Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Deaths at Delaney Hall

Immigration officials have used a new reporting loophole to conceal the deaths of at least two individuals who were abruptly released from custody amidst medical emergencies.

Jose Chajon-Raxon was booked into the privately-run Delaney Hall in New Jersey on July 18 and began experiencing recurring seizures shortly after his arrest. It wasn’t until four days later that he was released and sent to the hospital, where he died shortly after his arrival. Less than two weeks later, Edwin Lopez-Cornejo experienced a similar fate. After being denied prescription medication for over a month, he experienced a medical emergency, was quickly released from custody, and died.

Neither family was alerted that their relative had been transferred until after their death. In both cases, ICE did not file a report and refused for days to confirm what had happened, only relenting after sustained pressure from activists, lawmakers, and the families of Chajon-Raxon and Lopez-Cornejo. Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), a vocal critic of the facility who successfully conducted an oversight visit in December, said the private prison company that runs Delaney Hall does not provide adequate onsite medical care for those in detention.

“GEO Group does in-house for most of their medical services. We’ve gone many times and we’re like, ‘Hey, where’s the physician? Not here,’” McIver told COURIER. “They’ll have an RN there, or maybe some assistants on staff, but never 24/7 a physician — which is problematic in the first place. We’re like, ‘Give us answers on how a person intakes. How do you make sure people are getting their medicine? What is the routine?’ And it’s never consistent, never transparent.”

The process has become even less transparent since June, when ICE ended a policy requiring the department to report to Congress the death of any individual who died within 30 days of being detained. With the policy gone, detention staff are no longer required to report a death as long as the individual is released before they die, as was the case with Lopez-Cornejo, Chajon-Raxon, and an unknown number of others who may have been released while experiencing medical emergencies.

@couriernewsroomActivists say private contractors at Delaney Hall are using a loophole called "discretionary release" to dump severely ill detainees — like a man actively having seizure — outside of the facility. Because he technically wasn't in their custody when he passed away, the facility doesn't have to report his death to anyone. In 2025 alone, 33 people died in ICE custody. This year, there have already been at least 26 deaths. Under the Trump administration, changed reporting rules and restricted oversight have made it easier than ever for private contractors to hide the true toll of their neglect.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

The change is part of an ongoing effort by the Trump administration to restrict what the public knows about conditions in immigration detention. McIver had attempted to conduct an oversight visit for months before she finally gained access. DHS has since changed the rules around when a member of Congress can conduct an inspection, how long they can stay, who they can talk to, and how much notice they’re required to give before being granted access.

The Trump administration has also attempted to make an example of McIver in an effort to dissuade her colleagues from conducting similar visits. In May 2025, Delaney Hall security initially denied McIver access to the facility while she was attempting to conduct a routine oversight visit. She was eventually allowed in, but was later charged by the DOJ with a three-count indictment for assaulting federal officers. The case is ongoing, and McIver says the legal threats against her have only strengthened her resolve.

“It’s all a part of their agenda — the Trump administration’s agenda. Cruelty is the point of everything that they do,” said McIver. “They tried to stop me last May. But since then — with me even returning, and going back multiple times — there’s always a new rule. There’s always something. ‘Oh, you can’t talk to these people, you can’t do this, you can’t do that.’ Because they’re literally trying to cover up the cruelty.”

In 2025, 33 people that we know of died in ICE custody — more than during the entire Biden administration. This year, there have been 26, but thanks to the new reporting rules, the only reason the public knows about the two most recent deaths at Delaney Hall is that members of Congress like McIver, activists, and family members of those taken by ICE are there every day, pushing for answers.

Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated Rep. McIver was arrested. While she was charged, the congresswoman was never under arrest.

Share

One year in: Oversight Chair eyes criminal referrals in Epstein probe

A congressional investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network is expected to submit criminal referrals to prosecutors by the end of the year, as Republicans face mounting pressure from voters to act before the midterm elections.

Leaders from both parties on the House Oversight Committee have now committed to pursuing criminal charges based on discoveries made in its ongoing investigation into Epstein. Ranking member Rep Summer Lee (D-PA) told COURIER in April that perjury charges should be brought against former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Darren Indyke, Epstein’s former attorney, for lying to the committee. Rep. James Comer (R-KY) told NOTUS he expects to send referrals to the Justice Department before his term as chair ends in December.

Below The Belt(way) is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

“I fully expect criminal referrals, and some things — we’ve found enough that I believe the Department of Justice should look into certain people, “Comer said. “We’re going to do everything we can to hold anyone accountable who’s still alive.”

Since conducting its first deposition with former Attorney General William Barr in August 2025, the committee has questioned a number of current and former government officials, as well as Epstein’s friends, staff, clients, and prison guard. It has privately spoken with witnesses and survivors, conducted depositions and hearings in New York, Ohio, and Florida, and released thousands of previously unseen documents obtained from Epstein’s estate.

Many of those brought in by the committee were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation into Epstein, despite the department compiling more than 6 million records on the convicted sex criminal’s multibillion-dollar international human trafficking empire.

Democrats on the committee have expressed frustration over the way Comer has handled the investigation, opting for voluntary interviews rather than mandatory depositions under oath and on camera. While the approach has yielded results, Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) believes it has also produced disingenuous testimony and would like to hold future hearings in public, backed by the legal weight of congressional subpoenas.

“That’s how every single one of these should be: under oath in a public hearing in front of the American people, videotaped,” Ansari said. “We need full transparency for the survivors as well as for the American public.This cover-up has to end immediately.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who would become committee chair next year should Democrats win a majority in the House, already has committee staff “working on preparation, letters, research.” He plans to issue a slew of subpoenas and hold public hearings to expose what he has described as one of the most extensive government cover-ups in the history of the United States. At the top of Garcia’s subpoena list are First Lady Melania Trump, who has been accused of being entangled in Epstein’s trafficking network, and President Donald Trump, a longtime friend of Epstein who is believed to be impeding the committee’s investigation behind the scenes.

And voters may soon give him the chance to do so. Comer has been one of the few — and often only — Republicans on the committee to participate in the investigation, and the campaign strategies of Democrats in swing states suggest the electorate still hasn’t forgiven Republicans for their resistance to releasing the Epstein Files. That, coupled with the Trump administration’s decision to close its criminal investigation into Epstein despite having only one conviction under its belt, have made accountability for Epstein’s enablers a focal point of Democratic attack ads in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

For Comer, who is expected to easily win reelection, taking action on Epstein could have consequences that extend well beyond the midterms. The five-term Republican is expected to run for Congress next year, where he could square off against Rep. Thomas Massie, known for spearheading the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Criminal prosecutions stemming from the investigation before Comer’s term-limited tenure as committee chair ends could help put him on equal footing with Massie, whereas failing to do so could put him at a severe disadvantage.

While criminal referrals now seem likely no matter which party is in control, what would happen with those recommendations remains unknown. US Attorney General Todd Blanche has repeatedly shown a softer side for Epstein’s co-conspirators than he has for his victims. Last August, he moved Epstein accomplice and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a low-security prison, and last month refused to follow leads given to him during a meeting with survivors.

It could take significant pressure from Congress to force Blanche’s hand — pressure both Comer and Garcia have promised to apply if necessary.

Share

Subscribe now

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

A congressional investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network is expected to submit criminal referrals to prosecutors by the end of the year, as Republicans face mounting pressure from voters to act before the midterm elections.

Leaders from both parties on the House Oversight Committee have now committed to pursuing criminal charges based on discoveries made in its ongoing investigation into Epstein. Ranking member Rep Summer Lee (D-PA) told COURIER in April that perjury charges should be brought against former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Darren Indyke, Epstein’s former attorney, for lying to the committee. Rep. James Comer (R-KY) told NOTUS he expects to send referrals to the Justice Department before his term as chair ends in December.

“I fully expect criminal referrals, and some things — we’ve found enough that I believe the Department of Justice should look into certain people, “Comer said. “We’re going to do everything we can to hold anyone accountable who’s still alive.”

Since conducting its first deposition with former Attorney General William Barr in August 2025, the committee has questioned a number of current and former government officials, as well as Epstein’s friends, staff, clients, and prison guard. It has privately spoken with witnesses and survivors, conducted depositions and hearings in New York, Ohio, and Florida, and released thousands of previously unseen documents obtained from Epstein’s estate.

Many of those brought in by the committee were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation into Epstein, despite the department compiling more than 6 million records on the convicted sex criminal’s multibillion-dollar international human trafficking empire.

Democrats on the committee have expressed frustration over the way Comer has handled the investigation, opting for voluntary interviews rather than mandatory depositions under oath and on camera. While the approach has yielded results, Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) believes it has also produced disingenuous testimony and would like to hold future hearings in public, backed by the legal weight of congressional subpoenas.

“That’s how every single one of these should be: under oath in a public hearing in front of the American people, videotaped,” Ansari said. “We need full transparency for the survivors as well as for the American public.This cover-up has to end immediately.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who would become committee chair next year should Democrats win a majority in the House, already has committee staff “working on preparation, letters, research.” He plans to issue a slew of subpoenas and hold public hearings to expose what he has described as one of the most extensive government cover-ups in the history of the United States. At the top of Garcia’s subpoena list are First Lady Melania Trump, who has been accused of being entangled in Epstein’s trafficking network, and President Donald Trump, a longtime friend of Epstein who is believed to be impeding the committee’s investigation behind the scenes.

And voters may soon give him the chance to do so. Comer has been one of the few — and often only — Republicans on the committee to participate in the investigation, and the campaign strategies of Democrats in swing states suggest the electorate still hasn’t forgiven Republicans for their resistance to releasing the Epstein Files. That, coupled with the Trump administration’s decision to close its criminal investigation into Epstein despite having only one conviction under its belt, have made accountability for Epstein’s enablers a focal point of Democratic attack ads in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

For Comer, who is expected to easily win reelection, taking action on Epstein could have consequences that extend well beyond the midterms. The five-term Republican is expected to run for Congress next year, where he could square off against Rep. Thomas Massie, known for spearheading the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Criminal prosecutions stemming from the investigation before Comer’s term-limited tenure as committee chair ends could help put him on equal footing with Massie, whereas failing to do so could put him at a severe disadvantage.

While criminal referrals now seem likely no matter which party is in control, what would happen with those recommendations remains unknown. US Attorney General Todd Blanche has repeatedly shown a softer side for Epstein’s co-conspirators than he has for his victims. Last August, he moved Epstein accomplice and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a low-security prison, and last month refused to follow leads given to him during a meeting with survivors.

It could take significant pressure from Congress to force Blanche’s hand — pressure both Comer and Garcia have promised to apply if necessary.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

A court filing this week revealed a major factor in the president’s adamancy that he and his primary business be given immunity from IRS audits: money laundering.

President Donald Trump sued Capital One last year over the financial institution’s decision in 2021 to close nearly 400 accounts connected to the president and his businesses. Trump’s lawyers argued the accounts were closed due to “political discrimination” following his impeachment for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Capital One, however, says the decision had nothing to do with politics and instead stemmed from concerns the accounts were being used to launder money.

“The closures were the result of months of analysis and a careful review by Capital One’s [anti-money laundering] team in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance,” the court filing states. “Plaintiffs cannot meaningfully criticize the robust process undertaken by Capital One’s [anti-money laundering] professionals with decades of law enforcement experience in deciding to close the accounts.”

The findings of Capital One’s internal investigation have not been made public, and it’s unknown whether the suspicious activity was reported to the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). No federal investigation is currently possible, however, because acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has granted Trump tax immunity for any financial crimes committed before May 2026.

In a settlement agreement between Trump and his administration, Blanche “forever barred” the federal government from pursuing any legal claims against Trump, his two eldest sons, or the Trump Organization that would involve any of their tax returns. Without those records, it would be impossible to investigate alleged crimes reported by Capital One or any other financial institution. Blanche’s order also saved Trump from being required to pay back at least $100 million in back taxes.

It’s unclear if Blanche’s prohibition on auditing Trump will remain in effect after the president’s term ends, or if it can legally be in effect at all. A federal judge in July declared Blanche’s agreement illegal, and US Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent seeking verification that it had not gone into effect.

“The Department of Justice lacks the authority to declare in a settlement that the IRS will drop audits unrelated to the lawsuit being settled. Federal law also bars the President and White House officials from requesting that the IRS end audits into particular taxpayers,” the letter states. “The IRS should not and cannot implement illegal orders.”

What’s less clear is whether FinCEN would take any action to investigate Trump’s alleged money laundering, even if it was reported by Capital One. The agency’s history of prosecuting blatant criminal activity is abysmal, at best. Convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein made over $1.8 billion in suspicious money transfers over the course of 20 years and was never investigated. A 2020 whistleblower revealed that FinCEN and major financial institutions routinely ignore illegal transactions that fund organized crime, terror networks, and human and drug trafficking because of the profit that’s generated from these transactions.

Despite that record, Trump is one of the few financial criminals FinCEN has successfully prosecuted — on multiple occasions. The first instance was in 1998, when Trump Taj Mahal was fined nearly $500,000 for consistently failing to file currency transaction reports on its customers. Casinos are required to keep a record of anyone who makes transactions larger than $5,000. Without that information, it’s impossible to trace money flowing in and out of casinos, making them a premiere destination for money laundering.

In one month alone, “Trump Taj Mahal failed to file 30 CTRs totaling $500,000, stemming from the Casino’s failure to adequately monitor and report when a patron inserts more than $10,000 into a slot machine in a given day.”

Trump’s casino continued ignoring anti-money laundering laws and was fined another $10 million in 2015. Investigators found that it had allowed millions of dollars in transactions to go untraced for at least a decade, and had “willfully violated the program, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act,” even after being warned several times.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

New Mexico releases first report on Epstein’s Zorro Ranch

On Wednesday, a commission established by the New Mexico Legislature to investigate crimes committed at Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch released its initial findings and issued subpoenas to three state agencies and a local spa where Epstein preyed on women.

The Survivors’ Truth Commission’s brief meeting included an overview of its 110-page interim report led by state Rep. Andrea Romero, as well as testimony from Rachel Benavidez, one of several massage therapists Epstein hired and then raped once they arrived at Zorro Ranch. Benavidez was first brought to the ranch in 1999, when she was 25.

“While my survivor sisters continue to show up in Washington, demanding justice and accountability, questioning the powers that be about the withholding of justice, I, too, am here today asking these very same questions,” Benavidez said. “There is a mountain of evidence this government has been sitting on for decades. We don’t need more paper files sitting as artifacts. We need the black-and-white words and names within those files to jump off the page and become real-time answers and actions.”

Benavidez is one of more than 1,000 women the US Department of Justice believes were abused as part of Epstein’s international trafficking operation. Despite the scale of the abuse, coupled with the roughly 6 million investigative records compiled as part of the government’s case against Epstein, the Trump administration concluded that only two people were responsible for the crimes committed.

No previous investigation into Epstein’s criminal network examined what happened in New Mexico, but state officials are hopeful that what is uncovered by the Commission’s investigation will prompt prosecutors to pursue additional charges against accomplices and co-conspirators.

Here are the seven takeaways from the Commission’s interim report:

1. Epstein first set up shop in New Mexico

Before his international sex trafficking operation took root in Manhattan and the US Virgin Islands, Epstein bought nearly 8,000 acres of land just outside Albuquerque in 1993. Over the next 25 years, at least 30 girls and women were brought there and abused by Epstein and his co-conspirators. As is detailed in the report, local law enforcement during those years — including after Epstein’s first conviction — “played a passive role in investigating him,” and allowed his trafficking empire to grow undisturbed.

2. State charges against co-conspirators appear unlikely

Based on what’s been uncovered so far, it’s unlikely that criminal charges for state crimes will result from this investigation. The Commission identified eight chargeable offenses for the crimes uncovered so far, most with a statute of limitations of only five or six years. Witness testimony and evidence currently available place the alleged criminal conduct at Zorro Ranch between 1996 and 2012.

Two potential charges — criminal sexual penetration and criminal sexual contact — remain prosecutable until a victim turns 35 if they were a minor at the time of the assault. The Commission has recommended amending state law to remove the statute of limitations on trafficking for future cases, though restrictions in the state constitution prevent such a change from applying retroactively.

The Commission has also recommended the legislature close New Mexico’s age of consent loophole, which allowed Epstein to stay off the state’s sex offender registry after his 2008 conviction.

3. Zorro Ranch was a 50,000-square-foot compound with a live-in staff and shooting range

Epstein got an incredible deal on the land purchase, thanks in part to his now-convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who served as a “disinterested person” in appraising the land. Part of the sweetheart deal included ranching and agricultural leases with the Bureau of Land Management that New Mexico officials didn’t monitor and Epstein failed to uphold.

Over the next six years, Epstein built a sprawling, 50,000-square-foot compound featuring a three-story main residence, eight guest houses, stables, a hangar and airstrip, a helipad “as part of a labyrinth garden,” and a shooting range. The Commission identified 13 Zorro Ranch employees, some of whom lived onsite, were issued cell phones and had access to ranch vehicles. Epstein also installed extensive communications infrastructure.

4. Epstein used his girlfriend’s dental license to order oxygen and anesthetics

Karyna Shuliak, Epstein’s girlfriend at the time of his death and the primary beneficiary of his fortune, was a licensed dentist in New Mexico from 2015 to 2021. She had graduated from Columbia University’s dental school a few years prior — thanks to Epstein’s connections, a reported $5-10 million donation, and $630,000 in tuition payments — and told the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department she planned to open a practice called Zorro Smiles at the ranch.

The business never materialized, but Epstein asked Shuliak to have oxygen and anesthetics delivered to the property. The interim report notes that multiple victims said they woke up at the ranch next to medical equipment, though it “is unknown at this time if Shuliak’s dental instrumentation and these accounts are related.”

5. New Mexico officials ignored Epstein for decades

Despite victim testimony pointing to Zorro Ranch as early as 1996, local and federal law enforcement never seriously investigated Epstein’s New Mexico operation. Different departments routinely deferred responsibility to others rather than taking action themselves. The Commission found that local and state officials repeatedly chose to let “others in Miami and in New York do it. As a result, the conduct of Epstein and his co-conspirators in New Mexico went unexamined and unpunished.”

Even while federal prosecutors were building their massive case against Epstein and Maxwell in 2019, cooperation with New Mexico authorities amounted to little more than requisite paperwork. In September of that year, New Mexico Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran sent investigators in the Southern District of New York “materials related to the criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators.” The Commission later found that Moran’s office did not retain any copies of the investigative material after it was passed along.

Two months later, Moran’s office offered to assist SDNY in executing a search warrant at Zorro Ranch, suggesting that the property could be seized and funds from its sale could be used to benefit survivors. Neither department applied for a warrant, and the property was sold by Epstein’s estate for $18 million.

6. 24 subpoenas issued, 100,000 records received

The Commission issued four new subpoenas Wednesday to three state agencies and a local spa used by Epstein as a recruiting hub. Earlier this year, it subpoenaed ten other state and local agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration, JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank, and US Attorney’s Offices in New Mexico, New York, Florida, Michigan, South Carolina, and the US Virgin Islands.

About half have complied with their subpoenas, submitting roughly 100,000 records to the Commission. Deutsche Bank has agreed to fully comply, and says it will deliver approximately 60,000 pages of Epstein’s financial records.

7. Several witnesses and victims have come forward since the investigation began

Dozens of survivors and witnesses have contacted the Commission since its investigation began. The number of known individuals abused at Zorro Ranch has grown from 10 to 30, five of whom have their experiences outlined in the interim report. The sheer volume of emails, calls, texts, and in-person encounters with those who wish to speak with the Commission stands in stark contrast to the US Department of Justice, which closed its investigation into Epstein last year, and whose acting attorney general refused to meet with survivors until his job depended on it.

“This was a monster who used power, intimidation, wealth, influence, false pretenses, and a masked disguise to gain access and exploit the one thing that meant everything to me at that time — my hard-earned career. He exploited us all. And too many people within his network scoffed at the idea that he could possibly be a sexual predator and a criminal,” said Benavidez. “Let there be no mistake — I use this survivor platform to stand on the right side of every survivor’s journey toward truth and justice. I am holding on to faith that real accountability will be achieved.”

Share

Subscribe now

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Pledge Your Support

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

On Wednesday, a commission established by the New Mexico Legislature to investigate crimes committed at Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch released its initial findings and issued subpoenas to three state agencies and a local spa where Epstein preyed on women.

The Survivors’ Truth Commission’s brief meeting included an overview of its 110-page interim report led by state Rep. Andrea Romero, as well as testimony from Rachel Benavidez, one of several massage therapists Epstein hired and then raped once they arrived at Zorro Ranch. Benavidez was first brought to the ranch in 1999, when she was 25.

“While my survivor sisters continue to show up in Washington, demanding justice and accountability, questioning the powers that be about the withholding of justice, I, too, am here today asking these very same questions,” Benavidez said. “There is a mountain of evidence this government has been sitting on for decades. We don’t need more paper files sitting as artifacts. We need the black-and-white words and names within those files to jump off the page and become real-time answers and actions.”

Benavidez is one of more than 1,000 women the US Department of Justice believes were abused as part of Epstein’s international trafficking operation. Despite the scale of the abuse, coupled with the roughly 6 million investigative records compiled as part of the government’s case against Epstein, the Trump administration concluded that only two people were responsible for the crimes committed.

No previous investigation into Epstein’s criminal network examined what happened in New Mexico, but state officials are hopeful that what is uncovered by the Commission’s investigation will prompt prosecutors to pursue additional charges against accomplices and co-conspirators.

Subscribe now

Here are the seven takeaways from the Commission’s interim report:

1. Epstein first set up shop in New Mexico

Before his international sex trafficking operation took root in Manhattan and the US Virgin Islands, Epstein bought nearly 8,000 acres of land just outside Albuquerque in 1993. Over the next 25 years, at least 30 girls and women were brought there and abused by Epstein and his co-conspirators. As is detailed in the report, local law enforcement during those years — including after Epstein’s first conviction — “played a passive role in investigating him,” and allowed his trafficking empire to grow undisturbed.

2. State charges against co-conspirators appear unlikely

Based on what’s been uncovered so far, it’s unlikely that criminal charges for state crimes will result from this investigation. The Commission identified eight chargeable offenses for the crimes uncovered so far, most with a statute of limitations of only five or six years. Witness testimony and evidence currently available place the alleged criminal conduct at Zorro Ranch between 1996 and 2012.

Two potential charges — criminal sexual penetration and criminal sexual contact — remain prosecutable until a victim turns 35 if they were a minor at the time of the assault. The Commission has recommended amending state law to remove the statute of limitations on trafficking for future cases, though restrictions in the state constitution prevent such a change from applying retroactively.

The Commission has also recommended the legislature close New Mexico’s age of consent loophole, which allowed Epstein to stay off the state’s sex offender registry after his 2008 conviction.

3. Zorro Ranch was a 50,000-square-foot compound with a live-in staff and shooting range

Epstein got an incredible deal on the land purchase, thanks in part to his now-convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who served as a “disinterested person” in appraising the land. Part of the sweetheart deal included ranching and agricultural leases with the Bureau of Land Management that New Mexico officials didn’t monitor and Epstein failed to uphold.

Over the next six years, Epstein built a sprawling, 50,000-square-foot compound featuring a three-story main residence, eight guest houses, stables, a hangar and airstrip, a helipad “as part of a labyrinth garden,” and a shooting range. The Commission identified 13 Zorro Ranch employees, some of whom lived onsite, were issued cell phones and had access to ranch vehicles. Epstein also installed extensive communications infrastructure.

4. Epstein used his girlfriend’s dental license to order oxygen and anesthetics

Karyna Shuliak, Epstein’s girlfriend at the time of his death and the primary beneficiary of his fortune, was a licensed dentist in New Mexico from 2015 to 2021. She had graduated from Columbia University’s dental school a few years prior — thanks to Epstein’s connections, a reported $5-10 million donation, and $630,000 in tuition payments — and told the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department she planned to open a practice called Zorro Smiles at the ranch.

The business never materialized, but Epstein asked Shuliak to have oxygen and anesthetics delivered to the property. The interim report notes that multiple victims said they woke up at the ranch next to medical equipment, though it “is unknown at this time if Shuliak’s dental instrumentation and these accounts are related.”

5. New Mexico officials ignored Epstein for decades

Despite victim testimony pointing to Zorro Ranch as early as 1996, local and federal law enforcement never seriously investigated Epstein’s New Mexico operation. Different departments routinely deferred responsibility to others rather than taking action themselves. The Commission found that local and state officials repeatedly chose to let “others in Miami and in New York do it. As a result, the conduct of Epstein and his co-conspirators in New Mexico went unexamined and unpunished.”

Even while federal prosecutors were building their massive case against Epstein and Maxwell in 2019, cooperation with New Mexico authorities amounted to little more than requisite paperwork. In September of that year, New Mexico Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran sent investigators in the Southern District of New York “materials related to the criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators.” The Commission later found that Moran’s office did not retain any copies of the investigative material after it was passed along.

Two months later, Moran’s office offered to assist SDNY in executing a search warrant at Zorro Ranch, suggesting that the property could be seized and funds from its sale could be used to benefit survivors. Neither department applied for a warrant, and the property was sold by Epstein’s estate for $18 million.

6. 24 subpoenas issued, 100,000 records received

The Commission issued four new subpoenas Wednesday to three state agencies and a local spa used by Epstein as a recruiting hub. Earlier this year, it subpoenaed ten other state and local agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration, JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank, and US Attorney’s Offices in New Mexico, New York, Florida, Michigan, South Carolina, and the US Virgin Islands.

About half have complied with their subpoenas, submitting roughly 100,000 records to the Commission. Deutsche Bank has agreed to fully comply, and says it will deliver approximately 60,000 pages of Epstein’s financial records.

7. Several witnesses and victims have come forward since the investigation began

Dozens of survivors and witnesses have contacted the Commission since its investigation began. The number of known individuals abused at Zorro Ranch has grown from 10 to 30, five of whom have their experiences outlined in the interim report. The sheer volume of emails, calls, texts, and in-person encounters with those who wish to speak with the Commission stands in stark contrast to the US Department of Justice, which closed its investigation into Epstein last year, and whose acting attorney general refused to meet with survivors until his job depended on it.

“This was a monster who used power, intimidation, wealth, influence, false pretenses, and a masked disguise to gain access and exploit the one thing that meant everything to me at that time — my hard-earned career. He exploited us all. And too many people within his network scoffed at the idea that he could possibly be a sexual predator and a criminal,” said Benavidez. “Let there be no mistake — I use this survivor platform to stand on the right side of every survivor’s journey toward truth and justice. I am holding on to faith that real accountability will be achieved.”

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Once thought to be a shoo-in, Todd Blanche’s confirmation as attorney general is now in peril after his efforts to use his office to personally benefit the president began eroding support within Congress.

The Senate Judiciary Committee canceled a vote planned for Thursday to advance Blanche’s nomination over objections from a majority of its members. The main point of contention is the nearly $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund Blanche created for President Donald Trump, along with a provision barring the IRS from auditing any member of the Trump family or their businesses.

Though Blanche testified under oath that he had put an end to both, he has refused to provide a written rescission of the settlement agreement he filed with the courts in May. Until he does, the slush fund and tax immunity are legally still in effect.

“All I want them to do is to confirm what he said in his sworn testimony before the Judiciary Committee, with regard not only to the weaponization fund, but also who is protected from future audits and what agencies of the federal government are bound by the release,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told reporters. “It’s pretty simple, and we’ve actually sent them a redline strikeout.”

Without Cornyn’s support, Blanche cannot advance out of the Judiciary Committee and would instead have to go through a lengthy procedural process before reaching the Senate floor. Trump responded by suggesting he might temporarily withdraw Blanche’s nomination until after the midterm elections in the hope that the incoming Congress will somehow be more willing to do his bidding than the current one.

Blanche’s refusal to end DOJ initiatives that personally benefit Trump mark a clear line between what he is and isn’t willing to do to keep his job. During his confirmation hearing earlier this month, Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) laid out two conditions Blanche would have to meet in order to secure their votes: shut down the slush fund and meet with survivors of Jeffrey Epstein.

He quickly fulfilled only one of those demands. A meeting with survivors was held that same day, but those in the room describe Blanche as disrespectful, condescending, and performative.

Jena-Lisa Jones, a survivor whose lawyers attended the meeting, told COURIER that no one left believing that Blanche had taken their concerns seriously. She said survivors repeatedly confronted him with information implicating their abusers, only for the acting attorney general to cut them off and tell them to report any tips to their local FBI office.

“Todd Blanche is unfit to serve as the highest position of law enforcement in this country,” said Dani Bensky, a survivor who also attended the meeting with Blanche. “He’s led the DOJ to protect perpetrators with absolute impunity, while exposing nude photos and all of our identifying information. He’s prioritized mitigating the president’s reputational harm by meeting in the White House’s Situation Room instead of following a single investigative lead.”

The bare minimum effort appears to have fallen short with Tillis as well. Though Tillis was initially appreciative toward Blanche for holding the meeting, the senator changed his tone after speaking directly with Benski on Wednesday, making clear that spoken assurances from Blanche are no longer going to cut it.

“I didn’t hear in there — I want to see — specific action items,” said Tillis. “And some of that may even have to do with the investigation.”

Benski, Jones, and other survivors have demanded that the DOJ reopen its investigation into Epstein and his co-conspirators, return convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell to a maximum security prison, and offer restitution for the department’s failure to properly redact the Epstein Files.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Sen. Duckworth on the Iran War and voting against an overblown defense budget

Congress is currently in a stalemate over the Trump administration’s request for a $1.5 trillion defense budget, which includes funding for an unauthorized war in Iran and startup money for a $1 trillion “Golden Dome” missile defense project.

Until last year, the National Defense Authorization Act was one of the most reliably bipartisan pieces of legislation at the Capitol. But this year’s proposal — the ballooning of an already massive budget loaded with stockpiles of cash for President Donald Trump’s pet projects — has seen even some of the military’s strongest champions drop their support.

To better understand the current status of the defense budget, and what those opposed to it would like changed, I spoke with National Guard Army veteran Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL). A member of Congress since 2013, Duckworth has spent years shaping military funding legislation after earlier serving in state and federal veterans affairs’ offices beginning in 2006.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Camaron Stevenson

Just to kick it off, could you let me know about the current situation of the Defense Authorization Act?

Sen. Tammy Duckworth

The Defense Authorization Act is basically to authorize the defense budget for the nation. It has been one of the most bipartisan pieces of legislation going back over 60 years. I myself have never voted ‘no’ on a Defense Authorization Act until last year, and this year is the first time I’ve ever voted no on it in committee.

It passed out of committee on essentially largely partisan lines. We’re at a point now where it takes 60 votes to open debate on the bill, and they don’t have 60 votes to open debate. So we’re at a stalemate. And a lot of it has to do with the war in Iran, and what President Trump is doing with prosecuting this war against the wishes of the American people.

Stevenson

To that end: you did introduce an amendment regarding the war and funding for it. Could you tell me a little about what your amendment does, and how much money would go to fund the Iran War if your amendment isn’t part of the bill?

Duckworth

My amendment basically says that there can be no more spending on this war in Iran until the administration comes and explains to the American people what exactly they’re doing through their representatives in Congress. They need to come and explain: what is the goal of the war? How are you going to end the war? What are you going to do? What are you going to spend after the war is over in Iran?

The American people need to know this. They’ve asked for something like $300 billion to rebuild Iran. I would like $300 billion to rebuild the United States of America. This president would rather spend money rebuilding Iran than rebuilding America. What my amendment says is no more money for the war, no more money for Secretary of Defense Hegseth to continue to travel, until the administration comes and explains to the American people what the heck they’re doing.

It’s pretty simple. Now, you can still continue to defend America. You can still spend money on defense, on intelligence gathering. You just can’t spend any more money prosecuting the war.

Stevenson

How is it that we’ve been able to spend money on this war in the first place when it hasn’t been approved by Congress?

Duckworth

Well, they’re taking money from other parts of the defense budget that they already had. And as far as we know — as of almost a month ago — they came to us and said they’d already spent $35 billion. And that was just in the first couple of months, so that number is old. We think it’s going to be upwards of $400–$500 billion when all is said and done. But we don’t know.

They’re supposed to come tell us: How many munitions have you expended? What is the cost of rebuilding America’s military bases that have come under attack in places like Kuwait? Those are the numbers that they have not given to the American people. And frankly, the American people deserve to know — because we have bridges that need to be fixed.

They’ve cut funding for educational programs like Pell Grants by declaring that nursing is not a profession, so nursing students can’t qualify for a lot of Pell Grants anymore and will have to take on more student loan debt. I’d rather spend money on that than on rebuilding Iran, which is what this president is proposing to do.

Stevenson

Is there anything else in the Defense Authorization Act that you feel is a non-starter — or conversely, is there anything in there that you think is really good that you wish would come through?

Duckworth

There’s stuff that I wish was in there. For the first time in a few years, my bill on providing IVF to military families was not included. This was something that passed unanimously out of committee in both the House and the Senate two years ago, and last year it passed. The year before that, it passed by a roll call vote. Last year, it passed by voice vote. This is how popular it is.

This year, when the same language that people voted on previously came up for a vote, Chairman Whitaker — just before we had a voice vote on it, like we did last year and it passed — said, What does Susan B. Anthony think of this? This is the anti-choice, anti-IVF group.

And immediately the whole thing fell apart, and so it was not part of it. And frankly, with infertility rates among military men and women being more than double that of the general population, these are people who need help starting their families. I don’t know why we would be opposed to helping provide IVF for military families. So I wish that was in the bill.

Stevenson

One other thing I wanted to ask about — there was in this bill a ban on stock buybacks for companies who make money from the defense bill. Are you familiar with that?

Duckworth

I am. There are certainly things in that bill that I have voted for, but overall, I just cannot vote to authorize the war in Iran. See, if you vote on the defense budget, that is voting to authorize the war in Iran. If you vote on the supplemental — which is a piece of legislation that asks for more money to prosecute the war in Iran — then you’re saying you approve of the war in Iran.

I am at a place where the administration has not come to explain to the American people why they’re conducting this war, how they plan on ending the war, and what they’re going to spend to rebuild Iran. If they don’t tell us that, I can’t vote to authorize it. So I can’t vote on the supplemental. I can’t vote on the defense budget.

They need to come tell me — I have to do my job for the American people, and that is: tell me exactly what you are doing with this war that you started on your own, against the wishes of the American public.

Stevenson

And then I want to ask about one other thing — Secretary Hegseth today announced that he’s going to implement testosterone testing. Mandatory over 30, optional if you’re under 30. Does this sound like anything you’re familiar with from your experience in the military, and what do you think the real purpose of this is?

Duckworth

I try not to get in the head of the most incompetent Secretary of Defense in our nation’s history, but I will tell you that to me it sounds like gender-affirming care. And I’m supportive of gender-affirming care, so if that’s what his intent is, then great.

But look: bottom line, I want more health care for military men and women. I want more health care for all Americans. If we can expand health care for military men and women, that would be something that I could support — but it has to be for women as well as for men. Let’s do hormone testing for both men and women, and if you find that hormone levels are low and you need help getting pregnant, then let’s provide access to IVF for military men and women so that they can start their families.

But I don’t think that’s what Hegseth is doing. I think this is performative bullshit from a Secretary of Defense who cares more about lifting fake weights that look bigger and heavier than they really are and how many push-ups he can do. He should be more worried about what’s actually happening in Iran than this kind of stuff. But it’s to be expected of an incompetent Secretary of Defense.

Stevenson

Is there anything else you want to touch on that maybe I missed — about the Defense Bill, the Secretary of Defense, or anything that people might be missing out on right now?

Duckworth

I think what people have to understand is that we cannot effectively defend the United States of America if we do not have a well-trained, healthy, well-supported fighting force. We are going to lose men and women out of our military mid-career — people we’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to train — if they can’t start their families. We’re going to lose them. They’re going to leave the military and go into the civilian world.

We’ve invested all this money to train them. If they’re not treated well while they’re in the military, if they feel that they’re being used as cannon fodder for wars of choice from a president that the American people have not authorized — then we lose them.

When you send somebody to war, when you ask them to be ready to lay down their lives to defend this nation, you better safeguard that commitment from these heroes by doing your job and upholding your responsibility to make sure that what you’re asking them to do is truly to the benefit of the American people, is truly for the defense of this great nation.

And frankly, we’ve not done that. The President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense have not done that. They’ve just started a war of choice that’s resulted in dead service members, wounded service members. And for what? Are we safer than where we were before? We have a worse Ayatollah than the one that was there before. The Strait of Hormuz is now closed. Americans are suffering with higher gas prices. And now the President says he wants to spend $300 billion rebuilding Iran when he should be spending $300 billion rebuilding America.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Estimates for President Donald Trump’s ongoing vanity projects have surpassed $1 billion, with much of that money being directly funneled to his wealthy donors through no-bid contracts and opaque tax-deductible contributions.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee and the Senate Subcommittee on Investigations held a hearing Wednesday on government waste, where witnesses detailed personal and professional concerns about Trump’s costly pet projects. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee, believes the initiatives serve two purposes: to satiate the president’s ego and provide him with a way to reward his supporters at no personal cost.

“It’s both a huge vanity project, but it’s also about corruption,” Garcia said in an interview with COURIER. “Donald Trump is destroying America’s monuments, he’s trying to destroy the White House — which he’s doing now — the Kennedy Center, putting his name on it; the reflecting pool, millions of dollars in contracts to his donors; he’s building an arch to himself. This is about Trump trying to remake DC in his own image, while giving contracts to his friends. That’s a level of corruption that has to be investigated, and has to be stopped.”

The estimated price tag of the administration’s construction projects around the nation’s capital, including those Garcia highlighted, is over $1 billion. Some, like the White House ballroom, have tripled in cost since their original estimates. Others, such as the renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, have incurred additional expenses beyond original estimates due to poor craftsmanship.

Current estimates for projects the administration is planning or already carrying out include:

$600 million: Demolition of the East Wing and construction of a six-story subterranean bunker complete with a military hospital, drone defenses, and a ground-level ballroom for entertaining guests.

$257 million: Renovation of the Kennedy Center, not including associated legal costs for the illegal placement and court-ordered removal of Trump’s name from the building’s facade.

$100 million: Construction of the Triumphal Arch, a 250-foot granite structure modeled after Europe’s triumphal arches despite commemorating no specific military or national victory.

$40 million: Creation of the National Garden of American Heroes, a sculpture garden featuring statues of 250 historical figures to mark the United States’ 250th anniversary.

$16 million: Failed restoration of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

The Trump administration has also deployed National Guard troops to Washington as part of its DC Safe and Beautiful Task Force, an operation that currently costs roughly $3 million per day. The total cost of the deployment, which ends in January 2029, is projected to be upwards of $3 billion.

Independent investigations have found that an overwhelming majority of the government contracts awarded for these projects have gone to people and corporations that have donated to Trump’s presidential campaigns or other initiatives. A report by the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen found that more than a dozen corporations that contributed to the construction of Trump’s ballroom were later awarded a combined $50 billion in government contracts. Those corporations will also be effectively reimbursed for their donations as they were funneled through nonprofit organizations and qualify as tax-deductible.

“Tens of millions were raised from companies that have business before the government,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said of the ballroom donations. “Of those donors, more than half have received new contracts or expanded the ones they have now. Pay-to-play is the MO here. These actions are a microcosm of how the president views our whole country. He expects all of us to glorify him and pay money to his friends and family whenever they ask — even while everyday Americans struggle to meet the needs of life.”

The intra-congressional meeting Democrats held was one of a growing number of “shadow hearings,” unofficial proceedings held without the support of the majority party. While they can do little to spur immediate action, Democrats hold them as a preview of how they will run the Capitol should voters give them control in the November midterm elections.

Share

Melania Trump threatens former modeling friend with defamation lawsuit over Epstein allegations

First Lady Melania Trump on Tuesday made another defamation threat against individuals linking her and the president to Jeffrey Epstein, alleging they caused her “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” through comments made during a live YouTube interview last week.

Trump’s legal team sent a retraction demand to journalist Zev Shalev and diplomat Amanda Ungaro, who shared the letter with COURIER. In it, attorneys outline three statements made during the hourlong interview they contend are defamatory toward Mrs. Trump. The comments in question center on Ungaro’s former partner, Paolo Zampolli, a longtime friend of the Trumps who currently works in the administration and has maintained that it was he, not Epstein, who introduced the future first couple in 1998.

Ungaro and others dispute that account, claiming that Zampolli falsely took credit for introducing the couple in order to shield them from scrutiny during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. During the interview, Ungaro and Shalev also discuss how Melania has remained unusually close to Zampolli and supposedly pressured her husband into giving him a role within the administration.

The contested statements include the title of the video itself — “First Lady Spy Scandal,” even though the word “spy” is not mentioned once during the interview -— and two comments made by Shalev:

“What is she trying to hide? Why come out with a statement like that without ever needing to?” Shalev said, describing an April press conference held by Mrs. Trump. “It’s really the man that you have in common with her, which is Paolo Zampolli.”

Later in the interview, Shalev added, “Melania tried to get [Zampolli] to be an ambassador … and she went on to insist that he become a special envoy. … He brought her to the United States, he’s in constant contact with her, she’s rewarded him with this special envoy title.”

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, reviewed the letter at COURIER’s request and said defamation threats like this are often used by powerful people to intimidate critics into silence.

“Defamation lawsuits and threats of litigation have too often been used by the powerful as a tool to stifle constitutionally protected criticism. President Trump and his allies have repeatedly employed that tactic,” Terr said in a statement. “We take no position on whether the statements challenged in this demand letter are defamatory. But it’s notable that the letter characterizes the challenged statements at a high level of generality, offering little explanation of why they’re defamatory, while baldly asserting the speakers knew they were making false statements.”

Alejandro Brito, the Florida-based attorney representing the First Lady, did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Melania has vehemently denied accusations that she was an escort, and has been aggressively litigious when confronted about her association with Zampolli and how she met her husband. Her first major lawsuits came in September 2016 against the Daily Mail and Tarpley.net, a small Maryland-based blog. The Daily Mail reported that she and Zampolli ran an escort service disguised as a modeling agency, while Tarpley alleged that Melania had worked as an escort. Two months later, she threatened to sue People magazine for publishing a firsthand account of a woman who accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2005, while Melania was pregnant.

Melania prevailed in her suit against the Daily Mail, securing $3 million in damages and a public apology. Tarpley settled before the case went to trial, and was ordered to issue an apology and pay a “substantial sum,” according to Politico. The defamation lawsuit against People never materialized, and the magazine never retracted its story.

Litigation largely took a pause during the four years’ between Trump’s presidencies. Melania remained noticeably silent throughout her husband’s legal battle with writer E. Jean Carroll, whom a jury determined was raped (as the term is commonly understood) and later defamed by Trump. But the legal threats ramped back up as the Department of Justice’s partial release of the Epstein Files brought renewed scrutiny on the Trumps’ history with the convicted sex trafficker.

In August 2025, the First Lady threatened to file a $1 billion defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden over comments he made during an interview with Channel 5 reporter Andrew Callaghan. Biden repeated the claim that Epstein introduced Melania and Donald and said he believed that future releases from the Epstein Files would further implicate the president. To date, no lawsuit has been filed and Biden, who refused to apologize, publicly welcomed any legal challenge that would allow him to depose members of the Trump family.

Two months later, Mrs. Trump sent a demand letter to journalist and Epstein confidante Michael Wolff, ordering him to retract and apologize for his public statements claiming Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump.That dispute remains ongoing. This past Tuesday, Melania filed a motion requesting that the court sanction Wolff, accusing him of using their legal battle as a fundraising opportunity.

In addition to the retraction demand sent to Shalev and Ungaro, the First Lady’s lawyers this week sent a similar letter to blogger Anthony Andrews over a Substack post he made about President Trump. The letter to Andrews, who has less than 1,000 subscribers on the platform and has recently written about Zampolli and Ungaro, suggests the White House is willing to cast a wide net in its efforts to silence any commentary speculating on the relationship between Epstein, Zampolli, and the Trumps.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Brad Finstad, Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District

Since taking office in 2022, Rep. Finstad has:

• Seen his net worth decrease from $7 million to $4 million

• Sponsored 64 bills, none of which have been signed into law

• Held zero in-person town halls in 2025

• Voted against the expulsion of disgraced Rep. George Santos from Congress

• Threatened an ethics investigation into Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) for holding town halls in his district

• Signed onto a bipartisan statement condemning the politically-motivated assassination of Melissa and Mark Hortman in Minnesota

Fun Facts

One of the first bills Rep. Finstad introduced was the Audit and Return It Act, which would have created a system for the government to recover misused COVID relief funds and apply them toward reducing the federal deficit. The proposal included an audit of Paycheck Protect Program (PPP) loans, an area where Finstad has an interesting history.

Shortly after PPP loans became available, the staff at Finstad’s private company tripled from 11 to 33, qualifying the business for a $168,620 loan. The following year, his seemingly pandemic-proof business grew to 43 employees and received a second PPP loan worth $155,873. Both loans were later forgiven and since then, his company has reduced its workforce back to 11 employees.

One of Finstad’s major accomplishments in the Minnesota Legislature was securing public funding for a Major League Baseball field. The deal was largely funded by taxpayer dollars, saving Carl Pohlad, the billionaire owner of the Minnesota Twins until his death in 2009, over $350 million.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

First Lady Melania Trump on Tuesday made another defamation threat against individuals linking her and the president to Jeffrey Epstein, alleging they caused her “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” through comments made during a live YouTube interview last week.

Trump’s legal team sent a retraction demand to journalist Zev Shalev and diplomat Amanda Ungaro, who shared the letter with COURIER. In it, attorneys outline three statements made during the hourlong interview they contend are defamatory toward Mrs. Trump. The comments in question center on Ungaro’s former partner, Paolo Zampolli, a longtime friend of the Trumps who currently works in the administration and has maintained that it was he, not Epstein, who introduced the future first couple in 1998.

Ungaro and others dispute that account, claiming that Zampolli falsely took credit for introducing the couple in order to shield them from scrutiny during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. During the interview, Ungaro and Shalev also discuss how Melania has remained unusually close to Zampolli and supposedly pressured her husband into giving him a role within the administration.

The contested statements include the title of the video itself — “First Lady Spy Scandal,” even though the word “spy” is not mentioned once during the interview -— and two comments made by Shalev:

“What is she trying to hide? Why come out with a statement like that without ever needing to?” Shalev said, describing an April press conference held by Mrs. Trump. “It’s really the man that you have in common with her, which is Paolo Zampolli.”

Later in the interview, Shalev added, “Melania tried to get [Zampolli] to be an ambassador … and she went on to insist that he become a special envoy. … He brought her to the United States, he’s in constant contact with her, she’s rewarded him with this special envoy title.”

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, reviewed the letter at COURIER’s request and said defamation threats like this are often used by powerful people to intimidate critics into silence.

“Defamation lawsuits and threats of litigation have too often been used by the powerful as a tool to stifle constitutionally protected criticism. President Trump and his allies have repeatedly employed that tactic,” Terr said in a statement. “We take no position on whether the statements challenged in this demand letter are defamatory. But it’s notable that the letter characterizes the challenged statements at a high level of generality, offering little explanation of why they’re defamatory, while baldly asserting the speakers knew they were making false statements.”

Alejandro Brito, the Florida-based attorney representing the First Lady, did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Melania has vehemently denied accusations that she was an escort, and has been aggressively litigious when confronted about her association with Zampolli and how she met her husband. Her first major lawsuits came in September 2016 against the Daily Mail and Tarpley.net, a small Maryland-based blog. The Daily Mail reported that she and Zampolli ran an escort service disguised as a modeling agency, while Tarpley alleged that Melania had worked as an escort. Two months later, she threatened to sue People magazine for publishing a firsthand account of a woman who accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2005, while Melania was pregnant.

American Freakshow

Who IS Paolo Zampolli? Live with Bekah Day and Katie Chenoweth

Your Freakshow guides have recently introduced you to Italian oaf, Melania pal, and Trump’s “envoy” for global partnerships - a made-up, non State Department diplomatic-appearing role. Today we got to spend an hour with investigative journalist Bekah Day, who from her perch in Kansas City, broke the Amanda Ungaro deportation story months before the New …

Listen now

2 months ago · 313 likes · 31 comments · Nina Burleigh, Katie Chenoweth, and bekah day

Melania prevailed in her suit against the Daily Mail, securing $3 million in damages and a public apology. Tarpley settled before the case went to trial, and was ordered to issue an apology and pay a “substantial sum,” according to Politico. The defamation lawsuit against People never materialized, and the magazine never retracted its story.

Litigation largely took a pause during the four years’ between Trump’s presidencies. Melania remained noticeably silent throughout her husband’s legal battle with writer E. Jean Carroll, whom a jury determined was raped (as the term is commonly understood) and later defamed by Trump. But the legal threats ramped back up as the Department of Justice’s partial release of the Epstein Files brought renewed scrutiny on the Trumps’ history with the convicted sex trafficker.

In August 2025, the First Lady threatened to file a $1 billion defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden over comments he made during an interview with Channel 5 reporter Andrew Callaghan. Biden repeated the claim that Epstein introduced Melania and Donald and said he believed that future releases from the Epstein Files would further implicate the president. To date, no lawsuit has been filed and Biden, who refused to apologize, publicly welcomed any legal challenge that would allow him to depose members of the Trump family.

Two months later, Mrs. Trump sent a demand letter to journalist and Epstein confidante Michael Wolff, ordering him to retract and apologize for his public statements claiming Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump.That dispute remains ongoing. This past Tuesday, Melania filed a motion requesting that the court sanction Wolff, accusing him of using their legal battle as a fundraising opportunity.

In addition to the retraction demand sent to Shalev and Ungaro, the First Lady’s lawyers this week sent a similar letter to blogger Anthony Andrews over a Substack post he made about President Trump. The letter to Andrews, who has less than 1,000 subscribers on the platform and has recently written about Zampolli and Ungaro, suggests the White House is willing to cast a wide net in its efforts to silence any commentary speculating on the relationship between Epstein, Zampolli, and the Trumps.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

After no consequences for January Killings, ICE agents open fire in Texas and Maine

Immigration officers shot and killed individuals in Texas and Maine earlier this month, but lawmakers have noted a troubling difference from the extrajudicial killings by ICE agents earlier this year: no one recorded the attacks.

Graphic footage from the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti in Minnesota earlier this year set off a wave of nationwide protests against ICE, forcing the Trump administration to reign in some of the more violent protocols it had previously encouraged among law enforcement. Recordings from multiple angles — taken by bystanders, ICE agents, and Pretti himself — were seen by millions, and the widespread videos of unprovoked aggression are seen as a major factor in public sentiment turning against the Trump administration’s anti-immigration efforts.

No such footage exists of the deaths of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Joan Sebastian Guerrero. The officers were not wearing body cameras, no bystanders have come forward with recordings, and video from nearby security cameras is indiscernible. And no footage has been released of a third ICE-related death that occurred the same week, when a man in Florida was struck by oncoming traffic while attempting to flee an immigration traffic stop. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) said the lack of consequences for officers involved in earlier shootings has emboldened agents and created a chilling effect among witnesses.

“People are scared to death to take out their phone and record ICE. Why? Because there are no consequences, and because the last person that did it — Alex Pretti — was murdered for taking out his phone to video an interaction with ICE. This is part of their strategy: to have people too scared to hold them accountable,” said Frost. “The fact that we don’t have that kind of video for the last three incidents just shows that their strategy, unfortunately, is working, and it’s scaring people.”

The Trump administration confirmed as much, when White House official Tom Homan blamed the murders on those exercising their First Amendment rights by recording law enforcement and informing immigrants about their legal protections.

“It all goes back to the Dems, who want to continue to attack ICE, and tell people to evade ‘em, tell people, ‘don’t comply,’ tell people to resist, and tell people ICE isn’t a real law enforcement agency,” Homan told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. “You and I talked about this a year and a half ago, Laura. I said, ‘If the hateful rhetoric didn’t stop, there will be bloodshed,’ and I’m saying it right now: there’s still gonna be more bloodshed unless they shut their mouth and let ICE enforce the laws.”

The administration has gone to great lengths to protect its immigration officers from consequences — both legally and socially. DHS agents regularly use unmarked vehicles, cover their badges, mask their faces, and refuse to identify themselves to the public. Vice President JD Vance at one point offered offending agents “absolute immunity,” and the White House has responded to each killing by defending the shooter and attacking the deceased.

Rep. Christian Menefee (D-TX), whose hometown of Houston has been devastated and enraged by the death of Salgado Araujo, believes the Trump administration has corrupted DHS beyond repair and that ICE must be abolished entirely in order for the federal government to mend its lethal approach to immigration.

“President Trump, Kristi Noem, and the current head of DHS — they have radicalized that agency. They now view themselves as a military force that is able to go throughout the country, through President Trump’s enhanced ICE enforcement operations, and target people. We saw what they did to Keith Porter, we saw what they did to Alex Pretti, to Renee Goode, and they now act like a radicalized military police force,” said Menefee. “It’s horrific, and it just shows that that agency needs to be ripped down to the studs.”

While abolishing ICE has gained support in recent years, the effort would be an uphill battle that could take years before meaningful change is realized. As a more immediate step, Frost has introduced the Right to Record Act, a bill that would immediately strengthen First Amendment protections and create financial consequences for law enforcement officers who violate them.

Law enforcement officers are currently protected from civil lawsuits by the doctrine off qualified immunity, which generally shields them from personal liability for actions taken in their official capacity. Some states have taken those protections a step further and codified them into law. In Arizona, voters approved a 2024 ballot proposition that grants what the vice president might describe as absolute immunity to any officer who violates someone’s rights while enforcing immigration laws.

The Right to Record Act would supersede qualified immunity in any form and allow anyone whose “right to record, observe, or peacefully protest law enforcement activities” has been violated to sue both the federal government and the offending agent for $25,000 per violation, with up to an additional $100,000 per violation in punitive damages.

“In a just world, these people would — number one, be off the job, and they would be held accountable in a court of law,” Frost said. “But I don’t really believe in the agency itself being the be-all and end-all of deciding what consequences their own people face. It needs to be done in a court of law and these people need to be held criminally liable. This is part of the problem with our system of law enforcement in this country — we shield people from personal accountability. And I think that’s a problem. You’re more likely to make a mistake, or to do something that could end in the loss of life, if there are no consequences. There is no other job in this country where you’re empowered to do something like that. There needs to be a heightened level of scrutiny.”

Frost said that ICE’s growing lethality has generated increased interest in his bill, as lawmakers watch the Trump administration do little to rein in its violent offenders. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) signed on as a cosponsor two days after Salgado Araujo was killed, and Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Rand Paul (R-KY) have said the continued shootings represent a failure on the part of the administration.

Menefee, who seemed supportive of the bill but has not yet signed on as a co-sponsor, said every effort should be made to right the wrongs committed by DHS, from holding agents accountable to transforming the agency itself.

“We should use every single tool in the toolbox. That means strongly pushing to reform the agency, but it also means holding individual agents accountable when they break the law,” Menefee said. “They should be treated the same way that someone who’s not in law enforcement is treated when they kill somebody. If President Trump and the head of DHS were so proud of what ICE agents are doing, why are they hiding their identities? To me, accountability looks like — at a macro level, taking on the agency; at a micro level, addressing the investigation and holding the individual agents accountable.”

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche met with victims of Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday afternoon after two senators told him he was required to do so in order to keep his nomination on track.

The meeting ended a yearlong stalemate between the DOJ and survivors, who say the Trump administration refused to speak with them about Epstein’s criminal network. But the change in course was not due to a change of heart; Blanche was told during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee that his nomination for attorney general would not advance if he continued to evade Epstein’s victims.

“I can’t understand how this attorney general could find 48 hours to visit with Ghislaine Maxwell, who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking, and can’t find 30 minutes to meet with the survivors,” ranking committee member Dick Durbin (D-Il) told survivor Dani Bensky during the hearing. “I don’t think his name should be called on the floor of the United States Senate until he meets with you. It’s not too much to ask.”

Durbin’s demand later received bipartisan backing from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who told Blanche he would need to meet with survivors in order to earn his support. With his job on the line, Blanche conceded and spent an hour at the Justice Department headquarters with a handful of women whose personal information had not been redacted from the DOJ’s initial publication of its Epstein Library, which contains a partial release of the government’s case files on Epstein.

But those in attendance described the meeting as more akin to checking a box than a meaningful conversation. Blanche gave noncommittal responses when offered leads on potential Epstein clients and accomplices of, offered unsatisfactory answers about transferring one of their abusers, Ghislaine Maxwell, to a minimum-security prison, and provided no additional details regarding the redactions in the Epstein Files that left survivors exposed, while seemingly protecting those implicated in crimes.

“I don’t think that we had high expectations going into this meeting. I certainly did not. But I didn’t expect to walk out of the meeting feeling the way that we feel right now. It was demoralizing, to say the very least,” Liz Stein, a survivor in attendance, told MSNOW. “It felt like more political posturing and using survivors the way that we’ve been used as political pawns.”

Blanche told reporters he did not intend for the meeting to be anything more than a listening session and encouraged survivors to share any information they have with federal investigators. The hands-off approach failed to win survivors’ support. After the meeting, they urged senators to reject his nomination.

Despite that reaction, Tillis signaled his support and commended Blanche for meeting with survivors, praising him for “doing what all his predecessors over the last two decades never did: meet with the victims of Jeffery [sic] Epstein’s horrific crimes.”

The encounter capped a tense, two-day confirmation hearing in which Blanche’s handling of the Epstein investigation was a focal point for senators. Blanche offered little, repeating his defense that redaction errors were a result of the “Herculean task” of complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which his department has so far failed to do. He also defended the FBI’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to investigate anyone else involved in Epstein’s criminal network, despite documents that appear to identify co-conspirators and seized messages to Epstein that seem to incriminate the senders, whose names remain redacted and hidden from public view.

Internal communications between federal agents have also revealed that the DOJ’s decision to close the case was based on a rushed review of less than 7% of the 6 million documents contained within the Epstein Files, and agents did not take financial documents, personal communications, or the majority of witness testimony into consideration when closing the case.

Blanche has been described by many in Congress — and by Bondi, his former boss at the DOJ — as wholly responsible for the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein investigation. Decisions to close the investigation, grant leniency to the only person convicted, and withhold information that the law requires to be made public have made Blanche the center figure in what is being described as the largest government cover-up in recent history.

“He’s at the center of the cover-up of the Epstein Files,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ). “When we spoke to Pam Bondi, in her transcribed interview, she mentioned Todd Blanche over 30 times, saying that the Epstein Files cover-up was entirely under his purview.”

Attempts to Sanewash

• Blanche holds meeting with Epstein accusers after request from Tillis

• Epstein survivors say Todd Blanche ignored them. Now one Republican senator is making him listen

• Blanche defends handling of Epstein files as he aims to solidify GOP support at confirmation hearing

Far-Right Spin

• Democrat politicos rerun underhanded leftist playbook in effort to torpedo Trump’s AG nominee

• Booker: As AG, Blanche Would Be ‘One of the Most Corrupt’ Law Enforcement Officers Ever

• Tillis Says Blanche Met With Epstein Accusers After His Demand

Subscribe now

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Brian Babin, Texas’ 36th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2015, Rep. Babin has:

• Seen his net worth increase from roughly $2.5 million to over $3.5 million, with a brief spike to $6.2 million in 2021

• Sponsored 99 bills

• Authored one bill that has been signed into law, to rename a post office

• Proudly documented his misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia

• Begged Trump to pardon convicted war criminals

• Attempted to end birthright citizenship

• Been investigated by his peers for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results

• Championed the failed SCOTUSCare Act, which would have required US Supreme Court justices to obtain health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace

• Attempted to stop refugee programs during the 2015 European migrant crisis, which had been partially caused by US-funded proxy wars in the Middle East

Fun Facts

Babin began his professional journey by enlisting in the US Air Force in 1975. He left after only four years, saying he felt “demoralized” by his commander-in-chief, President Jimmy Carter. He left the service and went to work on Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign.

He took the lessons of success he learned from Reagan back home to Texas, where he was elected mayor of Woodville. His political rise was undercut by his bigotry, however, during his failed 1998 congressional campaign. An outspoken opponent of LGBTQ rights, Babin had hired an openly gay campaign manager, who quit without warning a few months before the general election.

“Babin abhors homosexuality. I am a homosexual,” Jon-Marc McDonald said in his resignation statement. “Therefore, I can no longer work for someone who thinks that my sexuality is a disease, a sin and unnatural.”

McDonald later alleged that Babin told staff that “homosexuals should be shot,” and went on to become a successful New York playwright. Babin was given a series of consolation-prize positions in state government by former Governors George W. Bush and Rick Perry until he saw an opportunity to snag a safe Republican seat in the US House in 2015.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche met with victims of Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday afternoon after two senators told him he was required to do so in order to keep his nomination on track.

The meeting ended a yearlong stalemate between the DOJ and survivors, who say the Trump administration refused to speak with them about Epstein’s criminal network. But the change in course was not due to a change of heart; Blanche was told during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee that his nomination for attorney general would not advance if he continued to evade Epstein’s victims.

“I can’t understand how this attorney general could find 48 hours to visit with Ghislaine Maxwell, who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking, and can’t find 30 minutes to meet with the survivors,” ranking committee member Dick Durbin (D-Il) told survivor Dani Bensky during the hearing. “I don’t think his name should be called on the floor of the United States Senate until he meets with you. It’s not too much to ask.”

Durbin’s demand later received bipartisan backing from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who told Blanche he would need to meet with survivors in order to earn his support. With his job on the line, Blanche conceded and spent an hour at the Justice Department headquarters with a handful of women whose personal information had not been redacted from the DOJ’s initial publication of its Epstein Library, which contains a partial release of the government’s case files on Epstein.

But those in attendance described the meeting as more akin to checking a box than a meaningful conversation. Blanche gave noncommittal responses when offered leads on potential Epstein clients and accomplices of, offered unsatisfactory answers about transferring one of their abusers, Ghislaine Maxwell, to a minimum-security prison, and provided no additional details regarding the redactions in the Epstein Files that left survivors exposed, while seemingly protecting those implicated in crimes.

“I don’t think that we had high expectations going into this meeting. I certainly did not. But I didn’t expect to walk out of the meeting feeling the way that we feel right now. It was demoralizing, to say the very least,” Liz Stein, a survivor in attendance, told MSNOW. “It felt like more political posturing and using survivors the way that we’ve been used as political pawns.”

Blanche told reporters he did not intend for the meeting to be anything more than a listening session and encouraged survivors to share any information they have with federal investigators. The hands-off approach failed to win survivors’ support. After the meeting, they urged senators to reject his nomination.

Despite that reaction, Tillis signaled his support and commended Blanche for meeting with survivors, praising him for “doing what all his predecessors over the last two decades never did: meet with the victims of Jeffery [sic] Epstein’s horrific crimes.”

The encounter capped a tense, two-day confirmation hearing in which Blanche’s handling of the Epstein investigation was a focal point for senators. Blanche offered little, repeating his defense that redaction errors were a result of the “Herculean task” of complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which his department has so far failed to do. He also defended the FBI’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to investigate anyone else involved in Epstein’s criminal network, despite documents that appear to identify co-conspirators and seized messages to Epstein that seem to incriminate the senders, whose names remain redacted and hidden from public view.

Internal communications between federal agents have also revealed that the DOJ’s decision to close the case was based on a rushed review of less than 7% of the 6 million documents contained within the Epstein Files, and agents did not take financial documents, personal communications, or the majority of witness testimony into consideration when closing the case.

Blanche has been described by many in Congress — and by Bondi, his former boss at the DOJ — as wholly responsible for the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein investigation. Decisions to close the investigation, grant leniency to the only person convicted, and withhold information that the law requires to be made public have made Blanche the center figure in what is being described as the largest government cover-up in recent history.

“He’s at the center of the cover-up of the Epstein Files,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ). “When we spoke to Pam Bondi, in her transcribed interview, she mentioned Todd Blanche over 30 times, saying that the Epstein Files cover-up was entirely under his purview.”

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Voters opted for the “change” candidate in 2024, but much of Donald Trump’s second term has felt like a rehash of his first: baseless claims about rigged elections, demanding for an increased military budget, provocations of war with Iran, and an octogenarian Republican senator whose health has repeatedly threatened his grip on Congress.

The difference, however, is the scale. What were once campaign talking points or stalled proposals have become major legislative and foreign policy priorities in this administration. Trump’s voter suppression efforts have heightened and formalized into what is known as the SAVE Act, the proposed defense budget has gone up by roughly $1 trillion, and the US has engaged in active warfare against Iran that has resulted in thousands of deaths. The escalation, according to US Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA), is due to a president obsessed with his legacy and a Republican-controlled Congress that has failed to provide a check on the executive branch.

“This is all about Donald Trump; Donald Trump’s fragile ego,” McGovern said. “This guy is crazy. He’s obsessed with himself. Everything that happens in Washington is about Donald Trump. We’ve never had a more self-obsessed president in our history. And he’s dangerous because everything is about him.”

Trump’s second term has been laser focused on legacy projects: violent attempts to end longstanding conflicts with Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba, along with vanity construction projects that have consumed millions of taxpayer dollars and reduced portions of the White House to rubble. Even among his most ardent supporters, the president’s priorities have been a source of disillusionment at a time when household costs keep rising.

“He’s making billions of dollars off the presidency. His family is too,” said McGovern. “Meanwhile, regular people are getting screwed. People can’t afford their groceries, can’t afford their health care, they can’t afford to go to college, they can’t afford to retire, they can’t afford anything. And all the talk here in Washington is not about how we help people; it’s about Donald Trump, it’s about how we feed his ego. And it’s really sad.”

@couriernewsroomWhile Americans struggle to keep up with rising costs, Trump is asking for a record $1.5 trillion defense budget — the largest in U.S. history.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

McGovern has served through six presidential administrations and watched Congress become increasingly paralyzed by partisan politics. It’s gotten to the point where the go-to move of Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune is to send lawmakers home and call an early recess, while Trump refuses to sign bipartisan legislation that’s already sitting on his desk.

“We had a housing bill that he was about to sign. Housing is unaffordable for most Americans, and this would have helped a little bit — it was a step in the right direction. There was bipartisan support for it,” McGovern continued. “The president said he supported it, then it came to his desk, and now he won’t sign it. He’s not signing it because he’s obsessed with this SAVE Act. His obsession — it’s not about how do we improve the quality of life for people in this country. It’s about him. Everything is about him.”

The SAVE Act is a voter suppression bill that Trump has said would allow him to ensure that Republicans don’t lose another election for 100 years. It also has no chance of passing — and in fact, has already failed as a standalone bill and as an amendment to the defense budget. Johnson is now preparing to attach it to the national budget, where it’s expected to meet the same fate.

Rather than shifting gears and focusing on popular policies that could actually pass, like the housing bill collecting dust on his desk, Trump is focused only on pet projects that benefit him personally — a decision that may ultimately come back to bite him.

“We’ll see what happens in the midterm elections,” McGovern said. “I think this is an opportunity for people to stand up and say, ‘Enough — we’re sick of it. We don’t want this. This is not what our country is about. We want to go in a different direction. And we’re sending you a message, Donald: we’re sick of you. And we’re going to put a check on you. And we’re going to turn this country around.’”

Attempts to Sanewash

• House gridlock clouds GOP push for more wins before August recess

• Lawmakers score big through NDAA earmarks

• Renewed war with Iran threatens to derail congressional agenda

Far-Right Spin

• Why Is Ilhan Omar Making It Harder to Hit Terror Groups?

• Could Mitch McConnell’s Absence Sink the $1.5 Trillion Defense Bill?

• Mike Johnson Has Plan To Pass Save America Act, But It Will Face Several Tripwires Along The Way

Share

DOJ refuses to release handwritten notes within Epstein Files

An unknown number of handwritten materials contained within the government’s case file on Jeffrey Epstein have been intentionally withheld from public view, according to a court brief filed earlier this month by Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche.

The admission came in response to a lawsuit filed by independent journalist Katie Phang, who has accused the Department of Justice of obscuring portions of the Epstein Files, in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Phang asked the courts to force the DOJ to remove certain redactions and release handwritten notes referenced throughout the files.

“Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court provide the following relief,” Phang’s lawsuit states. “Remove all unlawful redactions; explain the bases for any remaining lawful redactions; re-produce all materials that were produced but then unlawfully retracted; produce all materials that have not been produced that, by law, should be.”

The published files repeatedly reference handwritten materials, including detailed memos Epstein wrote about his criminal network and investigators’ accounts of witness testimony that contain greater detail than what is found in the typed reports. Law enforcement used a handwritten paper trail to build their 2006 case in Palm Beach, and investigators’ notes obtained by the Post and Courier provide incriminating information from a victim who alleged President Donald Trump had her trafficked across state lines to him on multiple occasions when she was a minor.

Those handwritten records have not been released by the DOJ, and the typed report documenting the woman’s allegations against Trump appears to be a watered-down version of what prosecutors were told.

Marina Lacerda, an Epstein survivor whom law enforcement tracked down after finding a handwritten note with her name in his trash, said Epstein kept a ledger documenting his cash payments. He also detailed gifts to girls paid by check, such as money for rent or medical visits. A prosecution memorandum confirms that law enforcement obtained the notes Epstein kept on his trafficking expenses, but the DOJ has not published the notes themselves.

@couriernewsroomUse the link in our bio to read Nina’s full piece.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

“He did write checks and stuff — he did write also in a book,” Lacerda said. “West Palm [Police] found me was because he threw my name away in the garbage, fucking idiot. He threw my name out with something about me getting paid.”

The omissions appear to be a direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a law passed by Congress last year requiring the DOJ to release the entirety of its investigation into Epstein, subject only to narrow exceptions for victims’ personal information and matters of national security. Blanche’s decision could also violate prior court rulings maintaining that the government is required to turn over agents’ interview notes should those notes contain any information not included in the final typed reports.

In response to Phang’s lawsuit, Blanche admitted that his department intentionally withheld handwritten notes, claiming that releasing them could violate the privacy of Epstein’s victims and that the information they contain is already found elsewhere in the published portion of the Epstein Files.

“The Department has not produced underlying handwritten notes for FD-302 interview reports because, by their nature, the underlying notes are substantially similar to the ultimate reports, and have accordingly been deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews,” the court filing states. “Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases

the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim [personally identifiable information].”

But discrepancies between the handwritten and typed accounts of Trump’s alleged abuse undermine Blanche’s claim that the documents are merely redundant. This would not be the first time the acting attorney general (who is also Trump’s former personal attorney) has attempted to suppress information that connects Epstein to the president. FBI agents were instructed to redact mentions of Trump before the files were released. As first reported by the American Freakshow, the DOJ initially omitted the interview with the woman who claims Trump had her trafficked to him, and after the omission was uncovered, published only the typed version, which left out details found in the handwritten notes.

Blanche’s admission comes just days before his two-day confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which begins July 15. His handling of the release of the Epstein Files will be a centerpoint of the hearing, as many in Congress believe Blanche is involved in a widespread cover-up in order to protect Trump.

“Blanche oversaw the department’s abysmal release of the Trump/Epstein files,” US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse wrote in an op-ed for The Contrarian. “The redactions were a mess, exposing victims’ identifying information. Serious, credible allegations against Trump were withheld. After stellar reporting by journalists discovered DOJ’s omissions, DOJ released some of the files about the Trump allegations. But even now, files are still being held back.”

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Gary Palmer, Alabama’s 6th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2015, Rep. Palmer has:

• Seen his net worth fluctuate from $1.6 million to $3.4 million, before settling around $2.7 million

• Sponsored 111 bills, three of which have been signed into law

• Accepted campaign contributions from fraudulent crypto exchange FTX

• Started his sixth term after promising to only serve five

• Condemned the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and blamed Trump for inciting the rioters, but voted against certifying the 2020 election and impeaching Trump for his role in the insurrection

Fun Facts

Before being elected to Congress, Rep. Palmer earned his conservative bona fides by co-founding the Alabama Policy Institute, a think tank that pushed for more private prisons, successfully petitioned the Alabama Supreme Court to constitutionally define marriage exclusively as between a man and a woman, and later became a major player in the creation of Project 2025.

Palmer has brought that same agenda to Capitol Hill, where he has consistently voted against abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights, while fully embracing the Trump administration’s mass deportation plans. His positions seem to come from the more conspiratorial wing of the infosphere: the news he shares on his congressional website is almost exclusively dominated by far-right media publishers like New Tang Dynasty, Yellowhammer, and Fox News.

Recently, Palmer appears to have developed a particular fixation with the transgender community. He accused the National Institute of Health of concealing research on puberty blockers and called for a transgender employee at an Alabama space camp to be fired because of a post he saw on the disinformation media account Libs of TikTok.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

An unknown number of handwritten materials contained within the government’s case file on Jeffrey Epstein have been intentionally withheld from public view, according to a court brief filed earlier this month by Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche.

The admission came in response to a lawsuit filed by independent journalist Katie Phang, who has accused the Department of Justice of obscuring portions of the Epstein Files, in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Phang asked the courts to force the DOJ to remove certain redactions and release handwritten notes referenced throughout the files.

“Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court provide the following relief,” Phang’s lawsuit states. “Remove all unlawful redactions; explain the bases for any remaining lawful redactions; re-produce all materials that were produced but then unlawfully retracted; produce all materials that have not been produced that, by law, should be.”

The published files repeatedly reference handwritten materials, including detailed memos Epstein wrote about his criminal network and investigators’ accounts of witness testimony that contain greater detail than what is found in the typed reports. Law enforcement used a handwritten paper trail to build their 2006 case in Palm Beach, and investigators’ notes obtained by the Post and Courier provide incriminating information from a victim who alleged President Donald Trump had her trafficked across state lines to him on multiple occasions when she was a minor.

Those handwritten records have not been released by the DOJ, and the typed report documenting the woman’s allegations against Trump appears to be a watered-down version of what prosecutors were told.

@couriernewsroomUse the link in our bio to read Nina’s full piece.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Marina Lacerda, an Epstein survivor whom law enforcement tracked down after finding a handwritten note with her name in his trash, said Epstein kept a ledger documenting his cash payments. He also detailed gifts to girls paid by check, such as money for rent or medical visits. A prosecution memorandum confirms that law enforcement obtained the notes Epstein kept on his trafficking expenses, but the DOJ has not published the notes themselves.

“He did write checks and stuff — he did write also in a book,” Lacerda said. “West Palm [Police] found me was because he threw my name away in the garbage, fucking idiot. He threw my name out with something about me getting paid.”

The omissions appear to be a direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a law passed by Congress last year requiring the DOJ to release the entirety of its investigation into Epstein, subject only to narrow exceptions for victims’ personal information and matters of national security. Blanche’s decision could also violate prior court rulings maintaining that the government is required to turn over agents’ interview notes should those notes contain any information not included in the final typed reports.

In response to Phang’s lawsuit, Blanche admitted that his department intentionally withheld handwritten notes, claiming that releasing them could violate the privacy of Epstein’s victims and that the information they contain is already found elsewhere in the published portion of the Epstein Files.

“The Department has not produced underlying handwritten notes for FD-302 interview reports because, by their nature, the underlying notes are substantially similar to the ultimate reports, and have accordingly been deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews,” the court filing states. “Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim [personally identifiable information].”

But discrepancies between the handwritten and typed accounts of Trump’s alleged abuse undermine Blanche’s claim that the documents are merely redundant. This would not be the first time the acting attorney general (who is also Trump’s former personal attorney) has attempted to suppress information that connects Epstein to the president. FBI agents were instructed to redact mentions of Trump before the files were released. As first reported by the American Freakshow, the DOJ initially omitted the interview with the woman who claims Trump had her trafficked to him, and after the omission was uncovered, published only the typed version, which left out details found in the handwritten notes.

Blanche’s admission comes just days before his two-day confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which begins July 15. His handling of the release of the Epstein Files will be a centerpoint of the hearing, as many in Congress believe Blanche is involved in a widespread cover-up in order to protect Trump.

“Blanche oversaw the department’s abysmal release of the Trump/Epstein files,” US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse wrote in an op-ed for The Contrarian. “The redactions were a mess, exposing victims’ identifying information. Serious, credible allegations against Trump were withheld. After stellar reporting by journalists discovered DOJ’s omissions, DOJ released some of the files about the Trump allegations. But even now, files are still being held back.”

American Freakshow

"Protect Source"

Here at the Freakshow, like everyone else, we sift through the millions of pages in the Epstein files with an eye for the elusive Trump connection, some proof behind the long-circulating rumors about his participation in the frolics Epstein arranged for himself and his coterie of wealthy ogres…

Read more

6 months ago · 142 likes · 17 comments · Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

We also discussed the latest developments with ICE’s mass detention plans, and how they’ve pivoted from abject cruelty to run-of-the-mill corruption.

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

In the latest sign of President Donald Trump’s waning influence over the legislative branch, his attempt to pressure Congress into tying his voter restriction law to the annual National Defense Authorization Act failed spectacularly and instead derailed both pieces of legislation.

Congress is currently in the process of approving the Trump administration’s request for a $1.5 trillion defense budget, roughly a half-a-trillion increase from our current budget, $860 billion more than during Trump’s first term, and $1 trillion more than when the US launched the war on terror.

“Even Dr. Strangelove would be impressed with that kind of figure. It’s pouring a bunch of money into weapons systems that I don’t think are necessary, and take away from other things that are really important,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA). “I’m a big advocate for redefining what we mean by national security. It needs to be about more than bombs. National security includes whether or not you can afford food, whether you can afford housing, whether or not you can afford education or health care. People lose sleep at night wondering whether they’re going to be able to afford the basic necessities, they’re not worried about whether or not we can build another weapon system.”

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the legislative vehicle for the Pentagon’s budget — typically sails through Congress with bipartisan support, despite the agency’s repeated audit failures and growing voter concern over the military’s ever-expanding budget.

That’s changed in recent years. Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA), who has served on the House Armed Services Committee since 2010 and considers himself a strong supporter of the military, has played a big role in shaping previous NDAAs. This year, however, he voted against the defense bill in committee and again when it was to be brought to the House floor on Tuesday. It marked the second time Garamendi has voted against military funding since Trump’s return to office.

“There’s so much money here that it cannot be spent wisely,” said Garamendi. “And there are so many things that we ought not be spending money on — for example, the entire nuclear enterprise. We’re building new submarines or building new airplanes or building new rockets, and we’re maintaining the intercontinental ballistic missiles in the silos in the upper Midwest that dates back to the 1950s. We simply are headed down the wrong road on so many pieces of the military.”

And Garamendi wasn’t alone. More than a dozen Republicans joined Democrats to shut down a series of votes required to pass the NDAA, though for very different reasons. At Trump’s request, Speaker Mike Johnson attempted to attach a voter restriction package, known as the SAVE Act, as an amendment to the defense bill, but some Republicans felt it would be too easy to remove later. They preferred the two remain independent pieces of legislation and voted accordingly.

The end result stalled both the SAVE Act and the NDAA indefinitely, prompting Johnson to cancel the remainder of the week’s votes and send lawmakers home early for the July 4th recess. Earlier in Trump’s second term, Republicans largely rallied behind whatever cause the president laid before them — but now, four months before the midterm elections, legislators appear much less willing to appease the president unconditionally.

“The whole SAVE Act really is about Donald Trump’s fragile ego. He lost the presidential election in 2020, and his ego just can’t handle it. So he has to fantasize that he lost because the elections were rigged,” said McGovern. “Unfortunately, it would have real-life detrimental effects on regular people and make it more difficult for people to vote, make it more difficult for women to vote. You’d have to provide more identification. If you had a name change, it would be a nightmare trying to sort things out. Trump thinks that the fewer people that vote, the better for him, the better for Republicans. I think that’s anti-American.”

Without the full-throated support of Congress, Trump’s vision of a $1.5 trillion defense budget and codified voter suppression seems unlikely, and Democrats are hopeful the cracks in loyalty could provide an opening for compromise. There are glimpses of some already in this year’s NDAA: a small pay raise for servicemembers, restrictions on defense contractors’ stock buy-backs… and then there are the Trump things.

There’s a section to officially rename the Defense Department the Department of War, along with a 20-year, trillion-dollar commitment to develop a “Golden Dome” missile defense system. Then there’s funding for military actions, like the strike against Venezuela (which earned Trump a gently used Nobel Peace Prize) and the Iran War, which the US lost and conditionally agreed to pay at least $300 billion in reparations for.

But the most glaring provision in the Defense budget is also the most predictable: Trump has found a way to turn this massive amount of taxpayer dollars into his own personal piggy bank.

“Presumably, we know where the money is going to go,” Garamendi told COURIER. “Well, that’s a presumption, not based on fact and certainly not based on some of the intricate detail that’s in that bill that allows the Department of Defense and the president to take money from one program and move it to anywhere they want to move it, basically circumventing the authority of Congress to determine where the money is going to be spent.”

Share

Epstein probe hones in on billionaire kryptonite: non-disclosure agreements

The top Republican overseeing the House investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network issued a surprise subpoena on Friday after its recipient refused to answer questions about his use of non-disclosure agreements with women he had affairs with.

Leon Black was far from the first ultra-wealthy person of interest to willingly appear before the House Oversight Committee, only to be less than forthcoming about his association with Epstein. But while committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) could excuse former Victoria’s Secret mogul Les Wexner’s chronic gullibility and the Epstein-shaped hole in Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s memory, his patience ran out when Black refused to address whether or not Epstein helped negotiate NDA terms between Black and women he had sexual relationships with.

“They didn’t have non-disclosure agreements, and this guy does, which means he’s paid women for — whatever reason,” Comer told COURIER. “According to some of the survivors, Epstein negotiated some of these NDAs. He negotiated the terms. Now, Mr. Black said in the transcribed interview — which if he’s lying to Congress, that’s a felony — he said that Epstein didn’t have anything to do with the NDAs. I don’t know if that’s factual or not, and a lot of people in the committee want to know for sure whether that’s true or not. So now I have subpoenaed the NDAs.”

The confidential nature and legal force of non-disclosure agreements has been abused for decades by people in positions of power to hide predatory and illegal behavior. Disgraced figures such as Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nassar coerced their victims into silence by tricking them into believing NDAs barred them from reporting crimes to law enforcement or speaking publicly about the abuse they endured.

Possibly the most prolific NDA manipulator is none other than President Donald Trump, who has used them excessively in both public and private life. Since returning to the White House, Trump has forced confidentiality agreements on federal workers, a mandate seen as an attempt to dissuade public servants from reporting illegal activity. In 2023, Trump settled a class-action lawsuit accusing his campaign of illegally using NDAs to silence allegations of sexual discrimination and workplace toxicity. And in 2024, Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, including a $130,000 hush money payout to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in exchange for an NDA regarding her sexual encounters with Trump.

Like Trump, Black was a longtime friend and associate of Epstein’s who used NDAs to guarantee silence from women he cheated on his wife with. Congressional investigators believe Epstein introduced Black to the practice and allegedly negotiated an $18 million NDA between the Wall Street billionaire and Russian model Guzel Ganieva. Ranking committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who was in the room when Black was subpoenaed, believes compelling his testimony is crucial to uncovering other accomplices and co-conspirators in Epstein’s criminal enterprise.

“We asked a bunch of questions about disclosure agreements — about women, about accusations, about some extramarital affairs that he has been open about —and he refused to answer those,” Garcia said. “When we pushed, that’s when he shut down and walked out — and he walked out because he doesn’t want to answer questions or be held accountable. He is at the center of this Epstein investigation. There’s credible evidence that points to abuse, and now he’ll have to come back under oath and answer our questions.”

As first reported by Business Insider, a recent court filing by Epstein’s convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, revealed just how widely NDAs were used by clients of Epstein’s underage sex trafficking business. Maxwell claimed in December 2025 that she was not informed about NDAs some of Epstein’s victims signed at the behest of his clients — men Maxwell says she would have called in to testify as witnesses.

Maxwell learned about the existence of these NDAs from a podcast featuring Brad Edwards, a lawyer who represents many of Epstein’s victims. During the interview, Edwards said 50 of his clients were "lent out" by Epstein to at least 30 different men. Many of those women never spoke publicly about the abuse — and still haven’t — due to fear of repercussions from violating NDAs they had signed.

The subpoena Comer issued to Black could be the first crack in the NDA armor that has protected those implicated in Epstein’s criminal network. Black is now required to turn over every NDA he’s executed before sitting for his under-oath deposition on July 16. In addition to connecting Black’s secret relationships to Epstein, the subpoena could bring to light other confidentiality agreements he facilitated or embolden survivors to provide their own NDA agreements to Congress.

Should this provide the Oversight Committee with useful information, committee member Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) said she hopes it will put an end to Comer’s reliance on voluntary interviews with potential Epstein accomplices and conspirators in what she believes constitutes an ongoing government cover-up led by the Trump administration. Administration officials Howard Lutnick and Pam Bondi have both spoken to the committee, but were not subpoenaed or under oath — approaches Black’s behavior seems to validate as necessary to obtaining a forthcoming testimony.

“I’m grateful that Chairman Comer decided to actually issue a real subpoena so that Leon Black has to come and testify in front of the American public,” said Ansari. “Every single one of these interviews should be a public hearing, should be in front of the American people so that everyone is able to see and hear the answers for themselves. This needs to be the new standard, and I hope Chairman Comer makes it as such.”

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Ken Calvert, California’s 41st Congressional District

Since taking office in 1993, Rep. Calvert has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $3 million to nearly $23 million

• Sponsored 285 bills, 12 of which have been signed into law

• Received more money from the defense industry during the 2022 midterms than almost any other congressional candidate

• Staffed his congressional office with dozens of former lobbyists, including representatives for Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and the National Potato Council

• Received a $265,000 campaign boost from Elon Musk during the 2024 election

• Allegedly used his position to score lucrative land deals for himself and his realtor friends

• Promised to only serve six terms, but is now serving his 16th

Fun Facts

Throughout his 3+ decades in Congress, Rep. Calvert has made it a priority to bring his real estate expertise to Washington — particularly when it scores him a nice payoff. He’s shown an acute ability to use earmarks — guarantees in the federal budget that certain amounts of money can only be used for certain projects — to make previously worthless land spike in value. Maps of earmarked transportation projects he’s signed off on are often lined with properties tied to Calvert. Such deals were found to violate state laws in 2007 and made him the subject of an FBI investigation in 2009. As recently as 2024, Calvert faced renewed criticism after securing millions in federal funds to improve the areas around 10 rental properties he owns in Riverside.

But it hasn’t all been business: during his first term, Calvert was caught in what he described as “an extremely embarrassing situation” with someone police described as a “known prostitute.” The incident happened during Calvert’s prime mid-life crisis years, shortly after his wife left him, and ultimately resulted in neither criminal nor political consequences.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

The top Republican overseeing the House investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network issued a surprise subpoena on Friday after its recipient refused to answer questions about his use of non-disclosure agreements with women he had affairs with.

Leon Black was far from the first ultra-wealthy person of interest to willingly appear before the House Oversight Committee, only to be less than forthcoming about his association with Epstein. But while committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) could excuse former Victoria’s Secret mogul Les Wexner’s chronic gullibility and the Epstein-shaped hole in Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s memory, his patience ran out when Black refused to address whether or not Epstein helped negotiate NDA terms between Black and women he had sexual relationships with.

“They didn’t have non-disclosure agreements, and this guy does, which means he’s paid women for — whatever reason,” Comer told COURIER. “According to some of the survivors, Epstein negotiated some of these NDAs. He negotiated the terms. Now, Mr. Black said in the transcribed interview — which if he’s lying to Congress, that’s a felony — he said that Epstein didn’t have anything to do with the NDAs. I don’t know if that’s factual or not, and a lot of people in the committee want to know for sure whether that’s true or not. So now I have subpoenaed the NDAs.”

Subscribe now

The confidential nature and legal force of non-disclosure agreements has been abused for decades by people in positions of power to hide predatory and illegal behavior. Disgraced figures such as Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nassar coerced their victims into silence by tricking them into believing NDAs barred them from reporting crimes to law enforcement or speaking publicly about the abuse they endured.

Possibly the most prolific NDA manipulator is none other than President Donald Trump, who has used them excessively in both public and private life. Since returning to the White House, Trump has forced confidentiality agreements on federal workers, a mandate seen as an attempt to dissuade public servants from reporting illegal activity. In 2023, Trump settled a class-action lawsuit accusing his campaign of illegally using NDAs to silence allegations of sexual discrimination and workplace toxicity. And in 2024, Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, including a $130,000 hush money payout to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in exchange for an NDA regarding her sexual encounters with Trump.

Like Trump, Black was a longtime friend and associate of Epstein’s who used NDAs to guarantee silence from women he cheated on his wife with. Congressional investigators believe Epstein introduced Black to the practice and allegedly negotiated an $18 million NDA between the Wall Street billionaire and Russian model Guzel Ganieva. Ranking committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who was in the room when Black was subpoenaed, believes compelling his testimony is crucial to uncovering other accomplices and co-conspirators in Epstein’s criminal enterprise.

“We asked a bunch of questions about disclosure agreements — about women, about accusations, about some extramarital affairs that he has been open about —and he refused to answer those,” Garcia said. “When we pushed, that’s when he shut down and walked out — and he walked out because he doesn’t want to answer questions or be held accountable. He is at the center of this Epstein investigation. There’s credible evidence that points to abuse, and now he’ll have to come back under oath and answer our questions.”

American Freakshow

The Epstein Lawyers Association

One of the unprecedented benefits of the Epstein Files Transparency Act is that the records expose how power actually works – especially among lawyers. A whale like Epstein, a locus of money and influence, attracted elite lawyers no matter how dirty a client he was. The legal circle around him was filled with insiders who began their careers wearing the…

Read more

2 months ago · 125 likes · 14 comments · Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth

As first reported by Business Insider, a recent court filing by Epstein’s convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, revealed just how widely NDAs were used by clients of Epstein’s underage sex trafficking business. Maxwell claimed in December 2025 that she was not informed about NDAs some of Epstein’s victims signed at the behest of his clients — men Maxwell says she would have called in to testify as witnesses.

Maxwell learned about the existence of these NDAs from a podcast featuring Brad Edwards, a lawyer who represents many of Epstein’s victims. During the interview, Edwards said 50 of his clients were "lent out" by Epstein to at least 30 different men. Many of those women never spoke publicly about the abuse — and still haven’t — due to fear of repercussions from violating NDAs they had signed.

The subpoena Comer issued to Black could be the first crack in the NDA armor that has protected those implicated in Epstein’s criminal network. Black is now required to turn over every NDA he’s executed before sitting for his under-oath deposition on July 16. In addition to connecting Black’s secret relationships to Epstein, the subpoena could bring to light other confidentiality agreements he facilitated or embolden survivors to provide their own NDA agreements to Congress.

Should this provide the Oversight Committee with useful information, committee member Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) said she hopes it will put an end to Comer’s reliance on voluntary interviews with potential Epstein accomplices and conspirators in what she believes constitutes an ongoing government cover-up led by the Trump administration. Administration officials Howard Lutnick and Pam Bondi have both spoken to the committee, but were not subpoenaed or under oath — approaches Black’s behavior seems to validate as necessary to obtaining a forthcoming testimony.

“I’m grateful that Chairman Comer decided to actually issue a real subpoena so that Leon Black has to come and testify in front of the American public,” said Ansari. “Every single one of these interviews should be a public hearing, should be in front of the American people so that everyone is able to see and hear the answers for themselves. This needs to be the new standard, and I hope Chairman Comer makes it as such.”

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

What Happened

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s slate of fiery progressives swept establishment-backed Democrats in the state’s congressional primaries on Tuesday, ousting two sitting congressmen in a resounding show of force for the democratic socialist leader of America’s largest city, who is fighting to reshape the Democratic Party in New York and beyond.

Tuesday’s primaries represented a major political gamble for the 34-year-old mayor, whose strength is surging, and a potential headache for Democratic leaders, who fear that Mamdani and his loyalists may push the party too far left ahead of November’s midterm elections — when voters across the nation will decide which party controls Congress for the last two years of Trump’s final term.

The noticeable shift to the left by Democratic primary voters comes at a time when Trump-backed partisan gerrymandering is pushing Republican-majority districts farther to the right. The gambit could backfire, however, as is evidenced by New York’s primary elections, as well as the steady stream of upset victories Democrats have won in special elections since Trump was reelected.

Even in races where Republicans win, they’re doing so by much smaller margins than in previous years. It’s a clear sign from voters that they don’t think the party in power is listening to their needs. It’s led to Democrats regaining control of the Michigan state senate, the Virginia House, and chipping away at Republican supermajorities in Arkansas and Florida.

Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, believes Republicans may have overplayed their hand, and 2026 could be the year Republicans lose control of a number of state legislatures where they hold narrow majorities.

*The Associated Press contributed to this story.

@couriernewsroom
As Democrats make gains in places Republicans assumed they could always win, National Correspondent Camaron Stevenson explains why the GOP’s redistricting advantage is no longer a sure thing.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

Timeline: Epstein’s 30-year friendship with billionaire Leon Black

The House Oversight Committee is scheduled on Friday to interview a fourth implicated billionaire as part of its investigation into the government’s handling of the case against Jeffrey Epstein’s international human trafficking ring.

The transcribed interview will be the first time Wall Street billionaire Leon Black has appeared before Congress to answer questions about his relationship with Epstein, although it is far from the first time he’s been asked to testify. Black successfully avoided subpoenas from prosecutors as a defendant in 2021 and a witness 2026, when civil cases he was named in were settled before he was compelled to speak.

Black’s long, sordid relationship with Epstein is of particular interest to congressional investigators, who view his role as friend and financier as crucial to understanding how a failed high school teacher came to own two islands, develop close relationships with the world’s richest and most powerful people, amass a personal fortune of over $500 million, and operate an international trafficking and money laundering network seemingly undisturbed for nearly 30 years.

US Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who launched an investigation into Epstein’s finances in 2021, has uncovered a number of suspicious financial entanglements between Black and Epstein. In addition to overpayments for tax services to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, Wyden claims Black “appears to have” used Epstein as an intermediary to avoid paying taxes on payments made to women he had affairs with. He’s also raised questions surrounding Epstein’s use of Black’s transactions to launder money to his trafficking accomplices in Eastern Europe.

“It appears that Epstein kept close tabs of women who Black had reached settlements/NDAs with and reached out to Russian government officials to help Black with these so-called problems,” Wyden said in a statement. “Epstein even appears to have acted as a middleman for Black to pay women on Black’s behalf, raising concerns of potential money laundering.”

Wyden’s inquiries into Epstein and Black’s financial dealings have so far been stymied by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has refused to grant congressional investigators access to confidential financial documents. The Treasury Department also provided Wyden extremely limited access during the Biden administration — just one day onsite — and in that short period, investigators identified roughly $1 billion in suspicious transactions flowing through Epstein’s accounts. Wyden has requested expanded access from Bessent, who in turn has threatened to launch financial investigations into Wyden.

Black’s interview with the Oversight Committee could provide a glimpse into Epstein’s financial web, as the two were monetarily entangled from 1997 to 2018.

To better understand Black’s involvement in Epstein’s dealings, COURIER created a timeline of their relationship based on legal filings, financial records, internal correspondence, and other evidence contained in the Epstein Files, portions of which have been published in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Mid-1990s

Leon Black first meets Jeffrey Epstein.

1997

Black appoints Epstein as the sole director of the Black Family Foundation, an institution he set up as the vehicle for his charitable giving. Epstein remained on the board until 2012.

2002

A woman claimed in a lawsuit that Black raped her in 2002 when she was 16 years old at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion. The case was later dropped after the judge concluded the plaintiff had falsified evidence.

2003

Black joins a handful of Epstein’s close associates in contributing to a scrapbook commemorating Epstein’s 50th birthday.

2006

Epstein is indicted by a Florida grand jury and charged with soliciting prostitution.

2008

A woman named Guzel Ganieva claims she met Black at an International Women’s Day event, where he offered to help her make professional connections. Months later, Ganieva alleged in a lawsuit, Black flew her against her will to meet Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach, where Epstein, Black, and Sarah Kellen tried to pressure her into having a threesome with the two men. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Manhattan Supreme Court judge in May 2023, according to CNBC.

Later that year, Epstein pleads guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor.

2009

According to an ongoing investigation by the Senate Finance Committee, Black directly paid a Siberian woman named Irina Chernova hundreds of thousands of dollars over a four-year period. After 2012, Black continued making payments to Chernova through Epstein, using him as an intermediary to avoid paying the federal tax on gifts.

A full account of Chernova’s involvement with Epstein and Black can be read at American Freakshow.

On the day Epstein’s prison sentence ends for solicitation of a minor prostitute, Black sends him a message stating “Happy Days are Here Again”.

2011

Financial Trust, Epstein’s financial advisory firm, invests in an environmental company where two of Black’s sons served as board members.

Throughout 2011 and 2012, Epstein helps cultivate a relationship between Black and one of his alleged recruiters, Victoria Housez, according to an in-depth analysis conducted by American Freakshow authors Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth. Black gifts Housez more than $50,000, and she privately discusses with Epstein ways she could convince Black to bestow more of his fortune to her.

In a statement to American Freakshow, Black’s attorney denied wrongdoing, but did not respond to the allegations surrounding Housez or Chernova.

2012

Black formally hires Epstein as a tax advisor, a role for which he is compensated $170 million over six years. While on a family vacation, Black sails to Epstein’s island, allegedly to attend a barbecue.

2013

Epstein establishes Southern Trust in the US Virgin Islands after successfully negotiating lucrative tax breaks with territory officials.

Black pays him $50 million for tax services through said company.

2014

Black pays Epstein $70 million for tax services.

2015

Black made $8 million in payments from 2015 to 2018 to Eastern European women, transactions that Wyden uncovered in 2026, and said “were potentially involved in prostitutions and possible victims of

Epstein’s trafficking scheme.”

As a result of a deal brokered by Epstein, Black agrees to pay Ganieva $18 million over a 15-year period in exchange for her signing an NDA related to their relationship. Shortly after Epstein helps Black negotiate the payout plan for his mistress’ discretion, Black pays Epstein $20 million. He pays an additional $30 million for tax services.

2016

The IRS begins an audit of the finances of Black and Anastasiya Siro, a woman he had been having an affair with. Black reported $600,000 in gifts to Siro when filing his taxes, but she did not report or pay taxes on the amount. Epstein steps in to resolve the matter for both Black and Siro, who he had known since 2010.

2017

Chernova contacts Epstein about a new arrangement between her and Black, in which she was told payments would come through Epstein. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), ranking member of the Finance Committee, believes this to be an example of one of the many avenues Epstein used to launder money.

2018

Among a number of growing disagreements, Black demands Epstein pay back a $30 million loan. He ultimately repaid only $10 million, according to the New York Times.

2019

In July, Epstein is arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking. Later that month, Black tells Apollo Global Management investors he only had “a limited relationship” with Epstein.

2020

In January, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George files a civil forfeiture lawsuit against Epstein’s estate, in which she alleges that Epstein trafficked girls and women in the Caribbean and deceived USVI officials to abuse the territory’s tax code for personal gain. Months later, she announces plans to subpoena Black for his role in subsidizing Epstein’s illegal activity.

Apollo Management Group hires the law firm Dechert to conduct an independent review of Black’s relationship with Epstein and determine any potential harm it may have caused to investors.

2021

Dechert concludes its review of Black and determines no wrongdoing. Months later, Black resigns from Apollo due to the “relentless” effects of Dechert’s report. The report omits most details around Black’s financial arrangements with Ganieva and Siro, as was later reported by the New York Times.

2022

Cheri Pierson files a lawsuit against Black and Epstein’s estate, alleging sexual abuse in 2002. Pierson dropped the suit in 2024.

2023

In January, Black settles with the US Virgin Islands for $62.5 million and admits that “Epstein used the money Black paid him to partially fund his operations in the Virgin Islands.”

2025

The government releases portions of its investigation into Epstein, as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The release includes sensitive details about Black’s finances, and previously unknown details about his relationship with Epstein.

2026

As a result of the information revealed in the Epstein Files, Apollo Global Management shareholders in March file a class action lawsuit against Black, accusing him of fraud by lying about his relationship with Epstein.

In May, Black is scheduled for a deposition for another Epstein-related civil lawsuit, filed by his victims against Bank of America. The parties involved reach a settlement agreement days before Black is due to testify.

Black is currently scheduled to appear for a transcribed interview on June 26 with the House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the government’s handling of the Epstein case.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. David Valadao, California’s 22nd Congressional District

Since taking office in 2012, Rep. Valadao has:

• Listed as both one of the poorest and richest members of Congress, due to his practice of taking out millions of dollars in debt, then filing for protected bankruptcy to retain his assets

• Sponsored 88 pieces of legislation, one of which has been signed into law

• Lost his seat for one term in 2018 by less than 1,000 votes

• Voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare

• Potentially kicked 40% of his district off its health insurance in order to subsidize billionaire tax cuts

• Catered legislation to benefit a wealthy donor who “uses more water than every home in LA combined”

• Refused to pay a lawsuit settlement of $325,000 for paying farm workers less than minimum wage

• Maintained generally terrible working conditions on his farms, resulting in injuries and amputations

Fun Facts

Valadao has spent the last decade walking on a Trumpian tightrope, opposing nearly everything about the President as a person but supporting every fiber of his agenda. The balancing act began in 2016, when Valadao withdrew his endorsement of Trump on the grounds that he “denigrates people based on their ethnicity, religion, or disabilities.” His conviction didn’t extend to policymaking, however; Valadao voted in line with Trump 98% of the time and shielded the president from financial transparency.

This unholy alliance temporarily cost Valadao his seat when he was voted out in 2018. He won back in 2020, after receiving Trump’s endorsement, but the latter’s loss that year set the stage for Valadao’s loyalties to be tested again. After Trump incited the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in an attempt to retain power, Valadao was one of 10 Republicans who voted in favor of impeachment. He later went against his party by voting to establish the January 6th Committee.

The two mended fences eventually, and Valadao proudly attended the second inauguration of a man he believed goaded a violent mob into attacking the US Capitol so he could overturn the 2020 election results.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

The House Oversight Committee is scheduled on Friday to interview a fourth implicated billionaire as part of its investigation into the government’s handling of the case against Jeffrey Epstein’s international human trafficking ring.

The transcribed interview will be the first time Wall Street billionaire Leon Black has appeared before Congress to answer questions about his relationship with Epstein, although it is far from the first time he’s been asked to testify. Black successfully avoided subpoenas from prosecutors as a defendant in 2021 and a witness 2026, when civil cases he was named in were settled before he was compelled to speak.

Black’s long, sordid relationship with Epstein is of particular interest to congressional investigators, who view his role as friend and financier as crucial to understanding how a failed high school teacher came to own two islands, develop close relationships with the world’s richest and most powerful people, amass a personal fortune of over $500 million, and operate an international trafficking and money laundering network seemingly undisturbed for nearly 30 years.

US Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who launched an investigation into Epstein’s finances in 2021, has uncovered a number of suspicious financial entanglements between Black and Epstein. In addition to overpayments for tax services to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, Wyden claims Black “appears to have” used Epstein as an intermediary to avoid paying taxes on payments made to women he had affairs with. He’s also raised questions surrounding Epstein’s use of Black’s transactions to launder money to his trafficking accomplices in Eastern Europe.

“It appears that Epstein kept close tabs of women who Black had reached settlements/NDAs with and reached out to Russian government officials to help Black with these so-called problems,” Wyden said in a statement. “Epstein even appears to have acted as a middleman for Black to pay women on Black’s behalf, raising concerns of potential money laundering.”

Wyden’s inquiries into Epstein and Black’s financial dealings have so far been stymied by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has refused to grant congressional investigators access to confidential financial documents. The Treasury Department also provided Wyden extremely limited access during the Biden administration — just one day onsite — and in that short period, investigators identified roughly $1 billion in suspicious transactions flowing through Epstein’s accounts. Wyden has requested expanded access from Bessent, who in turn has threatened to launch financial investigations into Wyden.

Black’s interview with the Oversight Committee could provide a glimpse into Epstein’s financial web, as the two were monetarily entangled from 1997 to 2018.

To better understand Black’s involvement in Epstein’s dealings, COURIER created a timeline of their relationship based on legal filings, financial records, internal correspondence, and other evidence contained in the Epstein Files, portions of which have been published in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Subscribe now

Mid-1990s

Leon Black first meets Jeffrey Epstein.

1997

Black appoints Epstein as the sole director of the Black Family Foundation, an institution he set up as the vehicle for his charitable giving. Epstein remained on the board until 2012.

2002

A woman claimed in a lawsuit that Black raped her in 2002 when she was 16 years old at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion. The case was later dropped after the judge concluded the plaintiff had falsified evidence.

2003

Black joins a handful of Epstein’s close associates in contributing to a scrapbook commemorating Epstein’s 50th birthday.

2006

Epstein is indicted by a Florida grand jury and charged with soliciting prostitution.

2008

A woman named Guzel Ganieva claims she met Black at an International Women’s Day event, where he offered to help her make professional connections. Months later, Ganieva alleged in a lawsuit, Black flew her against her will to meet Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach, where Epstein, Black, and Sarah Kellen tried to pressure her into having a threesome with the two men. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Manhattan Supreme Court judge in May 2023, according to CNBC.

Later that year, Epstein pleads guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor.

2009

According to an ongoing investigation by the Senate Finance Committee, Black directly paid a Siberian woman named Irina Chernova hundreds of thousands of dollars over a four-year period. After 2012, Black continued making payments to Chernova through Epstein, using him as an intermediary to avoid paying the federal tax on gifts.

A full account of Chernova’s involvement with Epstein and Black can be read at American Freakshow.

On the day Epstein’s prison sentence ends for solicitation of a minor prostitute, Black sends him a message stating “Happy Days are Here Again”.

2011

Financial Trust, Epstein’s financial advisory firm, invests in an environmental company where two of Black’s sons served as board members.

Throughout 2011 and 2012, Epstein helps cultivate a relationship between Black and one of his alleged recruiters, Victoria Housez, according to an in-depth analysis conducted by American Freakshow authors Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth. Black gifts Housez more than $50,000, and she privately discusses with Epstein ways she could convince Black to bestow more of his fortune to her.

In a statement to American Freakshow, Black’s attorney denied wrongdoing, but did not respond to the allegations surrounding Housez or Chernova.

2012

Black formally hires Epstein as a tax advisor, a role for which he is compensated $170 million over six years. While on a family vacation, Black sails to Epstein’s island, allegedly to attend a barbecue.

2013

Epstein establishes Southern Trust in the US Virgin Islands after successfully negotiating lucrative tax breaks with territory officials.

Black pays him $50 million for tax services through said company.

2014

Black pays Epstein $70 million for tax services.

2015

Black made $8 million in payments from 2015 to 2018 to Eastern European women, transactions that Wyden uncovered in 2026, and said “were potentially involved in prostitutions and possible victims of Epstein’s trafficking scheme.”

As a result of a deal brokered by Epstein, Black agrees to pay Ganieva $18 million over a 15-year period in exchange for her signing an NDA related to their relationship. Shortly after Epstein helps Black negotiate the payout plan for his mistress’ discretion, Black pays Epstein $20 million. He pays an additional $30 million for tax services.

2016

The IRS begins an audit of the finances of Black and Anastasiya Siro, a woman he had been having an affair with. Black reported $600,000 in gifts to Siro when filing his taxes, but she did not report or pay taxes on the amount. Epstein steps in to resolve the matter for both Black and Siro, who he had known since 2010.

2017

Chernova contacts Epstein about a new arrangement between her and Black, in which she was told payments would come through Epstein. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), ranking member of the Finance Committee, believes this to be an example of one of the many avenues Epstein used to launder money.

2018

Among a number of growing disagreements, Black demands Epstein pay back a $30 million loan. He ultimately repaid only $10 million, according to the New York Times.

2019

In July, Epstein is arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking. Later that month, Black tells Apollo Global Management investors he only had “a limited relationship” with Epstein.

2020

In January, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George files a civil forfeiture lawsuit against Epstein’s estate, in which she alleges that Epstein trafficked girls and women in the Caribbean and deceived USVI officials to abuse the territory’s tax code for personal gain. Months later, she announces plans to subpoena Black for his role in subsidizing Epstein’s illegal activity.

Apollo Management Group hires the law firm Dechert to conduct an independent review of Black’s relationship with Epstein and determine any potential harm it may have caused to investors.

2021

Dechert concludes its review of Black and determines no wrongdoing. Months later, Black resigns from Apollo due to the “relentless” effects of Dechert’s report. The report omits most details around Black’s financial arrangements with Ganieva and Siro, as was later reported by the New York Times.

2022

Cheri Pierson files a lawsuit against Black and Epstein’s estate, alleging sexual abuse in 2002. Pierson dropped the suit in 2024.

2023

In January, Black settles with the US Virgin Islands for $62.5 million and admits that “Epstein used the money Black paid him to partially fund his operations in the Virgin Islands.”

2025

The government releases portions of its investigation into Epstein, as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The release includes sensitive details about Black’s finances, and previously unknown details about his relationship with Epstein.

2026

As a result of the information revealed in the Epstein Files, Apollo Global Management shareholders in March file a class action lawsuit against Black, accusing him of fraud by lying about his relationship with Epstein.

In May, Black is scheduled for a deposition for another Epstein-related civil lawsuit, filed by his victims against Bank of America. The parties involved reach a settlement agreement days before Black is due to testify.

Black is currently scheduled to appear for a transcribed interview on June 26 with the House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the government’s handling of the Epstein case.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

ICE rushes public comment period to create mega-prison in Arizona desert

The Department of Homeland Security is pushing through plans to reopen a closed, 500-capacity prison in southern Arizona and use it to hold nearly 1,500 detainees.

The proposed location in Marana has been met with fierce opposition from local communities. Earlier this year, both the Pima County Board of Supervisors and the neighboring Tucson City Council voted to oppose the site’s use as a detention center. In an apparent attempt to sidestep that pushback, DHS has cut its typical 30-day public comment period down to eight days.

Because this is a federal project, members of the public from across the country are encouraged to submit comments regarding the proposal to icesustainability@ice.dhs.gov by June 18. Grassroots group Pima Resists ICE first noticed the expedited timeline only days before it was set to close. The group has carefully monitored the proposed site since it was first announced, and lead organizer Caroline Isaacs believes the attempt to block the community out of the process is a sign that public pressure is working.

“This is a pattern that we’re seeing in this administration, and particularly within DHS of systematic dismantling of any shred of accountability, of transparency, of checks and balances,” Isaacs told COURIER. “It’s very clear from every step that they’ve taken that they have no interest in hearing community concerns or addressing them, and they’re not going to go out of their way to allow for what used to be standard public input processes and good governance.”

Isaacs advised anyone submitting comments to focus on the purpose of the public comment period — namely, environmental concerns. While the administration could dismiss human rights violations as outside the scope of the review, issues relating to the site’s potentially hazardous location on a 100-year floodplain, the light pollution that could come with increased capacity, or the impact of additional barbed wire fences on property values are more likely to be seriously considered.

The Marana proposal is one of the latest in a string of prison camps the Trump administration has attempted to rush through without public consent. Local governments in Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Virginia, Utah, and several other states have enacted measures of opposition to stall or prevent facilities from opening, though those efforts have only succeeded in a handful of cases.

Members of Congress have joined protestors in pressuring DHS to abandon its incarceration plans in Georgia, New York, and Arizona, with mixed results. The Trump administration ignored requests from Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) and the residents of Circle City, Georgia, and purchased a site expected to hold 10,000 people. In response, city officials determined there wasn’t adequate utility infrastructure and shut off the water to the site. In Chester, New York, DHS abandoned its plans after Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) collected more than 20,000 petition signatures from community members in opposition to the site.

In Surprise, Arizona, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) was initially opposed to the proposed site in his district, but got on board after DHS officials assured him they would listen to community concerns. Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ), who represents Marana, has remained silent on the issue, prompting his colleague in a neighboring district to take action.

Once again, DHS is rushing through a public comment period to avoid public scrutiny and expedite Trump’s mass deportation agenda. Our community has already made its concerns clear. DHS should extend the review period by at least 30 days to give the public a meaningful opportunity to review this report and provide feedback,” said Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ). “Human beings are not cargo to be warehoused in detention facilities, where far too many are denied even the most basic medical care and treatment. DHS should abandon its plans for this facility, just as they have done with others around the country.”

“Detention expansion is a money-making machine for the private prison industry. Arbitrary deportation quotas mean more beds, bigger contracts, and more profits for companies that have poured millions into Trump’s campaign,” Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) said after the site was announced. “Time and again, these facilities have operated with too little oversight and accountability – with devastating human consequences, including dozens of deaths in custody. Our community deserves transparency, and families deserve an immigration system rooted in dignity and due process, not corporate profit.”

Opposition to the mass incarceration of immigrants has risen sharply since December 2025, when plans made by the Trump administration to convert industrial warehouses into detention camps were leaked to the Washington Post. The decision to hold massive amounts of people in uninhabitable warehouses, coupled with the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti by ICE agents in Minnesota, caused a seismic shift in public support for the president’s anti-immigration efforts.

*Editor’s Note: This story has been updated with a statement from Rep. Grijalva.

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Marina Lacerda was twelve years old when she had to become the main provider for her mom and little sister. She was able to get odd jobs around Queens thanks to an older friend — nothing glamorous, but it kept the lights on.

After about a year, her friend came to her with what sounded like a huge break: a rich guy in Manhattan who paid $300 for massages. She’d told him about Marina’s situation and he said to bring her by. In 2002, that was two weeks’ rent — money that would normally take a week of hard work to earn.

So she went.

“I immediately thought, wow, this is the real deal. Having a maid open the door and seeing all that — it was so different from what I was used to,” Marina told COURIER. “Seeing that, and just walking into his mansion, and walking into his waiting room, seeing all the pictures with different presidents and different friends and celebrities. I was just so impressed — and, you know, shocked that I was even in this mansion.”

The extravagance was intimidating, but Marina’s friend reassured her it would be a quick job with a big payoff. The maid took them up to the third floor, where they waited in the massage parlor until the owner arrived.

“He walked into the room, he was wearing a robe, and he comes up and he puts out his hand,” Marina recalled. “And he says, ‘Hi, my name is Jeffrey.’”

Marina was first ensnared by Jeffrey Epstein when she was 13 years old and remained in his web for six years. The grooming and sexual abuse she encountered with him wasn’t entirely unfamiliar; it reminded her of her stepfather, who would creep into her room at night when she was younger.

Both men preyed on her youth and her desperation. But while she eventually reported her stepfather to the police to put an end to his abuse, Epstein was experienced. He knew exactly how to coerce her both into coming back and into silence. Every visit ended with a thick envelope of cash, either from him directly or from his executive assistant, Lesley Groff. Lesley even gave Marina her cell phone number and encouraged her to call if she needed anything. There was always just enough money to help Marina get by — but never enough for her to break the cycle of abuse.

“If I was going to get paid, Jeffrey Epstein would pay me directly with cash. But if I did need money or if I wanted something else, or if I needed furniture, I would have to call Lesley Groff,” Marina said. “If I even wanted to speak to Jeffrey Epstein, I had to go through Lesley Groff.”

Groff was questioned by congressional investigators in June as part of their probe into the government’s handling of the now-closed case against Epstein’s trafficking empire. She claimed to have had absolutely no knowledge of her boss’ criminal activity during her long tenure as his executive assistant.

“For 18 years, I worked for Dr. Jekyll but was never permitted to see the true Mr. Hyde,” Groff said in a prepared statement. “Mr. Epstein was, in hindsight, a master manipulater [sic] and deceiver who separated his legitimate life from his secret life as an abuser and made sure, that as his secretary, those two worlds did not collide.”

But accounts from Marina and other survivors tell a completely different story. Lesley was the point-of-contact for New York girls in Epstein’s orbit, just as Sarah Kellen was for girls in Florida. Lesley met Marina in person, scheduled massages over the phone, and gave her money.

Marina may have been forced to do adult things, but she was very much a child — in voice, in size, in mentality. Those aren’t the sort of things that go unnoticed. And, by all accounts, they didn’t.

Marina said that by the time she was 17, Epstein had lost interest in her sexually and told her she was looking and acting too old for him.

That’s when he and Lesley pushed her into recruiting.

“I didn’t know what trafficking was,” Marina said. “I didn’t think that me bringing my friends and some of the girls that I thought needed help, who were also immigrants, were also getting kicked out of their house and were also in a house where there was drug abuse, where there was alcohol abuse. I’m thinking that I’m helping these women — I’m sorry, these girls.”

For a little while, she did what her friend had done: found girls in her neighborhood who could use the money, brought them to Epstein’s mansion, and they both got paid.

Marina didn’t recruit for long. She eventually cut ties and tried to move on from Epstein completely. And she thought she had, until a few years later, there was a knock at her door.

“So in 2008, when the FBI agents reached my door and knocked on the door, I opened up the door and they introduced themselves and they said, we want to talk to you about Jeffrey Epstein. And immediately, my first reaction was like, ‘Oh no,’” Marina said. I closed the door, and when I closed the door, the FBI agent put her foot on the door and said to me, ‘You’re going to speak to me whether you like it or not.’ And she dropped her card inside my house and I closed the door. And when I closed the door, I picked up the card and I was just like, ‘Oh my God, like, what do I do?”

As Marina describes it, the government treated her more like a suspect than a victim — and it looked like they were still deciding which one she was.

Buried within the Epstein Files are internal documents and email correspondence between the agents assigned to Marina’s case and Epstein’s attorneys. These files pull back the curtain on what was going on. Many of the source files have since been taken down by the US Department of Justice after it was discovered that they were improperly redacted; Marina’s name was illegally left unredacted at least 50 times, even on pages where the names of Epstein’s known accomplices were blacked out.

Prosecutors were unsure how to handle the complicated victim/accomplice structure Epstein had created: was Marina a victim due to the sexual abuse, or an accomplice as a result of her participation in recruiting other girls? The FBI wanted to use her as a witness, but at the time of their visit, had not determined whether or not to grant her immunity.

“Lacerda was a victim (she was paid to perform sexual acts when she was under 18) and was also paid to bring girls to Epstein, thus Lacerda could be classified both as a victim and as a co-conspirator,” agents wrote in their immunity determination, listing four federal crimes she would face if immunity was not granted.

While prosecutors deliberated, Marina reached out to the only person she knew with the resources to help.

“I ran up my stairs and I called Lesley and I said, ‘Lesley, I’m very confused. I have two FBI agents here asking me about Jeffrey Epstein.’ And she says, ‘Don’t worry, Jeffrey’s going to call you right away.’ Jeffrey calls me within seconds, and when he called me, I said, ‘What the hell is going on? Why are there FBI agents in my door?’” Marina said. “And he said, ‘Listen, don’t call me. Don’t call the office. Don’t do anything.’ And I said, ‘Jeffrey, I’m very scared. I need to call these people. The FBI agent said that I need to speak to her.’ He said, ‘Don’t worry, I’m going to have lawyers call you.’ And within five minutes I had lawyers calling me.”

After that, the lawyers went to work — for Jeffrey Epstein.

“I went to their office and my first question was, ‘Should I be completely honest about everything?’ And they said, ‘Yes, you need to be completely honest about everything that you know,’” Marina said. “And I was honest, I think too honest to the point that they were telling me, ‘You’re going to go to jail. You were trafficking women.’ And I was like, ‘But I was 14 years old, 13, 15 years old. They’re like, ‘Well, what you did is against the law.’”

The FBI did eventually determine that Marina should receive immunity and wanted to bring her in to testify before a grand jury, but instead of contacting her directly, prosecutors went through Epstein’s attorneys. Marina was never told about the deal, and Epstein’s lawyers told prosecutors that if they compelled her to appear, she would plead the Fifth and refuse to cooperate with the investigation.

As a result, prosecutors left the entire New York side of Epstein’s operation out of the 2008 indictment. It severely limited their case and paved the way for the sweetheart deal that allowed Epstein to continue trafficking for another decade.

Marina knew none of this until the Epstein Files were released.

She also discovered an answer to a question she’d had for years — one that could provide a tangible, undeniable thread connecting Epstein’s clients, accomplices, and co-conspirators to the countless crimes they committed.

“It’s crazy how today I can see all my files and see how the FBI found me in 2008. From what I understand, and from what I’ve learned so far, it’s that they had a piece of paper with my name on it, and he was in his West Palm Beach home,” Marina said. “He threw it out in the garbage, and I guess they were conducting an investigation, and they found that piece of paper. And that’s how they found me in New York in 2008.”

According to a 2019 prosecution memo, Epstein kept notes on his criminal conspiracy. He wrote down his conversations, how he spent his cash, and kept a ledger of where his money was going and what it was used for. Those notes are referenced in the files, but don’t appear to have been released by the DOJ, an omission that would be in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker

Since taking office in 2007, Sen. Wicker has:

• Seen his net worth decrease from $1.5M to $796K

• Sponsored 332 bills, 15 of which have been signed into law

• Believes the US should execute a preemptive nuclear strike against Russia

• Opposes humanitarian aid of any kind to Palestine

• Opposed President Obama nominating a Supreme Court Justice in an election year: “American people should have the opportunity to make their voices heard before filling a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court.”

• Supported President Trump nominating a Supreme Court Justice in an election year: “Republicans promised to confirm well-qualified, conservative judges and justices to the federal courts. We should continue to fulfill this promise.”

Fun Facts

Sen. Wicker is loyal to his campaign donors — and the return on their investment has been well worth it. One of his first successes in office was to guarantee $6 million in spending to Aurora Flight Sciences, a defense contractor whose president had donated $8,000 to his first Senate run in 2006. Wicker has continued to fight for the private company’s bottom line, securing them another $48 million contract in 2018.

His opposition to addressing climate change appears to be financially motivated as well. Wicker was quiet on the subject until the oil and gas industry began donating to his campaign in 2012. Two years later, he was pushing for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. In 2015, Wicker was the only senator to vote against the formal recognition of climate change, and in 2017, he was one of the primary voices that convinced Trump to leave the Paris Climate Agreement.

Wicker was generously rewarded for his actions: he received $200,000 from the oil and gas industry before the Paris pullout and another $1 million in the years since.

Subscribe now

Share

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Marina Lacerda was twelve years old when she had to become the main provider for her mom and little sister. She was able to get odd jobs around Queens thanks to an older friend — nothing glamorous, but it kept the lights on.

After about a year, her friend came to her with what sounded like a huge break: a rich guy in Manhattan who paid $300 for massages. She’d told him about Marina’s situation and he said to bring her by. In 2002, that was two weeks’ rent — money that would normally take a week of hard work to earn.

So she went.

“I immediately thought, wow, this is the real deal. Having a maid open the door and seeing all that — it was so different from what I was used to,” Marina told COURIER. “Seeing that, and just walking into his mansion, and walking into his waiting room, seeing all the pictures with different presidents and different friends and celebrities. I was just so impressed — and, you know, shocked that I was even in this mansion.”

The extravagance was intimidating, but Marina’s friend reassured her it would be a quick job with a big payoff. The maid took them up to the third floor, where they waited in the massage parlor until the owner arrived.

“He walked into the room, he was wearing a robe, and he comes up and he puts out his hand,” Marina recalled. “And he says, ‘Hi, my name is Jeffrey.’”

Subscribe now

Marina was first ensnared by Jeffrey Epstein when she was 13 years old and remained in his web for six years. The grooming and sexual abuse she encountered with him wasn’t entirely unfamiliar; it reminded her of her stepfather, who would creep into her room at night when she was younger.

Both men preyed on her youth and her desperation. But while she eventually reported her stepfather to the police to put an end to his abuse, Epstein was experienced. He knew exactly how to coerce her both into coming back and into silence. Every visit ended with a thick envelope of cash, either from him directly or from his executive assistant, Lesley Groff. Lesley even gave Marina her cell phone number and encouraged her to call if she needed anything. There was always just enough money to help Marina get by — but never enough for her to break the cycle of abuse.

“If I was going to get paid, Jeffrey Epstein would pay me directly with cash. But if I did need money or if I wanted something else, or if I needed furniture, I would have to call Lesley Groff,” Marina said. “If I even wanted to speak to Jeffrey Epstein, I had to go through Lesley Groff.”

Groff was questioned by congressional investigators in June as part of their probe into the government’s handling of the now-closed case against Epstein’s trafficking empire. She claimed to have had absolutely no knowledge of her boss’ criminal activity during her long tenure as his executive assistant.

“For 18 years, I worked for Dr. Jekyll but was never permitted to see the true Mr. Hyde,” Groff said in a prepared statement. “Mr. Epstein was, in hindsight, a master manipulater [sic] and deceiver who separated his legitimate life from his secret life as an abuser and made sure, that as his secretary, those two worlds did not collide.”

But accounts from Marina and other survivors tell a completely different story. Lesley was the point-of-contact for New York girls in Epstein’s orbit, just as Sarah Kellen was for girls in Florida. Lesley met Marina in person, scheduled massages over the phone, and gave her money.

Marina may have been forced to do adult things, but she was very much a child — in voice, in size, in mentality. Those aren’t the sort of things that go unnoticed. And, by all accounts, they didn’t.

Marina said that by the time she was 17, Epstein had lost interest in her sexually and told her she was looking and acting too old for him.

That’s when he and Lesley pushed her into recruiting.

“I didn’t know what trafficking was,” Marina said. “I didn’t think that me bringing my friends and some of the girls that I thought needed help, who were also immigrants, were also getting kicked out of their house and were also in a house where there was drug abuse, where there was alcohol abuse. I’m thinking that I’m helping these women — I’m sorry, these girls.”

For a little while, she did what her friend had done: found girls in her neighborhood who could use the money, brought them to Epstein’s mansion, and they both got paid.

Marina didn’t recruit for long. She eventually cut ties and tried to move on from Epstein completely. And she thought she had, until a few years later, there was a knock at her door.

“So in 2008, when the FBI agents reached my door and knocked on the door, I opened up the door and they introduced themselves and they said, we want to talk to you about Jeffrey Epstein. And immediately, my first reaction was like, ‘Oh no,’” Marina said. I closed the door, and when I closed the door, the FBI agent put her foot on the door and said to me, ‘You’re going to speak to me whether you like it or not.’ And she dropped her card inside my house and I closed the door. And when I closed the door, I picked up the card and I was just like, ‘Oh my God, like, what do I do?”

As Marina describes it, the government treated her more like a suspect than a victim — and it looked like they were still deciding which one she was.

Buried within the Epstein Files are internal documents and email correspondence between the agents assigned to Marina’s case and Epstein’s attorneys. These files pull back the curtain on what was going on. Many of the source files have since been taken down by the US Department of Justice after it was discovered that they were improperly redacted; Marina’s name was illegally left unredacted at least 50 times, even on pages where the names of Epstein’s known accomplices were blacked out.

Subscribe now

Prosecutors were unsure how to handle the complicated victim/accomplice structure Epstein had created: was Marina a victim due to the sexual abuse, or an accomplice as a result of her participation in recruiting other girls? The FBI wanted to use her as a witness, but at the time of their visit, had not determined whether or not to grant her immunity.

“Lacerda was a victim (she was paid to perform sexual acts when she was under 18) and was also paid to bring girls to Epstein, thus Lacerda could be classified both as a victim and as a co-conspirator,” agents wrote in their immunity determination, listing four federal crimes she would face if immunity was not granted.

While prosecutors deliberated, Marina reached out to the only person she knew with the resources to help.

“I ran up my stairs and I called Lesley and I said, ‘Lesley, I’m very confused. I have two FBI agents here asking me about Jeffrey Epstein.’ And she says, ‘Don’t worry, Jeffrey’s going to call you right away.’ Jeffrey calls me within seconds, and when he called me, I said, ‘What the hell is going on? Why are there FBI agents in my door?’” Marina said. “And he said, ‘Listen, don’t call me. Don’t call the office. Don’t do anything.’ And I said, ‘Jeffrey, I’m very scared. I need to call these people. The FBI agent said that I need to speak to her.’ He said, ‘Don’t worry, I’m going to have lawyers call you.’ And within five minutes I had lawyers calling me.”

After that, the lawyers went to work — for Jeffrey Epstein.

“I went to their office and my first question was, ‘Should I be completely honest about everything?’ And they said, ‘Yes, you need to be completely honest about everything that you know,’” Marina said. “And I was honest, I think too honest to the point that they were telling me, ‘You’re going to go to jail. You were trafficking women.’ And I was like, ‘But I was 14 years old, 13, 15 years old. They’re like, ‘Well, what you did is against the law.’”

The FBI did eventually determine that Marina should receive immunity and wanted to bring her in to testify before a grand jury, but instead of contacting her directly, prosecutors went through Epstein’s attorneys. Marina was never told about the deal, and Epstein’s lawyers told prosecutors that if they compelled her to appear, she would plead the Fifth and refuse to cooperate with the investigation.

As a result, prosecutors left the entire New York side of Epstein’s operation out of the 2008 indictment. It severely limited their case and paved the way for the sweetheart deal that allowed Epstein to continue trafficking for another decade.

Marina knew none of this until the Epstein Files were released.

She also discovered an answer to a question she’d had for years — one that could provide a tangible, undeniable thread connecting Epstein’s clients, accomplices, and co-conspirators to the countless crimes they committed.

“It’s crazy how today I can see all my files and see how the FBI found me in 2008. From what I understand, and from what I’ve learned so far, it’s that they had a piece of paper with my name on it, and he was in his West Palm Beach home,” Marina said. “He threw it out in the garbage, and I guess they were conducting an investigation, and they found that piece of paper. And that’s how they found me in New York in 2008.”

According to a 2019 prosecution memo, Epstein kept notes on his criminal conspiracy. He wrote down his conversations, how he spent his cash, and kept a ledger of where his money was going and what it was used for. Those notes are referenced in the files, but don’t appear to have been released by the DOJ, an omission that would be in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

The House Oversight Committee on Wednesday interviewed a third billionaire as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal enterprise, providing further clarity into the world of wealth and privilege that fostered his trafficking operation.

Tech billionaire Bill Gates sat with congressional investigators for over four hours, answering questions about his relationship with Epstein and responding to accusations made against him. Like fast-fashion mogul Les Wexner, Gates chalked up the relationship to poor judgement, allowing business interests to trump any ethical concerns. And like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Gates denied having a personal relationship with Epstein, despite evidence from both of their wives at the time to the contrary.

While the trio’s answers to the committee were fairly sanitized, filtered through high-profile lawyers and exceptionally poor memories, Oversight Committee member Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), said the broad similarities revealed an austere mentality collectively held by our country’s wealthiest elites.

“Ultimately, what this shows to be is this culture in the Epstein Class that exists in the billionaire class in this country, of legitimizing people even when they have committed crimes,” said Ansari. “It’s not just about Bill Gates, but all of the other rich and powerful people who surrounded Jeffrey Epstein and continued to engage with him and meet with him and hang out with him. That is what allowed Jeffrey Epstein to continue the crimes and to continue abusing countless other women, even after 2008 until 2019, when he was finally arrested.​​”

Nearly every person interviewed by the committee who wasn’t a survivor of Epstein’s depravity has been adamant that, despite their proximity to him, they were completely unaware of his multibillion-dollar international criminal enterprise that claimed over 1,000 victims. Even the financial institutions that facilitated and documented Epstein’s money laundering deny any knowledge of wrongdoing, despite paying more than $1 billion in civil lawsuit settlements to keep cases against them from going to trial.

For Gates, Wexner, Lutnick, and Wall Street billionaire Leon Black — one of Epstein’s primary bankrollers, who is scheduled to testify June 26 — Epstein’s criminal history and rumors surrounding his sexual abuse seemed to warrant such little consideration that it didn’t even register as part of standard business due diligence. Gates, who built his fortune by carefully analyzing Microsoft’s startup competitors and crushing them by way of illegal monopolization, claims he “didn’t take the time to “fully understand the extent of the crimes [Epstein] committed” when he sought to leverage billions from the disgraced financier for his philanthropic endeavors.

“It’s obviously really, really troubling, and I’m somebody who believes that Bill Gates has done extraordinary philanthropic work around the world and truly life-saving work,” committee member Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), told Politico. “But we obviously have to separate our feelings about that from this investigation, and those two things co-exist.”

While Gates sought money from Epstein’s network, Wexner and Black entrusted their own wealth to him, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Wexner went so far as to grant Epstein power of attorney over his personal finances, and Black admitted in 2023 that he helped fund operations on Epstein’s islands in the US Virgin Islands.

Fellow billionaire and Epstein associate President Donald Trump similarly maintained a relationship with the deceased sex trafficker, though his association was primarily social. The pair were known to spend significant time together, and it was revealed in 2025 that Epstein used Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort as a recruiting ground, grooming young female employees and luring them to his neighboring mansion, where he sexually abused them.

Ansari says it’s simply not believable that men who had climbed to such high positions of power could have been completely unaware of the risks that came with associating with Epstein. The freshman congresswoman was in high school when Epstein was first arrested and remembers stories about Epstein’s pedophilia and evasion of justice percolating amongst her teenage social circles.

“I was a child in 2008 when Jeffrey Epstein got this crazy sweetheart deal, when he was accused of abusing girls, children, and then ultimately was prosecuted,” Ansari said. “Everybody knew about Jeffrey Epstein, at least about accusations against him, even if you didn’t believe the accusations.”

Attempts to Sanewash

• “I’ve Never Victimized Anyone,” Bill Gates Said in a Hearing on the Epstein Case.

• Bill Gates calls Epstein meetings a ‘grave error’ while defending actions in house testimony

• Bill Gates Tells Congress His Affairs Had Nothing to Do With Epstein

Far-Right Spin

• ‘GRAVE ERROR’: Diabolical Depopulationist Bill Gates Reveals Information That Jeffrey Epstein Tried to ‘Leverage’ Against Him

• Prominent Nick Kristof Donor Bill Gates Questioned By Congress Over Yearslong Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein

• We Asked Lawmakers Why Epstein’s Pal Bill Gates Was Allowed To Testify Behind Closed Doors

Share

From COURIER Texas: Republicans held a hearing to defend Turning Point USA from the SPLC. Rep. Jasmine Crockett responded by reading Charlie Kirk’s own words aloud, then asked a former federal prosecutor what she thought.

@couriertexasRepublicans held a hearing to defend Turning Point USA from the SPLC. Rep. Jasmine Crockett responded by reading Charlie Kirk's own words aloud, then asked a former federal prosecutor what she thought.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Mike Bost, Illinois’ 12th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2015, Rep. Mike Bost has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $385K to $478K

• Sponsored 140 bills, seven of which have been signed into law

• In 1986, a beagle bit his daughter. He drove to the owner’s house, found the dog in its kennel, shot it, and killed it

• Got so upset during a debate over concealed carry laws that he smashed his microphone

Fun Facts

“Meltdown Mike” has a well-documented history of temper tantrums that extends far beyond destruction of property and killing household pets. Bost’s 2012 outburst, where he lost it on the Illinois House Floor and compared reading lengthy bills to being a slave. The outburst landed him a top spot on CNN’s “Best Celebrity Flip-Outs of All-Time” list and is merely one in a series of emotional moments for Bost, who is known for screaming, throwing things, and breaking whatever he can get his hands on.

While his love for firearms is well-documented, Bost’s ability to document where his guns are is less of a priority. In 2006, a prized revolver owned by Bost was used in an attack and was retrieved by the police. When they questioned Bost, he didn’t know the gun was missing and blamed a 17-year-old girl who had been staying with him—why she was living with him at the time is also unclear.

Two years later, Bost voted against a bill that would have required gun owners to report a stolen firearm as soon as it was discovered to be missing.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

[ PLEDGE ]

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Internal communications from the Department of Justice reveal that the decision to close the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein was made after a narrowly focused review of less than 7% of the case files, centered entirely on photo and video evidence.

FBI Director Kash Patel tasked agents in March 2025 to “determine if there are any images of individuals on any videos which should be considered for prosecution,” according to emails published as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The resulting review examined an estimated 400,000 of the 6 million files compiled against Epstein and did not include financial documents, personal communications, or a majority of witness testimony.

The review was conducted by an agent working out of the DOJ’s Southern District of New York office and completed within a few hours of the request. It supposedly found no evidence implicating anyone other than Epstein and his now-convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.

“All videos and images from the case file and from Epstein’s residences and devices were reviewed for evidence of a crime,” the agent wrote in their analysis. “Those reviews revealed no evidence from any of the searches we conducted or any of the files we reviewed that any videos or other images exist of any victims in this case being sexually abused. Nor did those reviews reveal any evidence that anyone other than Epstein and Maxwell participated in the sexual abuse of victims in this case.”

The internal memo sheds new light on the agency’s abrupt decision to end its investigation into Epstein’s multi-billion dollar sex trafficking operation, and adds context to the public memo on the matter that many derided as woefully insufficient. In the analysis, the agent emphasized that their determinations were made exclusively based on visual evidence, and even that was limited to include investigations specific to the SDNY.

The review omitted all surveillance footage, for example, as the 2019 search warrant executed at Epstein’s properties only authorized confiscation of evidence related to crimes committed within the preceding 20 years. Witness testimony was also severely limited: anything other than on-camera interviews with the Palm Beach Police department was not considered.

The language in Patel’s official FBI memo announcing the closure of the investigation mirrors the internal analysis almost identically, and a reexamination of the text suggests the video and image elements were the only determining factors.

“The files relating to Epstein include a large volume of images of Epstein, images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors, and over ten thousand downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography. Teams of agents, analysts, attorneys, and privacy and civil liberties experts combed through the digital and documentary evidence” the memo stated. “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

The DOJ and FBI did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

The decision to close the investigation into Epstein’s criminal enterprise without pursuing additional inquiries into potential accomplices or co-conspirators was seen as a miscarriage of justice by survivors, witnesses, and members of Congress, particularly after the DOJ acknowledged that there were “over one thousand victims” connected to the case.

Two weeks after the investigation was closed, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee forced a vote to open an inquiry into the government’s handling of the files. Patel’s decision not to pursue charges based on a small, selective portion of evidence reinforces committee members’ assertion that the DOJ has been involved in a cover-up to protect those implicated from harm.

“This is obviously really concerning. We have a lot of questions about this,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee. “We have some other information as it relates to the FBI director and the way he’s mismanaged the redaction process, so there are a lot of questions for Kash Patel, including the really serious ones that you raised. And so this is why Kash Patel has got to be in front of the committee, and he’s got to answer our questions.”

On Tuesday, Garcia sent a letter to committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) requesting that Patel and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche be brought in for questioning.

@couriernewsroomPam Bondi is refusing to answer fully in testimony. Hear from COURIER's Camaron Stevenson.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Patel and Blanche were repeatedly referenced by former Attorney General Pam Bondi during her recent interview with the committee, during which she redirected nearly all criticism to her subordinates. According to Bondi, Blanche handled the day-to-day affairs of the Epstein investigation — including transferring convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a more desirable prison with low security and luxurious amenities — while Patel oversaw the consolidation of the files and redaction process.

“Pam Bondi deflected to Todd Blanche over 30 times. I mean, it was crazy how often she would put the blame on Blanche. So, if that’s going to be the case, we want to talk to Blanche. We want to understand why Bondi was saying that Blanche was the one in charge of the redactions, in charge of the investigation. He has questions to answer,” said Garcia. “She did mention Patel numerous times on the FBI redaction side. And so we have questions obviously for Kash Patel. These are people that we want to talk to as soon as possible.”

Survivors of Epstein’s abuse have also come forward in support of Garcia’s request, demanding answers as to why they were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation and why the FBI failed to redact personal and identifying information about them while adding redactions to the names of those implicated in criminal activity.

Share

Nationwide anti-corruption tour aims to help local communities fight back against political corruption

While polarization is part of the Trump administration’s brand, Donald Trump’s insistence on using his position for personal gain has united voters around one issue: the fight against corruption.

Concerns about political corruption rank among voters’ top issues — even higher than affordability, according to polling commissioned by the political action committee End Citizens United. Anti-corruption sentiment spans the political spectrum, exacerbated by Trump’s penchant for trading stocks based on privileged information, abusing the unregulated cryptocurrency market, and selling pardons for profit and personal favors.

While the six-times-bankrupted Trump and his family have leveraged his position in public service to make $4 billion, wages across the US have remained stagnant, the cost of basic necessities has skyrocketed, and inflation has risen to its highest point in nearly a year with no sign of relief.

“Americans are fed up with the pay-to-play culture that has taken over government,” said Tiffany Muller, president of End Citizens United. “They’re watching the cost of everyday essentials like groceries and health care go up while wages stagnate and opportunities disappear. At the same time, they see their elected officials tripping over themselves to reward billionaire donors and corporations while working families get ignored.”

Many, including Muller, see her organization’s namesake as the root of the problem: since the US Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, the amount of money spent on political campaigns per cycle has exploded. In presidential elections alone, spending — largely by corporations and billionaires — increased from $16 million in 2008 to $2.6 billion in 2024.

In an attempt to tap into that frustration and give voters resources to fight back against corruption in local and national politics, End Citizens United plans to hold a nationwide Kick Out Corruption tour. At each stop, local politicians will present their plans to address the abuses of position and power that have become entrenched in modern American politics.

The tour is a joint effort between End Citizens United and anti-corruption advocacy nonprofit Stand Up America. The first stop is scheduled for June 7 in Tempe, Arizona, where Sen. Mark Kelly will deliver remarks focused primarily on stock trading. He is expected to outline his legislation that would require members of Congress and their families to put their stock holdings in blind trusts while in office, preventing them from profiting from nonpublic information obtained through their positions.

At least seven stops are planned for the tour so far. In addition to insider trading, organizers plan to address aspects of corruption that tend to fly under the radar, including politicians changing the rules in order to remain in power — such as through congressional gerrymandering — and preferential treatment for donors once in office, like the no-bid contracts awarded to private prison contractor GEO Group, a major Trump donor.

“Americans are paying more for health care, housing, and groceries because Donald Trump has handed Washington over to billionaires and powerful corporations who benefit when the system stays broken,” said Christina Harvey, executive director of Stand Up America. “The Kick Out Corruption Tour is our chance to elevate leaders who are serious about the reforms that will be needed to end the era of government by and for the powerful few.”

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Abe Hamadeh, Arizona’s 8th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2025, Rep. Hamadeh has:

• Sponsored 25 bills, none of which have been signed into law

• Praised Trump’s military birthday parade and was rewarded with Trump’s endorsement

• Allegedly altered his mom’s ballot to vote for Barack Obama in 2008

• Ran on election denialism because “the crazies love to see me fighting”

• Spent his teenage years on Ron Paul message boards, where his 4,000+ posts are littered with sexism, antisemitism, and confessions of voter fraud

Fun Facts

Shortly after winning his election, an elderly Democratic constituent went to Hamadeh’s office to talk with him. Instead of meeting with her, his office had her car towed. They then lied about it, but records from the tow yard have Hamadeh’s office as the point of contact for the tow. Not the most neighborly move, but odds are Hamadeh and the people he represents live anywhere near each other, since he doesn’t live in the district.

When first running for office in 2022, Hamadeh was an unknown longshot. It wasn’t until he tricked Trump into endorsing him—thanks to his announcement that he raised a massive $1 million in campaign contributions—that he became a frontrunner. The war chest turned out to be smoke and mirrors: Hamadeh’s brother loaned the campaign $1 million shortly before the campaign finance reporting period ended, and the money was returned shortly after.

And, oddly enough, Trump endorses Hamadeh on his birthday weekend every year.

After losing his bid to be Arizona Attorney General, Hamadeh spent the next several years—including during his congressional run—suing the state to swear him in. He claimed in court that he was “personally entitled” to be the state’s chief legal officer.

In the early 2000s, when he wasn’t on the Ron Paul Forums advocating for ethnic cleansing—he believed it was “good we’re targetting [sic] Arabs now, next we target Jews” — he was writing Sarah Palin fan mail.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.