The Jeffrey Epstein files are being released in batches, and with each new document dump this week, there are even more mentions of Prince Andrew. Remember Andrew’s 2019 BBC interview, where he insisted that he wasn’t even that close to Epstein, that Ghislaine Maxwell was his friend but he barely associated with Epstein? Yeah. Andrew was constantly catching rides on Epstein’s Lolita Express and Andrew visited Epstein’s New York mansion and private island frequently. All of which has led to another round of “why isn’t Andrew under police investigation again?” To be fair, the FBI has wanted to interview Andrew for years, but the British police have shrugged off every attempt to get a thorough investigation into Andrew’s domestic and international crimes. That didn’t stop Republic, the anti-monarchy group, from reporting Andrew yet again:

Prince Andrew has been reported to London’s Metropolitan Police by anti-monarchy group Republic over an allegation he took part in a sexual assault of a minor—believed to be Virginia Giuffre—while in London. The allegation was made public in a huge trove of court papers released by U.S courts Wednesday naming associates of Jeffrey Epstein, and was first reported by U.K. tabloid The Sun. Andrew was also alleged to have participated in an orgy with “numerous” “under-aged girls” at Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

“The document is clear that while in London, an individual was forced to have sexual relations with Andrew when she was a minor,” Republic posted on their Instagram account. “That’s why today Republic are reporting Andrew to the police, demanding that the Met investigate these accusations. It’s simple—the royals should not be above the law. Accusations of criminality should always be investigated thoroughly. THAT’S WHY THE MET MUST ACT.”

The Met has so far declined to comment on calls to launch a fresh investigation into Andrew, whose name appears more than 70 times in nearly 1,000 pages of interviews and transcripts unsealed in the U.S. on Thursday.

In 2021, the Met announced it had completed its investigation of Giuffre’s claims in her US civil action—alleging Andrew had sexually assaulted her when she was a minor and being trafficked by Epstein—stating that they would take no further action. However, it said it would continue to “liaise with other law enforcement agencies who lead the investigation into matters related to Jeffrey Epstein.” Andrew has denied all accusations of wrongdoing and claims to have no memory of meeting Giuffre, but settled Guiffre’s civil claim in 2022 for a reputed $14 million.

In a statement, Graham Smith, Republic’s CEO, said: “I have reported Andrew to the police, well aware that the Met claims to have looked into this before. To date there appears to have been no serious criminal investigation, no interview of the accused or other witnesses and no clear justification for taking no action.

“I am calling on the Met police to re-open this case, I am calling on MPs to debate this affair in parliament, and I am calling on Charles to make a public statement—in front of the press and taking questions—to respond to these allegations and what they say about the monarchy. How can we not expect a response from the government and head of state? At the time of the alleged offences Andrew was a government trade ambassador and an active member of the royal family. They fudged and obfuscated for 11 years before taking any definitive action.”

“The government, police and palace all have questions to answer. Now is the time to start answering them. The question many people will be asking is simple: if the accused were anyone else, do we believe they wouldn’t have been investigated and prosecuted.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Nothing will happen, but I’m glad that someone is at least attempting to hold Andrew’s feet to the proverbial fire. The lack of outrage from the British media has been notable this week, and it’s perfectly clear that not only does Andrew have the support of his family, but the royal establishment is doing the most to protect him at every level as well.

They got Labour leader Keir Starmer on the record about Andrew too – Starmer said that the police should “look at” any and all claims made by victims: “Wherever there’s a complaint made, it’s inevitable that it should be looked at. We have to start with the victims here, and look at what allegations have been made.” Meaning, Andrew’s victims would have to come forward, in England, and file police reports. Which would then be ignored.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

These photos are from Wednesday, at a New Year’s reception in Denmark’s Christiansborg Palace. Queen Margrethe attended, as did Prince Frederik and Princess Mary. They will not officially be king and queen until January 14th. Rumors have been circulating all week about why Margrethe is abdicating and whether she’s trying to protect Fred and Mary’s marriage and force them to stay together. While Fred and Mary looked happy on New Year’s Eve, apparently their vibe was “frosty” at this reception.

Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark put on a frosty display this morning as they arrived at the Christiansborg Palace for a New Year reception. Frederik, 55, dressed in military regalia, while Mary, 51, looked chic in a navy dress as they met with Queen Margrethe, who will step down in 11 days time.

Walking side-by-side into the palace, the couple appeared tense as they walked to greet the diplomatic corps

Insiders told Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet that the ‘the couple did not look they were enjoying themselves’ and described the atmosphere as being at ‘freezing point’.

‘Words were exchanged between the two, and it didn’t look like they wished each other good luck’ the paper claims.

The couple kept a polite distance and barely exchanged words as they walked towards the Knights’ Hall, flanked by soldiers. The atmosphere remained cold when they took their place beside Queen Margrethe inside the hall, both dressed formally for the occasion.

[From The Daily Mail]

Judging solely from the photos, this looked like a pretty serious reception for (I think?) the diplomatic corps or something. It was work – it would have been inappropriate for Fred and Mary to be laughing or partying. Now, I believe that things are generally “frosty” between them and that the chill is all about Fred’s alleged affair with Genoveva Casanova. Interestingly enough, the Mail also has a story about how Casanova is in the wind. The Spanish media outlet Lecturas (which broke the affair story with photos) says that Casanova went to London for Christmas and she’s only been seen out a couple of times in northern Spain since the story broke. I wonder if she’ll stay silent throughout all of this abdication drama.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Getty.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amy Robach (@ajrobach)

Another week has brought us a fresh episode of my favorite new podcast to gossip about, “Amy & T.J.” On this week’s ep, co-hosts and lovaaahs Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes welcomed in 2024 by reflecting on their dramatic 2023. And, just as you’d expect, their reflections, particularly Amy’s, had it all. Love was declared, shade was dropped, and worldly possessions were lost. That’s right, on this week’s pod, Amy proclaimed that love conquers all, made a petty remark about her ex Andrew Shue, and shared that she sold or gave away most of her things while she was going through her divorce. Doing the whole bitter ex routine is not as wild as last week’s overshare about T.J.’s toxic fighting tactics, but we can still work with it.

Amy Robach revealed she lost many of her “worldly possessions” following her divorce from Andrew Shue. The former “GMA3” co-anchor and beau T.J. Holmes shared on Tuesday’s episode of their “Amy and T.J.” podcast what they learned in 2023, and Robach admitted she had to sell her personal effects.

“You can lose your job, you can lose your reputation, you can lose friends and you can lose most of your worldly possessions and still be happy,” Robach shared, prompting some slight confusion from Holmes.

“You lost most of your ‘worldly possessions’?” Holmes, 46, questioned while chuckling.

“There was a lot of selling going on, a lot of giving away,” she explained.

“It was a great yard sale,” Holmes quipped.

Robach, 50, also appeared to shade Shue, 56, when she told Holmes that “you don’t really know someone until you divorce them.”

Holmes, who went through his own divorce last year from Marilee Fiebig, didn’t want to unpack the statement and responded, “Moving on.”

[From Page Six]

Amy, welcome to divorce, hun. Even on the most amicable of terms, it’s an expensive process, and I suspect their divorce was not amicable. Lawyers, mediators, specialists… they all cost money and I’m betting that Amy didn’t hire a divorce attorney with a low hourly rate, lol. I don’t know how much Amy’s ABC severance package was but there were reports that she got a better one than T.J. did. There were also reports that Amy moved into a $2.3 million apartment when she moved out. It sounds like Shue took a look at her financial disclosures and did not come to play. Honestly, given the circumstances of their divorce, good for him. Amy also declared during the podcast that “Choosing love is always worth it.” Bookmark those words, y’all. I’m super excited to see how they’ve held up during Amy & T.J.’s 2024 reflection podcast, if there is one.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amy Robach (@ajrobach)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amy Robach (@ajrobach)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amy Robach (@ajrobach)

What is Jeremy Allen White’s appeal? People have been debating that a lot in recent years, especially with the success of The Bear, where JAW stars as a talented chef who inherited his late brother’s sandwich shop in Chicago. JAW was famous before The Bear – he grew up and glowed up on Shameless, but the success of The Bear put him at another level and ruined his marriage. Now he’s single – and dating Rosalia – and a bona fide heartthrob. Obviously, Calvin Klein came calling and now JAW is modeling underpants.

The print ads and Calvin Klein commercial were released on Thursday and everyone is screaming “YES CHEF.” Like… did we know he had this kind of body? He’s ripped but he doesn’t look like a too-chiseled gym rat. The tattoos are doing it for me and so is the hair. Like, it’s all working for me, honestly. I love men who have that jolie-laide vibe. A big nose, a weird chin, puffy lips, and you think “maybe this guy isn’t all that” and then it turns out he had ANGLES. I also think it helps that JAW is crazy-photogenic. It’s a gift.

(For some reason, these videos remind me of that story Cameron Diaz told about Tom Cruise, that whenever Tom has to be shirtless in a scene, he would do push-ups right before “action” was called.)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Calvin Klein (@calvinklein)

Photos courtesy of Mert Alas for Calvin Klein.

Everyone has known for weeks that all of these Jeffrey Epstein records would be released at the start of 2024. Even without the records, everyone knew about Prince Andrew’s associations with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Andrew paid an eight-figure out-of-court settlement to Virginia Giuffre in 2022 because Andrew abused girls and women trafficked to him by Epstein and Maxwell. Even with that knowledge, Queen Elizabeth II and King Charles have done the most to include Andrew, to show their public support for Andrew, to ensure that everyone knows that Andrew is inside the royal tent, unlike Prince Harry. Charles even allowed Andrew and Sarah Ferguson to participate in the church walk in Sandringham on Christmas Day. Well, now questions are being raised about how badly King Charles has f–ked up regarding the “Andrew Problem.” Which is why palace courtiers ran to Richard Kay at the Mail:

Charles the Christian: With the benefit of hindsight would the King have agreed to include Prince Andrew in the Royal Family’s Christmas parade at Sandringham? At the time this fraternal decision seemed a typically Christian one from Charles. Ten days later as toxic new revelations about the Duke of York’s sleazy behaviour emerge from unsealed court documents in New York, the gesture seems not just astounding but possibly unwise. What is all the more baffling is that the royals cannot hide behind the suggestion that they did not know quite how bad the allegations were going to be. The prospect of more sensational claims from the long fall-out from the unsavoury Jeffrey Epstein affair coming to light, had been telegraphed for weeks.

Andrew had been bracing himself for weeks: Andrew himself had been braced for a fresh round of claims for some time and although outwardly bullish in the face of the accusations which include groping a young woman’s breast and taking part in an underage orgy, he has been crushed by the never-ending stories. As one friend of the Duke said: ‘These are not new and are, as they have been in the past, emphatically denied.’ Perhaps the more damaging aspect of the latest disclosures is the growing realisation that Andrew, 64 next month, will never escape the tentacles of this grubby saga. And while his own lingering hopes of rehabilitating his public reputation are surely finally over, the issue for the royals is one of containment.

A risk of backfire: By embracing Andrew as they so overtly did last week, there was always a risk that it could backfire. Friends of the King insist he did not invite his brother to the public element of the Sandringham festivities — the walk to church for the Christmas service — blindly. ‘It would have been easier to have asked him to stay away,’ said one. ‘But if the message of Christmas is anything, it is about family and togetherness. That’s also why he extended the invitation to Fergie as well.’

Charles is concerned about Andrew’s confidence: Another figure says that Charles may have been encouraged to act as he did precisely because he knew what was coming and wanted to throw a protective arm around his brother. ‘He has seen for himself the diminishing effect the allegations have had on the Duke over the years, what they have done to his personality and his confidence,’ the figure said. ‘He is not going to banish his brother; he feels a responsibility for him.’ It was this concern for his mental wellbeing and how tormented he has been that encouraged the King to include Fergie as a thank-you for standing by Andrew.

A promise to QEII: It is also understood that Charles had assured the late Queen that he would look after Andrew. According to one insider it was because of his affection for his brother that the King ventured the idea that he might want to move from Royal Lodge, his vast mansion at Windsor with its costly upkeep, into something smaller and more manageable. ‘He thought it might give him something less to worry about,’ the insider said. Stubbornly Andrew refused. But it has become a touch stone issue — and one, which the Mail reveals today, the King is determined to solve.

Andrew still refuses to give up Royal Lodge: ‘Forcing the Duke to give it up, however well-intentioned, would be seen as the King punishing his brother for something he insists he is innocent of,’ says a friend of Andrew. ‘And anyway he has a lease.’

How could the royals even punish a rapist? It is also hard to see what further sanctions could be taken by the royals against the Prince. He has already lost his private office, his cherished military titles and does not use his HRH style. It is four long years since he last carried out official formal duties and it is highly unlikely that he will ever again climb into the ermine trimmed robes of a Garter Knight or appear on the balcony of Buckingham Palace.

[From The Daily Mail]

“Sleazy behavior” – try criminal behavior, degenerate behavior, predatory behavior. He’s accused of raping teenagers and there are still calls for Andrew to face criminal charges, however much that might undermine his bloody confidence. The fact that Charles and the entire royal establishment believes that they can get away with positioning themselves like this is particularly galling. Oh, Charles is such a Christian, that’s why he wanted to show support for his degenerate rapist brother, you guys! Charles is worried about Andrew’s mental health! It was quite a choice for Charles to include Andrew for the Christmas walk, just as it was a choice to include a Garter-robed Andrew at the coronation, just as it was a choice to walk with Andrew on Easter Sunday. Now Charles has to live with his poor choices and he has to live with the fact that his positioned his reign as one which supports rapists and not survivors, one which supports predators and degenerates but not the girls and women they hurt.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Well, the 2023 holiday season is coming to a close, which means *sob* it’s time to start thinking about taking down the tree and decorations. This Saturday is January 6, which marks the 12th day of Christmas (or the Feast of the Epiphany as many Christian denominations know it as). That’s the timeline that my family used while I was growing up and I think it’s fair. You get to extend the season a little bit past New Years, but also don’t still have a Christmas tree and blow mold Santa up until St. Patrick’s Day.

When we talked about the artificial vs. real Christmas tree debate, some of you mentioned that you keep your trees up for a while after the holidays are over. I love that! According to a 2022 Home Decor Report from Opendoor, 84% said that they take their decorations down sometime in January, with 51% responding that they put them away on or around January 1. Today.com recently talked to some experts to get their thoughts on when it’s time to take your Christmas tree and decorations down. Their answers varied, ranging from religious traditions to practicality to personal preference.

New Year’s Day: “January 1st is that clear marker of time that the holidays are over and a new beginning is here,” Ariana Lovato, owner and principal designer at Honeycomb Home Design, tells TODAY.com. “Time to clean up the home, clear up the clutter and take a breath from the stress of the holidays.”

January 6: “Many people will…wait until January 6 as the final day to remove all holiday decor,” Lewis Puleo, vice president at Puleo International, the oldest artificial tree company in the country, tells TODAY.com. January 6 is known as the Epiphany, Little Christmas or Three Kings Day. From the perspective of religion tradition, it’s the day that the Magi (the Three Kings or the Wise Men) brought gifts to the infant Jesus, so it makes sense for many to mark this as the last day for the Christmas season. And as the song goes, there are indeed 12 days of Christmas, with the last being January 6.

Any time in January: According to the 2020 “Undeck the Halls” report by Neighbor, more than half of Americans won’t frown upon keeping decorations up past January 1. You might start to get the side-eye from your neighbors at a certain point, though: 31% said decorations should come down by January 15, while 33% extended the deadline to February 1.

When your tree says it’s time: If you have a real Christmas tree in your midst, it’s really up to the fir itself to decide when it comes down. And unfortunately, it might be sooner rather than later. If your tree is exhibiting any of the following signs, Carpenter says it might be time to take down your tree, no matter the date:

The needles are falling, either on their own or with the touch of your hand

The limbs are stiff or droopy

It smells musty rather than like citrus or pine

The tree doesn’t seem to be taking in much or any water

Don’t let any of this sway you from having a real tree, though. “With proper care, you could easily enjoy your tree from Thanksgiving through the New Year or Epiphany, because who doesn’t want to make the holidays last just a little bit longer,” Carpenter adds.

But really, take down your tree anytime you want: Provided you have an artificial tree — or maybe you just have a green thumb — you can leave your tree up for as long as you want. It’s your house, your rules. What’s more, the aforementioned Neighbor report found that 9% of respondents wouldn’t mind if you kept your decorations up all year. “The tree can be thought of as a transitional object/security blanket,” Amber Dunford, a design psychologist and the style director for Overstock, tells TODAY.com. “It’s a symbol of comfort for us, so it makes sense that people want to carry it with them throughout all seasons because Christmas can be such a magical time.”

[From Yahoo]

I think most people generally keep their decorations up for a week or so after Christmas and/or New Years is over, but the time table for the tree may be different. For example, our neighbor took her tree down on December 27, but says she’s keeping the outside lights up through this weekend, if the weather allows. I’m curious to hear what everyone else does! We’ll enjoy our tree and decorations through the 6th and begin to take them down on the 7th. It’s helpful that it’s a weekend this year or else I’d probably use a weekday as an excuse to delay. It did take a while to put the outside lights up, though, so we just may be *that* house on the block that keeps them on juuust a few days longer. (Although Mr. Rosie will tell you differently, lol.)

I have a funny story about live trees telling you when it’s time to go! Every year, my sister and parents cut down their trees from a local farm. Two years ago, my sister noticed sometime before Christmas that there were little brown growths on her tree. She didn’t think too much of it until the day after Christmas, when those brown growths opened and out popped something like 150 baby praying mantises! My parents were there at the time and said it was a whole scene trying to get the “nice” ornaments off of the tree, get the tree outside, and catch all of the baby praying mantises. Needless to say, both groups examine their trees a lot more carefully now.

Photos credit: James Wheeler, Peter Chapin and Freestocks on Unsplash and Geoffrey Swaine / Avalon

Every time I read about Lucy Hale she comes across as curious, independent, and chill. I loved her preaching the merits of solo travel last summer, something I indulge in and thoroughly recommend myself. I hope she finds her way to a project that will give her career a jolt. Not that she hasn’t been working steadily since Pretty Little Liars ended in 2017, but nothing has been as visible for her since that show. Going by her own comments lately, it sounds like she’s in a settled, open mindset after putting in some dedicated self-work. Lucy rang in the New Year in a fabulous set of pajamas and by marking two years of sobriety. Bravo, Lucy!

“This continues to be the greatest gift I’ve given myself,” she captioned her Instagram post Tuesday.

“I remain so grateful for another year of growth, growing pains, lessons, joys, and self-realizations.”

Hale said the “interactions, conversations, and moments of vulnerability” she’s shared with people since quitting drinking has given her “so much meaning.”

“Those experiences have been my favorite takeaway from this last year,” she continued. “To every person I have connected with…thank you from the bottom of my heart.”

Hale, who has been open about her past “self-destructive” battle with alcoholism, addressed fans who may be having battles of their own.

“Lastly, if you are struggling please know you are not alone and that you do not have to trek this path alone,” she wrote.

“There is no right or wrong way to heal and it is deeply personal and unique to each of us. My only advice is to remain open hearted, curious, and to find the people who see and support you. It does get better. Take it moment by moment.”

“I’ve been working on getting sober since I was 20,” Hale said in Feb. 2023 during an appearance on “The Diary of a CEO” podcast with Steven Barlett. “I’m 33, it takes time. It took patience with myself.”

“I can show up exactly who I am and share my story, and to actually be able to talk about this is so freeing because it’s not chaining me down anymore,” she went on.

“It takes the power away from it. I can be Lucy, which is not always cute at times. It’s dark and disgusting and scary and that’s what makes us all complex, beautiful human beings, is we all have got this shadow self.”

[From Page Six]

Oof, her comments on it taking time and patience really resonated with me. I’m not a drinker, but I am an eater. It’s overwhelming whenever I think of the total amount of weight I want to lose, and that just makes it harder for me to get started and to stick with it. And I say that as someone who did lose a lot of weight when I was younger at a very steady pace over a period of a couple years. I just, well, managed to find the weight I’d lost! So I salute Lucy in her victory of two years of sobriety — she should absolutely celebrate it and be proud of herself. Sobriety, like all aspects of health and wellness, isn’t something that’s achieved, it has to be perpetually maintained. Lucy seems to have found peace with the work being ever-present. I’d say that deserves splurging $137 on feather-cuffed silk pajamas (and that’s the sale price!).

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Lucy Hale (@lucyhale)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Lucy Hale (@lucyhale)

photos credit: Xavier Collin / Image Press Agency / Avalon and via Instagram

There has been some really fun casting gossip to come out about Barbie. For instance, John Cena landed his cameo as Mermaid Ken because he just so happened to be filming a different movie at the same studio as Barbie and when he ran into Margot Robbie at a restaurant, she asked him if he wanted to come play on set for a day. We found out that Dan Levy, Bowen Yang, Ben Platt, and Matt Bomer all had to turn down roles as Ken while Jonathan Groff reluctantly passed on Allan. We also learned that Gerwig was disappointed that Timothée Chalamet and Saoirse Ronan were both unavailable to make “speciality cameos.” But one really fun bit of casting that we hadn’t heard the story behind until now was that of America Ferrera’s husband, Ryan Piers Williams. Williams plays the husband of Ferrera’s character, Gloria. He makes a couple of brief appearances as a part of a movielong joke about him being too busy practicing Spanish via Duolingo to notice that Gloria and their daughter Sasha have disappeared into Barbie Land. Turns out, this was merely a very coincidental case of art imitating life.

“We didn’t tell anybody, any of our friends or family,” Ferrera, 39, says of her husband’s cheeky cameo in this week’s issue of PEOPLE. And it all started with an early call she had with Barbie director and co-screenwriter Greta Gerwig.

“It came about because on my first zoom with Greta. I was telling her all my favorite parts of the script and all the parts that made me laugh out loud,” Ferrera recalls. “And I said, “Oh my God, I laughed so hard when you cut to the dad doing his Spanish lessons, because my husband was literally in the other room doing his Spanish lessons.”

Ferrera continues: “Right away she was like, “Oh my God, does he want to play your husband?” And I was like, “I don’t know, you’ll have to ask him.” Fast forward to when they were closer to the shoot, Gerwig hadn’t forgotten about the idea. “When it came time, she was like, “Remember when I asked you if your husband would play your husband?” And he said yes,” says Ferrera. “So it was really fun and it did, it made it a family affair and it was great.”

[From People]

I freaking love this little tidbit! It’s a really funny coincidence. I’m glad Greta saw the humor in it as well and ended up casting Williams because this background info makes the husband/dad character all the more fun. America and Ryan both ended up moving to the UK with their children while Barbie was being filmed, which makes sense since they’re both so young (currently ages five and three) and because the production reportedly had strict Covid rules that required everyone in the cast and crew to live in the UK during the three months of filming. I’m really glad America shared this story because now it will forever be a part of Barbie movie lore.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by America Ferrera (@americaferrera)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by America Ferrera (@americaferrera)

Photos credit: Jeffrey Mayer/Avalon, Lumeimages/ImageBROKER/Avalon, Roger Wong/INSTARimages, Sara De Boer/startraksphoto.com

You guys, we might have to watch this season of Feud: Capote vs. The Swans. It’s a genuinely great story with meaty roles for all of these actresses. [Seriously OMG]
Kendall Jenner & Bad Bunny reunited for New Year’s. [Just Jared]
Barry Keoghan, Saltburn and candles. [LaineyGossip]
Taylor Lorenz & the year-end recap industrial complex. [Pajiba]
Jon Hamm enjoyed his last manicure of 2023. [Go Fug Yourself]
Should Troye Sivan collab with Tom Ford? [OMG Blog]
Caitlin Clark destroyed the net. [Jezebel]
Kerry Condon wore a Louis Vuitton sack dress. [RCFA]
T&L’s favorite movie costumes. [Tom & Lorenzo]
We haven’t heard anything about Meryl Streep & Don Gummer’s split since the story broke. That’s interesting, huh? [Hollywood Life]
Therapists share the very common & normal things their patients discuss. [Buzzfeed]

Bill Clinton associated with Jeffrey Epstein years ago, basically in Clinton’s first years post-presidency. Clinton liked to catch rides on Epstein’s private plane. No one knows how far the association went, and the newly released “Epstein files” don’t have a confirmation of anything beyond “Clinton caught a lot of flights on the Lolita Express.” The Epstein files do include some new info though, including Johanna Sjoberg saying, in a deposition, that Epstein told her that Clinton “liked them young.”

Jeffrey Epstein claimed Bill Clinton “liked them young”, an alleged victim of the late financier told lawyers. Deposition documents released today detail how Johanna Sjoberg was asked if she knew Bill Clinton was a friend of Epstein.

Ms Sjoberg said: “I knew he had dealings with Bill Clinton. I did not know they were friends until I read the Vanity Fair article about them going to Africa together.”

And when asked if Epstein had ever talked about Clinton, Ms Sjoberg said: “He said one time that Clinton likes them young, referring to girls.”

Ghislaine Maxwell said she was “sure” Bill Clinton had eaten a meal on Epstein’s plane. The convicted sex offender asked about her relationship with former US president and his then close aide Doug Band during a 2016 deposition.

Maxwell said: “just so we are clear, the allegations that Clinton had a mean on Jeffrey’s island is 100 per cent false.”

Asked whether he had had a meal on Epstein’s plane, she said: “I’m sure he had a meal on Jeffrey’s plane”, but she said she did not know how many times he had flown on it. Maxwell was also asked about her relationship with Mr Band. Asked how she knew him she said: “He used to or still works for Bill Clinton.”

She added: “I was friends with Doug but you are suggesting something more so I want to be clear what you are actually asking me.”

Maxwell also said she could not remember where she stayed on a trip with Mr Clinton. She said: “I recollect the trip but if you’re asking me where we stayed , you can see it’s a very fast paced trip.”

[From The Telegraph]

With the politicians, the Epstein files haven’t been a smoking gun? We knew Clinton and Epstein were associated with each other, but Clinton has had twenty years to cover his tracks pretty thoroughly, and none of the Jane Does have said that they were trafficked to Clinton or that they witnessed him in any criminal acts. Donald Trump’s name has only come up a few times in the first phase of the document dump – Epstein was talking openly about hanging out with Trump in Atlantic City, at one of the casinos. Hopefully there will be more about Trump in the next phases of the document release.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Instar and Getty.