Trump told friends he was ‘banging’ his assistant Madeleine Westerhout, according to Epstein email.

Checked on December 1, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Michael Wolff’s 2019 draft email to Jeffrey Epstein included a passage saying President Trump told friends he was “banging” his aide Madeleine Westerhout; that passage was reported by multiple outlets and Wolff later removed the aide’s name from the published book [1] [2]. Westerhout has strongly and repeatedly denied the allegation through her lawyer, calling the claims “absurd” and “defamatory,” and reporting notes that Wolff has been accused of peddling falsehoods [3] [2] [4].

1. What the leaked email actually says

A draft of Michael Wolff’s 2019 book—shared via email with Jeffrey Epstein—contained a passage describing a scene at the White House and asserting Trump told friends he was “banging” his personal secretary, identified in the draft as Madeleine Westerhout; Wolff’s later published text removed the aide’s name [1] [2]. Multiple outlets reprinted Wolff’s quoted lines about the empty White House, the aide finding Trump “in his underwear,” and Trump telling friends he was staying in Washington because he was “banging” her [2] [5].

2. The principal denials and the accused’s response

Madeleine Westerhout’s lawyer immediately called the account “absurd and defamatory” and Westerhout herself has forcefully denied having an affair with Trump, describing the allegations as “unhinged from reality” [3] [5]. Reporting shows Westerhout has a public record of defending her reputation and later wrote about her White House tenure without mentioning such a relationship [4] [6].

3. Source credibility and the Wolff provenance

The claim’s provenance is a draft from Michael Wolff sent to Jeffrey Epstein—an association that has increased public scrutiny. Several stories note Wolff’s reputation for publishing sensational Trump anecdotes and that portions of his drafts have been edited before final publication; in this case, the aide’s name was removed from the 2019 book Siege [2] [1]. Some outlets explicitly describe Wolff as a “discredited writer” or warn he has “peddled falsehoods,” language echoed in Westerhout’s lawyer’s statement [2] [4].

4. Reporting convergence and differences

Multiple tabloid and mainstream outlets reported the email’s content and Westerhout’s denial nearly verbatim, so there is clear convergence that Wolff wrote the line and that Westerhout denied it [2] [1] [5]. The sources differ in tone and emphasis: some foreground the salacious quote and the Epstein connection [7], while others emphasize the denial and Wolff’s contested reliability [3] [4].

5. What the available reporting does not establish

Available sources do not provide independent corroboration—no contemporaneous eyewitness account, documents, or contemporaneous White House records that verify the alleged affair are cited in these stories, and reporting does not claim corroboration beyond Wolff’s draft [1] [2]. Sources do not mention any legal finding or investigation that validated the claim; instead, coverage centers on Wolff’s draft and Westerhout’s denial [3] [5].

6. Why this resurfaced and the political context

The allegation resurfaced because the Wolff–Epstein email cache became public and media outlets combed the drafts for sensational material; that context—Wolff’s history of contested claims and the Epstein connection—shapes how outlets frame the story and how Westerhout and her lawyer respond [1] [2]. Some coverage explicitly notes that Wolff later edited out the aide’s identity before publication, suggesting editorial caution even from Wolff himself [2].

7. How to read the competing claims

The factual claim rests solely on Wolff’s draft wording as reported in multiple outlets; Westerhout’s categorical denial and characterizations of the piece as defamatory are equally well-documented in the same reporting [2] [3]. Readers must weigh Wolff’s contested track record and the absence of independent corroboration against the direct textual quote in the leaked draft and the consistency of Westerhout’s public denials [1] [4].

8. Bottom line

Reporting shows Michael Wolff wrote that Trump boasted he was “banging” Madeleine Westerhout in a 2019 draft emailed to Jeffrey Epstein, and that Westerhout’s camp denies the allegation as “absurd” and defamatory; independent verification is not provided in current reporting [1] [3]. Decide whether to treat this as an allegation originating from a single contested source (Wolff’s draft) or as a proven fact—the sources themselves present both the accusation and an emphatic denial [2] [4].

Want to dive deeper?
Who is Madeleine Westerhout and what was her role in the Trump White House?
What does the Epstein email allegedly saying Trump boasted about an affair mean for current legal or political investigations?
How have Trump and Westerhout responded publicly or legally to the Epstein email allegation?
What is the provenance and credibility of the Epstein emails released or reported on in 2025?
Have similar claims about Trump and aides emerged previously and how were they handled by media and investigators?