BREAKING: I found the real "coverup" in the Epstein Files!
Forgive me: I’ve been working diligently on new material from the latest round of “Epstein Files.” But I had to do a quick standalone summary tonight, because this one particular file I just came across is simply too sublime to delay magnifying for a single second longer. Of course, you’ll see nothing about it anywhere in the rest of our vaunted media landscape, and since so many people out there in internet La La Land are clearly desperate for a “coverup” they can enjoyably rage about, let me go ahead and satisfy your cravings:
Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York found the marquee Epstein “survivor,” Virginia Roberts Giuffre, also known as VRG, to be so lacking in credibility that they were impelled to compose a lengthy December 19, 2019 memo detailing the many preposterous flaws with her many fantastical tales.
— They said they were “unable to corroborate” the central claim of VRG’s purported victimization, which had also given rise to the very essence of Epstein mythology as we now know it: that she was “lent out” for sexual services to prominent men, such as Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz.
— They noted that VRG’s accounts of her own sexual abuse were “internally inconsistent,” and not just over long periods of time, but within a single interview they conducted with her on September 9, 2019.
— They noted that VRG admitted to repeatedly lying about basic facts, destroying evidence, and telling falsehoods to the media.
— They noted that VRG schemed with a tabloid trash journalist, Sharon Churcher of the Daily Mail, to generate “big headlines” by accusing lots of prominent people of heinous child-sex crimes, in hopes that this would entice prospective publishers to buy their forthcoming “memoir” for big bucks.
— They noted that VRG claimed the FBI told her they were aware of “40 other Epstein victims,” but the FBI never told her any such thing.
— They noted that VRG had falsely claimed the FBI told her “Epstein had cameras watching her at all times,” and repeated this tantalizing claim to the media, but the FBI never told her any such thing. And indeed, they were “not aware of any such cameras.”
— They noted that VRG became “particularly combative” when asked for specific details of her claims, at one point cursing at the Assistant US Attorneys when they requested more information about the specific instances in which Ghislaine Maxwell had purportedly “directed her to have sex with another person.” An infuriated VRG eventually proclaimed: “She’s the one who brought me to be trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein in the fucking first place!” Which, conspicuously, did not answer the prosecutors’ question. Oh what I wouldn’t give for the video footage of VRG frothing at a stone-faced Maurene Comey.
— They noted that VRG “began using drugs so heavily that Epstein said he did not want her around anymore.” VRG has long acknowledged consuming large quantities of memory-impairing drugs during her tenure as a supposed sex slave, but I’m not aware of the drug-taking habit ever being cited as the proximate cause of her departure from Epstein. (But I could be misremembering; I’ve consumed such a lunatic amount of this material, I might as well be on some mind-melting substance.) Either way, VRG’s excess drug consumption is not supposed to be mentioned in polite company, because we’re not to “shame” her, even though VRG’s self-told memories of sexual misfortune many years after the fact are what unfortunately form the basis of the currently-existing Epstein mythology.
— They noted that VRG made a “continuous stream” of “sensationalized” claims in her public media appearances.
— They noted that VRG falsely claimed the FBI had told her there was a “credible” death threat against her, and repeated this in public several times, including in front of the Manhattan federal courthouse after the infamous August 27, 2019 struggle-session hearing I’ve previously written about. The memo says the FBI actually told her the exact opposite: that there were no credible threats against her! WTF!
PLEASE RECALL: This is the same person whose phony baloney October 2025 memoir was an overnight international sensation, generating credulous wall-to-wall media coverage across multiple continents, rocketing up the best-seller charts, and igniting massive political turmoil in several countries — especially the UK, where in response to that ridiculous book, the feeble-minded Royal Family decided to promptly strip Prince Andrew of his lifelong royal title! And then kick him out of his royal lodging! Not that I’ve ever cared all that much about the fate of the Royal Family, but if they’re going to have a downfall, couldn’t it at least be instigated by something minimally non-fictional?
Ironically, federal prosecutors did a way more thorough job scrutinizing VRG’s chronic confabulations (in their internal memoranda, anyway) than the American or British media ever have. This memo itself would serve as a far better “book review” than anything produced by the BBC or CNN on the subject. Because even though these SDNY prosecutors were in zealous pursuit of any possible speck of evidence, no matter how minuscule, that could support their soon-to-be-brought “child sex-trafficking” charges against Maxwell, they were nonetheless compelled to note — accurately, as it happens — that the first iteration of VRG’s supposed “memoir” manuscript, from 2011-2012, was a “fictionalized account of her experiences with Epstein and Maxwell.” And it had “described a number of incidents that she has since admitted did not in fact take place.” They drolly go on to note that “these include descriptions of a sexual encounter with a Nobel Prize winning scientist and a scene in which [REDACTED] is caught with cocaine in her room and fired.” (The redacted name is Sarah Kellen, one of Epstein’s adult female assistants, who is apparently now being treated by the government as yet another “victim” to add to their puzzlingly gargantuan tally — postulated to have now reached either 1,000+ or 1,200+ total “victims,” depending who’s counting.)
Elsewhere in the memo, VRG is said to have remarked that other than Maxwell, somebody else whose name has been [REDACTED] was actually “the best for picking up girls.” This would appear to again be Sarah Kellen, or perhaps Nadia Marcinkova, or perhaps The Little Mermaid — sadly, we’re left only to speculate, thanks to the tireless efforts of principled transparency and disclosure advocates who’ve been passionately calling for such expansive redactions. But thankfully, there’s still plenty of material to work with, because “when asked to describe specific instances in which she personally observed [REDACTED] recruit anyone,” VRG said “she did not recall actually seeing [REDACTED] recruiting anyone.” Oh gee, nevermind then!
RECALL: Virginia Roberts Giuffre is not just another interchangeable “victim.” She was the very genesis of all the most outlandish theories that have come to be so widely believed about Epstein: the mass-scale “child-sex trafficking,” the audacious “blackmail” operation, the prolific ensnarement of prominent individuals, etc. And yet: “No other victim has described being expressly directed by either Maxwell or Epstein to engage in sexual activities with any other men,” says the memo. Put another way, even after this intensive federal law enforcement investigation, the “pedo trafficking and blackmail” theory continued to rest solely on the uncorroborated word of VRG.
So when VRG finally did sit for an extended interview with federal prosecutors, who by that time were in fiendish pursuit of any Epstein “co-conspirator” they could conceivably muster, they were disturbed to find VRG so flagrantly non-credible that in their resulting memo, they didn’t even categorize her as among the “victims who were abused as minors.” Instead, they had to invent a whole separate category for her.
And indeed, VRG really is in a category all her own. Few people in human history have been the sole progenitors of such astronomical volumes of bullshit — with such astronomically destructive consequences for everybody else. And along the way, she managed to cajole so many others into twisting their own recollections to comport with her discombobulated sex-slavery dreamscape — in part out of “survivor sister” allyship, sure, but perhaps more importantly, the chance to get tons of money.
In that phony posthumous* memoir last year, ghostwriter Amy Wallace gave the following sanitized account of why VRG did not testify at the 2021 criminal trial of Ghislaine Maxwell — despite theoretically being the most slam-dunk witness the government had available, given that it was she (VRG) who first claimed to have been recruited and trafficked by Maxwell into Epstein’s ghastly sex-servitude:
Months earlier, the lead prosecutors, Pomerantz and Maurene Comey, had broken the news to me that I would not be testifying because, essentially, I would be too big a distraction. For example, if I were a witness, all the men that I had previously named as my abusers would likely be called by the defense as rebuttal witnesses, the prosecutors said. They feared such theatrics would dilute jurors’ focus, taking the spotlight off Maxwell. At its heart, prosecuting a case is about creating a clear narrative that jurors find easy to follow. My narrative was complicated, if only because I’d named so many names.
…
I was very disappointed — I had been looking forward to doing my part to send Maxwell to prison. While Siggy [her favorite extortionist lawyer — MT] tried to console me that I had done my part already, being excluded from this proceeding felt unfair to me. For one thing, I expected that many people would assume prosecutors shut me out because they didn’t believe me. But that couldn’t be helped.
The average sympathetically-minded reader is supposed to infer from this that the reasons for VRG’s exclusion were entirely innocuous: SDNY prosecutors simply made the prudent strategic calculation, deciding a streamlined case against Maxwell, sans VRG, would be the most sensible course of action. Certainly then, her exclusion had nothing at all to do with the mountains of impeachable evidence VRG would have inevitably gift-wrapped defense counsel had she testified. And certainly, if it were revealed to jurors that such critical plot-points in the larger Epstein storyline were ultimately all predicated on the wild phantasmagoria of VRG, this couldn’t have created any doubts in jurors’ minds about the underlying premise of the “sex-trafficking conspiracy” they were being asked to render an impartial verdict on. Right?
What a sick joke this whole thing is! Holy crap!
Again: if you or someone you know/love/hate is still frantically looking for an “Epstein coverup” they can fulminate about, please do not hesitate to pass along this fascinating new information. Because it turns out there really is a major “coverup” hidden deep in the “Epstein Files.” Just not the “coverup” that fever-brained internet hordes were banking on.
The memo I’ve been quoting from throughout this article was suspiciously uploaded, and then removed, by the DOJ. So I’m uploading my own preserved copy, embedded below, for your convenience. By the way, if you happened to come across any documents that were also published and subsequently removed, please let me know, because I’m only one man, and there are literally millions of these friggin’ files!
*Given recent developments in the probate dispute over her lucrative estate in Australia, I am now willing to tentatively acknowledge that VRG is in fact deceased — because the threshold for satisfactory corroboration has now been (tentatively…) met. Although, I should say… there’s still a bunch of peculiar stuff around the circumstances of her apparent death that need to be further investigated. For one thing, why has nobody ever been able to interview the estranged husband? Do I need to go to Australia myself? Sheesh…
Wow! Great work. I’m going to say it even if I piss people off: Maxwell should Not be in prison and at the very least be given a new hearing. Thanks Michael. Kathryn from Brooklyn.
The DOJ could have nipped this conspiracy theory in the bud 5 years ago but calling an alleged victim a total liar just doesn't come across well in the #MeToo era.
Heck, even Kash Patel was forced to skirt around outright calling "American hero" Virginia Giuffre a liar in his congressional testimony, saying that there was no "credible" evidence of any trafficking to other men, i.e. she was not credible.