Remember when we were all scandalized during TSF's first term, that Michael Wolfe had...

[Trueblue Texan]

…such easy access to TSF? Didn’t we read that he had his desk set up in the hallway outside the Oval or something crazy like that? His friendship with Epstein might explain that access. He seems to be as sleazy as the group he’s been writing about for the last decade.

[AZJonnie]

1. I don't know that it's fair to bash journalists for the company they keep in the course of their work

It's kinda their job to rub elbows with people who create news stories for them to report on, even if they're criminals

[Trueblue Texan]

2. If you've been reading the recently released emails, you've seen Wolfe was doing much more than rubbing elbows.

His behavior goes beyond what would account for good journalism. He’s as creepy as the rest of the pervs in my view. I’ll try to find you a link to the story that brought me to this conclusion .

[AZJonnie]

4. I would imagine one way one could earn a perv's trust is to talk pervy yourself

Anyways, I think everyone should consider this recent dump from the "Epstein Estate" as consisting of EXACTLY what Trump and Pam Bondi wanted us to see, because we have no proof that it is NOT exactly that.

And, strategically, it seems like Wolff is now an enemy of Trump, and he's someone who knows a lot of inside shit. I'm not going to tear that guy down at this point in time over some distasteful stuff in emails, unless it's REALLY bad. I'm not the sexual thought police, and the enemy of my enemy is generally my friend

[Trueblue Texan]

5. These are emails from the estate...

I don't think the "Epstein files" as voted on for release by Congress have actually been released, have they? I've read enough from Wolfe. He's a creep in my view.

[AZJonnie]

6. How do we know that the emails the Estate has weren't all reviewed by the DoJ

before giving to Congress? It's like everyone hears "they came from the Estate" and assume that must mean those are unfiltered originals, in full. I do not subscribe to that notion. Even if the Estate said that were the case I wouldn't necessarily believe them, but I don't know that they've even made any such assurances

As of 2016 (the time of the communication you mentioned below), Julie Brown's Herald article was not out yet, and Epstein had gotten a slap on the wrist for solicitation of a minor for prostitution eight years earlier, the details of which were not national news, so a given person could conceivably be forgiven for not being aware of (or possibly questioning) the real severity of the allegations. And solicitation does not require that "sex was had", in fact that level of charge implies that it did not.

As such I can forgive some people for not completely shunning Epstein as of 2016. I'm sure other people would disagree, but that's my feeling on it, ASSUMING they did not know the actual scope of what he was really doing, as a key stipulation And yes I know Wolff was talking to him after the Herald article as well, but still, he's a journalist. I give legit journalists more leeway and judge their actions by a different standard in this case.

[Trueblue Texan]

7. No matter the condition of the emails when released, that...

doesn't change the fact that Wolfe expected TSF to be able to "wave them away" if anyone could. That doesn't appear to be a particularly moral stance in view of the information Epstein had just shared with him re the Katie Johnson case. And Wolfe DOES appear to be rather familiar in the way he mentions TSF. Just my take, YMMD.

[AZJonnie]

8. Fair enough I'm not trying to tell anyone what to think :)

I'm just thinking that strategically I don't know it's the best idea for Democrats to publicly burn him like Larry Summers and anyone else who could be useful that didn't act perfectly how we'd want. The Katie Johnson case was, IMHO, a hoax (and not by "Katie Johnson", I don't think there even IS, exactly, a Katie Johnson IRL), but leaving that aside I think the gist of what he's saying is just a comment on Trump's ability to get away with *everything*. And he was right on that count

[Trueblue Texan]

3. Here's the link

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/11/21/2354976/-Trump-s-alleged-child-rape-victim-Katie-Johnson-is-in-the-Epstein-Files?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web

You’ll have to scroll quite a bit to find the following excerpt. Very chummy exchange between Epstein and Wolfe regarding “Donald”. Creeps, all.

“
Rep. [Melanie] Stansbury, who is on the House Oversight Committee, has repeatedly claimed that President Trump’s name appears over 1,000 times in the Epstein files. She’s also continuously accused Trump of a cover-up.

Now, Stansbury is claiming that a 2016 lawsuit, accusing Epstein and Trump of repeatedly raping a 13-year-old girl in 1994, is mentioned in the files. As she’s mentioned, an April 2016 email exchange between Michael Wolff and Epstein has surfaced.

In the exchange, Epstein forwards an email chain began by Reuters News’ David Ingram. Ingram emailed Martin G. Weinberg, giving a heads up about the outlet preparing to report on the newly-filed lawsuit accusing Trump and Epstein of raping a minor. Ingram told Weinberg the outlet requested to speak with Epstein or a comment on his behalf.

Weinberg then warned Epstein that the federal court case was going to press in a few hours. Forwarding the chain to Wolff, Epstein said, “Here we go.” Wolff replied, “Well, I guess if there’s anybody who can wave thus [sic] away, it’s Donald. Let me know if there’s anything I can do.”