Wolff-Epstein Emails

The Left Shot Itself in the Foot: How the Wolff-Epstein Emails Destroyed Our Credibility

We Put All Our Eggs in the Epstein Basket – And Wolff Just Smashed Them All

Opinion – Once again, the left and our leaders have shot Marxism in the foot. We placed all our eggs in the Epstein basket, amplified every Michael Wolff revelation, cited his “Fire and Fury” book as gospel, and built years of anti-Trump journalism on what we now know was a foundation of sand – or worse, a foundation of collaboration between a journalist and a convicted sex offender.

The Wolff-Epstein emails don’t just embarrass one compromised journalist. They expose the entire progressive media ecosystem as complicit in amplifying what might have been Epstein’s political operation. They damage Democratic figures far more than they damage Trump. And worst of all, they validate every complaint Trump has ever made about “fake news.”

I’m writing this as someone who desperately wanted Trump held accountable. As someone who believed Wolff’s reporting. As someone who thought we were on the right side of history. But I have to be honest: these emails are a disaster for the left, and we need to reckon with what they reveal about our own failures.

How Did We Get Here?

Let’s start with the uncomfortable truth: we got desperate. After Trump’s 2016 victory, we were hungry for anything that would damage him. We amplified every scandal, promoted every exposé, and gave platforms to anyone with insider information – no matter how compromised their sources might be.

When Epstein was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges in July 2019, we hoped it would finally expose Trump’s connections to him. When Epstein died in federal custody that August, we lost a potential witness but gained years of speculation.

Michael Wolff became a hero to the resistance. His “Fire and Fury” gave us exactly what we wanted: confirmation that Trump was as chaotic, incompetent, and morally bankrupt as we believed. We didn’t ask enough questions about Wolff’s methods or sources. We didn’t demand transparency about his access.

Now we know why. Wolff wasn’t operating as an independent journalist. He was strategizing with Jeffrey Epstein about when to weaponize information about Trump for maximum political impact. He was offering Epstein the choice to either “hang” Trump or “save him” for future leverage.

That’s not journalism. That’s political operation. And we amplified it for years.

The Damage to Democratic Figures

The emails hurt Trump’s critics far more than they hurt Trump. Let me count the ways:

Bill Clinton’s Epstein Problem Gets Worse

We’ve spent years trying to minimize Bill Clinton’s connections to Epstein. The former president flew on Epstein’s plane multiple times. He visited Epstein’s properties. When confronted, Clinton claimed limited contact and no knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

Now we learn that Epstein was actively working with journalists to manipulate political coverage. That he was positioning himself as a source for anti-Trump reporting. That he cultivated relationships with prominent media figures who had platforms to shape public opinion.

This raises obvious questions: Was Clinton’s relationship with Epstein similarly transactional? Were other Democratic figures part of Epstein’s network of influence? How many progressive journalists and politicians were compromised by their associations with him?

The Wolff emails don’t answer these questions. But they raise them in ways that hurt Democrats far more than Republicans. Trump can now point to the emails and say, “See? Epstein was working against me. He was trying to help Democrats.”

Trump has publicly claimed he had a falling out with Epstein years before Epstein’s legal troubles – and the Wolff emails showing Epstein plotting against Trump in 2016 arguably support that narrative.

Clinton’s decades-long friendship with Epstein becomes even more problematic when we know Epstein was actively engaged in political manipulation.

Alan Dershowitz’s Credibility Destroyed

Alan Dershowitz represented Epstein during his 2008 plea deal and has long been associated with both Epstein and liberal causes. Dershowitz defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment. He’s been a prominent voice on constitutional law from a liberal perspective.

The plea deal itself, brokered by then-US Attorney Alexander Acosta, became a major scandal when it was exposed by the Miami Herald. Acosta eventually resigned as Labor Secretary under Trump over the controversy.

Now Dershowitz is named in Epstein-related litigation, accused of participating in Epstein’s activities. He denies all allegations, but his credibility is shot.

The conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate, in December 2021 kept the scandal in headlines and raised further questions about everyone in Epstein’s orbit.

The Wolff emails compound the problem by showing that Epstein was actively manipulating media coverage and cultivating journalists. Dershowitz’s legal defense of Epstein now looks even worse. His associations with Epstein now raise questions about whether his liberal advocacy was genuine or part of Epstein’s broader network of influence.

We can’t separate Dershowitz’s progressive legal work from his Epstein connections. The emails make clear that Epstein operated through networks of influential people. Dershowitz was in that network. His credibility as a liberal voice is destroyed.

Bill Richardson’s Epstein Connections

Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a Democrat who served as Secretary of Energy and UN Ambassador under Clinton, has been named in Epstein-related documents by alleged victims.

Richardson denies all allegations. But his name appearing in Epstein documents damages another prominent Democratic figure. The pattern is clear: Epstein cultivated relationships with powerful Democrats, and now those relationships are being exposed in ways that damage the party.

Epstein’s private island became a focal point of allegations, with flight logs and visitor records revealing the extent of his connections to powerful figures across politics, business, and entertainment.

The Wolff emails show that Epstein wasn’t just a criminal. He was a political operator who used his connections to influence coverage and protect his network. Richardson’s relationship with Epstein, whatever its nature, becomes more damaging in this context.

Hundreds of Progressive Journalists Exposed

But the damage to individual Democratic figures pales compared to the broader revelation about progressive journalism.

The Media Ecosystem Was Compromised

Michael Wolff wasn’t the only journalist in contact with Epstein. The email release includes communications between Epstein and multiple prominent media figures.

Epstein cultivated relationships not just with journalists but with tech leaders, scientists, and academics, using philanthropy and intellectual prestige to build his network of influence.

Former New York Times reporter Landon Thomas Jr. maintained a “longstanding and very productive source” relationship with Epstein. He was forced to leave the Times when editors discovered his ethical violations.

How many other journalists were compromised? How many progressive media outlets published stories based on information from Epstein without disclosing his role as a source? How much of our anti-Trump coverage was shaped by a convicted sex offender?

We don’t know the full extent yet. But what we do know is damaging enough. The entire progressive media establishment that we relied on to hold Trump accountable now stands accused of amplifying compromised sources.

The media’s failures in covering Epstein extended beyond individual journalists to institutional failures at major publications that should have caught these ethical violations.

Journalism Is Dead

I don’t say this lightly. I believe in the power of journalism to hold the powerful accountable. I believe in investigative reporting, in speaking truth to power, in using the press as a check on government overreach.

But the Wolff-Epstein emails expose something rotten at the core of progressive journalism. It’s not just that one journalist was compromised. It’s that the entire system failed to catch it. Editors didn’t ask questions. Fact-checkers didn’t flag concerns. Publishers gave platforms to reporting that was secretly coordinated with a convicted criminal.

Wolff wrote for Vanity Fair, New York Magazine, The Hollywood Reporter, and other major outlets. His Epstein-sourced reporting was published, promoted, and praised. No one caught the ethical violations until the emails surfaced.

Wolff’s legal battles with Melania Trump over defamation claims added another layer of controversy to his already questionable reputation.

That’s not a failure of one journalist. That’s a systematic failure of editorial oversight, ethical standards, and journalistic integrity.

And it’s not just Wolff. The WikiLeaks emails in 2016 showed problematic relationships between journalists and political operatives. The Fox News-Dominion case exposed how internal communications contradicted public narratives.

Now the Wolff-Epstein emails reveal that prominent progressive journalists were taking strategy sessions from a sex offender about how to damage political candidates.

Journalism isn’t dead because of Trump’s “fake news” attacks. Journalism is dead because we killed it by abandoning basic ethical standards in pursuit of political goals.

Wolff Destroyed Our Anti-Trump Credibility

This is the part that hurts most. We needed credible voices to document Trump’s unfitness for office. We needed independent journalism to hold him accountable. We needed sources who could be trusted.

Instead, we got Michael Wolff – a journalist with a history of questionable practices, secretly advising Epstein on political strategy while positioning himself as an insider with damaging information about Trump.

“Fire and Fury” was supposed to be our smoking gun. It was supposed to prove that Trump’s White House was as chaotic and dangerous as we believed. Millions of copies sold. Democratic politicians cited it. Progressive media amplified its revelations.

Now we know the book was partially sourced from interviews with Epstein – interviews conducted by a journalist who was simultaneously advising Epstein on how to manipulate Trump politically.

Every revelation in that book is now suspect. Every quote is now questionable. Every insider detail now carries the asterisk: “Source was a convicted sex offender receiving strategic advice from the journalist.”

Trump can now dismiss the entire book as propaganda. His supporters can point to Wolff’s emails and say, “See? We told you it was all fake news.” His lawyers can argue that media coverage of Trump was coordinated with Epstein’s political operations.

Never mind that Trump and Epstein had extensive social connections before Epstein’s conviction, or that their overlapping Palm Beach social circles were well-documented. The Wolff emails give Trump the ammunition to dismiss all of it.

Wolff didn’t just destroy his own credibility. He destroyed ours. Every progressive who cited “Fire and Fury” now looks like we were amplifying Epstein’s propaganda. Every journalist who praised Wolff’s work now faces questions about their own vetting procedures. Every Democratic politician who used the book to attack Trump now appears to have been manipulated.

When Wolff released audio recordings of his Epstein interviews in October 2024, just before the election, we should have known something was wrong. The tapes generated minimal attention, as if voters sensed the source was compromised.

We Gave Trump His Best Weapon

Trump has complained about “fake news” and media bias since he announced his candidacy in 2015. We dismissed these complaints as authoritarian attacks on press freedom. We defended journalistic integrity against his assaults.

Now we’ve handed him proof that at least some anti-Trump coverage was coordinated with a convicted sex offender. We’ve validated his claims about biased journalism. We’ve given him ammunition that he’ll use for years.

When Trump says the media is out to get him, he can point to Wolff’s emails showing a journalist offering Epstein options to either “hang” Trump or “save him for a debt.”

When Trump says journalists are politically motivated, he can point to Wolff’s October 2016 email telling Epstein there was an “opportunity to come forward this week and talk about Trump in such a way that could garner you great sympathy and help finish him” – timed just weeks after the Access Hollywood tape.

When Trump says the media coordinates against him, he can point to a journalist literally coordinating with Epstein about timing revelations for maximum political damage.

We gave him all of this. We amplified Wolff without proper vetting. We cited his work without questioning his sources. We built our case against Trump on a foundation that Wolff undermined with his compromised journalism.

Why Democrats Suppressed the Emails

Here’s the part that makes me angriest: our own leaders knew these emails existed and suppressed them.

Democrats controlled the Senate from January 2021 through January 2023. They had access to Congressional records. They had subpoena power. They controlled key committees investigating Epstein and Trump.

The Senate committee system gave them sweeping investigative authority, yet they chose not to use it to release these emails.

They could have released these emails during Trump’s second impeachment. They could have released them during the January 6th Committee investigation. They could have released them during the 2022 midterms when Trump-endorsed candidates were on the ballot.

They didn’t. Why? Because the emails hurt Democrats more than they hurt Trump.

The emails only surfaced after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election, when they could no longer affect the outcome.

Releasing them would have destroyed Wolff’s credibility – and with it, years of anti-Trump journalism that Democrats had amplified. It would have raised questions about Clinton, Dershowitz, Richardson, and other Democrats connected to Epstein. It would have exposed the compromised nature of progressive media.

Even as Trump faced four separate criminal indictments in 2023 and 2024, Democrats chose not to release emails that might have provided context – because that context hurt them more than it helped.

So they sat on the emails. They chose political expediency over transparency. They protected their own credibility at the expense of the truth.

That’s not just a tactical mistake. That’s a betrayal of progressive values. We claim to fight for transparency, accountability, and truth. But when the truth threatened our political interests, we suppressed it.

Democrats had no problem releasing Trump’s tax returns and other sensitive materials, but these emails stayed buried. The selective transparency reveals the political calculation.

The January 6th Committee’s broad subpoena power could have been used to obtain and release these emails, but wasn’t – another indication that Democrats knew the emails would hurt them more than help.

The Marxist Journalist Problem

I use the term “Marxist journalists” deliberately. Not because all progressive journalists are literal Marxists, but because we operate from a shared ideological framework: power structures must be challenged, the wealthy and powerful must be held accountable, systemic inequalities must be exposed.

This framework is supposed to make us more honest, not less. It’s supposed to make us question authority, not collaborate with it. It’s supposed to make us skeptical of the powerful, not partner with them.

But the Wolff-Epstein emails expose how hundreds of progressive journalists compromised these principles. We were so focused on taking down Trump that we didn’t ask enough questions about our sources. We were so committed to our narrative that we ignored red flags about Wolff’s methods.

Epstein was a billionaire who trafficked underage girls. He represented everything we claim to oppose: wealth, power, exploitation, abuse. Yet progressive journalists treated him as a valuable source. They maintained “productive” relationships with him. They published stories based on his information.

How did this happen? How did journalists committed to exposing power structures end up collaborating with one of the most powerful predators of our time?

The answer is uncomfortable: we let our hatred of Trump override our principles. We were so desperate to damage Trump that we accepted information from anyone who offered it, regardless of their credibility or their crimes.

Wolff’s reputation for embellishing stories and burning sources was known within media circles, yet we gave him platforms anyway.

That’s not principled journalism. That’s propaganda. And we participated in it.

The FBI’s failures in investigating Epstein for years before his 2019 arrest mirror the media’s failures in vetting sources connected to him.

What This Means for the Future

The damage from the Wolff-Epstein emails extends far beyond one compromised journalist. It undermines years of progressive journalism. It damages the credibility of every media outlet that amplified Wolff’s work. It validates Trump’s complaints about fake news. It hurts Democratic figures more than Republican ones.

Worst of all, it makes it harder to hold Trump accountable for his actual wrongdoing. When we build our case on compromised sources, we make it easier for Trump to dismiss legitimate criticism. When we amplify propaganda disguised as journalism, we undermine the credibility we need to expose real abuses of power.

We Need Complete Transparency

Every journalist who had contact with Epstein needs to disclose it. Every media outlet that published Epstein-sourced stories needs to review them. Every progressive publication that amplified Wolff’s work needs to acknowledge the ethical failures.

This will be painful. It will reveal more compromised journalism. It will damage more careers. It will hurt the movement.

But it’s necessary. If we don’t clean our own house, we have no credibility to demand accountability from others.

We Need New Standards

The editorial failures that allowed Wolff’s compromised journalism to flourish are systemic. We need new standards for source vetting, new procedures for ethical oversight, new accountability when journalists violate basic principles.

We need editors who will ask hard questions about access and sources. We need fact-checkers who will flag potential conflicts of interest. We need a media culture that prioritizes truth over political goals.

Congressional oversight powers exist to inform the public, but they’re meaningless if used selectively to protect political allies while attacking opponents.

We Need to Rebuild Trust

This is the hardest part. Progressive journalism has lost credibility with exactly the people we need to reach. Working-class voters. Moderate Democrats. Independents who might be persuaded.

These voters see the Wolff-Epstein emails and conclude that progressive media is just as biased and corrupt as Trump claims. They see Democratic figures connected to Epstein and conclude both parties are compromised. They see journalistic failures and conclude the entire profession is dead.

Rebuilding trust requires more than admitting mistakes. It requires fundamental change in how progressive journalism operates. It requires choosing truth over partisan advantage. It requires holding our own side accountable as rigorously as we hold the opposition.

The Left Shot Itself in the Foot

Once again, the left has undermined its own cause through tactical mistakes and ethical failures. We placed all our eggs in the Epstein basket, amplifying every revelation without proper vetting. We elevated Wolff as a hero of the resistance without questioning his sources or methods.

Now the basket is broken, the eggs are smashed, and we’re left with nothing but damage to our own credibility.

The emails expose compromised journalism at the heart of the progressive media ecosystem. They damage Democratic figures from Clinton to Dershowitz to Richardson. They validate Trump’s complaints about fake news. They prove that at least some anti-Trump coverage was coordinated with a convicted sex offender.

Most damaging of all: they reveal that our own leaders suppressed this information when they had the power to release it. They chose partisan advantage over transparency. They protected compromised journalism rather than exposing it.

This is a disaster for the left. Not because it exonerates Trump – the emails prove nothing about Trump’s conduct with Epstein. But because it destroys our credibility to hold Trump accountable.

We shot ourselves in the foot. And unlike Trump, who has survived countless scandals, we don’t have a base that will excuse our failures. Progressive voters demand better. They expect higher standards. They won’t forgive compromised journalism and suppressed truth.

Nor should they.

What I Hope Happens Next

I hope progressive journalists do some serious soul-searching about how we let this happen. I hope Democratic leaders explain why they suppressed these emails. I hope media outlets that amplified Wolff’s work acknowledge their failures.

Most of all, I hope we learn from this disaster. I hope we rebuild progressive journalism on a foundation of truth rather than partisan advantage. I hope we develop ethical standards that prevent this from happening again. I hope we prove that we’re capable of holding ourselves accountable.

Because if we can’t do that – if we can’t admit our failures, learn from them, and do better – then we deserve to lose credibility. We deserve to be dismissed as partisan hacks. We deserve Trump’s mockery.

The Wolff-Epstein emails are a wake-up call. The question is whether we’ll answer it, or whether we’ll keep making the same mistakes until progressive journalism is completely dead.

Right now, I’m not optimistic. But I’m still hoping we can do better.

We have to. The alternative is accepting that we’ve shot Marxism in the foot one too many times, and there’s no recovering from this wound.