Bulwark Takes Episode Summary: "BOMBSHELL: WSJ Confirms Trump in Epstein Files 'Multiple Times'"
Release Date: July 23, 2025
Host/Authors: Sarah Longwell & Will Sommer
1. Breaking News: Trump Mentioned in Epstein Files
Sarah Longwell opens the episode with a significant revelation: "Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. The Wall Street Journal has just dropped the story." [00:26] This report, led by journalist Josh Dawsey with a substantial byline, indicates that Trump's name appears multiple times in the documents reviewed by the Justice Department, as confirmed by senior administration officials.
2. The Significance of the WSJ Report
Will Sommer underscores the gravity of the news, stating, "I think it's really big. I think it's a really big deal." [01:05] The initial expectation among Trump's supporters was that other high-profile figures, deemed unfavorable by the MAGA base, would be implicated. Instead, Trump's inclusion is a surprising development that shifts the narrative.
Sarah elaborates on the WSJ's findings:
"When Justice Department officials reviewed what Attorney General Pam Bondi called a truckload of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein earlier this year, they discovered that Donald Trump's name appeared multiple times, according to senior administration officials." [01:22]
She points out that while the presence of Trump's name isn't inherently incriminating, the reluctance to release the files raises questions about the context in which his name appears.
3. DOJ's Handling of the Epstein Files
Sarah highlights that in May, AG Bondi informed President Trump of his mention in the Epstein files, assuring him that it wasn't indicative of wrongdoing. However, the lack of transparency and the administration's efforts to downplay the significance suggest potential underlying issues.
"We don't know what context. Right. Like, we don't know what it's saying, but we do know is that Donald Trump did not want to release these files." [02:33]
Will adds that the DOJ's reactions indicate that Trump's mentions could be more than mere coincidences:
"At minimum, I think we would expect the information in there to be embarrassing." [04:26]
He references earlier reports, such as a Wall Street Journal story about a letter Trump allegedly wrote to Epstein, implying a relationship that Trump might prefer to keep obscure.
4. Political Repercussions and Strategic Responses
Sarah connects the timing of the WSJ report with political maneuvers, noting:
"Tulsi Gabbard held a press conference today... the same day the Wall Street Journal is dropping the story. That feels like not a coincidence, would you say?" [05:18]
Will agrees, suggesting that the administration may be orchestrating smokescreens to distract from the Trump-related revelations:
"There's like a huge smokescreen effort happening. And as you said, if it was Trump... Because presumably a lot of other people are implicated or mentioned in these files." [05:18]
He speculates that attempts to release the grand jury testimony or focus on figures like Ghislaine Maxwell are strategic diversions to manage the fallout from Trump's inclusion in the documents.
5. Challenges in Releasing the Epstein Files
Sarah discusses the DOJ's justification for not unsealing the Epstein files, citing concerns over revealing victims' names and child pornography. She questions the validity of these reasons, especially given the available methods to redact sensitive information.
"I don't think anybody's asking for that. But they are using that part as the excuse for why the rest of this stuff couldn't come out." [08:17]
Will counters by pointing out the government's capability to redact and manage sensitive content:
"The government redacts things all the time. They know how to do this." [09:41]
He remains skeptical about the DOJ's reasons holding up under scrutiny, especially considering the presence of other incriminating evidence like flight logs that could be sanitized without disclosing victims' identities.
6. Internal Conflicts Within the DOJ
The episode delves into the internal tensions between DOJ officials, specifically between Pam Bondi and Bret Bongino.
Sarah recounts a conflict highlighted in the WSJ piece:
"Bongino exploded about Bondi, his face red, and called her a liar." [18:32]
Will interprets this as indicative of deeper issues and buck-passing within the administration:
"There's a lot of buck passing going on... The powers that be don't want us to know." [20:30]
He draws parallels to fictional narratives, suggesting that the interactions resemble dramatic plotlines from a John Grisham novel, emphasizing the disorder and lack of cohesive strategy within the DOJ.
7. The Ghislaine Maxwell Angle
Sarah brings up the administration's focus on Ghislaine Maxwell as a potential witness or key figure in the Epstein case, questioning the timing and motives behind this focus.
"Maybe you could just help me with the timeline... the year that you had them while you guys were in charge... why does he let all these guys go out there and hammer this during the election?" [13:06 - 14:32]
Will suggests that Maxwell's involvement might be a calculated move to distract or dilute the impact of the Trump revelations:
"This whole journey... suddenly now they're acting like we're just going to get to the bottom of this." [20:30]
He implies that Maxwell's potential testimony is part of a broader strategy to manage public perception and political fallout.
8. Concluding Thoughts: An Ongoing Saga
As the discussion wraps up, both hosts express frustration and uncertainty about the unfolding situation.
Will remarks:
"It just keeps going. I just feel like every news break, everything they try to do to close it up, it's just so weird. And then it just leaves you with more questions." [21:16]
Sarah adds:
"None of it makes sense." [18:32]
They acknowledge that the WSJ's reporting has provided a significant lead but also opened up numerous new questions regarding the DOJ's actions, Trump's involvement, and the broader implications for political trust and accountability.
Note: This summary excludes all advertisements and non-content sections of the podcast, focusing solely on the critical discussions between Sarah Longwell and Will Sommer regarding the Wall Street Journal's report on Donald Trump's mention in the Epstein files.