FACT-CHECK: New Trump Allegations, 'Epstein Was a Drug Dealer', and the Prison Guard 'Paid to Murder Him'

Another week, another tsunami of sensational headlines arising from mainstream media journalists diving into the Epstein files in search of clickbait. But what's fact, and what's fiction?

Epstein ‘the Ketamine King’

A previously undisclosed investigation by the Drug Enforcement Administration examined Jeffrey Epstein and roughly a dozen other individuals in 2015 over suspected money laundering, drug distribution and the alleged recruitment of Eastern European women to provide sexual services to wealthy clients, according to five people familiar with the matter.

The inquiry reportedly grew out of an ongoing organized crime investigation and was handled by a specialized intelligence unit within the DEA working alongside a transnational crime task force. The probe began after a confidential informant told authorities that Epstein had been involved in financing and supplying so-called “club drugs,” including ecstasy, ketamine and methamphetamine, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case involved sensitive law enforcement information.

Documents tied to the investigation identified a group of people connected to Epstein, including lawyers, accountants and several European women who worked for him as assistants or fashion models, the sources said. Two companies were also referenced in the case materials.

No charges were ultimately brought against any of the individuals named during the investigation. Because the full case file has never been made public, it remains unclear how long the inquiry continued or what conclusions investigators may have reached. Still, accounts of the DEA probe raise further questions about what federal authorities knew about Epstein years before his arrest in 2019. By that point, the U.S. Department of Justice has said that more than 1,000 people had been victimized by him.

The existence of the 2015 investigation first surfaced in January when the Justice Department released a heavily redacted document referencing it. The additional details now emerging deepen the uncertainties surrounding Epstein and indicate that scrutiny of him extended well beyond the sex-trafficking investigation that later captured global attention.

They also point to a broader pattern: while Epstein publicly cultivated relationships with prominent figures in finance, politics and aristocratic circles, numerous government agencies were quietly monitoring him. Records released earlier this year show that beginning in 2009, after Epstein left a Florida jail following a plea deal that included a conviction for soliciting a minor for prostitution, at least eight US agencies launched separate inquiries involving him. These included the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the DEA, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service.

According to those records, investigators tracked Epstein’s travel, compiled profiles of his associates and examined financial transactions flowing through offshore accounts. Authorities in other countries were also paying attention. Even years after Epstein’s release from Florida custody, the United States Secret Service’s White House division and police at Harvard University carried out background checks on him.

The Justice Department documents initially withheld the identities of the 12 people and two companies mentioned in the DEA investigation. According to individuals familiar with the case, those included Epstein’s longtime attorney Darren Indyke, his brother Mark Epstein and several accountants associated with him: Bella Klein, Harry Beller and Richard Kahn. Indyke and Kahn later became co-executors of Epstein’s estate after his death in federal custody in August 2019.

Mark Epstein (left).

Two companies also appeared in the investigative materials: Wagging Tail Entertainment and Ossa Properties Inc.. Entertainment publicist Peggy Siegal conducted business under Wagging Tail, according to emails contained in the Justice Department’s Epstein document trove. Ossa Properties, owned by Mark Epstein, managed real estate connected to Jeffrey Epstein. A company executive, Anthony Barrett, was also identified in the profile prepared for investigators. In several civil lawsuits, alleged victims have said they were abused inside a building operated by Ossa Properties.

A spokesperson for Siegal said she had never been interviewed by either the DEA or the FBI, no longer has any connection to Wagging Tail, and was unaware of any investigation involving the company. She was not listed among the primary investigative targets in the task-force document.

Mark Epstein said in an interview that he had no knowledge of the DEA inquiry and had never spoken with investigators regarding illegal financial transfers, drugs or prostitution allegations. He added that he would only address questions concerning the circumstances surrounding his brother’s death. Authorities ruled Jeffrey Epstein’s death a suicide, though Mark Epstein has repeatedly disputed that conclusion and insists his brother was killed.

Daniel Weiner, who represents Indyke and Kahn, said both men were unaware that the DEA had ever conducted such an investigation.

The story published by Bloomberg (which you can read in full by clicking here) is riddled with sensationalism and flimsy dot connecting. For instance, their article goes on to detail, in great length, another investigation carried out into alleged drug dealing in New York at the time, but gives no evidence to suggest any connection with Epstein.

Furthermore, Epstein was known to be incredibly anti-drugs. In fact, he sacked a number of his former staff members (including Virginia Giuffre) upon discovering that they were taking illegal narcotics. So it is hard to reconcile this with the fresh insinuation that he was heavily involved in trafficking narcotics.

I also find it difficult to understand why Epstein, who was already a multi-millionaire and was making an astronomical, documented income from trading and helping the rich and powerful pay less tax, would risk all of that by selling drugs.

That said, though unlikely (and indeed the FBI never pressed any charges, so couldn’t have found evidence to prove a case against him), it’s still a story that warrants further investigation before ruling it out completely.

‘New Allegations’ Against President Trump

The Department of Justice released additional documents into the Epstein files database this week after several news organisations accused it of holding back records that contained allegations involving the President. The department said the documents had initially been withheld because they were mistakenly categorised as “duplicative”.

The reality is that over 75,000 additional documents were due to be released before Friday 6th March, but journalists, some of whom have been working alongside the House Democrats and lawyers representing Epstein’s accusers, were only interested in material that can be spun into misleading headlines capable of smearing Donald Trump, whose relationship with Epstein ended in the early 2000s.

Therefore, largely ignoring all else, they instantly honed in on 16 newly released pages containing summaries and notes from three FBI interviews with a woman who accused Trump of sexual assault, describing her allegations in graphic detail.

According to the documents, the woman first contacted federal authorities in 2019, shortly after Epstein’s arrest. She alleged that the financier assaulted her on Hilton Head Island in South Carolina when she was about 13 years old, an incident she believes occurred around 1984. During the interviews, she told investigators that Epstein “drove her and/or flew her to either New York or New Jersey,” where she was taken to a “very tall building with huge rooms” in which she said Trump sexually assaulted her.

The notes record the woman saying that Trump allegedly “mentioned something to the effect of: ‘Let me teach you how little girls are supposed to be.’”

She alleged that Trump attempted to force her to perform a sex act before striking her in the head and having her removed from the room.

The FBI conducted additional interviews later that year, on 24 July, 7 August, 20 August and 16 October.

In those conversations, the woman told agents she believed her mother had been blackmailed by Epstein and said she experienced verbal and physical threats for years after the alleged incident, which she believed were connected to him.

On Thursday, Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the allegations were “completely baseless” and “backed by zero credible evidence.” She also questioned the credibility of the accuser, whose name remains redacted, citing her criminal history.

The Department of Justice reiterated its earlier warning that the Epstein files contain claims that are unverified and may be inaccurate.

“Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election,” the department said. “To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had any credibility, they would already have been used against President Trump.”

Katie Johnson was another woman found to have falsely accused Donald Trump.

This did not stop the press and media from publishing intentionally misleading headlines and clickbait articles, claiming that the documents constitute ‘new’ allegations against President Trump.

The journalists writing those pieces, of course, knew full well that they were willingly trying to pull the wool over your eyes.

They also knew full well that the allegations not only are nothing ‘new’, but that they were thoroughly debunked many years ago. Even Julie K Brown, the former Miami Herald journalist known for covering the case, has previously admitted that these allegations were proven to be false. However, this hasn’t stopped her from, in recent days, insinuating the very opposite to gain herself some attention. One must remember that Brown publicly admitted that the only reason she first took an interest in the Epstein scandal was because allegations had been made against Trump (whom Brown clearly and openly dislikes).

Some of the allegations were, in fact, already present in the Epstein files before the additional documents were added. And, surprisingly, even the left-wing Guardian recently debunked those allegations. Their article, put out at the end of last month, can be read by clicking here.

You can. also read about another allegation against Trump, and how it turned out to be a hoax orchestrated by a former Jerry Springer Show producer, by clicking here.

Epstein’s Prison Guard Made ‘Mysterious’ Cash Deposit After Googling Him

Freshly released documents from the US Department of Justice suggest that one of the prison guards on duty the night Epstein died conducted internet searches about him shortly before his body was discovered, and had made a ‘sizeable’ cash deposit days earlier that later drew scrutiny from investigators.

According to the records, correctional officer Tova Noel searched online for updates about Epstein roughly 40 minutes before he was found dead in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center on August 10, 2019. FBI logs of Noel’s computer activity indicate she typed the phrase “latest on Epstein in jail” at 5:42 a.m., repeating the search again at 5:52 a.m. Her colleague, correctional officer Michael Thomas, discovered Epstein hanging in his cell at about 6:30 a.m.

Both Noel and Thomas were later accused by prosecutors of falsifying prison logs to indicate they had carried out routine checks on Epstein during the night. In reality, investigators alleged that the mandatory half-hour welfare checks were not performed. The two officers were dismissed from their jobs, although criminal charges against them were eventually dropped.

Tova Noel (centre) outside court in December 2021

Earlier in the shift, prosecutors said Noel spent time browsing furniture online while Thomas looked at motorcycle listings instead of conducting rounds.

When Noel was questioned under oath by the Justice Department in 2021, she denied carrying out the internet searches recorded by the FBI. “I don’t remember doing that,” she said during the interview, according to a transcript. She added that she did not believe the FBI’s search logs were accurate, stating: “I don’t recall looking him up.”

Noel also told investigators that failing to perform routine rounds was common practice inside the Manhattan jail and that records were frequently filled out to indicate checks had been completed even when they had not. “I’ve never worked in the Special Housing Unit and actually done rounds every 30 minutes,” she said.

Separate documents released by the Justice Department show that Chase Bank flagged a series of cash deposits into Noel’s account in a suspicious activity report sent to the FBI in November 2019.

Bank records indicate that 12 deposits had been made beginning in April 2018, culminating in the largest payment, a $5,000 cash deposit on July 30, 2019, ten days before Epstein’s death. The files released publicly include account activity from December 2018 onward, showing seven deposits totalling $11,880 in cash.

Noel began working in the jail’s Special Housing Unit, where Epstein was being held, on July 7, 2019, only weeks before he died. Records also show she was driving a 2019 Land Rover Range Rover valued at around $62,000 at the time. Investigators did not question her about the deposits during the sworn interview.

Another document in the Justice Department release summarises an internal FBI briefing about surveillance footage from the night of Epstein’s death. Investigators believed Noel may have been the unidentified orange-coloured figure captured on a grainy camera image near the tier where Epstein was housed around 10:40 p.m.

The briefing noted that a correctional officer, believed to be Noel, appeared to be carrying either linens or inmate clothing toward the unit’s entrance at that time, describing it as the last moment an officer was seen approaching the tier during the night. Epstein was later found to have used strips of orange fabric to hang himself.

In her sworn statement, however, Noel said she last saw Epstein alive sometime after 10 p.m. and insisted she did not distribute linens or clothing to prisoners during her shift. “I never gave out linen — ever,” she told investigators, explaining that the task was normally carried out by the previous shift.

The unclear identity of the orange-coloured figure in the surveillance footage has fuelled debate and speculation since the FBI released the video publicly.

When investigators asked Noel directly whether she had any role in Epstein’s death, she responded simply: “No.”

Now, let’s step away from the sensational, perhaps even conspiratorial aspects of this story, and inject some common sense.

Firstly, not only have we not been told who the payments to Noel were made by (nor indeed if they come from separate senders), but the majority of those payments were made long before Epstein ever stepped foot inside the Metropolitan Correctional Centre (the prison where Noel worked). In fact, most were made before Epstein was even arrested.

Secondly, the FBI would have investigated the origins of these payments, and yet there is no evidence to suggest that they concluded any of them were made in relation to the Epstein case, nor sent by anyone with a motive to kill Epstein.

Thirdly, Noel googling updates on Epstein’s case isn’t suspicious at all, particularly considering that it was so high profile at the time and, that very day, the world media was awash with stories on Epstein’s. legal battle and fresh allegations being made against him. Curiosity is a natural human trait - even more so for a bored guard sat behind a desk on a silent late night shift just meters away from the famous man in question. Furthermore, Epstein wasn’t the only inmate whom Noel googled. Shortly after searching ‘latest on Epstein in jail’, she also googled ‘latest on Omar Amanat’.

Omar Amanat was another high profile inmate of the MCC during the time that Noel worked there, further ddemonstrating that she was merely, and naturally, interested in the online gossip and news relating to the inmates under her care.

Amanat was an American entrepreneur, film producer, and investor in media, technology and hospitality companies.

In July 2016 Amanat was arrested as part of the conspiracy case against former technology IPTV company KIT Digital. Prosecutors asserted that Amanat with Kaleil Isaza Tuzman, Stephen E. Maiden and an unnamed individual used an investment vehicle controlled by Tuzman to purchase KIT Digital shares. In December 2017, Amanat was found guilty of defrauding Kit investors, Judge Paul G. Gardephe thus. revoked his bail and ordered him remanded into custody at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC), citing the risk of flight and the presentation of fabricated evidence during the trial. He remained there until 2021, when he was finally sentenced to five years in federal prison.

And finally, are we really supposed to believe (as the headlines so clearly insinuate) that Noel would risk losing her job and risk serving a life sentence, to murder Jeffrey Epstein… for just $5,000 (the only large payment made to her during Epstein’s incarceration, and an amount that is less one month’s salary for a guard working at the MCC)?

I think not.

While I’ve got you here: Incase you missed mine and Jessica Reed Kraus’s latest live chat going over the evidence relating to Epstein’s curious death, including audio from his brother, Mark Epstein, and Epstein’s former cellmate, you can watch it by clicking here.