Karoline Leavitt Responds to Epstein Firestorm—But Sidesteps the One Question That Matters Most
Her responses today only raised more eyebrows.
Karoline Leavitt was just flooded with questions about the so-called Epstein “HOAX.”
Reporters didn’t go easy on her.
One asked why the DOJ is still holding the files instead of releasing a redacted version.
Her responses today only raised more eyebrows.
Ask Americans how they feel about the handling of the Epstein files, and you’ll hear the same answer from both sides of the aisle: total frustration.
According to a recent poll, just 3% of Americans say they’re satisfied with how the Trump administration has handled it.
Meanwhile, half the country is dissatisfied and believes the administration hasn’t been transparent.
Americans are furious because on February 21st, Pam Bondi told the world the Epstein client list was “sitting on [her] desk right now to review,” explaining it was part of a directive ordered by President Trump.
But on July 7, the Trump Justice Department concluded via internal memo that Epstein actually had no client list, didn’t blackmail anyone, and definitely killed himself.
This walking back of earlier claims has unleashed a frenzy.
Trump isn’t making the situation any better, though.
Yesterday, the president doubled down again, calling the Epstein Files a “hoax”, accusing Democrats of “planting” disinformation in the documents during the four years they controlled the Justice Department.
He says his Justice Department will release what is considered “credible” information, and no more.
The first round of Epstein questioning today came from Fox News reporter Jacqui Heinrich, who grilled Karoline Leavitt on President Trump’s recent claim that the Epstein files are a “hoax.”
“There’s been a lot of discussion about the Epstein files and the president’s comments yesterday calling it a hoax. Can you clarify which part is the hoax?” Heinrich asked.
Leavitt stood by the president, saying, “The president is referring to the fact that Democrats are suddenly pretending they ever cared about transparency when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein, which is an asinine suggestion.”
“They had control of the White House and Congress and did nothing to expose Epstein or his network,” she added.
Leavitt went on to defend Trump’s handling of the case, saying, “It was President Trump who ordered the DOJ and Attorney General to conduct a full review of the Epstein files, and they did.”
She emphasized that the people in charge of the review (Pam Bondi, Dan Bongino, and Kash Patel) were selected for a reason. “Some of the most trusted voices in our movement. That’s why the president appointed them,” she said.
“They spent months combing through the material and concluded what was published in that memo.”
Leavitt insisted President Trump “has been transparent” on Epstein and “followed through [on] his promises to the American people.”
She accused Democrats and the media of exaggerating the issue to distract from Trump’s recent accomplishments, saying they’re pretending “it is the biggest or the American people care about.”
Leavitt then highlighted several of Trump’s achievements, she said, were ignored by the press, such as securing $90 billion in investments for Pennsylvania, meeting with the King of Bahrain to bring foreign investment to the U.S., and signing a bipartisan bill to combat fentanyl deaths after meeting with families who lost children to the crisis.
“Those are the issues the president cares about,” and “those are the issues this president is going to remain focused on,” Leavitt said.
One reporter asked Leavitt if Trump would be appointing a special prosecutor in the Epstein case.
Leavitt’s response? A hard NO.
REPORTER: “The president has said he floated the idea of a special prosecutor in the Epstein case. Can you confirm that, and has he asked the Attorney General to do this—to appoint a special prosecutor to look it over?”
LEAVITT: “Well, the idea was floated from someone in the media to the president. The president would not recommend a special prosecutor in the Epstein case. That’s how he feels. And as for his discussions with the Attorney General, I’m not sure.”
Then came the pointed question everyone wants to know.
Fox News reporter Jacqui Heinrich asked why the Justice Department doesn’t simply release what they know, redact the sensitive parts, and let the American people decide what to make of the Epstein story.
Leavitt’s response? A classic deflection.
She said those decisions rest with the Justice Department, not the White House.
Essentially, “Don’t ask me.”
One reporter jumped in, questioning why President Trump fired Maurene Comey, former FBI Director James Comey’s daughter, who served as the lead prosecutor in both the Ghislaine Maxwell and Diddy cases.
Leavitt quickly corrected the claim, saying it was the DOJ—not the president—who made that call.
Leavitt closed with a firm message aimed at Trump supporters who are beginning to lose faith in the president after the Epstein fallout:
“This president is a great president because he listens. He takes in every perspective. But ultimately, he’s led this country to historic success—not just in the past six months, but throughout his first four years as the founder of the MAGA movement. He’s led through perilous times with instinct and strength. And as I always say, the American people should trust in President Trump.”
If this is “transparency” and there’s nothing to hide, why does it still feel like they’re hiding everything?
The story went from the client list being “on [Pam Bondi’s] desk” to “there is no client list,” and the whole thing is a “hoax.”
How do you feel about all this? I want to hear where you stand.
Thanks for making it to the end. If you’re new, here’s a bit about me.
I was banned 3 times from Twitter 1.0 for defying mainstream narratives.
Google “Vigilant Fox” and you’ll find my social media pages BURIED at the bottom of the results.
And yet, my work has been seen by billions.
You’ve probably come across it without even realizing it was me.
If that piques your curiosity, enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter. I think you’ll find a lot here that’s worth your time.
All of the stories stop here. Few ask the question: what would explain this behavior within the federal government, and who might be coordinating the effort to put the screws on this story? Why are so many people suddenly turning the lights off in the Office of Government Integrity? Is it US Intel, or foreign Intel? Or? That's the core of the story.
Laws for thee but not for me. Pretty typical of all politicians from all parties.