On the menu today: Check the NR home page for all the latest on the Supreme Court striking down President Trump’s tariffs. Today’s Jolt, written before the decision came down, is about some big news from yesterday. Thames Valley Police arrested ex-Prince Andrew, the former Duke of York and the brother of King Charles, under suspicion that Andrew passed sensitive government information to Jeffrey Epstein when he was a British trade envoy over 15 years ago. You could see in the British public reaction a sense of deep outrage that a member of the royal family could ever do something like this, mixed with a sense of pride that the arrest demonstrated that no one, not even the king’s brother, is above the law.
Those who look at the Epstein scandal through the lens of President Trump may believe that the U.S. Department of Justice releasing 3 million pages of records did not turn out to be that consequential. But from London to Wall Street to Oslo, Norway, the revelation of what was in those documents has led to resignations, arrests, and new investigations. Read on.
Epstein File Damage
There are those who argue that the U.S. Department of Justice should not have released the 3 million additional pages of records in its effort to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the department to publish all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the DOJ’s possession that relate to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein by December 19. (You can find and search the files here.)
Critics of the disclosure contend, reasonably, that prosecutors do not release all documents accumulated during a criminal investigation. Of course, this is far from a normal criminal investigation, and I have argued that the full release of all seized documents is necessary to attempt to restore public trust after the U.S. Department of Justice made an inexplicably lenient deal with Epstein back in 2008.
Apart from ex-Prince Andrew and a handful of others listed below, so far Epstein’s friends and longtime associates are not facing criminal charges for their actions. They’re suffering reputational damage that was entirely foreseeable from remaining friends or becoming friends with Epstein after June 30, 2008, after Epstein had “pled guilty to the pending state indictment charging felony solicitation of prostitution and, pursuant to the NPA, to a criminal information charging him with procurement of minors to engage in prostitution.”
If associating with Epstein was no big deal, just a reflection of being a poor judge of character . . . why do people keep resigning over it?
Here are some of the U.S. corporate leaders who have resigned just in the past few weeks:
- Elon Musk’s younger brother Kimbal Musk resigned from Burning Man’s board of directors in early February. “[Kimbal] Musk’s name appeared more than 100 times, including in messages arranging meetings and thanking Epstein for ‘connecting’ him to a woman in 2012.”
- Curator David Ross; I’m just going to quote the whole sordid thing from ArtNet:
Curator David A. Ross, who has helmed major museums — New York’s Whitney Museum of American Art, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, and the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston — was among those whose correspondence with Epstein was included in the latest release of files, in early 2026. Ross, 77, stepped down as chair of the MFA art practice program at the School of Visual Arts in New York on February 3, saying he was “ashamed that I fell for his lies.”
The DOJ files revealed that Ross wrote an email to Epstein after the latter completed his prison sentence in 2009 claiming “it was an undeserved punishment foisted upon you by jealous creeps.” When, later that year, Epstein proposed staging an exhibition called “Statutory” that would feature photos of girls and boys ages 14–25, “where they look nothing like their true ages,” Ross called the idea “incredible” and asked Epstein if he was familiar with “that total porno commercial kiddie picture of Brooke Shcilds [sic] that Richard Prince appropriated for an exhibition in the early 1980’s.” In 2015, Ross assured Epstein he was “still proud to call you a friend.”
- Brad Karp, chairman of the law firm Paul, Weiss, stepped down from the chair role and from the board of Union College February 5 after emails “showed personal and professional collaboration with Epstein.”
- Kathryn Ruemmler, chief legal officer and general counsel of Goldman Sachs and former White House counsel to President Obama, submitted her resignation February 12 after emails showed extensive, friendly contact with Epstein, including legal advice and acceptance of expensive gifts.
- Casey Wasserman, chairman of the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles, said on February 13 that he was starting the process of selling his talent agency. “The announcement followed a wave of defections from dozens of musicians and performers from the agency after flirtatious emails he sent years ago to Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime companion of Mr. Epstein, became public.” As of this writing, Wasserman is still chairman of the 2028 Olympics, but L.A. Mayor Karen Bass has called for his resignation.
- Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, CEO of the Dubai-based ports giant DP World, resigned
- Tom Pritzker, executive chairman of Hyatt Hotels Corporation, announced his retirement and departure from Hyatt’s board February 16, citing “poor judgment” in maintaining contact with Epstein after his conviction. Tom Pritzker is the cousin of Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker.
Microsoft founder and former world’s richest man Bill Gates hasn’t resigned from any official position, but he’s withdrawing from scheduled addresses at conferences.
The fallout in the U.S. political world is not as widespread, but it is there if you look:
- The name of former New Mexico Governor and United Nations Ambassador Bill Richardson was removed from University of New Mexico hospital buildings. Richardson, who died in 2023, issued a statement in 2019 insisting he had never been to Epstein’s private island; subsequent released documents revealed Richardson had been there in 2010.
- Former Treasury Secretary and Harvard president Lawrence Summers has taken a leave from teaching, resigned from the board of OpenAI, and been banned for life from the American Economic Association.
So far, Steve Bannon, Elon Musk, and Howard Lutnick have avoided any significant consequence for their past interactions with Epstein. Bill and Hillary Clinton faced a vote declaring them in contempt of Congress, but ultimately agreed to testify.
Now here are the foreign leaders who have resigned as a result of their interactions with Epstein:
- Back on September 11, before the release of the DOJ documents, United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer dismissed Peter Mandelson from his role as ambassador to the United States. Emails had revealed that Mandelson believed Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and offered to help Epstein to challenge the verdict. In recent days, reports have emerged that a lobbying firm that Mandelson founded is on the verge of collapse.
- On February 1, Miroslav Lajčák, the national security adviser to Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico, announced his resignation. One email from Epstein to Lajčák, referring to a group of women, said, “Don’t worry, they all look at least 20.”
- On February 2, Joanna Rubinstein resigned as the Swedish head of fundraising for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees after she was shown to have visited Epstein’s island in 2012 with her family.
- On February 6, the World Economic Forum announced it was investigating CEO Børge Brende for his friendship with Epstein. “He denied knowing Epstein most recently in November, but admitted to knowing him once the documents were released last week.” That investigation is still pending.
- Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the resignation of Mona Juul on February 8, days after she was suspended as Norway’s ambassador to Jordan and Iraq after disclosures of financial dealings between her, her husband, and Mr. Epstein. Norwegian law enforcement announced a corruption investigation into her and her husband on February
- Also on February 8, Morgan McSweeney, the chief of staff to Keir Starmer, announced his resignation as a consequence of recommending Mandelson for the position of ambassador to the U.S., insisting that while he “did not oversee the due diligence and vetting process,” that process had completely failed.
- Thorbjørn Jagland, a former prime minister of Norway, was charged with “aggravated corruption” in connection with his ties to Epstein, the Norwegian police said on February 12. Investigators are looking into “whether gifts, travel and loans were received in connection with his position,” and said the charges were based on information in the latest batch of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Justice Department.
- While she has not resigned from her position, Norway’s Crown Princess Mette-Marit is facing public debate about whether she should inherit the throne because of her years of friendship with Epstein.
- Separately, Paris prosecutor Laurence Beccuau announced that based upon the files, his office was launching two new investigations, one focusing on sex abuse crimes, the other on financial wrongdoing. All told, at least ten countries have launched new criminal investigations based upon the released documents. Those investigations may or may not lead to indictments or convictions, or additional resignations. But it does suggest that other countries’ law enforcement have looked at the same documents and found, at minimum, a basis for investigating other individuals who may have committed other crimes.
You may recall that unsigned DOJ and FBI memo from July 7 regarding its review of documents relating to Epstein that declared, “We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” The memo stated, “It is the determination of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation that no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”
Apparently, they didn’t look too hard.
That memo has never made sense, and the fact that apparently no one wanted their name attached to it suggested that those within the FBI and DOJ knew that it didn’t make sense. So how did it get written? Who came to that conclusion? Who decided to release it? The buck would appear to stop with Attorney General Pam Bondi. The same Bondi who, on February 21, said during a televised interview on Fox News Channel:
Anchor John Roberts: The DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients?
Attorney General Bondi: It’s sitting on my desk right now to review. That’s been a directive by President Trump.
Bondi later claimed she misunderstood the question. This explanation is very hard to believe.
We do know that the week after the FBI memo, President Trump posted on Truth Social that Americans should “not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about,” contending that unspecified “Epstein Files” were created by former President Obama, former Senator Hillary Clinton, and other officials from a Democratic administration.
Judging from the response from European police agencies, the DOJ’s unreleased files had significant amounts of evidence to warrant additional investigations and arrests. Apparently, no one in this administration or the previous one felt any reason to pass that evidence along to the police agencies that had jurisdiction.
ADDENDUM: Greetings from Colorado Springs, where I’ll be speaking to the fine folks at the Leadership Program of the Rockies today.