President Trump Issues Categorical Denial of Epstein Island Visits While Defending Commerce Secretary Lutnick
President Trump has firmly denied ever visiting Jeffrey Epstein’s private island, Little St. James, while simultaneously addressing reports concerning Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s past interactions with the disgraced financier. When pressed on whether he was aware of Lutnick’s presence on the island, Trump defended his cabinet member by characterizing the visit as a family excursion.
“No… from what I understand, he was there with his wife and kids. Some people may have gone,” Trump stated, distinguishing Lutnick’s actions from the illicit activities associated with the location. He immediately pivoted to a defense of his own history, asserting, “I didn’t. I was NEVER there. And someday someone will make that clear.”
This statement highlights a critical distinction the President has sought to maintain amid years of scrutiny. While federal flight logs have previously confirmed that Trump flew on Epstein’s private aircraft on multiple occasions—specifically flights connecting Palm Beach, Florida, and the New York area in the 1990s—Trump has consistently rejected allegations that he ever set foot on Epstein’s Caribbean island. His assertion that “someone will make that clear” implies an expectation of future evidence that will vindicate his version of events regarding the specific geography of his interactions with Epstein.
The defense of Lutnick, the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald and a key figure in the current administration, relies on framing the association as incidental or purely social. Lutnick is among a wide array of business leaders and politicians who have faced questions regarding their proximity to Epstein before the financier’s conviction. However, critics continue to challenge the President’s attempts to distance himself, frequently citing a 2002 interview in which Trump described Epstein as a “terrific guy” and noted their shared interest in social life. Despite the President’s unequivocal denial regarding the island, the continued unsealing of court documents and the scrutiny of Epstein’s associates ensure that the nature of these relationships remains a volatile subject in political discourse.
