Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Why did trump start attacking the Clintons' image in 2016, was it because he is trying to lay the groundwork to eventually pin Epstein on Clinton?
Executive summary
Donald Trump began publicly attacking Bill and Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign as part of a broader strategy of deflection and negative campaigning; contemporary reporting ties that pattern to moments when Trump faced damaging revelations about himself and to efforts to shift media attention [1]. Recent 2025 reporting shows Trump again ordered probes into Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Clinton after congressional releases of Epstein-related emails, a move many outlets and critics call a diversionary tactic while Trump faces scrutiny over his own Epstein connections [2] [3] [1].
1. 2016: Negative campaigning and a habit of “pulling rivals into the mud”
Journalists and analysts describe Trump’s 2016 attacks on the Clintons as part of an aggressive campaign playbook — using personal scandals about opponents to change the news cycle and blunt attacks on himself; the New York Times explicitly links this pattern to his reaction when the “Access Hollywood” tape threatened his campaign, noting he “pulls his adversaries, often one of the Clintons, into the scene with him — then he exits stage right” [1].
2. Deflection as a recurring political tactic, not unique to Epstein stories
Contemporary coverage frames Trump’s focus on Clinton-Epstein ties as a reprise of a long-standing tactic: when the spotlight burns, he points fingers at rivals to change the subject. The New York Times frames the 2025 Justice Department order as a similar deflection after Epstein-related revelations implicated questions about Trump himself [1]. Multiple outlets reported Trump asked the Justice Department to probe Clinton and other Democrats after House documents on Epstein were released [3] [4].
3. The 2025 episode: ordering probes after new Epstein documents
In November 2025 Trump publicly said he would ask Attorney General Pam Bondi and the DOJ to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Bill Clinton, Larry Summers and others following House Oversight releases; both Reuters and AP reported Bondi acceded and a top federal prosecutor was named to lead the inquiry, which Trump framed as exposing “the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats” [2] [4]. CNN and BBC likewise covered Trump’s call for DOJ action as tied to the newly released emails [3] [5].
4. Evidence and gaps: what sources show — and what they do not
The released documents and reporting show Epstein socialized with many high- profile figures and that the new email tranches include mentions of both Trump and Clinton [6] [7]. But reporting also notes contradictions in the records — Epstein himself once wrote Clinton “was NEVER EVER there” regarding the private island [8]. Available sources do not claim — and do not present direct evidence that Trump started attacking the Clintons in 2016 specifically to “lay groundwork” to later pin Epstein on Clinton; contemporary accounts instead place such attacks in the broader context of campaign strategy and moment-to-moment deflection [1].
5. Competing interpretations in the press
Mainstream outlets such as The New York Times and Reuters interpret Trump’s 2025 push against Clinton over Epstein as a political diversion aimed at shifting scrutiny away from his own links to Epstein, a reading echoed by Democrats and some columnists [1] [5]. Trump and his supporters frame the move as a legitimate demand for transparency about Epstein’s network and assert Democrats had significant ties to Epstein deserving investigation [3] [4]. Both narratives are present in the coverage; the sources document the demand for probes and the partisan claims around motive [3] [4].
6. Why motive is hard to prove from public reporting
Proving an actor’s exact motive — e.g., that Trump in 2016 had the specific long-term intent to “lay the groundwork” to later blame Clinton for Epstein — requires evidence beyond the pattern of attacks and later actions. The documents and reporting show patterns consistent with deflection and partisan advantage but do not provide a smoking-gun statement of that exact intent; therefore, “available sources do not mention” direct evidence that that was his conscious plan in 2016 [1] [3].
7. What to watch next for clearer answers
Follow DOJ inquiry documents, committee depositions, or internal campaign materials that might surface; Reuters and AP note the Justice Department’s involvement and that a named prosecutor will head the review — those records, if released, could supply firmer evidence about intent and chronology [2] [4]. Meanwhile, reporting on newly released Epstein emails continues to produce contradictory claims (e.g., Epstein denying Clinton ever visited the island), underscoring the limits of current public records [8] [6].
Bottom line: reporting supports the view that Trump has long used attacks on the Clintons as a reactive and strategic political tool and that his 2025 push to probe Clinton’s ties to Epstein fits that pattern; however, available sources do not provide direct evidence that his 2016 attacks were explicitly meant to set up a future effort to pin Epstein on Clinton [1] [3].