For years, Bannon has positioned himself as the ultimate truth-teller, the populist warrior fighting against corrupt elites and demanding transparency on the Epstein files. His War Room podcast has made him millions railing against the "globalist cabal" and calling Epstein "the key that picks the lock" to elite corruption. But newly released documents tell a very different story. They suggest that Bannon didn't just know about Epstein's crimes and connections—he allegedly helped cover them up while possibly creating the very conspiracy theory he now uses to build his brand. And in the process, he may have sabotaged President Trump's administration, or at minimum showed such reckless indifference to the consequences that the distinction hardly matters.
This isn't speculation. This is a reasonable inference from the evidence that has been released into the public. But in order for anyone to get to the bottom of this, someone has to be willing to ask the tough questions.
The Friendship That Launched a Thousand Conspiracies
Let's start with what we know for certain. In August 2017, shortly after being ousted as Trump's chief strategist, Steve Bannon met Jeffrey Epstein through Michael Wolff. According to Wolff himself, "Bannon and Epstein spent an enormous amount of time together and became very close friends." This wasn't a casual acquaintance. This was a convicted sex offender and a man who had just left the White House becoming what the documents suggest were genuine confidants.
Throughout 2018 and early 2019, the documentary evidence shows that Bannon and Epstein allegedly "texted and emailed at all hours, name-dropping prominent figures they had met or planned to meet." They allegedly "traded political intelligence, speculated about Trump's legal troubles and made plans to spend time together in far-flung locations such as Paris and New York." In May 2018, in a conversation about currency trading, Bannon allegedly called Epstein "God." Not as a joke. Not sarcastically. But in apparent admiration of his financial acumen.
The relationship allegedly went deeper than mere friendship. Epstein offered Bannon what the documents describe as "lavish perks, including private jet travel, lodging at his Manhattan townhouse, and medical care." They arranged secret meetings "under the cover of darkness" to avoid the surveillance cameras that monitored Epstein's residence. In one exchange, Epstein wrote: "Btw Im in New York tonite thru sat, if you want to visit under the cover of darkness or breakfast tomorrow if you like." Bannon allegedly responded by asking about "access that's not the front door," citing the "24/7 surveillance" on Epstein.
This is the context in which everything else must be understood. Steve Bannon, the man who would later demand full transparency on Epstein, was allegedly sneaking into his mansion through back entrances to avoid being seen. Steve Bannon, the populist champion of the working man, was allegedly accepting private jets and luxury accommodations from a billionaire pedophile. Steve Bannon, the Trump loyalist, was allegedly building a close friendship with a man who would soon become the most toxic figure in American politics.
But what were they actually discussing during all this time together?
January 1, 2019: The Day Bannon Allegedly Discussed Removing Trump
On the first day of 2019, as Democrats took control of the House of Representatives, Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein allegedly exchanged a series of text messages that should end any notion that Bannon was a loyal Trump ally. The exchange, according to documents released by the Department of Justice, began with Bannon declaring: "We either own 2019 or it will surely own us." Epstein responded by noting that he had spoken to his Democratic contacts and that "emotions running high."
What happened next is shocking. According to the documents, Bannon allegedly wrote: "Going to blow him up right our of the box– WH has zero plan to punch back– Fort Apache with no cavalry enroute." Epstein replied: "And no soldiers in the fort. He really is borderline. Not sure what he may do." Then came Bannon's alleged response: "I think it's beyond borderline — 25 amendment."
The 25th Amendment. The mechanism for removing a president from office. Steve Bannon was allegedly discussing this with Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender who was at that very moment under renewed federal investigation for sex trafficking minors. Not with Republican allies. Not with Trump supporters. Not with anyone who had the president's best interests at heart. With Jeffrey Epstein.
But the 25th Amendment discussion was just the beginning. As 2019 unfolded and federal prosecutors began to circle Epstein once again, Bannon's alleged role became even more troubling.
"Crush the Pedo/Trafficking Narrative"
In February 2019, with New York investigators on his heels and a new federal probe looming, Jeffrey Epstein allegedly turned to Steve Bannon for help. The text messages show Epstein asking: "Do you think I can do my own video interview and upload it on you tube." He wrote that "Woody said he would help edit. not sure how to stage, what points to make. but better than trying to do an interview that i have no experience doing." Then came the kicker: "Goal to himanize the monster."
"Humanize the monster." That's how Epstein allegedly described himself in messages to Bannon. And Bannon's response, according to the documents, wasn't to refuse. It wasn't to distance himself. It was to help.
By April 2019, as federal prosecutors were actively investigating Epstein's 2008 sweetheart plea deal, Bannon allegedly laid out a comprehensive strategy in a text message to Epstein: "first we need to push back on the lies ; then crush the pedo/trafficking narrative ; then rebuild your image as philanthropist." Let those words sit for a moment. "Crush the pedo/trafficking narrative." This wasn't a documentary filmmaker maintaining journalistic distance. This was allegedly a strategic advisor helping a sex offender avoid accountability.
The documents show that Bannon allegedly arranged "media training" at Epstein's residence that would be "totally confidential." The next day, Epstein reportedly told someone that his representatives were using the "script" Bannon provided when they interacted with The New Yorker about a potential story. Bannon wasn't just filming Epstein. He was allegedly coaching him on how to manipulate the media, providing talking points, arranging strategy sessions, and actively working to rehabilitate the image of a man he would later call a "globalist child molester."
After one filming session with Epstein, Bannon allegedly texted that his camera crew was "blown away" and "mesmerized because they have been sold you are a 'monster.'" The implication is clear: Bannon's crew wasn't horrified by what they found. They were allegedly charmed. They were being won over. And Bannon seemed pleased by this development.
Then came July 6, 2019. The morning of Jeffrey Epstein's arrest.
According to the documents, Bannon sent Epstein a text message that morning asking: "If we arrange it can we film on the island." He was referring to Little St. James, Epstein's private Caribbean island where, according to victim testimony and federal prosecutors, minors were systematically sexually abused. Epstein immediately agreed. They made plans to film later that morning at 11 AM. Hours later, Epstein texted: "All canceled." Bannon wrote back: "You r not coming?" There was no reply. Jeffrey Epstein had been arrested at Teterboro Airport on federal sex trafficking charges.
Steve Bannon had allegedly been planning to film a sympathetic documentary on the island where children were abused, on the very morning the man he was trying to help "humanize" was arrested for trafficking those children.
The Leak That Changed Everything
On July 9, 2019, three days after Epstein's arrest, journalist Vicky Ward published an explosive article in The Daily Beast. The story contained a bombshell claim from an anonymous source described as "a former senior White House official" in the Trump administration who "was friendly with Epstein a couple of years before his death" and had "knowledge of Epstein's then unknown connection to Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia."
According to this source, when Alex Acosta was being vetted for the position of Labor Secretary during the Trump transition, his name came up in connection with the Epstein plea deal. The source claimed that Acosta explained he'd cut the non-prosecution deal with Epstein's attorneys because he had "been told" to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. The exact quote that would launch a thousand conspiracy theories: "I was told Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and to leave it alone."
This single quote became the foundation stone for virtually every Epstein intelligence conspiracy theory that followed. Researcher Whitney Webb was allegedly "initially inspired to write two laboriously long volumes scrutinizing Epstein's supposed intelligence connections after coming across Acosta's purported 'belonged to intelligence' quote." The phrase became gospel in conspiracy circles, repeated endlessly as proof that Epstein was a Mossad agent, a CIA asset, a blackmail operative for foreign intelligence.
There's just one problem: Alex Acosta says it never happened.
When questioned by Congress years later, under oath and under penalty of perjury, Acosta was asked directly: "Steve Bannon has publicly stated that you told him that Epstein, quote, 'belonged to intelligence.' Do you recall ever speaking to Steve Bannon about Jeffrey Epstein?" Acosta's response: He didn't "recall ever speaking to Bannon about Epstein." When federal investigators from the Department of Justice asked whether he had knowledge of Epstein being an intelligence asset, Acosta stated clearly: "The answer is no."
Making false statements to federal investigators or Congress is a serious crime, carrying potential prison time. Making false statements to Vicky Ward, on the other hand, carries no legal consequences whatsoever. This creates an interesting asymmetry: If Acosta lied under oath, he faces prosecution. If someone lied to Ward, who then published it, there are no consequences at all.
So the question becomes: Who was Ward's anonymous source? And why would they tell her something that Acosta now denies under oath?
All Roads Lead to Bannon
Every single piece of circumstantial evidence points to Steve Bannon as the source of the "belonged to intelligence" story. Consider the profile: Ward described her source as "a former senior White House official" in the Trump administration as of July 2019. That's Bannon—he left the White House in August 2017. The source was someone "who was friendly with Epstein a couple of years before his death." That's Bannon—the documents prove he had an extensive relationship with Epstein from late 2017 through July 2019. The source had "knowledge of Epstein's then unknown connection to Mohammed bin Salman." That's Bannon—Michael Wolff has written about how Bannon saw photos of MBS with Epstein at Epstein's residence.
But the connection goes even deeper. Vicky Ward had spent two years writing a critical book about Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump called "Kushner, Inc.," published in early 2019. And Steve Bannon's role as a source for that book was, according to analysts, "transparently obvious" given "his bitter and well-attested feud with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump." One NPR reviewer noted that "Bannon's ideas quietly permeate the book without attribution" and observed: "Surely [Ward] could only write phrases like 'Bannon thought to himself' because he talked to her. But she remains coy."
Ward has appeared on Bannon's War Room podcast. She has "noted his sometimes forgotten background in Hollywood and praised his flair for dramatic storytelling." They have a working relationship. They share sources. They share agendas when it comes to Kushner and Ivanka.
And then there's Bannon's own stated philosophy about media manipulation. He has famously said: "the real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit." Creating a sensational but false story about Epstein "belonging to intelligence" and feeding it to a journalist who will protect you as an anonymous source—that's flooding the zone. That's creating so much noise and controversy that truth becomes impossible to discern.
If Bannon was the source—and the circumstantial evidence overwhelmingly suggests he was—then the "belonged to intelligence" leak was a masterpiece of information warfare. It accomplished multiple strategic objectives simultaneously, and the beauty of it is that each objective reinforced the others.
The Multi-Layered Attack
Consider what the leak accomplished if Bannon was indeed the source. First and most obviously, it damaged the Trump administration. Within days of Ward's article being published, Alex Acosta was under siege from the media, from Democrats, and increasingly from within his own party. Trump defended him publicly, calling Acosta "just an excellent Secretary of Labor" and suggesting that everyone makes mistakes. But the defense was futile. The combination of renewed Epstein charges and the explosive "intelligence" claim made Acosta's position untenable. He resigned, creating a cabinet crisis and generating weeks of damaging headlines connecting the Trump administration to Jeffrey Epstein.
Second, the leak allegedly helped Epstein in a perverse way. By creating an "intelligence asset" narrative, the story transformed Epstein from a simple pedophile into a geopolitical chess piece. It suggested that his crimes might have been overlooked not because of wealth or connections, but because of national security considerations. This is remarkably similar to what Bannon allegedly told Epstein directly in April 2019: the goal was to "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative." If people are arguing about whether Epstein was CIA or Mossad, they're not focused on the victims. They're not focused on the crimes. They're focused on spy games and conspiracy theories.
Third, the leak built Bannon's own brand and credibility. By establishing himself as someone who knew about Epstein's intelligence connections—even if the specific Acosta claim was false—Bannon positioned himself as an insider with access to information that others didn't have. This would later allow him to position himself as the ultimate Epstein truth-teller on his War Room podcast, demanding transparency and claiming to have the inside story. The conspiracy theory he allegedly created became the foundation for his credibility as someone exposing that very conspiracy.
Fourth, the leak attacked Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, Bannon's longtime enemies. The story implicated the Trump transition process, which Kushner had helped oversee. It reflected poorly on their judgment and their vetting procedures. And it came from Bannon's collaborator on an anti-Kushner book. The collateral damage to Kushner's reputation was likely not accidental.
But here's perhaps the most cynical element of all: The leak allegedly weaponized real intelligence connections that Bannon learned about through his friendship with Epstein.
So here's what may have happened: Bannon befriended Epstein in part because of his intelligence connections. He learned firsthand about the genuine foreign intelligence links, then he allegedly took that real information and created a false but plausible story—that Acosta had been told Epstein "belonged to intelligence"—and fed it to Vicky Ward. The story was credible precisely because it contained elements of truth. Epstein really did have intelligence connections. But the specific claim about Acosta appears to have been fabricated.
This is sophisticated disinformation: mixing truth with lies to create something that's both believable and useful to your purposes.
The Broader Pattern of Betrayal
The "belonged to intelligence" leak wasn't an isolated incident. The documents reveal what appears to be a sustained pattern of Bannon allegedly undermining Trump while maintaining his relationship with Epstein.
Consider the text messages disparaging the president. According to released documents, Bannon allegedly called Trump the "worst negotiator in human history" in conversations with Epstein. Just one week before Epstein's arrest, Epstein allegedly texted Bannon: "Now you can understand why Trump wakes up in the middle of the night sweating when he hears you and I are friends." This wasn't Epstein taunting Bannon. This was Epstein suggesting that Bannon's friendship with him was something Trump feared—and Bannon apparently didn't disagree.
Then there's the alleged sharing of confidential White House information. In December 2018, a text exchange allegedly shows Bannon and Epstein discussing President Trump's assistant at the time, Madeleine Westerhout. The messages allegedly contain intimate details about the president's private residence, with Epstein writing about "the sight of him in the residence in his undies is hard to fathom" and promising to give Bannon "details when I see you." Both Westerhout and Trump have strongly denied the implications of these messages, but the question remains: How would Epstein know these details about what was happening inside Trump's White House residence unless someone with access was telling him?
And then there's the coordination with Michael Wolff, the journalist who wrote two devastating books about the Trump White House. The documents show extensive communication between Wolff and Epstein, with Wolff allegedly coaching Epstein on media relations and political strategy. In November 2018, Wolff wrote to Epstein that he "planned to meet with Bannon the next afternoon while working on a forthcoming project." Later, Bannon allegedly fretted to Epstein about Wolff's second Trump book, which Epstein had previewed and said contained "lots of Steve quotes. Lots." Bannon worried: "How bad am I going to get lit up???"
So we have Bannon allegedly:
Working with Wolff on anti-Trump books while sharing information from his time in the White House. Discussing those books with Epstein, who was receiving advance copies. Disparaging Trump in messages to Epstein. Sharing what may have been confidential information about White House personnel. Discussing Trump's removal via the 25th Amendment. And allegedly creating a leak that would force the resignation of Trump's Labor Secretary.
All while claiming to be a Trump loyalist. All while helping Epstein "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative." All while building his own brand as a populist warrior against elite corruption.
Two Theories, One Verdict
There are two ways to interpret Steve Bannon's alleged actions during this period, and while they differ in motive, both lead to the same damning conclusion.
The first theory is that Bannon orchestrated a calculated attack on Trump. Under this interpretation, Bannon befriended Epstein specifically to gain access to intelligence connections and insider information. He discussed political strategy with Epstein, including the possibility of removing Trump from office. He coordinated with Michael Wolff on books that would damage the president. And then, as Epstein faced renewed federal scrutiny, Bannon allegedly created and leaked the "belonged to intelligence" story specifically to force Acosta's resignation and embarrass the Trump administration.
In this scenario, the help Bannon allegedly provided to Epstein—the media training, the scripts, the strategy to "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative"—was the price of admission. It was what Bannon had to do to maintain Epstein's trust and continued access. The documentary was cover. The real project was using Epstein as a weapon against Trump while building Bannon's own brand as someone with insider knowledge of elite corruption.
The evidence supporting this theory is substantial. The 25th Amendment discussion shows Bannon discussing Trump's removal not with Republicans or Trump supporters, but with Epstein—suggesting possible coordination rather than casual conversation. The timing is suspicious: Bannon helps Epstein in February and April 2019, the "intelligence" story drops in July 2019, and Acosta resigns shortly thereafter. The multi-layered benefits of the leak—damaging Trump, helping Epstein, building Bannon's brand, attacking Kushner—suggest sophisticated planning rather than accident. And Bannon's own philosophy of "flooding the zone with shit" describes exactly this kind of coordinated disinformation campaign.
The second theory is one of reckless indifference. Under this interpretation, Bannon didn't necessarily target Trump deliberately. He simply didn't care about the consequences for anyone else. He befriended Epstein opportunistically, seeing a chance for documentary access, social connections, material benefits, and post-White House positioning. He learned about intelligence connections incidentally rather than strategically. He helped Epstein because it served his own interests—maintaining access to a fascinating subject—not because he wanted to protect a pedophile. He leaked the "intelligence" story because it made for a dramatic narrative and helped his relationship with Vicky Ward, not because he was deliberately trying to bring down Acosta. And he discussed Trump's removal with Epstein because he was bitter about being pushed out of the White House and genuinely believed Trump was unfit, not because he was coordinating a coup.
In this scenario, Bannon allegedly pursued his own interests with complete disregard for who got hurt along the way. If Trump lost a cabinet member, that was Trump's problem. If Epstein's victims were denied justice because Bannon helped "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative," that was unfortunate but not Bannon's concern. If the conspiracy theory he allegedly created would poison public discourse for years, so be it—it made for good content. The collateral damage to Trump, to victims, to truth itself was simply the cost of Steve Bannon getting what Steve Bannon wanted.
Here's the thing: It doesn't actually matter which theory is correct.
Because either way, the documented evidence establishes that Steve Bannon allegedly:
Developed a close friendship with a convicted sex offender while claiming to fight elite corruption. Advised that sex offender on how to "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative" against him. Planned to film a sympathetic documentary on the island where minors were allegedly abused. Discussed removing a sitting president from office via the 25th Amendment with that same sex offender. Likely created a false conspiracy theory that he knew would damage Trump's administration. Shared what may have been confidential White House information. Used real victims' suffering as fodder for his documentary and his brand. Now profits from the very conspiracy theory he allegedly manufactured.
Whether these actions were calculated malice or reckless indifference, they constitute a betrayal of Trump, of Epstein's victims, and of the American public.
The Hypocrisy Laid Bare
The contrast between Bannon's alleged actions in 2019 and his public persona today could not be more stark. Today, Steve Bannon calls Jeffrey Epstein a "globalist child molester" and positions himself as the ultimate truth-teller demanding transparency on the Epstein files. He describes Epstein as "the key that picks the lock" to understanding elite corruption. He claims his forthcoming documentary will expose "how the elites and the intelligence services are inextricably linked."
But in April 2019, he was allegedly texting Epstein strategies to "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative."
Today, he demands full release of the Epstein files and accountability for everyone involved.
But in 2019, he was allegedly planning to film a sympathetic documentary on Epstein's private island on the very morning Epstein was arrested.
Today, he rails against elite corruption and powerful pedophiles on his War Room podcast.
But his own podcast has been almost entirely silent about his own extensive involvement with Epstein, even as "the story has gripped the country for months."
Today, he presents himself as a champion of Epstein's victims and demands justice.
But in 2019, he was allegedly working to "humanize the monster" and rebuild Epstein's image as a philanthropist.
The documents don't just reveal hypocrisy. They reveal what may be one of the most cynical cons in modern American politics: A man allegedly helping a pedophile while undermining a president, then using the conspiracy theory he created to build a media empire based on exposing that very conspiracy.
The Questions That Should Be Asked
Were you Vicky Ward's source for the "belonged to intelligence" story that forced Alex Acosta's resignation? If not, who was, and how did they know about Epstein's connection to Mohammed bin Salman?
What exactly did you mean when you texted Epstein to "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative" in April 2019? How is that consistent with being a documentary filmmaker maintaining journalistic distance?
Why were you planning to film on Epstein's private island—where minors were allegedly sexually abused—if you were making a critical documentary rather than a rehabilitation project? What footage did you expect to capture there?
Why were you discussing President Trump's removal via the 25th Amendment with Jeffrey Epstein on January 1, 2019? What did you hope to accomplish by having that conversation with a convicted sex offender under federal investigation?
What confidential White House information did you share with Epstein, and why? How did Epstein know details about events inside the president's residence?
Will you release all communications with Epstein, Michael Wolff, and Vicky Ward from 2017 through 2019? If you have nothing to hide, surely transparency is in everyone's interest?
Do you acknowledge that the "belonged to intelligence" story—which you have used extensively to build conspiracy theories on your podcast—has been denied under oath by Alex Acosta? Do you have any evidence beyond an anonymous source that this conversation ever occurred?
These questions deserve answers. But Bannon won't answer them. Because the documents have already answered them.
The Verdict of History
Whether Steve Bannon deliberately weaponized Jeffrey Epstein against Donald Trump or simply pursued his own interests with complete indifference to the consequences, the documentary record reveals a fraud of staggering proportions. A man who allegedly helped a pedophile "crush the pedo/trafficking narrative" now presents himself as demanding justice for victims. A man who allegedly created a false conspiracy theory about intelligence connections now profits from that conspiracy. A man who allegedly discussed removing Trump from office with Epstein now presents himself as a Trump loyalist.
Steve Bannon's greatest strategy wasn't exposing the Epstein conspiracy. It was creating it—while helping a pedophile, betraying a president, and building a media empire.
The only question left is whether it was malice or indifference.
I don't know about everyone else, but as a supporter of President Trump and former listener of The War Room I would like to know the answers.
SOURCES
NBC News, "Before Epstein's arrest, Steve Bannon worked to rebuild his image, files show," February 12, 2026
Skeptic Magazine, "Did Jeffrey Epstein 'Belong to Intelligence'?," November 11, 2025
The New Republic, "Steve Bannon Called Jeffrey Epstein 'God,' New Text Messages Reveal," February 15, 2026
MS NOW, "Epstein discusses jail time in newly released video with Steve Bannon," February 2, 2026
MS NOW, "Emails reveal Trump ally Steve Bannon's plot to rehab Epstein's image," November 20, 2025
Mediaite, "Steve Bannon Told Jeffrey Epstein Trump Should Be Removed Via 25th Amendment During First Term," February 16, 2026
MS NOW, "Steve Bannon had a plan to rehabilitate Jeffrey Epstein's image, files reveal," February 10, 2026
The Hollywood Reporter, "Bannon, Epstein Were Plotting a Documentary, Plans to Bring on Wolff," November 22, 2025
The Daily Beast (Vicky Ward), "Jeffrey Epstein's Sick Story Played Out for Years in Plain Sight," July 9, 2019
Daily Caller, "Architect Of Sweetheart Plea Deal Alex Acosta Denies Alleged Epstein Intelligence Ties," October 17, 2025
Newsweek, "'No Regrets is a Very Hard Question': Alex Acosta Defends Epstein Plea Deal," July 10, 2019
Drop Site News, "Israeli Spy Stayed for Weeks at a Time at Jeffrey Epstein's Mansion," November 11, 2025
Al Jazeera, "What were Jeffrey Epstein's links to Israel?," February 9, 2026
Middle East Online, "Was Epstein a Mossad agent?"
TRT World, "Disgraced paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, the spy theory and Israel angle," January 12, 2024
CBS News, "Inside Jeffrey Epstein's inner circle, emails and texts show Trump was a regular topic," November 14, 2025
Jacobin, "Steve Bannon Was Much Closer to Epstein Than You Realize," December 2025
The Hollywood Reporter, "Steve Bannon's Secret Jeffrey Epstein videos: Tale of the tapes," July 22, 2025
Gateway Pundit, "BANNON BREAKS SILENCE: Says Epstein Texts Were for Documentary," February 17, 2026
