheard Trump saying he thought she was 16. She said she had no further interactions with Trump and did not see him engage in any inappropriate behavior with girls or young women.
What People Are Saying
Trump wrote on Truth Social on Saturday: "I have asked the Justice Department to release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval. With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request. It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!"
Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat, said on CNN's State of the Union on Sunday: "People have a reason that they want to know what's in there. They believe the president when he said there's stuff in there that people should see. Wall Street Journal. These are not bastions of liberalism or wild progressives that have come out and said the public have a right to know what is in these documents."
Representative Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican who cosponsored the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, said on ABC's The Week on Saturday that unsealing grand jury records is "a start."
Of the Epstein files, he said: "I want them released. But my warning is this, let's make sure that we're not releasing the names of some of these who—who were then children, now adults, that were abused by this dirtbag, Epstein. And let's make sure we don't release things that are—that have innocent names on them."
What's Next
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche requested the unsealing of transcripts from grand jury proceedings that resulted in indictments against Epstein and Maxwell.
But legal analysts—including former prosecutors from both liberal and conservative camps—have cautioned that the public is unlikely to find a "smoking gun" or sweeping narrative implicating a wider circle of powerful figures.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration will likely continue to face calls to release the government's files on the Epstein case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A look at details of the settlement between Columbia University and the Trump administration
A deal between Columbia University and the Trump administration calls for the Ivy League school to pay more than $220 million to resolve multiple federal investigations into alleged violations of federal antidiscrimination laws. The agreement announced Wednesday clears the way for the school to keep billions of dollars in federal research money, including more than $400 million in grants canceled earlier this year. In return, the deal calls for a number of reforms in areas such as admissions, campus protests policies and its curriculum, including a number of changes the school agreed to previously in March. It is a document President Donald Trump's administration is calling a road map for settlements with other colleges accused of not doing enough to address campus antisemitism. Columbia University's acting president, Claire Shipman, said it protects the school's values and autonomy. Here's what's in the settlement: Financial payout The university will pay the federal government $200 million over three years. It will also pay $21 million to settle alleged civil rights violations against Jewish employees that occurred following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel. A pledge to end diversity programs The university agreed to end programs 'that promote unlawful efforts to achieve race-based outcomes, quotes, diversity targets or similar efforts.' Columbia, as part of the agreement, must also issue regular reports to an independent monitor assuring that its programs 'do not promote unlawful DEI goals.' The agreement pushes Columbia to limit the consideration of race even beyond the Supreme Court's 2023 decision ending affirmative action. That decision left open the possibility that universities could consider an applicant's discussion of how their race affected their life, including in college application essays. The agreement says: 'Columbia may not use personal statements, diversity narratives, or any applicant reference to racial identity as a means to introduce or justify discrimination.' Faculty and curriculum changes Columbia agreed to review its Middle East curriculum and appoint new faculty to its Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies who will 'contribute to a robust and intellectually diverse academic environment.' To further support Jewish students on campus, the agreement calls for a new administrator to serve as a liaison on antisemitism issues. Reporting on international students Columbia University agreed to new vetting for prospective international students. The agreement calls for introducing 'questions designed to elicit their reasons for wishing to study in the United States' and establishes processes to make sure all students are committed to 'civil discourse.' The university also promised to provide the government with information, upon request, of disciplinary actions involving student-visa holders resulting in expulsions or suspensions. 'In several instances, the agreement codifies other practices or policies already in existence, or reviews already underway. We must always comply with government regulations regarding the international student visa program, for example,' Shipman said. The agreement says Columbia also will 'examine its business model and take steps to decrease financial dependence on international student enrollment.' International students make up about 40% of the enrollment at Columbia. Abiding Trump's interpretation on sex discrimination The agreement requires full compliance with the administration's interpretation of Title IX, the federal law barring sex discrimination in education. Trump officials have used the law to force the removal of transgender athletes from women's sports. Campus protest policies The deal calls for Columbia to abide restrictions it agreed to on campus protests, including a ban on face coverings used to conceal demonstrators' identity. It says protests inside academic buildings are not acceptable under the university's code of conduct. ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
14 minutes ago
Trump signs bill to cancel $9 billion in foreign aid, public broadcasting funding
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump signed a bill Thursday canceling about $9 billion that had been approved for public broadcasting and foreign aid as Republicans look to lock in cuts to programs targeted by the White House's Department of Government Efficiency. The bulk of the spending being clawed back is for foreign assistance programs. About $1.1 billion was destined for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which finances NPR and PBS, though most of that money is distributed to more than 1,500 local public radio and television stations around the country. The White House had billed the legislation as a test case for Congress and said more such rescission packages would be on the way. Some Republicans were uncomfortable with the cuts, yet supported them anyway, wary of crossing Trump or upsetting his agenda. Democrats unanimously rejected the cuts but were powerless to stop them. The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense. Conservatives particularly directed their ire at NPR and PBS. Lawmakers with large rural constituencies voiced grave concern about what the cuts to public broadcasting could mean for some local public stations in their state. Some stations will have to close, they warned. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said the stations are 'not just your news — it is your tsunami alert, it is your landslide alert, it is your volcano alert.' On the foreign aid cuts, the White House argued that they would incentivize other nations to step up and do more to respond to humanitarian crises and that the rescissions best served the American taxpayer. Democrats argued that the Republican administration's animus toward foreign aid programs would hurt America's standing in the world and create a vacuum for China to fill. They also expressed concerns that the cuts would have deadly consequences for many of the world's most impoverished people. 'With these cuts, we will cause death, spread disease and deepen starvation across the planet,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii.
New York Times
38 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Gen Z New Yorkers Selling Their Parents on Mamdani
Zohran Mamdani's improbable ascent has been widely understood as a generational pivot, a resonant sign of the power of the youth vote when youth itself gets politically turned on. Even as so much about his claim to the Democratic nomination in New York City's mayoral race has undergone intense scrutiny, one aspect remains underplayed — that the 33-year-old candidate may have won not because of the city's demographics but rather despite them. Mr. Mamdani clearly energized young voters. But in statistical terms, the young do not dominate. There are roughly a half-million more New Yorkers over 50 than those between the ages of 20 and 39. The city's population, like its infrastructure, is simply getting older and older. During the past quarter-century the number of New Yorkers 65 and over increased by 53 percent, to 1.43 million. Since 2020 — and even with the devastations of a pandemic that left older people especially vulnerable — this age cohort has been the only one to grow. But the lack of available exit polling makes it impossible to know what percent of older Democratic voters actually ranked Mr. Mamdani in first place (or at all). But polling data released the day before the primary showed Mr. Cuomo's lead on him shrinking among voters over 60. In the weeks both before the June 24 primary and since, I have talked to many people in middle age and well beyond it about the mayoral race, about the candidate (or candidates) they supported and, in instances in which they changed their minds, what prompted their shifts in allegiance or interest. The discussions inevitably came around to Mr. Mamdani, and boomer and Gen X parents routinely told me that even if they were not drawn to him initially — questioning his lack of experience and policies, some of which struck them as entirely unfeasible or even absurd — they had been moved by their children's enthusiasm for him. One friend, a longtime Andrew Cuomo supporter, was recently asked by her 17-year-old son whether she would vote for the former governor in the general election, and she said she would not. As much as she believed he would make a very good mayor, the 'kids,' and her own in particular, had spoken. The future, she felt, belonged to them. Others view the future in a more proprietary fashion. Earlier this week, someone writing under the handle Caitlin on X described an unpleasant encounter she had just had with a Mamdani antagonist. 'A woman spent the entirety of my parents' party last night insulting me to every guest because I support Zohran,' she offered. 'Thanks to her, my parents, who had Cuomo prayer candles, just sent $1,000 to @ZohranKMamdani.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
