Bill Clinton Marched Into Vanity Fair And Threatened Journalists, Jeffrey Epstein Victim Claims
Virginia Roberts-Giuffre alleged that Bill Clinton put pressure on Vanity Fair magazine in 2011, amidst newly unsealed documents raising questions about the former US president’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
Discussing her upcoming book in 2011, alleged sex-trafficked victim Roberts-Giuffre claimed that Clinton marched into the offices of the magazine, owned by Condé Nast, to urge it halt a planned publication of a story about Epstein, newly released court documents show.
Roberts-Giuffre said that Clinton “walked into VF and threatened them not to write sex-trafficking articles about his good friend JE,” as per the DailyMail. Nevertheless, there has been no evidence found to back this allegation as of Friday, January 5, 2024.
Virginia Roberts-Giuffre alleged that Bill Clinton put pressure on Vanity Fair magazine in 2011 to halt a sex trafficking story set to be published
Image credits: netflix
A spokesperson for Vanity Fair’s then-editor, Graydon Carter, told conservative publication The Telegraph on Thursday (January 4): “This categorically did not happen.”
However, the late sex offender was also alleged to have prevented Vanity Fair from publishing reporting by journalist Vicky Ward, who had interviewed sisters Maria and Annie Farmer about their abuse by Epstein, as per the DailyMail.
In her 2022 podcast, Ward claimed that Epstein threatened her, telling her: “I have reports here about you, your husband, I have everything under the sun that was sent to me by people who want to be helpful.”
Vanity Fair reportedly said the claims of sexual abuse were not included in her 2003 published article because they were added late and did not meet legal standards.
Image credits: freepik
Roberts-Giuffre’s correspondence was made public on Wednesday (January 3) as part of a tranche of documents from her 2015 defamation case against Epstein’s partner in crime, Ghislaine Maxwell.
On Thursday (January 4), documents were released as the second tranche of files were unsealed by the Manhattan court.
As revealed by the unsealed documents, Roberts-Giuffre discussed in an email exchange in May 2011 whether to speak to Vanity Fair to promote her book.
Virginia’s correspondence was made public as part of a tranche of documents from her 2015 defamation case against Epstein’s partner in crime, Ghislaine Maxwell
Image credits: Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan/Getty Images
The sex-trafficking campaigner wrote: “I am looking at both sides to the picture. On the upside, it will give exposure to build up publicity for the case and the story, but, like you said, it must be carefully written and not give any notions about the upcoming book and or any new info.
“When I was doing some research into VF yesterday, it does concern me what they could want to write about me, considering that B. Clinton walked into VF and threatened them not to write sex-trafficking articles about his good friend J.E.”
Reporter Ward reportedly insisted that the then-editor Carter removed her bombshell allegations about Epstein in 2003. The former Vanity Fair boss reportedly said that the reporting did not meet their legal standards, and his editors alone made the decision.
Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson, and Stephen Hawking are just a few of the hundreds of names that were unveiled in the enormous documents
Image credits: ddp/vidapress
The 77-year-old ex-president has long insisted that his connections to infamous financier were on a professional basis, to aid the work of the Clinton Foundation charity.
Clinton further insisted in 2019, that during his four trips on Epstein’s private jet, in 2002 and 2003, he was always accompanied by staff and Secret Service agents.
However, the now unsealed court documents from June 2016 have painted a different picture after another document saw Epstein accuse Clinton of “liking them young.”
In her lawsuit filing against Maxwell, Roberts-Giuffre sought permission from the judge to force more people to sit for a deposition to bolster her case, according to the DailyMail.
Roberts-Giuffre reportedly argued that Clinton was close to both Maxwell and Epstein, as the court document revealed: “In a 2011 interview, Ms. Giuffre mentioned former President Bill Clinton’s close personal relationship with Defendant and Jeffrey Epstein.
Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were pictured in 1993 greeting Bill Clinton inside the White House at an event for donors to the White House Historical Association
Image credits: The Mega Agency/vidapress
“While Ms. Giuffre made no allegations of illegal actions by Bill Clinton, Ms. Maxwell in her deposition raised Ms. Giuffre’s comments about President Clinton as one of the ‘obvious lies’ to which she was referring in her public statement that formed the basis of this suit.
“Apart from the Defendant and Mr. Epstein, former President Clinton is a key person who can provide information about his close relationship with Defendant and Mr. Epstein and disapprove Ms. Maxwell’s claims.”
Ultimately, the former American president was mentioned 50 times throughout almost 950 pages of evidence.
Johanna Sjoberg, a separate alleged victim of sex trafficking by Epstein and Ghislaine, reportedly said in her deposition that the late sex offender told her “Clinton likes them young, referring to girls.”
On Wednesday (January 3), hours before the court documents were unsealed, Epstein’s brother Mark, a New York-based property developer, reportedly said Jeffrey had claimed to have information about ex-US presidents Donald Trump and Clinton, which was so explosive it would derail the 2016 presidential election, as per the DailyMail.
69-year-old Mark told The New York Post: “Here’s a direct quote: ‘If I said what I know about both candidates, they’d have to cancel the election.’ That’s what Jeffrey told me in 2016.”
Johanna Sjoberg, one of the victims, reportedly said in her deposition that Epstein told her “Clinton likes them young, referring to girls”
Image credits: Patrick McMullan/Getty Images
Epstein and Maxwell were pictured in 1993 greeting Clinton inside the White House at an event for donors to the White House Historical Association. Epstein attended the event after donating $10,000 to the fund, the DailyMail reported.
Reports suggest that Epstein made at least 17 visits to the White House, presidential logs show, while Clinton flew on the sexual predator’s private jet, making trips to Europe, Asia, and Africa between 2002 and 2003.
Mark Epstein recalled: “Jeff first took Clinton and I think it was Chris Tucker and some other people to Africa, which was a mistake my brother made by doing that because, prior to that, he was under the radar; nobody was looking at him.
“But when he flew Clinton there, it was like, ‘Who’s this guy flying Clinton?”’
Upon Epstein’s arrest in July 2019, one of Clinton’s spokespeople said that the ex-president “knows nothing about the terrible crimes that Epstein was accused of and that Clinton had not spoken to Epstein ‘in more than a decade.’”
Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson, and Stephen Hawking are just a few of the hundreds of names that were unveiled in the enormous documents that were unsealed from Roberts-Giuffre’s lawsuit.
With the documents having been made public, the world woke up to a disturbing list of A-list celebrities named in the first set of documents unsealed under a December 18 court order, with an awaited number of more notable names to be exposed in the coming weeks.
The documents, in total, including additional material yet to be unsealed, are expected to include nearly 200 names, including some of Epstein’s accusers, prominent businesspeople, politicians, and potentially more, CNN reported.
Readers were appalled by the Jeffrey Epstein case
I'm going to get nuked for this. The evidence against these people is basically a rich banker met famous people, flew some people on his jet, and some stayed at his house. This banker was unquestionably a pedophile who used his money to hire older teen girls. With the exception of a picture with Prince Andrew is there evidence other than guilt by association or third party hearsay (i.e. this dead guy said that Bill Clinton liked them young)? Stephen Hawking for goodness sake. The guy could barely move. The press is going line by line through depositions and reporting things that an influence peddling pedophile told to third parties as though they are facts. Is there any direct evidence that any of these names did anything other than ride on a rich dude's plane, shakes hands after he gave them money, or hang out on an estate in the tropics for a weekend? I don't know the facts, neither does the press but they sure like to report hearsay as though they are facts.
This is the correct take. Even if Trump's name were in these files, who we know palled around socially with Epstein via pics and video, these aren't names of clients of Epstein. Context matters and it's asinine people keep running with this as if everyone named in them is a pedophile. These are just names of people mentioned in all sorts of communications. Epstein was a banker/financier/broker/etc in the upper crust of New York. Obviously people would be dealing with him in social or professional settings. Talking about these people out context doesn't help with punishing the actual rapists and the victims. Stop obfuscating this important issue with this BS because "OMG CLINTON AND HAWKING ARE NAMES IN TRHESE DOCUMENTS." If Clinton is a rapist then he should be punished but to equate his name being here with what we know about Trump and his relationship with this monster.
Load More Replies...
Context is everything here. OK, so these people's names were in Epstein's files but why and in what context? Are there any allegations or more importantly evidence that all of these people were involved in illegal activity? All we have are some vague "revelations" of people's names. No indication of what else those files contained or why those people were named. Before we start reaching for the torches and pitchforks maybe we should wait until actual investigations have been made and more details released, rather than making judgements based on lurid attention grabbing headlines and news stories that contain much speculation but almost nothing of actual substance.
Its hilarious how the left is screaming "TRUMP WAS ON THE LIST!" and the right is screaming "CLINTON WAS ON THE LIST," but no one seems at all upset that underage girls were being sex trafficked and sold to rich men. Each side wants to villainize the other side, but not the man who made it all happen. I don't care who is on the list. If they paid for sex with underage girls, castrate them all. This is not a political issue, its an issue about humanity and the destruction and abuse of these girls. Stop defending the politician you pledged your allegiance to and start demanding these people be held accountable and prosecuted. Get your heads out of your a*s. If you were a Republican and Trump raped your daughter, you'd kill him. If you were a democrat and Clinton raped your daughter, you'd kill him. Everyone of those underage girls were and are someone's daughter, sister, friend, cousin, grand daughter.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t everyone’s take that this man was a disgusting predator and being attracted to young girls is wrong? Everyone cares that these young girls were trafficked? Isn’t everyone extremely upset this man cannot be prosecuted by law?
Load More Replies...
I'm going to get nuked for this. The evidence against these people is basically a rich banker met famous people, flew some people on his jet, and some stayed at his house. This banker was unquestionably a pedophile who used his money to hire older teen girls. With the exception of a picture with Prince Andrew is there evidence other than guilt by association or third party hearsay (i.e. this dead guy said that Bill Clinton liked them young)? Stephen Hawking for goodness sake. The guy could barely move. The press is going line by line through depositions and reporting things that an influence peddling pedophile told to third parties as though they are facts. Is there any direct evidence that any of these names did anything other than ride on a rich dude's plane, shakes hands after he gave them money, or hang out on an estate in the tropics for a weekend? I don't know the facts, neither does the press but they sure like to report hearsay as though they are facts.
This is the correct take. Even if Trump's name were in these files, who we know palled around socially with Epstein via pics and video, these aren't names of clients of Epstein. Context matters and it's asinine people keep running with this as if everyone named in them is a pedophile. These are just names of people mentioned in all sorts of communications. Epstein was a banker/financier/broker/etc in the upper crust of New York. Obviously people would be dealing with him in social or professional settings. Talking about these people out context doesn't help with punishing the actual rapists and the victims. Stop obfuscating this important issue with this BS because "OMG CLINTON AND HAWKING ARE NAMES IN TRHESE DOCUMENTS." If Clinton is a rapist then he should be punished but to equate his name being here with what we know about Trump and his relationship with this monster.
Load More Replies... Context is everything here. OK, so these people's names were in Epstein's files but why and in what context? Are there any allegations or more importantly evidence that all of these people were involved in illegal activity? All we have are some vague "revelations" of people's names. No indication of what else those files contained or why those people were named. Before we start reaching for the torches and pitchforks maybe we should wait until actual investigations have been made and more details released, rather than making judgements based on lurid attention grabbing headlines and news stories that contain much speculation but almost nothing of actual substance.
Its hilarious how the left is screaming "TRUMP WAS ON THE LIST!" and the right is screaming "CLINTON WAS ON THE LIST," but no one seems at all upset that underage girls were being sex trafficked and sold to rich men. Each side wants to villainize the other side, but not the man who made it all happen. I don't care who is on the list. If they paid for sex with underage girls, castrate them all. This is not a political issue, its an issue about humanity and the destruction and abuse of these girls. Stop defending the politician you pledged your allegiance to and start demanding these people be held accountable and prosecuted. Get your heads out of your a*s. If you were a Republican and Trump raped your daughter, you'd kill him. If you were a democrat and Clinton raped your daughter, you'd kill him. Everyone of those underage girls were and are someone's daughter, sister, friend, cousin, grand daughter.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t everyone’s take that this man was a disgusting predator and being attracted to young girls is wrong? Everyone cares that these young girls were trafficked? Isn’t everyone extremely upset this man cannot be prosecuted by law?
Load More Replies...
-5
29