One of the most recent pieces of evidence involving the Epstein matter generally, and his association with Donald Trump specifically, is the picture of a Mar-a-Lago club member standing beside Epstein with a large faux check written out to Donald Trump from Epstein and a longtime Mar-a-Lago member as a “joke” about selling a ‘fully depreciated’ woman to Donald Trump for $22,500. No doubt, this is deeply disturbing on just so many levels. Here is the picture we are discussing.
NEW PAGE FROM EPSTEIN’S BIRTHDAY BOOK: Epstein and a longtime Mar-a-Lago member joking about selling a "fully depreciated" woman to Donald Trump for $22,500. pic.twitter.com/iEMNSRX7X8
— Oversight Dems (@OversightDems) September 8, 2025
Who “jokes” about buying and selling women? And we know that Epstein was primarily involved in raping underage “women” (KIDS). So what does that mean in the context of someone “fully depreciated”? The single most logical takeaway is that Epstein allows Trump access to the kids after he has already assaulted them. It could mean that the kids are now of age, but that’s a very very kind reading of the matter, and it certainly doesn’t exclude the possibility that they never transferred over a girl who wasn’t yet of age. “Fully depreciated” is about the ugliest term imaginable. Ugly enough that former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade believes that it hides more grotesque details.
McQuade appeared on Morning Joe and quite appropriately called out the photograph as more disturbing than the original drawing Trump sent Epstein, talking about “secrets.” If the “joke” didn’t contain a kernel of truth in it, it makes no sense and is as offensive as it would be with anyone. Clearly, the “joke” in this matter is the “fully depreciated” (WHAT does that mean?) aspect, covering over the fact that it is premised on buying and selling women. There is also the fact that the amount is awfully specific; it is not $20,000, or $25,000, or $10,000, or $100,000. It is a somewhat random amount, and that makes one wonder whether it truly reflects an amount used in some transaction. McQuade was deeply disturbed:
“I found this item even more troubling than the drawing because of what it suggests. Now, of course, it appears that it was created by some member. It may be a completely fabricated joke, but, you know, people make jokes based on some grain of truth because that’s what makes it funny.”
“So I think it raises a lot of questions. I also think the drawing suggests, you know, the drawing itself is sort of bawdy, but it suggests a close relationship with Trump — if it’s authentic — referring to Jeffrey Epstein as his pal and that they have secrets together. So I think it raises a lot of questions as to where it’s going.”
McQuade went on to say that the most logical thing that Trump could do – if he were innocent – would be to say, “This is enough. I am tired of people probing around this matter, and it’s time to release the entirety of the files so as to remove any doubt.”
Of course, that is never going to happen. But it certainly should happen. Picture a scenario in which Trump isn’t president and is some normal, almost anonymous, relatively rich guy with little power. Picture an investigation into the Epstein matter, trying to find other rapists who joined him. Picture concerns about trafficking in women. In such a scenario, Donald Trump, the person to whom the check is directed, would be one of the very first people investigated. And yet in this matter, he continues to rely on the “hoax” theory regarding concerns that he is involved. The questions surrounding his relationship with Epstein are so obvious that the use of the word “hoax” is offensive.
Again, even if we were talking about women of age, this picture implies trafficking in sex workers, near slaves. The “fully depreciated” (Think about how sick a concept that is) screams “ownership” (or why “sell”?) and that means sex trafficking.
Now, I am not sure why President Biden didn’t release the files of the investigation. It is a bit concerning that he did not. But one of the explanations could be that doing so would look so obviously political that Biden simply didn’t want to “go there.” But given that Trump ran on the issue, given that Trump implied that there were only powerful Democrats on the list, it is now absolutely incumbent that those knowing the most about the Epstein matter come forth with what they have.
It appears that Congress will subpoena the entirety of the records. There are still two Dems waiting in the wings for special elections to occur this fall. If Dems get those two extra votes, coupled with the four Republicans who have voted to subpoena the records already, that would put the votes at 218, sufficient to move the vote into full session, and sufficient to subpoena the records.
Thus, there is a chance that the FBI files will come out. Whether any records pertaining to Trump remain unburned (Bondi did assign tons of agents to pull all mention of Trump) is still an open question. But if other perpetrators are exposed, it is possible that more victims come out to point fingers. Unfortunately, given Trump’s propensity to award silence with pardons (It is still stunning that he acts so obviously corrupt right out in the open), it is hard to imagine other actual men involved doing so. It would almost surely come down to more victims coming forward or possible mentions in files that continue to point to Trump.
Given Bondi and Patel’s actions in this matter, there seems to be little hope that either will simply name Trump as someone deeply involved in the matter. And that’s how we get around to pointing to the evidence, like the picture above, as some of the most compelling stuff out there. The joke is the “fully depreciated” reference. Selling a girl and the amount don’t seem to be the part that makes it “funny,” and one is left to almost assume that they were buying and selling women.
It is about as bad as it gets. No wonder McQuade points to this as particularly awful and worthy of investigation. See below:
**** Please follow me now on Bluesky
God Bless: I can be reached at [email protected] and also on X at @JasonMiciak.
Zoomers, we are always in need of donations. We work hard to get you analysis that you will not find in the mainstream media, but all media have been hit hard since the big companies have gobbled up and monopolized commentary. Anything you can spare will be immensely appreciated. And thank you to all who have donated generously already. Ursula
i’m sorry but no, she didn’t hint at anything. like the rest of us she believes there is evidence in the files onplicating trump but she doesn’t say or suggest that she actually knows anything. logic says that all the effort going into protecting trump means he’s guilty but no one has orovided any proof. where are the 1000 fbi agents? the silence of all of them, and everyone else who has seen the material is very troubling.
Maybe Biden didn’t release the records because some of his colleagues would be implicated
it would have been highly innapropriate for biden, garland or anyone else tp even ask to see the files. it’s what we do and well past time we stopped. I