There is no end in sight to the Jeffrey Epstein saga. This week nearly three million files were newly released by the US department of justice. They revealed more details of the astonishingly large number of elite men – and women – who were connected to Epstein, the power broker who trafficked and sexually abused minors.
While this has led to a reckoning for some, others continue to escape the consequences of their actions.
In Britain, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has been further disgraced, as the files showed a picture of him leaning on all fours over a woman or girl. Peter Mandelson quit his position in the House of Lords and, based on revelations that he passed sensitive government information to Epstein, he now faces a criminal investigation.
In Ireland, information in the new files damaged the reputation of George Mitchell, the former US senator known for his role in negotiating the Belfast Agreement. Queen’s University Belfast promptly removed Mitchell’s name from its Institute of Global Peace, Security and Justice, while the US-Ireland Alliance announced that its scholarship programme would no longer be named after him. There is no indication that Mitchell was involved in any wrongdoing.
READ MORE
However, the new documents suggest that, contrary to Mitchell’s previous statements, there was still contact between the two men following the disgraced financier’s 2008 conviction for procuring a 14-year-old girl for prostitution. Mitchell said he “declined or deflected” the “small number of invitations” he received from Epstein.
In the US, renewed attention has focused on Epstein’s relationship with Bill Clinton. Their relationship has long been public knowledge, though Clinton denies he knew about Epstein’s sexual abuse and claims the friendship ended in 2003.
This week, Bill and Hillary Clinton agreed to appear before the US House of Representatives committee investigating the Epstein fallout. They did so only after several Democrats on the committee supported a measure to hold the Clintons in criminal contempt for failing to testify, an extraordinary step for them to take against a former Democratic president and a former Democratic senator, secretary of state and presidential candidate.
While the shock waves from the Epstein scandal continue to reverberate on both sides of the Atlantic, one group of figures have escaped accountability: those associated with right-wing politics. The latest document dump showed that, contrary to Elon Musk’s prior bragging that he had declined repeated invitations to visit Epstein’s notorious island, he had asked Epstein in 2012: “What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?”
While there is no evidence that Musk visited the island, it sure does sound as if he wanted to. Meanwhile, it emerged that US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick visited Epstein’s island in 2015 with his family – years after he claimed to have severed relations with Epstein. And questions continue to swirl around the man who, according to one account, was once Epstein’s “best friend”, US president Donald Trump.
For essentially the same thing – having lied about their continuing relationship with Epstein following his 2008 conviction – Mitchell suffered immediate reputational damage while Lutnick retained his current political post with few calling upon him to resign. How have those on the right escaped comeuppance while others have not?
One obvious answer is that the release of files is politically motivated. While Congress voted in November that the department of justice should release all files (save those that revealed the identities of victims), it pointedly failed to release an additional three million of them. The Republican-controlled House oversight committee is more intent on nailing the Clintons for partisan political advantage than in summoning attorney general Pam Bondi. She could explain why the department of justice has ignored the law, and demand the full release of the files.
[ Newly released Jeffrey Epstein files: 10 key takeaways so farOpens in new window ]
Is it possible that the department of justice is withholding evidence that would damage Trump and his political allies? We can only speculate, but we do know that Trump has been keen to punish his enemies and protect his supporters. When Trump was pressed by his erstwhile ally Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of the few members of Maga to break with him publicly over this issue, as to why he first opposed release of any files, he replied: “My friends will get hurt.”
Protecting women from sexual violence, a long-time feminist demand, has gained traction on the centre and the left. A decade ago, the #MeToo movement dramatically publicised sexual violence against women and helped ensure that abusers such as Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein were held to account.
Compare this with the treatment of Bill Clinton in 1998. When Clinton’s sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, a 22-year-old White House intern, first emerged the vast majority of Democrats defended him against Republican moral prudishness and partisan attacks. Few considered things from Lewinsky’s point of view, as a young woman faced with the sexual demands of her boss, a man twice her age and the most powerful politician in the world. Lewinsky now calls Clinton’s actions a “gross abuse of power”. And few Democrats are eager to defend Clinton today.
On the right, however, there has been a shift toward open defence of male supremacy. Right-wing figures have dismissed the #MeToo movement as censorship and “cancel culture”. Figures in the online “manosphere” promote the cult of the alpha male which requires sexual dominance over women.
The right supports a president who infamously boasted about groping women without their consent and who was found guilty of the rape of E Jean Carroll in civil court. The behaviour of Trump and others is defending with the sexist mantra that “boys will be boys”. Why would we expect the right to hold their leaders responsible for their associations with Epstein?
[ Latest Epstein file dump deepens America’s exhaustion syndromeOpens in new window ]
It looks increasingly unlikely that dozens of Epstein’s victims will get the justice they deserve. The most recent file release contained thousands of documents that identified Epstein’s victims (they have since been taken down) while it redacted and withheld documents that might identify perpetrators. Trump’s department of justice is not pursuing any criminal cases against those who may have conspired with Epstein.
With the right unwilling to hold its sexual abusers to account, the court of public opinion will offer at best partial justice.
Daniel Geary is Mark Piggott professor in US history at Trinity College Dublin
