Jeff Childers has an important piece …Pass the Popcorn
Yesterday, the BBC reported an extraordinary White House statement, headlined, “Melania Trump denies ties to Jeffrey Epstein and urges hearing for survivors.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3ex07l1qvpo
The rare public statement could be described as having two parts: a legal defamation warning, and a call for transparency.
The First Lady read a prepared statement in which she completely denied any connection with Jeffrey Epstein, including the widely circulated claim (by Democrats) that Epstein originally introduced Melania to the President. “My attorneys and I have fought these baseless lies with success, and will continue to maintain my sound reputation without hesitation. To date, several individuals and organizations have been legally obligated to publicly apologize and retract their lies about me, including the Daily Beast, James Carville, and Harper Collins UK.”
It’s true. Last August, for instance, Democrat operative James “Ragin’ Cajun” Carville posted a podcast video repeating Michael Wolff’s debunked allegation that Melania and Trump met through Epstein’s modeling agency. Melania’s lawyers sent him a demand letter. Shortly thereafter, Carville opened his podcast saying, “We took a look at what they complained about, and we took down the video and edited out those comments from the episode. I also take back these statements and apologize.” Womp.
Now all media actors are on notice. The First Lady isn’t playing. Stop lying about me, or else.
? But then she went further. She called for survivor hearings. In other words, for more transparency.
“Epstein was not alone,” Melania said. “Several prominent male executives resigned from their powerful positions after this matter became widely politicized. We must work openly and transparently to uncover the truth. I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors. Give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress with the power of sworn testimony. Each and every woman should have her day to tell her story in public if she wishes. Then her testimony should be permanently entered into the Congressional record.”
It was exactly what the “survivor groups” have been demanding. Time on the record before Congress. Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) has long demanded Congressional hearings with survivors. She’s been pushing the House Oversight Committee to hold exactly the kind of hearing Melania just called for. But after Melania’s statement, an anonymous group of “survivors” immediately pivoted to saying they don’t want to testify. Yesterday’s Guardian headline:
\
Now they say they’ve already done their part, even though the anonymous survivors never complained when Representative Pressley demanded survivor hearings. Meanwhile, named survivors, like Lisa Phillips, went on CNN last night praising Melania’s statement as “huge” and noting that “nobody’s ever said that.”
And, just a second. I’m sorry, but I must ask: what’s with calling them survivors? None of the victims died. The only person who died was Jeffrey Epstein. Is that how they’re survivors? They outlived Jeffrey? Oh, never mind.
For some reason, the BBC topped its story with a full video of Melania’s statement. It’s like they didn’t quite know what to make of it or how to frame it. It came right out of left field. More importantly, it revived a flagging story. NBC’s Garrett Haake tweeted that the speech was “breathing new life into the Epstein saga.” Fox noted that Melania’s statement resurrected the Epstein story “just when it finally seemed to be fading, as the country’s attention is riveted on the Iran war and its shaky ceasefire.”
The tentative media narrative is currently hinting at some kind of secret schism between Melania and Trump; a disagreement to which neither has hinted, but drawing the conclusion that Melania is somehow working against her husband, who, the media believes, would prefer the story die in prison. (For example, Reuters ran a one-sentence story headlined, “Trump tells MS Now he did not ‘know anything about’ Melania’s statement.”)
I highly doubt any secret schism exists. More likely, Trump isn’t ready for the Epstein story to fade out. But if Trump pushed the story, trad-media would wave it away as “Trump weaponizing Epstein to distract from the Iran war.” So now appears Melania, courageously calling for survivor hearings and confounding reporters.
Corporate media keeps framing Epstein as Trump’s vulnerability. But every move the Trumps make suggests they see the story as a weapon. And weapons don’t get boxed up in the attic until the threat has been vaporized
Loading ...
