No journalist named on this page has been accused of any offence, and none is alleged to have known about the trafficking. Cultivating a source is not a crime and is often good journalism. What the released files show is a relationship that ran in the opposite direction — reporters supplying strategy to their subject — and this page documents that, with the correspondence quoted and the denials noted.
Why the press layer belongs beside the money and the introductions.
This archive documents how the operation survived twenty years in plain sight. Money bought access, introductions bought legitimacy — and the press decided whether any of it became a story.
What is genuinely new in the released files. Not that Epstein courted journalists; that was known. It is that several of them were advising him — on framing, on timing, on which enemy to pick, and on how to convert a scandal into leverage.
Three distinct things are documented here, and this page keeps them apart:
One — the correspondence. Primary-source emails between Epstein and named journalists, released by the DOJ and the House Oversight Committee. This is the strongest material and it needs no inference.
Two — the paid retainer. Three invoices showing Hiltzik Strategies billing Epstein $25,000 a month in 2017. Covered in full in the companion report.
Three — the placement allegations. Four outlets named in a civil complaint, on the strength of publicists’ text messages. This is the weakest tier and is labelled as such in Section 03.
The distinction matters because the three are constantly merged, and merging them produces a claim the documents do not support: that the press was bought. What the documents support is narrower and stranger — that some of it volunteered.
Journalists are taught that private cultivation of a source is one thing, and advising that source how to manage his own scandal is another.
A media scholar who reviewed the Wolff correspondence described it as “kibbitzing with a child molester for no apparent purpose.”
Wolff’s answer: his knowledge of the media gives him “the kind of cachet that gives me a place at the table, which has gotten me the Epstein story, if anybody wanted to pay attention.”
Section 01
Michael Wolff
A two-time National Magazine Award winner, columnist for New York Magazine and Vanity Fair, author of Fire and Fury and a biography of Rupert Murdoch. The correspondence below was released by the House Oversight Committee and the DOJ.
Wolff tells Epstein: “I hear CNN planning to ask Trump tonight about his relationship with you.” Epstein replies: “If we were to craft an answer for him, what do you think it should be?” Wolff’s response is the passage that defines the record: “I think you should let him hang himself. If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt.”
“NYT called me about you and Trump. Also, Hillary campaign digging deeply. Again, you should consider preempting.” A journalist relaying press and campaign interest to its subject, and advising him to get ahead of it.
On James Patterson’s book Filthy Rich: “You do need an immediate counter narrative to the book. I believe Trump offers an ideal opportunity. It’s a chance to make the story about something other than you, while, at the same time, letting you frame your own story.” He adds that “becoming anti-Trump gives you a certain political cover which you decidedly don’t have now.”
At one point Wolff asks Epstein what he should ask Trump in a forthcoming interview. The source is now directing the questions.
The day the Los Angeles Times published six women’s allegations against Brett Ratner, Epstein emails Wolff: “brett ratner next.” Ratner denied the allegations and was never charged.
Wolff, a two-time National Magazine Award winner, conceded some messages were embarrassing, but said his media knowledge gives him “the kind of cachet that gives me a place at the table, which has gotten me the Epstein story.” He has not been accused of any offence.
Section 02
Landon Thomas Jr. and the #MeToo File
Landon Thomas Jr. covered Wall Street for the New York Times. His exchanges with Epstein are chatty and familiar, and one of them records something a reporter would not normally tell a subject.
Thomas wrote that another journalist — working on a book about Epstein — had been calling him: “He seems very interested in your relationship with the news media.” A reporter alerting a subject to a rival’s line of enquiry, on the precise subject of that subject’s press management.
The #MeToo correspondence is the other significant thread. The files show Epstein following the movement in real time as it removed other powerful men, and doing so in company.
1 November 2017. The day the Los Angeles Times published six women’s allegations against Brett Ratner, Epstein emails Wolff: “brett ratner next.”
21 November 2017. On Charlie Rose, he writes to Thomas: “the charley thing is wild… I m not sure why he was sanctimonious and agressive when detailing the harvey weinstein allegations. now watching the overlay , its amazing.”
2018 — the Krauss strategy. As physicist Lawrence Krauss faced a Title IX investigation at Arizona State after BuzzFeed News reported misconduct allegations he denied, Epstein wrote: “I would look for some reporter to do a more nuanced post-morten on the case — with Trump overtones, legal joustings, #metoo-isms, and profit-motives.”
Read that last one closely. It is a media plan for someone else’s misconduct allegation: find a reporter, supply a frame, change the subject. Krauss took $2.25m of Epstein money at ASU.
Thomas has not been accused of any offence. He left the New York Times in 2019 after the paper said he had violated its policy in connection with Epstein.
Section 03
The Outlets Named in the Filings
These four outlets are named in Blake Lively’s complaint against Justin Baldoni and in the related Jonesworks suit. In each case the evidence is a publicist’s text message claiming a relationship. That is evidence about the publicist. It is not evidence that any outlet knowingly published planted material, and no court has found that it did. All allegations are contested; the defendants’ counsel says the firm acted as any crisis management firm would.
Texts attributed to Melissa Nathan reference speaking off the record to a Daily Mail journalist, and she is described as having a friend who is an editor there. Separately, Sara Nathan was MailOnline’s US showbusiness editor-at-large until March 2015.
Evidence: text messages in a civil complaint. No finding that the Mail knowingly published planted material.
The outlet most heavily implicated, and the only one both parties accuse of carrying planted material. Lively’s complaint describes coordination to place pro-Baldoni and anti-Lively coverage through the Post and Page Six. Baldoni’s countersuit alleges the reverse — that Lively’s publicist planted “an unfavorable, false and defamatory story about Baldoni’s Baháʼí faith to Page Six,” and a false claim of “multiple” HR complaints. Sara Nathan has been the Post’s editor-at-large since 2018.
Evidence: two opposing complaints, each alleging the other side planted stories here. The sibling relationship to Melissa Nathan is widely reported but not confirmed here in a primary document.
Jennifer Abel is described as citing a friend of twelve years at People who would run favourable material. Sara Nathan was previously executive editor at People.
Evidence: a single text message. Nothing establishes the contact acted on it.
Nathan is described as using sources at Variety to publish a claim that Ryan Reynolds was “anti-feminist” and had rewritten scenes.
Evidence: a single text message, contested by the defendants.
On the volume of coverage. The Post and Page Six covered the dispute at unusual length and frequency throughout the litigation, and the tenor of that coverage has been widely criticised as one-sided against Lively — a pattern her own complaint attributes to placement rather than news judgement. This site has not counted the articles, and does not assert a figure. A claim about volume needs a tally to mean anything, and no published tally has been located.
What can be said without one. A publicist’s texts describing an intent to shape coverage, and an outlet that then covered the subject heavily and unfavourably, are two facts that sit beside each other. Neither establishes that any editor knew the origin of what they published — and the Baháʼí story allegation shows placement claims running in both directions at the same outlet.
What is worth noticing is the aggregate, not any single entry. One publicist is described as having working relationships across four outlets simultaneously, and the career of one senior editor — MailOnline, then People, then the New York Post — spans three of them. That is a coincidence of career path unless something more is produced, and this site is not producing it.
The full lineage — Epstein’s publicist, and where that practice went next →
Section 04
Open Questions
Section 05
Sources
Too Close
Nov 2025. The Wolff and Thomas correspondence, and the scholar’s assessment of what it shows.
fortune.com →How Epstein Tracked #MeToo
Feb 2026. The “pariahs club,” the Ratner and Rose messages, and the Krauss media strategy in full.
19thnews.org →The Counter-Narrative Emails
The Patterson book advice, the “political cover” line, and the NYT and Hillary campaign warning.
foxnews.com →“Let Him Hang Himself”
The December 2015 exchange in full, released by the House Oversight Committee.
aol.com →How Chummy Is Too Chummy?
The ethics analysis — why private cultivation and strategic advice are different things.
firstamendment.mtsu.edu →The Reputation Machine
The $25,000-a-month invoices, and where Epstein’s publicists went next.
Read the report →Platform Manipulation
Reddit, TikTok, the fake accounts, and the Manila search-suggestion operation.
Read the report →“We Can Bury Anyone”
What crisis PR firms actually do — astroturfing, untraceability, and the money route.
Read the report →The Frame
The four-part formula Epstein wrote down — and why not one word of it addresses whether anything happened.
Read the report →Michael Wolff
The advice, the 100 hours, and what journalism ethicists said about it.
Read the profile →Bill Clinton
The 2002 Africa trip, the manifest, and the endorsement Epstein got out of it.
Read the profile →Lawrence Krauss
The $250,000, the 2011 defence of Epstein, and what he did when accused himself.
Read the profile →Matthew Hiltzik
The full profile — Weinstein’s spokesman, Epstein’s publicist, and the Trump White House pipeline.
Read the profile →