Trump, Epstein, and the files that won’t go away: A timeline of shifting statements and mounting scrutiny

People take a photo of an image of U.S. President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, along with the words - "President Trump: Release All the Epstein Files", projected onto the U.S. Department of Commerce headquarters on July 18, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

When The Wall Street Journal reported in July that US President Donald Trump had been briefed about his name appearing in the so-called Epstein files, it confirmed what many in Washington had suspected for weeks: something had shifted behind closed doors. The president’s tone had changed. His team’s statements grew defensive. And the public’s calls for transparency were met with distraction, deflection, or flat-out denial.

While Trump has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection to Jeffrey Epstein, the sequence of official statements, public posturing, and internal confusion suggests a deliberate attempt to manage—and possibly suppress—the fallout. Here's a breakdown of the major developments since Trump returned to office, and how the administration’s messaging has evolved in real time.

May: The quiet briefing that changed the tone

Sometime in May, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy AG Todd Blanche reportedly told Trump that his name appears multiple times in Epstein-related materials. This was never publicly disclosed at the time—but following the meeting, Trump’s tone on Epstein noticeably hardened. His comments became more dismissive, and his administration’s posture shifted toward limiting public disclosures.

June–July: Shift in strategy, growing backlash

In a June interview, Trump said he supported the release of “credible” material related to Epstein, but warned there may be “phony stuff” in the government’s files. That hedge was unusual—especially for a president who thrives on conspiracy narratives when they suit his aims.

By July, the Department of Justice released a memo claiming there was no “client list” and that Epstein’s death was a suicide. Trump allies who had long promoted Epstein theories—including Kash Patel and Dan Bongino—suddenly pivoted, defending the DOJ and dismissing “conspiracies.”

But Bondi’s earlier comments—claiming tens of thousands of Epstein videos and that she had a “client list” on her desk—didn’t go unnoticed. And when she distributed binders labelled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” at a White House influencer event, conservative frustration grew at the lack of real revelations.

July 7-17: Trump lashes out, tries to shut down the story

As pressure built, Trump began openly attacking the media, calling coverage of Epstein a “desecration” and “pretty boring stuff.” He then claimed Bondi had never told him about his name in the files—despite the Wall Street Journal report to the contrary.

On July 16, he labelled the entire Epstein controversy a “hoax” invented by Democrats. The following day, he rejected calls for a special prosecutor and then sued The Wall Street Journal for defamation, seeking $20 billion in damages. Legal experts say the case is weak—and Trump’s track record on such lawsuits is poor.

Meanwhile, Trump’s push to unseal grand jury transcripts—despite knowing they’re unlikely to contain politically useful information—has been interpreted as a performative move designed to suggest cooperation without revealing potentially damaging records.

July 22: The return of distraction politics

With the Epstein narrative refusing to die down, Trump resorted to familiar tactics—calling on his DOJ to “go after Obama” for an unsubstantiated claim about the 2016 election. “I don’t follow [Epstein] too much,” he said, contradicting years of his own statements and his administration’s deep involvement in the matter.

What it all adds up to

While there is still no direct link between Trump and criminal activity related to Epstein, the administration’s erratic response, shifting statements, and attempts to manage disclosures raise more questions than answers. The DOJ’s refusal to release non-grand jury evidence and the White House’s attempts to control the narrative suggest an effort to bury details that could be politically damaging—if not legally consequential.

The bottom line: This story is far from over, and the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein files may become a case study in crisis mismanagement. As former dissident Adam Michnik once said in another context: “It was books that were victorious in the fight.” In this case, it might be the documents—and the truth behind them—that ultimately prevail.