Kash Patel Will Never Uncover Truth In the Epstein Files

FBI Director Kash Patel recently made a claim that has raised eyebrows across the world. Patel proclaimed there is “no credible information” that Jeffrey Epstein trafficked girls or young women to anyone other than himself. Somehow this has caused many in the news industry or political system to make absurd claims like – victims were not abused – because they cannot comprehend of a man who only abused these people himself. While most observers dismiss Patel’s handling as an obvious political cover-up, the reality is far more complex and disturbing than simple corruption.

In part, Kash Patel is simply too dumb. The FBI Director’s statements on the Epstein case, as well as the Kirk investigation, reveal a perfect storm of unspoken legal technicalities, investigative incompetence, and willful blindness that makes him uniquely unsuited to uncover the truth about one of the most significant criminal enterprises in modern history.

This piece deals with a multitude of issues that our news media and elected officials are incapable of and disinterested in dealing with. They are too biased, partisan, or frankly, stupid, to even attempt to comprehend most of it. Others are clearly compromised and involved in Epstein business or even Epstein-like business. Some of the more bold ones like Adam Schiff and Chuck Schumer or Cory Booker, avail themselves to debasement on social media and in public hearings, performing outrage at Patel. This is no defense of Patel at all.

Quite the contrary.

These fools work in tandem to shield you from truth.

A Four-Dimensional Truth Problem

Simple questions require simple answers. Complex questions require even simpler answers. When you ask somebody who considers themselves an expert on Epstein and his enterprise, they do not have simple explanations for anything. No unifying theory that explains or discredits loose ends. Yet, they act as if there is certainty.

On the internet you will often hear a tired refrain of, “two things can be true at once” when people cannot reconcile contradictory or even paradoxical facts or interpretations. For example, most people could not even consider that Patel is both lying, and telling the truth, in some respect, simultaneously. But this case demands you think along at least four dimensions, each which create layers of plausible deniability that allow corruption to masquerade as legitimate investigation.

There are also layers of truth which you will not hear or read about other than here, because it requires a very strange series of intertwined expertise, which I have and very few others do.

Layer 1: Egomaniacal Predators Don’t Play Well With Others

Epstein was notoriously possessive and greedy. Just like many of his associates, including Donald Trump. One of the most realistic and believable pieces of information from this entire affair are recent comments Donald Trump made about Epstein *stealing* people from him. Make of that what you will, as far as how deep the connotation should be taken. However, it reveals that there is a possessiveness amongst these so-called “friends.” On a side note, for those of you who believe wholeheartedly these two men were “best friends” because of some obscure audio recording or birthday cards, you are losing it. These people don’t have friends like you have friends.

It’s entirely plausible that Epstein didn’t “share” what he viewed as his property – the girls he abused – unless he did so within his social circle. If no money changed hands for access to victims, it likely would not meet the federal statutory definition of trafficking. This creates a legal loophole wide enough for an FBI director to drive a false narrative through.

If Patel discovered this, he can claim technical accuracy while ignoring the broader criminal enterprise.

In part, this would explain why all the discussions about a “release” of clients, is futile.

Also, Epstein was the recipient of illegal prostitution. A customer. Not a distributor, as far as we know. For anybody who thinks that somehow that would logically conclude there were no victims, you need to have your head examined. It means that Epstein himself personally victimized dozens, hundreds, or maybe even thousands of people. That is entirely plausible without him additionally being a trafficker.

Layer 2: The Maxwell Family Misdirection

Everyone talks about “the Epstein files,” but what about the Maxwell files?

Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted specifically for her role in recruitment and trafficking. She is the trafficker. She had her own network, her own methods, and obviously her own client(s). By focusing obsessively on Epstein, investigators and members of Congress are playing a party to convincing the public that this is all basically in the past.

Maxwell operated independently and had different skill sets than Epstein.

While everyone demands Epstein’s client list, the more revelatory documents might be Maxwell’s operational records, that have received far less public attention and investigative scrutiny.

The entire “release the Epstein files” campaign was designed, or at least capitalized on, for Ghislaine Maxwell to lobby for better treatment. I warned about this in a piece called “Stop Helping Ghislaine” recently, which predated her move to a lower security prison and the things which followed from that.

Her family is on a crusade to convince the world she is actually the victim of this situation.

Layer 3: The Victim-Conspirator Protection-Prosecution Paradox

We actually know of many potential co-conspirators of Epstein’s, but this part will upset you.

It is possible that this layer has been totally unexplored due to there being no party interested in it, or because this would undermine the criminal conspiracy style of an Epstein-Maxwell type scheme.

Epstein’s operation functioned like a multilevel marketing scheme where victims became recruiters, under duress and coercion. That created a legal nightmare: these victim-recruiters are technically co-conspirators. Yet, that also means, they are protected under the non-prosecution agreement.

Did those girls, who are now adult women, traffic girls to anybody other than Epstein? Did they technically work for Maxwell? Any attempt to investigate their “clients” would mean prosecuting trafficking victims themselves.

This protection loop creates an investigative dead end that.

It’s a legal Catch-22 that makes comprehensive investigation not just difficult, but potentially illegal under existing agreements. This explains some of the difficult interchanges between Senators and Kash Patel from this week.

Layer 4: The Digital Archaeology Gap

Here’s where Patel’s limitations become most apparent.

The Maxwell family were early internet pioneers. Robert Maxwell was a media mogul, but more importantly, Christine Maxwell (Ghislaine’s sister) co-founded early search engine Magellan. Their family understood digital networks long before most people had email addresses. Though some of the details are fuzzy, there is some evidence to suggest that when arrested for drunk driving in 1996, Ghislaine Maxwell’s profession was listed as “internet operative,” and some believe she had computer programming skills or education herself.

The massive cache of digital evidence found on Epstein’s hard drives – were what amounted to an “orgy” of evidence, of downloaded internet pornography. Yet, this was never traced back to its sources or distribution networks. You never heard about the child pornography distributor he downloaded content from. No one was charged with producing or distributing this content, either.

Standard investigative protocol would involve tracking the digital breadcrumbs: where did this content originate? Who else accessed these networks? How were payments processed? How did they arrange their meetings? It is known that Ghislaine contacted some of the victims while grooming them, over the internet. How specifically, has not necessarily been uncovered or described publicly or in official documents. AOL chat rooms? Emails?

It’s strange to me that Christine Maxwell has never been questioned about her own involvement in Ghislaine’s crimes, given Christine’s expertise in computers and cybersecurity. Maybe she should be.

The unanswered answers here likely lie in legacy internet systems that most modern investigators don’t even know exist.

The Financial Crimes Connection

This digital blindness extends beyond sex trafficking into the likely financial crimes Epstein and Maxwell were running.

These same legacy networks that facilitate trafficking also enable sophisticated market manipulation and insider trading schemes. Private forums discussing market-moving information, coordinated trading strategies, and advance knowledge of regulatory actions – all operating in digital spaces that modern financial regulators never audit – would be very valuable.

If Epstein and Maxwell were operating sophisticated digital networks for trafficking, those same networks were likely facilitating financial crimes worth billions. This explains what unparalleled value Epstein may have had that is otherwise inexplicable by his background, family, education, and notable lack of general intelligence required to be an investor. If he was part of market manipulation, he just had to be a criminal, not a financial guru.

But investigating this requires technical expertise that Patel and his team clearly lack or are intentionally obfuscating.

The Institutional Failure Is Tragic

Patel’s statement reveals someone who is simultaneously:

• Partially truthful (no direct evidence of Epstein personally trafficking to others)
• Technically accurate (legal definitions may not capture the full scope)
• Willfully ignorant (refusing to investigate sophisticated digital networks)
• Politically motivated (burying investigations that could implicate powerful figures)
• Professionally incompetent (lacking technical expertise to understand legacy digital systems)

This isn’t just corruption – it’s a fundamental mismatch between the sophistication of modern criminal enterprises and the capabilities of traditional law enforcement leadership.

The tactics of Epstein-Maxwell type digital criminal conduct have not even changed since those days. While some lower level operators might use modern encrypted messaging apps and things of that nature, those are still owned by private companies who are vulnerable to law enforcement.

For people like this, they need something more secure than even a Tor/Onion situation.

Though Patel touts all the criminals his agency has locked up this year, he has nothing to do with that.

Agents in the field do hard work every day. Patel is a glorified press secretary who is there to entertain people by arguing with Congress on television. He is not good at investigatory work at all.

Patel Must Be Removed From His Position Immediately

The Epstein scandal represents a criminal enterprise that exploited legal technicalities, digital networks, and institutional blind spots. Even though the public wants there to be a treasure trove of CSAM and a black book of famous rich people’s names in it, along with video evidence of Donald Trump abusing children while holding his social security card signed with a copy of the newspaper from that day on it – this kind of smoking gun likely does not exist.

To get to the bottom of this, and stop whoever inherited the network, it requires investigators who understand both cutting-edge technology and seemingly obsolete systems, who can navigate complex legal paradoxes, and who aren’t beholden to political masters. Patel brings none of these qualifications. He’s a political appointee trying to manage a technical and legal challenge that’s beyond his expertise and contrary to his loyalties. His statement about Epstein reveals someone who either doesn’t understand the complexity of what he’s investigating or doesn’t want to understand it.

The sex trafficking crimes won’t be fully exposed, and the related financial crimes won’t be prosecuted, until Patel is removed and replaced with either:

• A genuinely independent prosecutor with technical expertise
• A state-level investigator outside federal political influence
• An international investigation that can’t be politically controlled

Sadly, Patel is also unfit to get to the bottom of the murder of Charlie Kirk, another incredibly sensitive issue that involves the President and members of his cabinet – and Patel himself.

At a minimum, he has to recuse himself from both of these cases.

You Must Rethink What You Know About Epstein

The Epstein scandal isn’t just about one pedophile and his network. It’s about how sophisticated criminal enterprises exploit institutional weaknesses, legal technicalities, and technological blind spots. It’s about how traditional law enforcement fails when faced with crimes that operate across multiple dimensions simultaneously.

Kash Patel’s statement is proof that he’s exactly the wrong person for this moment.

The country deserves better. The victims (including those who were coerced into conspiracy) deserve better.

And the truth, however complex and multi-layered, deserves someone capable of pursuing it wherever it leads.

Until that happens, both the sex crimes and the financial crimes will continue operating in the shadows of systems that investigators don’t even know to look for.