Plagiarism Alert — Jessica Reed Kraus
I’m not sure I’d ever heard of Jessica Reed Kraus, but someone just sent me an article of hers, thinking I’d be flattered by how complimentary she was of me. Apparently, this woman has the #2 publication on all of Substack in the category of “culture.” So I scanned the article — and “flattery” is not what stood out. What stood out was the plagiarism.
She does link and extensively quote from some of my recent articles. Which is fine. But then she takes whole sections, lightly adjusts them, and passes them off as her own. That’s plagiarism.
Michael Tracey, Has anyone actually bothered to look into the “victims” who were paraded around at the Epstein Press Conference? — September 4, 2025
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.
Jessica Reed Kraus, Capitol Theater: Epstein Victims and the Politics of Victimhood — September 8, 2025
Annie Farmer spoke on the Capitol steps. Also familiar from Maxwell’s trial, she testified that Maxwell talked her into a “non-sexual” massage when she was in New Mexico and Epstein climbed into her bed the following morning without her permission. She managed to escape further advances by hiding out in the bathroom until he gave up and left her alone. Her payout reportedly exceeded $1 million. Judge Alison Nathan declared that Farmer had endured no “illegal sexual activity” at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.
The same was judicially determined for Anouska De Georgiou, another of the four “victims” the government chose to call at Maxwell’s 2021 trial. She spoke at a press conference too, weeping as she insisted 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 proclaimed. She received $3.25 million from the Epstein Victims Compensation Program.
Over the course of the 2021 trial, it was established 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. Accordingly, nothing that occurred to her could be regarded as “illegal sexual activity.”
Yet, 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 pseudonym “Kate.” On her behalf, it was apparently decided that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution could be set aside.
Pure plagiarism. You can’t just copy and paste someone else’s text, make minor adjustments to the wordage, and then present it as your own writing. There is zero reason why she couldn’t have just blocked-quoted me, instead of trying to cover her tracks by changing “Apparently this was a person on whose behalf it was decided that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution must be suspended” (my sentence) to “On her behalf, it was apparently decided that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution could be set aside.” That’s just shuffling around some words so people don’t notice you’re committing plagiarism.
And she does the same thing over and over.
Michael Tracey, Has anyone actually bothered to look into the “victims” who were paraded around at the Epstein Press Conference? — September 4, 2025
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.
Jessica Reed Kraus, Capitol Theater: Epstein Victims and the Politics of Victimhood — September 8, 2025
By 2008, Anouska, then around 31, emailed Epstein while he was incarcerated in Florida, offering to send him photos of herself.
In 2010, she began dating David Hasselhoff. By 2011, after apparently breaking up with Hasselhoff, she resumed emailing Epstein, asking to visit and stay with him in New York.
Emails between “Kate” and Epstein, submitted as evidence, show that their communication continued well into her 30s, even while he was jailed. The messages were affectionate, with her signing off, “I love you.”
By her 40s, De Georgiou stated that she had undergone “deprogramming” in her “mind and body,” which led her to realize she had been victimized by Epstein. “I have also suffered periods of disassociation,” she wrote in a Victim Impact Statement for Maxwell’s 2022 sentencing. Today, she is a certified life coach and hosts a podcast.
Sorry, but you can’t swap the word “Now” with the word “Today” and then just lift somebody else’s sentence. Apparently this woman is commonly described as a “journalist.” She even claims she’s been “inducted into the White House press.” And she apparently has received some sort of press access to cover the White House. (She’s also been described as a “mommy-blogger,” which is frankly a world I don’t care to investigate too deeply.)
In the aforementioned article, Jessica Reed Kraus includes a link to an earlier article of hers, published on August 7, 2025, which she calls an “EXCLUSIVE.”
Here, she cribs and copies word-for-word from a dossier on Virginia Roberts Giuffre that I know to have been circulated, and which I’ve also seen.
Dossier:
Jessica Reed Kraus:
Dossier:
Jessica Reed Kraus:
Dossier:
Jessica Reed Kraus:
Dossier:
Jessica Reed Kraus:
I also couldn’t help but notice that in this same article, Jessica Reed Kraus posts an excerpt from a court filing that I found and published, after spending countless hours reading through countless documents. Even the highlighter, which I added myself after conducting this original research, is identical. But four days after my article appeared, Jessica Reed Kraus posts the excerpt with no link, attribution, or citation whatsoever.
This represents my findings after merely skimming two of her recent articles. One can only imagine how widespread her cribbing, copying, and outright plagiarism is. And she’s one of the most popular “journalists” on Substack. Awesome.
Here is an original copy of her September 8, 2025 Substack post in case she modifies it:
And here’s a copy of the August 7, 2025 post:
I know people might wonder why I’m “going after” this person, given that she seemingly would be “on my side” with respect to the Epstein issue — but frankly I couldn’t care less. This stuff is pernicious, and has to be policed by somebody. Believe it or not, it takes a lot of work to research, report, and write original articles. That’s what I do. For some other “journalist” to just lift your work, and then profit from it, has to be “called out.”
I sent a Substack DM to Jessica Reed Kraus and have not heard back by the time of this writing.
UPDATE FROM MT:
Just after publishing, I learned that this woman, Jessica Reed Kraus, was among the lucky recipients of Pam Bondi’s infamous “Epstein Files” prop binder. She later deleted her Instagram post touting what an honor it was to receive the phony binder.
ANOTHER UPDATE FROM MT:
Here’s a post from her Instagram on February 27, 2025. How lovely:
Michael Tracey, Plaintiff
v.
Jessica Reed Kraus, Defendant
Case No. 25-PLAG-0925
JUDGMENT
The Court finds:
Defendant copied substantial portions of Plaintiff’s work with only trivial edits.
Defendant failed to provide attribution.
Defendant profited from the appropriation.
VERDICT: GUILTY of plagiarism.
SENTENCE:
12-month suspension from Substack leaderboard.
Pinned public apology.
Retroactive attribution in all affected posts.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ HON. JUDGE JUDY
Presiding, Court of Substack Integrity
The great thing is THIS comment section is she can’t delete comments and block anyone who pushes back like she did to thousands of her paid Substack followers and her IG followers. Not even rude pushback. Just asking questions when things didn’t add up. She claims curiosity is not a crime while simultaneously blocking anyone who asks questions. She constantly plays the victim and will NEVER admit when she got something wrong. She will continue to delete articles instead of owning up and double-down and delete and block. She’s a classic pathological narcissist and pushes her own narratives claiming to be a truth teller but does stuff like this. She is a grifter. She continues to burn bridges and cleans out anyone who says anything negative so her other followers can’t see it. I’m not one of those people who just devote time to talking crap on her. I’ve just never followed anyone for so long who is terrible to her paid subs and followers and completely contradicts herself in every hypocritical way. She’s just not a good human and I don’t say that loosely. Shes mean and awful to the people closest to her. She steals other people’s work and gaslights into trying to make them think SHE was helping THEM. The only good thing out of this is now I’m following you. You’re a great writer whether I agree with you or not! I appreciate all aspects. 😊