In a political climate already brimming with controversy and suspicion, a new storm has erupted over the connections between former President Donald Trump and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. On September 5, 2025, House Speaker Mike Johnson made headlines by asserting that Trump had acted as an FBI informant in the Epstein case—a claim that has since drawn sharp responses from political figures, commentators, and even sports legends.
Standing before reporters in Washington, D.C., Johnson declared, “He was an FBI informant trying to take this down. The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who suffered these unspeakable harms. It is detestable to him. We spoke about this as recently as 24 hours ago.” According to CNN, Johnson went further, stating that Trump had banned Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida as soon as he heard allegations about Epstein’s predatory behavior, and that Trump’s motivation stemmed from his sympathy for Epstein’s victims.
But the claim that Trump was working undercover for the FBI to help dismantle Epstein’s sex trafficking ring wasn’t met with universal acceptance. Within hours, secular humanist commentator Marlene Robertson mocked Johnson’s remarks online, writing, “So Mikey claims Trump was working undercover for the FBI to bring down Jeffrey Epstein only to find out it was a Democrat hoax.” Tennis legend Martina Navratilova, never one to shy away from political commentary, responded on X (formerly Twitter) with a curt retort: “lol. And true. #hoax.”
This wasn’t Navratilova’s first foray into the Trump-Epstein debate. Over the years, she’s been an outspoken critic of Trump’s handling of the Epstein files. In previous social media posts, Navratilova accused Trump of suppressing records that could implicate him, stating, “If Trump didn’t show in the Epstein files in a really bad way, he would have released them long ago, no matter who else goes down. He only cares about himself. Because of what he has done, we won’t see them if Trump can help it.”
The tangled history between Trump and Epstein stretches back decades. The two men first crossed paths in the late 1980s, mingling in the same elite circles of New York and Florida. Photographs from the 1990s show them together at numerous parties. Their friendship reportedly ended in 2004 after a dispute over property at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s now-infamous Florida resort. Despite the falling out, their association remains a hot-button issue, especially with the resurfacing of old photographs and the persistent calls for transparency regarding the so-called "Epstein files."
Johnson’s assertion comes amid a broader push within Congress to force the release of all government records related to the Epstein case. Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democrat Ro Khanna of California have spearheaded a discharge petition in the House of Representatives that would require a public vote on making the files available. Their bipartisan effort has been bolstered by public pressure, including a recent press conference held by Epstein’s victims and their families demanding greater transparency.
Yet, Johnson has dismissed these efforts, labeling Massie’s petition as “baseless” and “unnecessary.” He told CNN’s Manu Raju, “When he first heard the rumors, he kicked him out of Mar-a-Lago. He was an FBI informant to help dismantle this case.” Johnson also sought to clarify Trump’s own statements, noting that when Trump called the Epstein controversy a “hoax,” he was not referring to Epstein’s crimes themselves but to what he characterized as a politically motivated attack on his presidency. “It’s been misrepresented. He’s not saying that what Epstein did is a hoax. He considers it a terrible evil,” Johnson explained.
Despite these claims, there remains a glaring absence of public documentation to substantiate Trump’s alleged role as an FBI informant. As reported by The Independent, "so far there is no public document proving that Trump or Epstein had any such role with the FBI." The Department of Justice, for its part, has stated it has found no evidence of a client list kept by Epstein, despite months of speculation and rumors that such a list exists and contains the names of influential figures.
Complicating matters further, the Wall Street Journal reported that Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi had, in February, informed Trump that his name appeared several times on the supposed client list. Trump’s response, as quoted in The Independent, was to call the ongoing controversy a Democratic ploy: “From what I understand, I could check, but from what I understand, thousands of pages of documents have been given. But it’s really a Democrat hoax because they’re trying to get people to talk about something that’s totally irrelevant to the success that we’ve had as a nation since I’ve been president.”
Epstein, who was convicted of sex abuse and awaiting trial on new sex-trafficking charges, was found dead in his New York jail cell in August 2019. His death was officially ruled a suicide, but conspiracy theories continue to swirl, with a significant portion of the American public suspecting a cover-up. Trump himself has previously speculated that Epstein could have been murdered, calling for a full investigation in 2019, yet more recently he’s dismissed the renewed focus on the case as a distraction.
Inside Trump’s own party, the controversy has caused division. According to The Independent, even staunch Trump allies like Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson have joined calls for more transparency regarding the Epstein files. The MAGA base appears split, with some defending Trump’s actions and others demanding a full accounting of Epstein’s connections and clients.
Meanwhile, the broader public debate rages on. Advocates for Epstein’s victims argue that only by releasing all the files can the public truly understand the scope of Epstein’s crimes and the extent of his powerful network. Critics of Trump, including Navratilova, remain skeptical of his motivations and question whether he has been forthright about his past relationship with Epstein. Supporters, on the other hand, echo Johnson’s claims that Trump acted decisively and out of sympathy for the abused women, painting him as a key player in bringing Epstein’s crimes to light.
As the political wrangling continues, the facts remain: there is still no public documentation verifying Trump’s alleged informant role, and the full extent of Epstein’s connections to powerful figures remains shrouded in secrecy. The debate over transparency, accountability, and political weaponization of the Epstein case shows no signs of abating, ensuring that this saga will remain a flashpoint in American political discourse for the foreseeable future.
For now, the American public is left to sift through competing narratives, half-truths, and pointed accusations—wondering whether the truth about Epstein, Trump, and the shadowy corridors of power will ever fully come to light.
