Replies

First, Wyden is a weasel so you have to read the words he uses very carefully to make sure he's saying what you think he's actually saying.

Wyden alleges that he has also laid eyes on other documents — now in possession of the Trump Treasury Department — that “contain extensive information on the extent to which high-profile individuals paid Epstein staggering sums of money,

Undoubtedly true....

which was then used to move women around the world....

First stop. Money is fungible and can be used for all sorts of things unknown/unintended by those who provided it. Just because people gave money to Epstein (who was an investment guy so that's what you'd normally do anyway) that he subsequently used to move women does NOT mean that those people knew he was doing that.

For example, if I paid some guy named JR to roof my house, and he then went out and bought meth with my money that he then sold to others, you could truthfully say, "BCC provided money to JR who then used it to deal meth" even if i had no idea what he was doing with it. So the precise wording is everything.

...or engage in dubious transactions indicative of money laundering.”

Again, same thing. The wording it so loose that it could be describing an actual money laundering operation, or not. "Dubious transactions indicative of money laundering" isn't the same as actual money laundering.

Black has been investigated on multiple occasions, including by the Dems in 2023. But they didn't come up with anything useful. So to the extent Wyden says he has something...it apparently isn't as much as he thinks because even his own committee and the Biden Administration didn't do anything with it.