Recent reports about Jeffrey Epstein have resurfaced, leading to confusion and misreporting in the media. A key accuser, Sarah Ransome, had previously implicated former President Donald Trump in her allegations against Epstein. However, multiple media outlets failed to highlight in their initial reporting that Ransome had retracted these claims in 2019.
In 2016, Ransome had emailed the New York Post, hinting at possessing sex tapes involving Trump, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Sir Richard Branson related to Epstein. Yet, when pressed for evidence, she couldn’t produce any tapes, and no such footage has been found.
The New Yorker reported in 2019 that Ransome admitted to fabricating the existence of these tapes as a tactic to protect herself from Epstein and to bring attention to his crimes.
Despite the retraction, several news outlets on Monday published stories reiterating the old allegations without initially clarifying that they had been withdrawn. Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, addressed this, stating, “These baseless accusations have been fully retracted because they are simply false and have no merit.”
For example, the Daily Mail ran a headline stating, “Donald Trump named in latest Epstein documents,” but only mentioned Ransome’s retraction several paragraphs down. Similarly, the New York Post’s headline suggested new revelations about Trump and others but eventually acknowledged Ransome’s retraction deep in the article.
This reporting trend raised concerns about the accuracy and intentions behind these media stories. Investigative reporter Vicky Ward, who first reported on Epstein in 2003, emphasized the complexity of covering this story. “Victims and witnesses are often afraid, memories can be imperfect, and motives complex,” Ward explained, urging caution in interpreting such sensational headlines.
This situation underscores how the mainstream media is dead set on attacking Trump while protecting others.