The Epstein emails: So far, no smoking gun

I know those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome are not going to like this, but even CNN acknowledges there is no smoking gun in the just-released Jeffrey Epstein emails, at least so far.

Importantly,  very importantly, is the quote from chief Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, that she never saw Donald J. Trump involved with any underage girls and said he “couldn’t have been friendlier.” If you believe her allegations against Epstein, and I do, then you should believe her exoneration of Trump. It is simple fairness, something not usually the currency of partisans.

Which brings me to a picture of Trump circulating on social media with his hands on a very pretty underage girl.

What the picture doesn’t tell you is that the girl is his daughter Ivanka. It‘s a lot less incriminating when you know that.

Having looked at the emails, one possibly incriminating word keeps popping up — “girls.”

Incriminating because we know now that Epstein was having sex with underage girls, meaning under the age of consent. In 2008, he plead guilty to a single count of soliciting sex from someone under 18, a charge greatly reduced by a U.S. attorney, who was working for the George W. Bush administration. It was widely regarded as a revolting sweetheart deal, that Epstein had bought his way out of facing federal charges.

It stank. (That U.S. attorney, Alexander Acosta, later became Trump’s labor secretary.)

As you read through the documents, you will see Giuffre’s account that Trump “spent time” at Epstein’s house with “girls.”

The term “girls” does not mean underage girls. The term “girls” is used by many men, and some women, to mean “women.”

Four professional female photographers at the Inquirer and the Bulletin, for example, referred to themselves as the “photo girls,” by no stretch demeaning themselves. It is a common term reflecting more on gender than on age.

That Trump “spent hours” at Epstein’s house (but not his island) does not say how much time, and here’s the part that those suffering from Trump Agreement Syndrome won’t like: Trump lies so much he creates potholes for himself.

He denied knowing Epstein other than casually, when there is a lot of evidence that they knew each other pretty well, and were seen together at parties.  Did this mean they were bros? It does not. I find Trump’s denial unbelieveable, while I do believe his assertion that Trump broke his relationship with Epstein because the financier was poaching female employees at Mar-a-Lago.

Does this mean Trump knew of sex trafficking? It does not.

In an email sent by Epstein to writer Michael Wolff, he said Trump “knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.” To stop what? Recruiting them? Again, we don’t know that “girls” means underaged, and that he supposedly asked her to stop suggests Trump didn’t like what he saw.

Is it possible a review of the thousands more Epstein emails will reveal believable evidence? It may.

The snippet about Trump being “dirty,” was in connection with his impeachment, not sex exploits. The only sure evidence we have of Trump’s sexual involvement with women — porn star Stormy Daniels, Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal, and sexual abuse victim E. Jean Carroll — is they are all adults.

A decade-old remark by Trump that Epstein likes women “on the younger side,” does not mean underage. Melania Trump is 24 years younger than her husband — truly “younger,” but very much an adult.

Trump’s relationship with Epstein apparently ended before his involvement with underage women was known.

So what I am saying here is that — so far — no matter how much you hate Trump, there is no factual evidence connecting him to any illegal sexual activity with Epstein.

Anything you read on social media is contrary to the facts as we know them. No smoking gun.