By Our Political Satire Desk
In what is becoming the political equivalent of a child pressing their nose against a candy store window, Democratic Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico has once again treated us to her special brand of breathless accusation regarding Donald Trump and the late Jeffrey Epstein. And honestly? It’s becoming harder to tell whether she’s conducting a legitimate congressional inquiry or auditioning for a role in a conspiracy thriller podcast.
“The United States government is engaged in an active cover-up of the largest sex trafficking scandal in the history of the United States, and Donald Trump is right at the center of it,” Stansbury declared recently, presumably while clutching a manila folder dramatically and staring intensely into a camera .
One imagines her waking up each morning, stretching, and thinking, “What explosive, completely evidence-supported revelation can I share today about the 45th and 47th president?”
The “Evidence” That Will Definitely Hold Up This Time
Let’s examine the receipts, shall we? Because Stansbury has been promising receipts like a street vendor selling Rolex watches for twenty dollars.
Back in November, Stansbury appeared on CNN to announce that newly released Epstein documents “name multiple cases involving sexual assault conversations Epstein had that involved the president and his time at his house, and the evidence that Donald Trump absolutely knew that Ghislaine Maxwell was recruiting and grooming young women from Mar-a-Lago” .
Sounds damning! “Absolutely knew” is quite the phrase. That’s the kind of language that suggests, oh, maybe a signed confession or videotape.
When FactCheck.org—you know, those boring fact-checkers who ruin perfectly good narratives with things like “evidence” and “reality”—asked for the proof behind this “absolutely knew” claim, Stansbury’s office pointed to… wait for it… four email exchanges .
And what did these explosive emails contain? Well, one had Epstein himself claiming that Trump knew about “the girls.” Another had Epstein asking someone if they’d like “photso [sic] of donald and girls in bikinis in my kitchen” (photos that may or may not exist—spoiler: they probably don’t) .
So the ironclad case that Trump “absolutely knew” about criminal activity rests largely on the word of Jeffrey Epstein—a man who built his entire life around lying, manipulation, and, oh yes, sex trafficking. If Epstein had emailed someone saying the moon was made of cheese, would Stansbury be introducing legislation about dairy-based astronomy?
The “Dog That Didn’t Bark” and Other Canine Confusions
Stansbury has also fixated on an email where Epstein wrote to Maxwell about “that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. [victim’s name redacted] spent hours at my house with him” .
This, apparently, is proof of… something. Perhaps a cover-up? Perhaps a conspiracy? Perhaps Epstein was just really into Sherlock Holmes references?
The White House response has been predictably dismissive. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt offered the devastatingly simple rebuttal: “These emails prove absolutely nothing other than the fact that President Trump did nothing wrong” .
And when Stansbury pressed further on CNN, White House Communications Director Steven Cheung delivered what might be the most concise summary of this entire saga: “DUMMY ALERT: @Rep_Stansbury may be the stupidest member of Congress. That or she is a stone-cold liar. Either way, she beclowned herself on national television, flailing around like a jellyfish (which doesn’t have a brain!) when confronted with the truth/facts” .
It’s not often you see “flailing jellyfish” used as a political descriptor, but here we are. Welcome to 2026.
The Irony of the Terramar Mix-Up
Now, here’s where things get genuinely amusing. While Stansbury has been busy connecting Trump to Epstein, it turns out her own financial disclosure forms briefly connected her to something rather awkward: a group with a suspiciously similar name to Maxwell’s nonprofit.
Stansbury’s initial congressional filing listed “Terramar Project” of Woburn, Massachusetts, as a prior employer. Maxwell’s nonprofit? “TerraMar Project”—which, at one point, listed Woburn as its address .
Cue the dramatic music! Is Stansbury secretly in league with Maxwell? Did she work for the same organization? Was there a shadowy meeting in Woburn involving obscure marine conservation groups and… no, wait, it turns out Stansbury actually worked for “Terramar Consulting Group” in Santa Fe on water policy projects.
Her spokesperson called the connection “100% false” and blamed the mix-up on a “computing error” in the House filing system that auto-populated the wrong name .
A computer error! The oldest excuse in the book, right up there with “my dog ate my homework” and “I was going to vote for that bill but got distracted by a shiny object.”
Of course, conservative website Piñon Post stands by its reporting, and Paul Gessing of the Rio Grande Foundation actually filed an ethics complaint about this back in 2021 . But let’s be honest—if Stansbury were truly connected to Maxwell, wouldn’t she have come up with a better cover story than “the computer did it”?
Meanwhile, in Actual Courtrooms…
While Stansbury treats us to her dramatic readings of decade-old emails, there has been some genuine legal action involving Trump and the Epstein saga—just not the kind she’s hoping for.
In July 2025, Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against News Corp, Rupert Murdoch, Dow Jones, and two Wall Street Journal reporters . The suit alleges the Journal published a “forged” letter supposedly from Trump to Epstein featuring a crude drawing and inscription. Trump has denied writing it, declaring he’s “never drawn a picture in his life” .
The case, Trump v. Murdoch (case number 1:25-cv-23232), is currently pending before Judge Darrin P. Gayles in the Southern District of Florida . The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that House Oversight Committee documents subsequently released include an identical letter, proving the reporting was accurate .
So let’s review: Trump is suing a major media outlet for $10 billion over Epstein-related reporting, and Stansbury is… reading emails on cable news. One of these is an actual court action with real money at stake. The other is a politician generating content for Twitter clips.
The Actual Court Actions (The Ones Where Victims Actually Got Paid)
Now, if Stansbury wants to talk about actual court actions involving Epstein victims, there’s a rich history to explore—though Trump’s name doesn’t feature prominently in the “writing checks to victims” column.
The Epstein civil case that actually matters is the one filed by his accusers against his estate. After Epstein’s 2019 death, a victims’ compensation fund was established, administered by Jordana Feldman, which paid out over $121 million to approximately 150 victims . That fund was funded by Epstein’s estate, not by any of his famous friends.
Virginia Giuffre—the very victim Trump mentioned as having been “stolen” from Mar-a-Lago by Epstein—received a settlement from the Epstein estate, though the amount was never disclosed . She also sued Ghislaine Maxwell in 2015, resulting in a confidential settlement.
Notably, Giuffre stated before her death in April 2025 that Trump had no part in her abuse . This is the same Giuffre whose name was redacted in those emails Stansbury finds so incriminating.
There was also the high-profile 2024 case where a federal judge in New York unsealed hundreds of pages of court documents related to Epstein—documents that mentioned numerous public figures but didn’t actually accuse most of them of wrongdoing .
And yes, there was a 2025 lawsuit filed by a “Jane Doe” alleging Trump aided Epstein’s trafficking network, but that complaint was filed by the same attorney who has represented multiple Epstein accusers and, as of this writing, remains in its early stages . No judgment, no settlement, no “Trump had to pay victims.”
The Bottom Line
Here’s the thing about conspiracy theories: they’re seductive. They offer clean narratives, clear villains, and the satisfying feeling of being “in the know.” Stansbury has clearly fallen under their spell, treating every redacted name and cryptic email as evidence of a vast cover-up centered on Donald Trump.
But the reality is messier. The Epstein documents released so far—thousands of pages’ worth—have generated headlines but little concrete evidence of criminal activity by major political figures beyond what was already known. They’ve shown that Epstein namedropped constantly, that he claimed associations with powerful people, and that he was a master manipulator who understood the value of implied connections.
They have not shown Trump “absolutely knew” about underage trafficking, despite Stansbury’s confident assertions.
Perhaps the most charitable interpretation is that Stansbury genuinely believes what she’s saying, having convinced herself that scattered references in Epstein’s emails constitute proof of presidential culpability. The less charitable interpretation—the one involving jellyfish and brainlessness—has already been offered by the White House.
Either way, as the legal battle over Trump’s defamation suit proceeds and the Epstein document release continues, one thing is certain: Melanie Stansbury will be there, ready with a dramatic statement and a firm belief that this time, the evidence will finally match the rhetoric.
Don’t hold your breath.
Quick Reference: Trump-Epstein Court Actions
Case/Action Filed By Status Victim Payout?
Trump v. Murdoch (1:25-cv-23232) Trump against WSJ Pending, motion to dismiss filed No—Trump seeking $10B
Epstein Victims Compensation Fund Epstein estate Completed, over $121M paid Yes—to ~150 victims
Jane Doe v. Trump et al. (25-CV-__) Anonymous plaintiff Recently filed, early stages None yet—complaint only
FactCheck.org – “Sorting out the Facts on Epstein Claims” (November 2025)
Santa Fe New Mexican – “NM Politics Check: Stansbury says report on ties to Ghislaine Maxwell is ‘100% false'”
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse – “Case: Trump v. Murdoch”
American Wire News – “Dem congresswoman declares Trump ‘is at the center’ of Epstein scandal”
HuffPost – “Trump Official Taunts Lawmaker As ‘Dummy’ After She Questions President’s Epstein Ties”