Has anyone actually bothered to look into the "victims" who were paraded around at the Epstein Press Conference?
After I was forcibly ejected yesterday from the Epstein “Survivors” Press Conference in front of the US Capitol, I meandered along the perimeter, waiting to see if I’d be able to get back in. Luckily enough, this was eventually possible. It turned out that Thomas Massie, the Congressman co-sponsoring legislation to ostensibly release more “Epstein Files,” was still present once the event was over, talking to journalists and others.
I managed to do a brief interview with Massie, which I’ll publish portions of in a later article. The discussion was initially substantive — but then Massie told me he thought I was “really rude” for asking a question at the press conference that he apparently disliked. I guess he believed my “really rude” question had been appropriate grounds for expulsion by the Capitol Police. At this point, Massie no longer wanted to speak to me.
Fortunately, Richard Hanania was also randomly on hand, and I dispatched him to ask Massie a few more questions as my sneaky proxy. Hanania brought up some concerns he had with the veracity of the evidence associated with alleged Epstein “victims.” Like for example, he said, it seems Virginia Roberts Giuffre was a chronic fabricator — despite having been venerated all throughout the press conference as some kind of martyred truth-teller. What, Hanania inquired, did Massie make of all these glaring evidentiary problems?
“I like to think that if there’s one bad Congressman, or even if a couple of them are bad, that doesn’t make me bad,” Massie said, apparently by way of analogy.
“I’m convinced there were hundreds of victims,” Massie continued. “Like I can’t tell you who is who — who had what happen to them. But I’m convinced there are hundreds of victims. And I’m convinced there’s somebody besides Epstein that’s done bad things.”
I then blew my cover, and asked Massie: “How do you know there are hundreds of victims, if you don’t know what happened to them?"
Massie scoffed at me, and turned away in annoyance, evidently not wanting to engage any further. I guess because he considered me to be so very “rude.”
"I don’t understand, Congressman,” I said to him. “I’ve always been very nice to you, and favorable toward you. And I just asked you some basic questions, and I guess you’re getting flustered. I don’t really get it."
However, it’s easy to see why Massie might’ve been reluctant to delve into the meddlesome details.
Among the purported “victims” present yesterday was Annie Farmer — one of the four government-identified “victims” (out of what we’re told is “over a thousand”) who was called to testify at the 2021 criminal trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. Over the course of that trial, Judge Alison Nathan, who was otherwise preposterously pro-prosecution, found herself compelled to instruct jurors that they were not to regard anything Annie Farmer claimed happened to her as “illegal sexual activity.” Recall, when she spoke to the FBI in 2006 and 2020, Annie Farmer never alleged anything that occurred to her during her purported encounters with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell was “sexualized.” Her tune changed when the Epstein Victims Compensation Program got established, and millions of dollars became available. That’s when she told the settlement fund’s mediator that she considered alleged acts such as “hand-holding” to be “sexual abuse.”
Annie Farmer — now a “licensed psychologist” specializing in “trauma” — also appears to have appointed herself as an all-purpose spokeswoman for the growing social network of alleged Epstein “victims.” And she’s been making lots of media appearances lately, under the professional moniker of “Survivor.” Which is a bit odd. You’d think “Dr. Farmer” would maybe want to be identified by her self-publicized professional title, “licensed psychologist.” But it seems “Epstein Survivor” is more lucrative. “I am not currently accepting new clients,” her website says.
Annie’s lunatic older sister, Maria Farmer, was not present in DC yesterday from what I could tell, but Annie made sure to carry on her sister’s crackpot legacy. “Why was my sister’s 1996 FBI report — why was nothing done at that time?” Annie asked yesterday. “I think for those of us, seeing so many people that have been harmed since that time, I can’t tell you how heartbreaking that is. To think, this didn’t have to happen.” Let’s remember, Maria Farmer claims she called the NYPD, then the FBI, in 1996 to report some kind of pedophilic conspiracy going on in Ohio which she claimed involved Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and the “Jewish mafia.” She claims to have been given multiple cancers by Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and possibly also Trump and/or Clinton. She claims to have had some sort of divine epiphany that allowed her to realize Epstein and Maxwell were “pedophiles” — after voluntarily climbing into bed with them, at age 26. At which point she claims she was “raped” of her “sanity.” To redress these profound wrongs, Maria Farmer has now filed a brand new lawsuit, circa May 2025, demanding $600 million from US taxpayers to compensate her for the “complex PTSD, debilitating fatigue, chronic illness,” and myriad other conditions she claims to have endured for the past 30 years. I wonder if Annie Farmer gave Maria the PTSD diagnosis?
Anyway, these and other questions would’ve been very interesting to pose to Annie Farmer, who I would wager has never been asked a single semi-critical media question, virtually ever. So I approached Annie after she gave one of her speeches yesterday, hoping to politely ask a few questions. After all, this was in theory supposed to be a public press conference; the media had been invited to come ask the participants questions. It’s not like I was randomly invading her private “space” or something. We were at a well-publicized political event — at which she was a voluntary participant!
However, as you might imagine, my questions were not welcome. As I approached, Annie Farmer summoned her security goons who were on the scene. A bunch of big black guys in plainclothes, if you’re curious. “Who are you?” some PR woman minder of hers asked me in a strident, accusatory tone. “Michael Tracey,” I replied. “Who are you?” She wouldn’t say. Then the security goons got in my face.
“Can you stop talking to her?” the goon said.
“No,” I replied. “We’re on a public sidewalk. Who are you?”
Naturally, the goon did not identify himself.
“Do you mind stepping back for me please?” the goon continued.
“No, I won’t,” I replied. “On what authority could you tell me to step back?”
“They’re with me, and I don’t want to speak with you!” Annie shouted.
I guess she’s been able to hire some very loyal “security” goons with the $1.5 million in settlement money she got for the “hand-holding” trauma that she allegedly experienced in the 1990s. (Annie probably got significantly more than that in total, as this was only what she was forced to disclose at the 2021 Maxwell trial, before additional generous settlement funds became available.)
Thomas Massie says he’s “convinced there were hundreds of victims,” but again — how does he know this? How much has he bothered to examine the actual facts and evidence around this case — which he’s now anointed himself such a bold crusader on? Is he aware that none of the “victims” who appeared at the press conference yesterday have ever actually been adjudicated as victims in any kind of meaningfully adversarial process? That is, with their claims tested and appropriately scrutinized for veracity?
Annie Farmer was declared by Judge Alison Nathan to have endured no “illegal sexual activity” at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell. The same was judicially declared of Anouska De Georgiou, another of the four “victims” who the government chose to call at the 2021 Maxwell trial. Anouska also spoke at the press conference yesterday, weepily recounting that for “so many years” her “voice” had been “silenced.”
“Make no mistake, my polished exterior is a shield hiding a wound that still bleeds,” Anouska poetically proclaimed. Hopefully her “wounds” were at least partially healed by the $3.25 million she received from the Epstein Victims Compensation Program. (By the way, these settlement payouts are tax-free! What a deal!)
It was determined over the course of the 2021 trial that De Georgiou, a posh British socialite, minor actress, and underwear model, was above the legal age of consent in England at the time she claims to have first encountered Maxwell and Epstein, hence nothing which occurred to her could be regarded as “illegal sexual activity.” Despite participating in an NBC News interview under her real name in September 2019, as well as a public hearing at the Manhattan federal courthouse in August 2019, Judge Alison Nathan allowed her to testify at Maxwell’s trial under the fake name “Kate.” Apparently this was a person on whose behalf it was decided that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution must be suspended.
Here is Anouska De Georgiou at a party in London for the premiere of the movie “Charlie And The Chocolate Factory,” on July 17, 2005. She’s the one with the lollipop in her mouth.
The above photo would’ve been taken many years after she’d allegedly been ensnared by the most prolific child-sex trafficking operation in American history, and perhaps world history, based on the histrionics that have now become so commonplace. It was also during this time that she was continuing to maintain consensual contact with Jeffrey Epstein — which she did throughout her 20s, and even into her 30s. By 2008, when she was around 31, Anouska De Georgiou emailed Epstein while he was incarcerated in Florida, and offered to send him photos of herself. In 2010, she started dating noted actor David Hasselhoff. In 2011, she apparently broke up with Hasselhoff, and again initiated emails with Epstein, asking to visit and stay with him in New York.
By her 40s, Anouska De Georgiou claimed to have undergone “deprogramming” in her “mind and body,” and this led her to realize she’d been victimized by Epstein. “I have also suffered periods of disassociation,” she wrote in a “Victim Impact Statement” for Maxwell’s 2022 sentencing.
Now she’s a “certified life coach” and has a podcast.
And in 2025, she’s apparently one of the hundreds of “victims” that Thomas Massie says he’s “convinced” must obviously exist.
I wish I’d gotten a chance to interview Anouska De Georgiou yesterday, but I’d been hauled out of the press conference by Capitol Police after Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene whipped up a mob and shouted calls for my ejection. Thanks to Marge’s antics, I was threatened with arrest for having committed the grave crime of asking a question she didn’t like at a public press conference, which I’d been specifically invited to attend by Ro Khanna’s staff.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, in case you ever happen to read this, or anyone screenshots it for you: It’s totally normal to have political disagreements. Even vehement, contentious, bitter political disagreements. But you’ve crossed a line. You tried to get me arrested for having the audacity to ask a totally legitimate question at a public press conference I’d been invited to attend. I now consider you an avowed enemy.
I have plenty more material from the ridiculous bonanza yesterday, so please consider subscribing to this Substack, and upgrading to a paid subscription if you wouldn’t mind. Here’s a segment I did last night on NewsNation. I have quite a bit more media I’ll be doing in the coming days, so I’ll keep you apprised, if you want.
I've come to the realization that this Epstein drama as a whole is the logical outcome to the #MeToo movement, i.e., any famous or rich person for the foreseeable future has to be on guard because not only are there going to be pretty scammers looking for a payout you need to be constantly fearful of, but now even the supposedly honest and heroic politicians will be shown to be be easily shorn of their wings and revealed to be just like all the rest (scammy) if they believe they can make a name for themselves by joining the braying mob of scammy head cases.
Anouska was allowed to testify under the pseudonym Kate, ostensibly to protect her daughter. Well, now she's waived her anonymity and has a new podcast called the Empowered Exchange that has "insightful conversations that inspire confidence, growth, and transformation". Okay.
The defense had a witness named Alexander Hamilton who gave an affidavit saying that Anouska told him the Epstein case had "fallen into her lap" and that Anouska was planning to write a book and use the Epstein money to move to Italy.
One problem with allowing accusers to testify pseudonymously is that such witnesses for the defense have to be tracked down by the defense at considerable expense. If it was publicly known that Anouska was one of Maxwell's accusers, might other associates of hers have gotten in contact with the defense on their own to pooh-pooh her claims?