🙀"Trump's Name in Epstein Files” Edition

In a plot twist that even QAnon didn’t see coming, Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly informed President Trump in May that his name shows up in Justice Department files related to Jeffrey Epstein. This bombshell, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, immediately triggered a White House response so nonsensical it could have been written by Kanye on a NyQuil and opioids bender.

First, the official statement called the story “fake news.” Then, a senior official clarified that it’s actually “technically true,” but that Trump was already aware of it because Bondi had previously shared the files with conservative influencers—because giving Alex Jones a preview is critical to national security.

Trump, who famously said he “knew Epstein like everyone else did” (everyone who wrote him bawdy birthday wishes), appears in multiple flight logs and Epstein’s contact book. But don’t worry, says the administration—it’s just a name. Like Beyoncé. Or Santa. No further questions.

Meanwhile, Trump’s diehard supporters—who once demanded Epstein’s client list like it was the Rosetta Stone—are now furious the files won’t be released. The Justice Department, in a stunning reversal of Trump’s campaign promise to “release it all,” said it found nothing worth investigating.

As MAGA-world spirals into a collective identity crisis, Speaker Mike Johnson abruptly dismissed Congress early to avoid a floor vote on Epstein records—proving once again that the best way to fight elite pedophilia is a five-week vacation.

To distract from the story, Trump floated new conspiracy theories about Obama, because if you’re in hot water over Epstein, why not pivot to a cold case about wiretaps and birtherism?

So to recap: the White House says Trump’s name is in the files, but it’s fine; the Justice Department says there’s no scandal, but won’t release the evidence; and most Americans think they’re lying. But hey—Happy Birthday, Jeff. May every day be “another wonderful secret.”

Bill Bramhall - Tribune Content Agency

Jeff Danziger - Tribune Content Agency

Jimmy Margulies - King Features

Chris Britt - Creators

Pedro Molina - Tribune Content Agency

Robert Arial - Andrews McMeel

Jeff Danziger - Tribune Content Agency

Drew Sheneman - Tribune Content Agency

John Branch - King Features

Nick Anderson - Tribune Content Agency

In a daring attempt to prove that voters are completely optional in a democracy, Texas Republicans have decided to give the state’s congressional map a MAGA makeover—five years early. The goal? Secure five extra House seats without the messy inconvenience of winning more votes. Because why gamble on democracy when you can rig the roulette wheel?

This move, lovingly encouraged by President Trump in between Epstein denials, would let Texas politicians choose their voters with the precision of a surgeon hopped up on Red Bull and resentment. The official reason for the mid-decade redraw? A sudden, completely sincere concern (insert eye roll here) over “racial gerrymandering.” The unofficial reason? “We’re losing, quick—change the map!”

Naturally, Democrats are alarmed, but not too alarmed to consider doing the exact same thing. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, normally a spiritual leader of the “high road” caucus, is now channeling Machiavelli at press conferences, while Beto O’Rourke has gone full Sith Lord, demanding “absolute ruthlessness” to reclaim power. Meanwhile, every independent redistricting commission in America just quietly wept.

This whole thing could spiral into a beautiful bipartisan arms race of cartographic revenge—until there’s only one competitive district left in the entire country and it’s a Chuck E. Cheese parking lot in Ohio.

And if Republicans overreach? No worries—either a wave election will flush them out of their artificially safe seats, or the real threat will come from the right: primary challengers who believe Texas isn’t gerrymandered hard enough.

In conclusion: the Texas GOP’s plan may not be constitutional, democratic, or wise—but it is on brand.