It is likely that most readers have at least seen this video at some point in the last year or two, but it is worth looking at again and pondering exactly why this video doesn’t almost establish that Donald Trump is on the Epstein list as someone who either raped underage girls or groomed them in a predatory way. A deposition occurred in one of the lawsuits against Epstein, and questions got around to his relationship with Trump. Epstein answers that he and Trump are good friends and socialize with each other (So, that’s established), and then immediately, when the questioning goes directly to whether underage girls were present, Epstein suddenly asserts his Fifth Amendment rights. There is no conceivable way that the assertion of his Fifth Amendment rights can be taken as anything but an admission – at least for the purposes of establishing the “list” and whether it involves Trump.
The point is that this deposition is so important as a factual matter that it is stunning that it hasn’t received significantly more heated attention. It has been almost set aside as nothing that can be used. And while that might be true as to whether it has any value in an actual legal proceeding against either Trump or the Epstein estate, we are simply talking about political exposure to the truth. This tweet should be put forth front and center as Exhibit One in the public arena, and yet it’s simply not garnered that much attention.
So Epstein answers a bunch of questions like if he and Trump are friends and he says yes,but when asked about Trump hanging out with girls under the age of 18 he says I must assert my fifth,sixth & fourteenth amendments today so this should tell you that answer easily! 😡🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/SiyF8AqYkp
— Suzie rizzio (@Suzierizzo1) September 8, 2025
It is really hard to accept that this critical evidence isn’t put forth in the investigation, perhaps by Congress, or at least the media, as one of the single most important pieces in public as of today regarding Trump’s relationship with Epstein.
Remember, this deposition wandered all over Epstein’s behavior, but it was at the point that it specifically involved his relationship with Trump that he immediately went to the Fifth Amendment. It is not unreasonable to simply insert a “Yes” to the question as to whether they did so in the presence of underage girls. And from that point, the most focused question is why grown men are even around girls that young without parents or something legitimate about the presence. It is not normal for grown men to simply be around 16 or so-year-old girls in any social setting.
So it is simply stunning as to why this video hasn’t been spread as far as the drawn bawdy picture that Trump signed and received just as much attention. It would seem to me to be a critical piece of evidence as to whether Trump is on that “list” of people who abused young girls around Epstein.
I don’t get it. I thought it was worth the reminder and moment to ponder.
**** 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
From watching Glenn Kirschner (“Justice Matters”) last year, I learned that in a civil case a jury may draw an adverse inference from a witness’s pleading the fifth, that is, they may infer that the witness is hiding something and use that against the defendant; but that this is not allowed in a criminal case. So if Trump were the defendant in a criminal case and Jeffrey Epstein, deceased (but testifying under oath) were the witness in question, pleading the Fifth could not be admitted as evidence by inference. But in a civil case, such as a suit for damages, it would be admissible.
A bit of irony is involved here and it comes from none other than Drumpf himself. Drumpf has gone on record MANY times as declaring words to the effect of “If you have nothing to hide and didn’t do anything wrong, then you have no reason to invoke the Fifth Amendment.”
So purely from a logic perspective, that statement alone doesn’t get close to “nearly” because he could be hiding his own involvement via his rights.
If he’d earlier admitted or made other statements that support his own “association” with minors then it does.
I understand. But the exact question was whether he had ever socialized with Donald Trump and underage girls. Therefore, he could have said “No” and protected all he had done alone. The question didn’t go to him alone and I am sure this wasn’t the only time he took the Fifth, I believe he likely did when it referenced him alone. If he had never socialized with young girls “with” Donald Trump, then he could have answered no. But given it was specific to the two of them together, he had to use the Fifth to protect himself bc they almost surely did together.
jason
I read Epstein’s response (pleading the fifth) was more due to the “underage girls” part than the Trump part.