Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Shifting the Spotlight: Trump’s Epstein Strategy Echoes His 2016 Playbook

Opinion

Shifting the Spotlight: Trump’s Epstein Strategy Echoes His 2016 Playbook

A photograph of US President Donald Trump and convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is displayed after being unofficially installed in a bus shelter on July 17, 2025 in London, England.

(Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)

This morning, many of us awoke to a jarring juxtaposition of headlines: The Wall Street Journal published a column revealing that Jeffrey Epstein received a birthday album filled with bawdy letters—including one from President Donald Trump. And shortly thereafter, news broke that Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of grand jury transcripts related to Epstein, citing mounting political pressure and intensifying public scrutiny.

Late last night, Trump took to Truth Social, posting that he had requested Bondi release “any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,” framing the controversy as a “SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats.”


This strategic move came after years of speculation among Trump’s most ardent supporters about the Epstein case. Many in MAGA have propagated conspiracy theories suggesting Epstein was murdered in jail, not that he died by suicide. A distrust of government institutions has fed rumors of a secret client list buried by the Department of Justice, painted as evidence of a vast “deep state” cover-up.

With the Journal’s publication of Trump’s letter and growing demands from MAGA loyalists, Trump’s call to release the transcripts isn’t just reactive—it’s a calculated pivot.

To understand why, we need only revisit a similarly critical moment in 2016.

Just one month before Election Day, the infamous Access Hollywood tape surfaced: Trump, caught on a hot mic, made vulgar remarks about women and boasted of sexually aggressive behavior. Many believed it would be his political undoing. Yet after making an apology, Trump went on the offensive—calling his remarks “locker room banter,” invoking Bill Clinton’s alleged indiscretions, and positioning himself as the victim of a media hit job.

It was Trump’s masterful example of narrative control.

And today he’s doing it again.

As the Epstein discourse spirals out of control, Trump is attempting to seize control of the narrative.. On July 16th, he posted on Truth Social:

“The Jeffrey Epstein Hoax... My PAST supporters have bought into this bullshit, hook, line, and sinker... Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats’ work... I don’t want their support anymore!”

As Trump so often does, he reframed the scandal as yet another “Radical Left Democrat scam”—equating it to past controversies like the Steele Dossier, Hunter Biden’s laptop, and the Russia investigation. Speaking to reporters, he reiterated:

“It was a hoax. It’s all been a big hoax. It’s perpetrated by the Democrats and some stupid Republicans...”

This is the standard Trump strategy: deflect, reframe, and dominate the narrative. By casting himself as the target of a partisan witch hunt, using the scandal to reinforce MAGA loyalty and their perception of him not merely as a survivor, but as a fighter against corruption and the deep state.

As grand jury transcripts are released, the media will undoubtedly spotlight prominent names connected to Epstein. This will give Trump the perfect opportunity to switch from defense to offense. He’ll be in control, focusing on what suits his narrative, ignoring what doesn’t, and channeling the chaos into an all too familiar pattern: blaming the media, vilifying the Democrats, and claiming victimhood.

The strategy is not without risk, but when backed into a corner, Trump had little choice. However, as proven so often in the past, Trump's ability to dominate the news cycle, even amid chaos, has proven to be a winning strategy.

Seems implausible? Stay tuned.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards
a hand holding a deck of cards in front of a christmas tree
Photo by Luca Volpe on Unsplash

Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards

Donald Trump has repeatedly used the phrase “holding the cards” during his tenure as President to signal that he, or sometimes an opponent, has the upper hand. The metaphor projects bravado, leverage, and the inevitability of success or failure, depending on who claims control.

Unfortunately, Trump’s repeated invocation of “holding the cards” embodies a worldview where leverage, bluff, and dominance matter more than duty, morality, or responsibility. In contrast, leadership grounded in duty emphasizes ethical obligations to allies, citizens, and democratic principles—elements strikingly absent from this metaphor.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability
campbells chicken noodle soup can

Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability

Most customers carry a particular image of Campbell's Soup: the red-and-white label stacked on a pantry shelf, a touch of nostalgia, and the promise of a dependable bargain. It's food for snow days, tight budgets, and the middle of the week. For generations, the brand has positioned itself as a companion to working families, offering "good food" for everyday people. The company cultivated that trust so thoroughly that it became almost cliché.

Campbell's episode, now the subject of national headlines and an ongoing high-profile legal complaint, is troubling not only for its blunt language but for what it reveals about the hidden injuries that erode the social contract linking institutions to citizens, workers to workplaces, and brands to buyers. If the response ends with the usual PR maneuvers—rapid firings and the well-rehearsed "this does not reflect our values" statement. Then both the lesson and the opportunity for genuine reform by a company or individual are lost. To grasp what this controversy means for the broader corporate landscape, we first have to examine how leadership reveals its actual beliefs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

When ego replaces accountability in the presidency, democracy weakens. An analysis of how unchecked leadership erodes trust, institutions, and the rule of law.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

When Leaders Put Ego Above Accountability—Democracy At Risk

What has become of America’s presidency? Once a symbol of dignity and public service, the office now appears chaotic, ego‑driven, and consumed by spectacle over substance. When personal ambition replaces accountability, the consequences extend far beyond politics — they erode trust, weaken institutions, and threaten democracy itself.

When leaders place ego above accountability, democracy falters. Weak leaders seek to appear powerful. Strong leaders accept responsibility.

Keep ReadingShow less
Leaders Fear Accountability — Why?
Protesters hold signs outside a government building.
Photo by Leo_Visions on Unsplash

Leaders Fear Accountability — Why?

America is being damaged not by strong leaders abusing power, but by weak leaders avoiding responsibility. Their refusal to be accountable has become a threat to democracy itself. We are now governed by individuals who hold power but lack the character, courage, and integrity required to use it responsibly. And while everyday Americans are expected to follow rules, honor commitments, and face consequences, we have a Congress and a President who are shielded by privilege and immunity. We have leaders in Congress who lie, point fingers, and break ethics rules because they can get away with it. There is no accountability. Too many of our leaders operate as if ethics were optional.

Internal fighting among members of Congress has only deepened the dysfunction. Instead of holding one another accountable, lawmakers spend their energy attacking colleagues, blocking legislation, and protecting party leaders. Infighting reveals a failure to check themselves, leaving citizens with a government paralyzed by disputes rather than focused on solutions. When leaders cannot even enforce accountability within their own ranks, the entire system falters.

Keep ReadingShow less