I was probably the first person to ever talk about Epstein being a pedo intelligence operative.

I'm less interested in his assumptions about that stuff and more interested in his absolute lie that he was one of the first, if not the first, to cover Epstein's child exploitation. Yeah, that's disgusting. You can go through Alex's history and you'll find that this is an absolute fiction. Epstein had been indicted in 2007, at which point Trump's future Secretary of Labor, Alexander Acosta, and Alex's buddy, Alan Dershowitz, negotiated him a non-prosecution agreement. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison, which he served in a very minimum security facility and was allowed to leave for work release. Subsequently, after he got released, there were a number of lawsuits. There was a lot of media coverage of this, particularly in places like the Miami Herald. If you go through Alex's old episodes dating back to 2003, he doesn't talk about Jeffrey Epstein at all until pretty late in the game. The word Epstein comes up, but that's mostly when he's talking about the Epstein bar virus, not Jeffrey. The first time Alex ever actually covered Jeffrey Epstein was on January 2nd, 2015, which was after the news about Virginia Gaffer's lawsuit had broken, after that news.

As far as I can tell, Alex didn't cover Epstein at all until the fairly recent past. And you know what? That's okay. I don't really think that's a problem. I don't expect Alex to hit every story, and particularly back in that stretch of time between 2006 and 2009, he had fewer writers to cover everything that came up. It's okay for Alex to have not covered Epstein until Pizzagate came along, because it made the connection between Hillary and a giant cabal of pedophile human traffickers. That was an essential piece of the argument for why Trump needed to be president. It makes sense that he would start covering all this stuff then.

I don't think it's necessarily a failing for Alex to have not covered the story, but from the perspective of present-day Alex... It is a gigantic failure, primarily because if he didn't cover the story previously, it really does just appear to be him engaging in crass opportunism about a horrific story he's trying to weaponize for his own gain. From my perspective, that's exactly what this is, and I will believe that until any evidence is provided to the contrary.