The Epstein Files: Where’s the List, and Are We Ready for It?
Hint: We are NOT
The internet is on fire over the Epstein Files—or rather, their mysterious absence. If Jeffrey Epstein was running a blackmail ring, as many allege, recording politicians, billionaires, and celebrities in heinous acts with minors to control their actions, then we, as a society, are owed the truth. Justice demands it.
The idea of a “Deep State” institutionalizing such a scheme, possibly with the knowledge or coordination of global intelligence agencies, isn’t new. From Cleopatra’s seductions to the KGB’s honey traps, kompromat is a timeless weapon. But the scale and depravity here—allegedly involving the rape of underage girls and boys—hits like a sledgehammer. X is ablaze with outrage, particularly from the MAGA base.
The anger is visceral, and it’s easy to see why. If powerful people were caught on tape committing atrocities, the public deserves to know who they are and what they’ve done.
But let’s step back and think beyond the X echo chambers.
Here are two critical angles missing from most takes.
1. Does the List Even Exist Anymore?
If Epstein was, as it increasingly appears, an intelligence asset running a blackmail honeypot—recording the rich and powerful raping children—then not only is it monstrous, it’s foundationally destabilizing.
And that’s where the conversation gets harder.
You can think of this as the American version of Operation Midnight Climax meets Eyes Wide Shut—but at scale. Blackmail is as old as Babylon, but this wasn’t just a perverted rogue operation. This was systematized. Institutionalized. Normalized—by people in positions of power so protected they operate beyond law.
So where’s the list?
Here’s one hard pill to swallow: There may not be a list anymore. At least not one we’ll ever see.
Do you really believe if there were multiple copies floating around the DOJ or FBI, they wouldn’t have been leaked already? We’ve seen everything from SCOTUS draft opinions to nuclear sub schematics get leaked. But this? Nothing.
Why?
Because when a blackmail operation of this scale gets compromised, the first order of business is to destroy the evidence. Not keep it in a desk drawer. Not upload it to a secure FBI server labeled “do not share.” You burn it, erase it, disappear it—and fast. Not to protect the pedophiles, but to preserve the masterminds behind it and the leverage. So long as the blackmail target doesn’t know if the tape still exists, they remain controllable.
That’s how real power works.
Blackmail operations like this don’t keep tidy records. When you’re running a scheme this illegal—potentially treasonous, with death-penalty consequences for everyone from the rapists to the masterminds—you don’t save a file labeled “Compromised Elites.”
If Epstein’s operation was blown open (and it was), the first move would be to destroy the evidence. Hard drives get smashed, tapes get burned, servers get wiped. The notion that multiple lists are just floating around the FBI, waiting to be leaked like the Pentagon Papers, doesn’t hold up.
That doesn’t mean a list never existed. Names, dates, videos—sure, they could’ve been compiled once. But if they were, they’ve probably been eradicated to shield the perpetrators and the blackmailers.
Here’s the diabolical part: even without physical evidence, the threat of its existence keeps targets in line. A senator or CEO doesn’t know if a dead man’s switch is out there, ready to expose them. That fear alone ensures compliance. Could there be an analog notebook hidden in a safe or an encrypted drive stashed offshore? Maybe.
Could a dead man’s switch exist, ready to drop if the wrong person gets “cleaned up”? Possibly. But Pam Bondi sitting on a complete list, weighing whether to release it? That’s a stretch.
And let’s not forget: Epstein’s “suicide” looks shakier by the day. The official narrative is replete with inconsistencies like broken cameras and sleeping guards. The top forensic examiner in the world testified that Epstein’s physical damage around his neck was NOT consistent with suicide by hanging. If he was silenced, it only strengthens the case that evidence was scrubbed to protect the guilty.
2. Can Society Survive the Truth?
The loudest cry on X is simple: “Release the list, let the chips fall.”
I feel the pull of that argument. Justice—biblical, civil, moral—demands that those who’d rape kids and betray the public face consequences.
But let’s run the simulation. What happens if we learn the American security state, via Epstein, was blackmailing half of Congress, a third of the judiciary, and a chunk of S&P 100 CEOs?
What if your favorite actor, athlete, or influencer is exposed as a controlled pedophile? Imagine undeniable evidence—verified videos, say—showing prominent leaders committing atrocities. The fallout wouldn’t be a neat courtroom drama. It could tear society apart.
Trust in institutions is already rock-bottom (Gallup’s 2024 data pegs confidence in Congress at 8%, media at 16%). If 2/3 of Congress is implicated, government grinds to a halt.
Judges tainted? The legal system collapses.
CEOs and celebrities exposed? Markets tank, and cultural icons vanish.
What happens when the top tier of our corporations and media, the so-called “thought leaders” of society, are shown to be puppets in a demonic kabuki theater?
Do we survive that as a nation?
Can civil society hold when the veil is torn off and the people realize it’s not just a few bad apples—it’s the orchard, the farmer, the entire food supply?
If half our leaders are pedos, what’s left of the system? Nothing.
Would people still pay taxes to a government revealed as a fraud?
Would the “burn it all down” crowd and a big chunk of the Democratic party backing ideas that would’ve gotten you institutionalized 20 years ago take to the streets in an orgy of terrorism and violence? Would the GWOT veterans denied proper healthcare and societal re-integration do the same?
Add mass exposure of elite pedophilia, and you’ve got a powder keg. History warns us.
The Bosnian War (1992-1995) showed how fast ethnic and political fractures can spiral into chaos. Rwanda’s 1994 genocide revealed how quickly trust can turn to slaughter. South Africa’s post-apartheid struggles underscore the fragility of social cohesion when ugly truths emerge. Our own society, polarized over election fraud claims and immigration debates isn’t exactly built to withstand this.
I lived through a parallel during the 2008 Financial Crisis. As a Wall Street insider, I saw the public’s rage to let the banks fail. They deserved it—greed and recklessness tanked the economy.
But what people didn’t see—and what we on the inside couldn’t risk—is what happens the day after. You wake up, walk to the ATM, and… it’s off. The banks are closed. The markets frozen. The economy grinds to a halt.
If 2/3 of the banking system collapsed overnight, vendors wouldn’t get paid. Food wouldn’t reach shelves. Society could’ve unraveled in days.
That’s not justice. That’s collapse.
So we bailed them out. A morally compromised but structurally stabilizing choice. And yes, it led to moral hazard, obscene wealth concentration, and the rise of crony capitalism. But we kept the lights on.
I’m not saying we should take the same path now.
I’m saying we have to understand the stakes before we yank the curtain down.
So, we propped up the banks, however messily. It was a choice between moral hazard and survival. Sadly, it was done in a manner that asked for zero accountability and allowed those who enabled and amplified the crisis to skate free doing business as usual.
The cost? A decade of money printing, wealth concentration, and skyrocketing inequality. But the lights stayed on.
The Epstein Files pose a similar dilemma. If a list exists and is released, can we punish the guilty without triggering collapse? Are there enough untainted leaders to steer us through?
And if the Five Eyes nations are all compromised by similar schemes, does that hand the advantage to rivals like Russia or China, who may not face this rot?
This Is a Controlled Demolition or It’s Civilizational Suicide
Yes, justice demands truth. And if this rot goes all the way up, then justice may look like tribunals, life sentences—or worse—for some of the most powerful people alive.
But are we prepared to go through with it?
Are there enough uncompromised patriots in the system to hold it together through that storm?
Are we capable of navigating the moral and institutional chaos that would follow the unsealing of this Pandora’s box?
Or would it simply lead to mass distrust, open rebellion, martial law, and the implosion of Western society… while China and Russia quietly reap the rewards?
There’s no easy answer here. But the answer is not "just drop the list" and hope everything works out.
I don’t have answers, but we need to wrestle with these questions before mindlessly shouting “release the list.” The veil of civilization is thinner than we think. That said, justice can’t be dodged. If evidence exists, we need a way to expose the guilty while minimizing chaos. There’s got to be a path—unlike the 2008 bailouts, which let banks skate with zero accountability—that punishes the wicked without torching society. Same goes for the Covid abomination.
Maybe it’s targeted leaks, verified by AI forensics, to take down the worst offenders first. Maybe it’s building a coalition of uncorrupted leaders (if they exist) to manage the transition. But a knee-jerk “drop the list” without planning for the fallout is reckless. And if the evidence is gone, as I suspect, we’re left with a harder truth: the system may be a fraud, run by demonic elements, and we’ll need to rebuild without the catharsis of public hangings.
Closing Thoughts: The Epstein Files aren’t just about a missing list—they’re about whether we can handle the truth and rebuild from it. Justice demands accountability, but survival demands strategy. As you reflect, ask yourself: How do we expose the guilty without lighting the fuse on society?
And if we stay silent, what’s the cost of letting the rot fester? There’s no easy path, but we can’t shy away from the fight. Drop your thoughts below, and I’ll dive deeper when I’m back from the road.
Stay sovereign, stay vigilant.
One Additional Note
Yes, the Epstein saga is infuriating. There is righteous anger here, and we deserve answers. But the relentless rage cycle some on our side seem addicted to? It’s becoming its own form of political fentanyl.
Same goes for the Iran situation. The MAGA base split into “hell yeah” and “how dare he” camps when Trump gave the green light to a surgical strike that turned Iran’s nuclear ambitions into radioactive gravel. Look, I’m not saying this was a perfect solution. But what was the alternative? A nuclear-powered apocalyptic death cult chanting “Death to America” while building missiles with help from China and North Korea? You want to talk about moral clarity? That was it.
And yet, after six months of absolute winning—after the best half-year of any presidency in modern memory—we’ve got parts of our movement sounding like MSNBC interns with a nicotine deficiency.
Let me get this straight.
We’ve got:
The border finally closed
The biggest remigration effort in history
Females protected from mentally ill men in sports
Colleges being slapped for extolling DEI/Marxist/Trans lunacy
Inflation down
Wages up
Gas under $3
Egg prices back to sanity
The Dow and S&P at record highs
A federal budget surplus in June (first in how long?)
Military recruitment soaring
China boxed out economically and diplomatically
Peace deals simmering in the Middle East and Africa
The DOJ slowly unshackling from the Lawfare lunatics
The FBI, DOD, and federal bureaucracy finally semi-functional
The Democrats publicly imploding
And Trump’s White House running smoother than any administration since Reagan...
...and some of y’all are melting down over minor cabinet posts and threatening like Andrew Schultz to start backing Bernie or AOC?
You miss The Vegetable or John Bolton that much? Or maybe you want Trump to rehire Anthony Scaramucci so we can relive the reality TV chaos of 2017? Be serious.
You don’t get perfection. You get politics. This isn’t the Sermon on the Mount—it’s trench warfare for the future of the American republic. And right now, for the first time in decades, our side has the high ground.
Could the DOJ be better? Sure.
Could the White House comms be tighter? Always.
But if you want to go back to Weekend at Bidens or the clown car cabinet of Trump 1.0—where every aide was leaking to Axios and trying to ghostwrite their own “Anonymous” op-ed—then you’re not serious about power. You’re chasing dopamine.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. The good right now is very good. And if you can’t recognize that, maybe politics isn’t your sport.
Because winners win. And they know when to take the damn W.
So here’s your Sovereign Sunday sermon:
Stop looking for reasons to be disappointed.
Stop doom-scrolling your own side.
Stop trying to trade in a Ferrari because the cupholders are too small.
Trump’s not the Messiah. But he’s doing something that no Republican has done in decades: govern effectively while making the left lose their minds in real time. And he’s got the receipts to prove it.
So take the win. Celebrate the moment. Sharpen your focus, not your pitchforks.
And next time someone says, “Yeah, but…”
Just look them in the eye and say:
"You can either bitch or you can build. Choose."
-MK
Victor Davis Hanson on Mamdani
From ZeroHedge:
Cracks are beginning to show in the carefully curated image of New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. Questions about his past and controversial positions are surfacing, drawing fresh scrutiny to his campaign.
Historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson highlighted three particularly troubling revelations that have recently come to light, warning that this might just be the start.
“I guarantee you more will come out every day because he’s a pampered, privileged, angry, young socialist-communist,” Hanson said.
Victor Davis Hanson says the façade is cracking around New York’s radical socialist mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, and the revelations aren’t pretty.
He lays out a portrait of a candidate who, despite a carefully managed public image, has a record steeped in hard-left ideology and contradictions that are starting to catch up with him.
“We’ve talked before about the front runner in the New York mayoral race, Zohran Mamdani,” he reminded viewers, setting the stage for what he described as a necessary unmasking.
Mamdani’s history of openly embracing Marxist ideas, Hanson argues, is not some youthful indiscretion but a core part of his politics.
“And we’ve mentioned before that he talked about seizing the means of production, which comes out right out of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels ‘Das Kapital,’ ‘The Communist Manifesto.’”
It’s an approach that extends beyond slogans.
Hanson pointed to a pattern of denying inconvenient truths, like Mamdani’s insistence he never supported defunding the police….even with clear evidence to the contrary.
“We talked about his claims that he never advocated defunding the police, even though there was an extensive social media trail where he advocates just that.”
And there’s the question of targeted taxation. Mamdani’s proposal to focus tax hikes specifically on “Whiter” neighborhoods isn’t just about class….it’s about exploiting racial division, Hanson says.
“He talked about going into richer and Whiter areas and taxing them specifically at a higher rate,” he explained, pointing out the selective language that conveniently skipped over the fact that Indian Americans….like Mamdani’s own family….are statistically among the nation’s highest earners.
“He didn’t say, in other words, richer and Indian American. He just use the word white because he was trying to cater himself to the African-American vote.”
But Hanson said that because Mamdani grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, he was never actually forced to go out and get a job or go through audits.
This has allowed Mamdani’s extremist past to remain out of the public, until now.
“He has an extensive left wing record and now that he’s in the public realm, everything is starting to come out.”
Mamdani’s father had extremist views which were clearly passed on Zohran.
“His father was in a, discussion of, you know, a conference discussion and said that Adolf Hitler’s idea for the final solution and many of his, policies toward the Jews came from Abraham Lincoln, the way Lincoln supposedly created or treated Indians on reservations.”
“That’s—that’s crazy.”
But ideology wasn’t the only problem.
Hanson turned to an incident that he argued should alarm any voter: Mamdani’s defense of Islamic terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki.
“He was an American citizen that went to Yemen, and he advocated killing Americans, and he was a terrorist.”
This wasn’t a controversial figure on the margins of debate….he was a known terrorist targeted by a drone strike under President Obama.
“Barack Obama, when he was president, ordered a predator hit team on him and killed Awlaki in a targeted assassination. Who was that, by the way, an ISIS supporter, but he was also a U.S. citizen.”
Years after that, Mamdani publicly defended him, offering an absurd rationale that Hanson dismissed outright.
“But now we learned in 2015, years after that Obama hit on him—on this ISIS figure—Mamdani was defending them and saying, basically, he turned radical because the FBI surveilled him.”
The logic, he argued, simply didn’t hold up.
“That’s like saying that Kash Patel turned radical because the FBI surveil him. People don’t go become terrorist kingpins because the American FBI thinks you’re a person of interest.”
Hanson also questioned Mamdani’s personal credibility, describing a pattern that, to him, reveals something deeper about the candidate’s approach to politics.
He EXPOSED Mamdani for trying to claim African American identity on college applications to gain an edge, despite having no connection to that experience.
“He’s very, sensitive about the African-American and Latino vote, which I don’t think he’s going to win,” Hanson noted.
“But now we learned that when he applied to college, to Bowdoin, and I think further to graduate school—in which he was not admitted, he claimed that he was an African American.”
It wasn’t just a one-off misrepresentation, Hanson suggested, but part of a larger disconnect between public messaging and private behavior.
It was, in Hanson’s view, part of a pattern he’d seen many times in academia.
“As someone who was in academia for three decades, I used to have students that were from North Africa, Egypt or Morocco or Algeria, but were not African American. That is, they were not Blacks, and they tried that trick and they were not successful. Neither was Mamdani.”
What bothered him most wasn’t just the strategy but the hypocrisy of someone willing to lecture Americans about inequality while privately trying to benefit from the very system he criticizes.
“But imagine he’s giving lectures, moral lectures, sanctimonious lectures, self-righteous lectures about how unequal the United States is,” he continued.
“And then yet he tries to mimic or pass on a Elizabeth Warren or Ward Churchill-like fraud that he’s African American, that he’s a Black African, just because his parents who were Indian and immigrants to Uganda, and were one of the 1% elite in that country—he’s now claiming that he should he should have had special—I shouldn’t say he’s now claiming, he claimed that he should have had special preference in admissions because he was Black.”
With the election fast approaching, Hanson dropped a stunning prediction: these revelations are just the start.
“You add all of this up, and I guarantee you more will come out every day because he’s a pampered, privileged, angry, young socialist-communist.”
He painted a picture of a candidate whose carefully managed image can’t hide the reality of a life with no debt, no real-world experience, and a sprawling public record waiting to be examined.
“He’s had no experience. He’s out of debt and he has a long social media record.”
In the end, Hanson offered less of a conclusion than a question….one he admitted he didn’t know how to answer himself.
The question itself was a testament to the times we are living in.
“And, the only question that I have for you, the audience and me, because I’m genuinely puzzled about it, the more that we hear that he’s a lunatic and unhinged and anti-American and socialist, does that help him or does that hurt him, given the demographics of New York?”
Mass Deportations Make Everything Better and Cheaper
What level of untapped talent exists in this country that a combination of DEI and immigration have basically cut out of the loop for the last 50 years?
Best of Twitter
Memetic Warfare
Parting Words
That’s it for this week folks. Hope you enjoyed!
Each week, Sovereign Sunday delivers battle-tested truths, bold analysis, and civilization-defending commentary you won’t find in legacy media echo chambers. No algorithms. No gatekeepers. Just raw signal in a world drowning in noise.
If this newsletter sharpens your mind, steels your spirit, or gives you ammo for the cultural battlefield—do your part:
Smash the like/heart button (it helps us beat the bots).
Forward to friends, family, fellow patriots—anyone who’s tired of lies wrapped in politeness.
Leave me a comment
Become a Paid Subscriber and fuel the mission. This isn’t a hobby—it’s a war for the narrative. And we’re building an army of the awake.
This is reader-supported, freedom-fueled journalism. Your support makes it possible.
—Michael Kimelman
Founder, Sovereign Sunday