Jeffrey Epstein’s brother makes bombshell claim about Trump and the Epstein files

Jeffrey Epstein’s Brother Makes Bombshell Claim About Trump and the Epstein Files..

Mark Epstein, brother of the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, has gone public with explosive allegations about former President Donald Trump’s relationship with his late sibling — and about how files related to Epstein’s criminal activities are being handled. In interviews over the past week, Mark has asserted that Trump deliberately stalled the release of the so-called “Epstein files” and that some names — including prominent Republicans — are being “sanitized” from the records.

Here’s what we know so far, what Mark is claiming, and how this fits into the broader Epstein-Trump story.

1. The Core Allegation: Trump Delayed the Release

Mark Epstein told CNN’s Erin Burnett OutFront that Trump’s delay in supporting the release of Epstein’s documents was no accident. According to him, “there’s things in there he doesn’t want people to see.” Yahoo+2Yahoo+2

He suggested that the delay was meant to give time for a cover-up: Mark believes the files are being “scrubbed” — edited or redacted — to remove or sanitize names that could be politically damaging. Newsner English+1

2. A Purported “Sanitization” Operation in Virginia

One of Mark’s more dramatic claims is about a facility in Winchester, Virginia, which he says is being used to clean up Epstein’s files. In his interviews, he stated:

“There’s a facility in Winchester, Virginia, where they’re scrubbing the files to take Republican names out of it.” VT+2Yahoo+2

He told NewsNation that this was not hearsay — he said he heard it from “a pretty good source.” Yahoo+2VT+2

If true, this would suggest a politically motivated effort to protect some figures. But as of now, there’s no public, independently verified proof that such a “scrubbing” facility exists or is being used exactly as Mark describes.

3. Friendship and Shared History Between Epstein and Trump

Mark has also offered insight into his brother’s relationship with Trump, asserting they were very close in the 1990s:

• He claims they flew on each other’s planes. According to Mark, Trump was on Epstein’s plane “like seven times.” Yahoo

• He says Trump was in Epstein’s New York office “quite a bit” in the ‘90s. Newsner English+1

• But he also asserts that the relationship soured. According to Mark, Jeffrey told him that he realized “Trump was a crook,” and that was a reason for them parting ways. Yahoo+1

These claims aim to emphasize that Epstein and Trump’s connection was not superficial, and that Epstein may have had real leverage or “dirt” on Trump — according to Mark.

4. Compromising Information, Possibly “Dirt,” on Trump

Perhaps the most striking of Mark’s claims is that Jeffrey Epstein had “something on Trump.” He says he doesn’t know everything his brother knew, but he is sure:

“He didn’t tell me what he knew, but Jeffrey definitely had dirt on Trump.” Yahoo

Mark suggests that Epstein’s information could have been politically or personally damaging, possibly enough to “cancel” Trump’s 2016 campaign, although Mark has not publicly offered specific details about that “dirt.” Yahoo

5. Post-2016 Phone Call, according to Mark

In a surprising twist, Mark claims that Trump and Epstein spoke even after Trump won the 2016 election. In his interview, he alleged:

“Jeffrey told me that it was after the election, Trump called him … ‘Can you believe this?’ because nobody believed Trump was going to win.” Yahoo

If true, this would directly contradict Trump’s repeated statements that he had not spoken to Epstein in years before Epstein’s arrest and death. CNBC+1

6. Accusation Against the FBI Director

Mark also leveled accusations at Kash Patel, the FBI Director. He claimed, based on his sources, that Patel is “in on the plot” of redacting or suppressing information in Epstein’s files. Newsner English

He implied that Patel might be complicit in concealing damaging details, possibly to shield Trump or other politically exposed figures. La Voce di New York

7. Historical Context: Why This Matters

These claims come amid renewed focus on the Epstein files. There has been increased political pressure to unseal documents related to Epstein’s network, and debates over how transparent the Justice Department and FBI should be. CNBC

Sen. Richard Durbin, for example, has said that FBI agents assigned to review Epstein’s records were instructed to “flag” any documents that mention Trump. CNBC

Meanwhile, according to The Wall Street Journal, Trump was told by Attorney General Pam Bondi that his name appeared multiple times in DOJ files on Epstein. CNBC But the White House pushed back, calling some of the reporting “fake news.” The Guardian

8. Trump’s Response and the Broader Debate

Trump has denied wrongdoing, framing the Epstein investigation as politically motivated. He’s argued that the files might include “fake” allegations, suggesting they were part of a broader conspiracy by political opponents. New York Post+1

For his part, Mark Epstein is calling for transparency. He seems to believe that if the files were released in full — unredacted — the public might learn more about the depth of Epstein’s connections and possibly about damaging information Epstein may have collected.

9. Skepticism and Challenges

• So far, Mark Epstein’s assertions rest largely on his own testimony and sources he claims to trust. There is no publicly verified evidence of a “facility in Winchester, Virginia” that is systematically removing Republican names. Newsner English+1

• Some of the claims, such as Epstein having “dirt” on Trump, are vague — Mark says he doesn’t know exactly what was in Epstein’s files.

• At the same time, political opponents and observers point to documented ties between Epstein and Trump in the 1990s — but they also note that the relationship is complicated, and that not all reported allegations are proven. Newsweek+1

10. Implications If True

If Mark’s claims are accurate, the implications are enormous:

1. Political Cover-Up: It would suggest that the delay in releasing Epstein’s files was politically motivated, not just bureaucratic.

2. Reputational Risk: Names being “scrubbed” could mean that high-profile Republicans, potentially including Trump, are being protected.

3. Public Trust: Such an operation — if real — risks undermining public confidence in how sensitive investigations are handled, especially those involving sexual exploitation and elites.

4. Legal and Ethical Questions: Could there be obstruction, manipulation, or even misuse of government power to conceal potentially criminal associations?

11. Bottom Line

Mark Epstein is making serious, sensational allegations. According to him, Trump not only delayed the release of Epstein files — but may have done so to hide damaging information. He claims there’s a deliberate effort to sanitize those files, possibly removing or protecting certain names. He paints a picture of a friendship between Epstein and Trump that was far more than social — possibly transactional, possibly fraught with secrets.

However, as of now:

• These remain claims, not proven facts.

• There is no publicly available concrete evidence supporting the existence of a “file-scrubbing” facility.

• Trump and his allies strongly deny wrongdoing, and some point to earlier intelligence agency reviews that found no prosecutable evidence. CNBC+1

Whether or not Mark Epstein’s version of events holds up under scrutiny, his assertions have added new fuel to the debate over what really lies in the Epstein files — who is named, who is protected, and just how deep the shadows go.