The new revelations about Epstein

Documents expose the complicity of elites and the policy of silence that protected a predator in exchange for influence and convenience

The release of more than 20,000 pages of documents linked to Jeffrey Epstein is not just the opening of another chapter in a judicial scandal. It is the reopening of a social wound that questions the moral foundations of power elites. The emails, with their mentions of Donald Trump, Prince Andrew and figures like Peter Mandelson, are not just strands of a criminal web; They are a symptom of a culture of impunity and collusion, where proximity to power seems to anesthetize the most basic ethical sense.

The immediate and furious reaction from Republicans, accusing Democrats of creating a “false narrative,” follows a predictable script of denialism and counterattack. However, the strategy of trying to discredit the revelations, rather than confronting their content head-on, is revealing.

The White House’s defense, centered on the allegation that Trump “expelled Epstein from his club decades ago,” sounds like a desperate gesture to erect a moral wall where there is, in fact, a long road of coexistence and association.

Also read: Trump returns to Epstein’s dark plot

The emails themselves are a study in the language of power and manipulation. The 2011 exchange, in which Epstein referred to Trump as “that dog that didn’t bark”, and the mention of Virginia Giuffre, do not constitute, in isolation, judicial proof of a crime.

But they paint a much more insidious picture: that of an inner circle where the existence of victims and the power dynamics over them were a known and talked about issue. Epstein’s claim that Trump “knew about the girls” is a shocking piece to this puzzle, suggesting an awareness of the exploitation taking place around him.

The correspondence with Michael Wolff is even more elucidative of the transactional nature of these relationships. Wolff’s offer to “end” Trump in exchange for public “sympathy” for Epstein, and the cynical discussion of how Trump could use Epstein as a trump card against “political correctness”, reveal a perverse game where the reputation of a sexual predator and the campaign of a future president were treated as mere commodities to be traded. It is politics in its most degenerate form: a trade of influence and silence, devoid of any principle.

The international extension of the network, with the reaffirmation of links with Prince Andrew and Peter Mandelson, demonstrates that this was not an American problem, but rather a global pathology of elites.

Mandelson’s casual banter with Epstein in 2016, years after the financier’s conviction, illustrates a shocking normality. It shows how prominent public figures were willing to normalize and maintain relationships with a convicted sex offender, completely separating their public moral conduct from their private associations.

One of the survivors, Annie Farmer’s eloquent plea for “full transparency” is the moral heart of this story. While politicians clash over partisan accusations, it is the voices of victims who carry the burden of seeking justice. Their demand is not for revenge, but for truth – a truth that powerful networks of influence insist on obscuring.

It is concluded, therefore, that the real scandal of these emails goes beyond any specific crime. It’s the normalization scandal. It is the revelation that powerful men, including a former president, operated in an ecosystem where a known sexual predator was not a pariah but an interlocutor, a political advisor and a valid social contact. This is not just a legal issue, but a profound ethical crisis.

The shadows cast by these emails are not just about what Epstein did, but about what so many others were willing to ignore to stay within the circles of power. And this is a bitter lesson for any society that claims to be fair.

With information from BBC*