Fact check: What did Trump say about Epstein after the Mar-a-Lago incident?

1. The Statue Sparked a Swift, Defiant Response — Trump Calls It “Wasted Money”

A statue installed near the White House showing Donald Trump holding hands with Jeffrey Epstein prompted an immediate reaction from Trump and the White House, with spokespeople calling the piece a symbolic waste of liberal funds. Media coverage summarized the response as twofold: deride the installation as a political stunt and assert a past break with Epstein, stressing that Trump removed Epstein from Mar-a-Lago for objectionable behavior. The reported reaction was disseminated widely in late September 2025, framing the White House narrative that the statue misrepresents Trump’s relationship with Epstein ^[1].

2. The Core Claim: “I Kicked Epstein Out” — Repetition and Political Use

The central, repeated claim in the White House statements was that Trump “kicked Epstein out” of his club, described publicly as done because Epstein was a “creep.” This phrasing reappeared across multiple outlets covering the statue controversy and was used to counter suggestions of ongoing association between Trump and Epstein. Reporters noted the political utility of the line: it both distances Trump from Epstein and offers a crisp, memorable rebuttal when critics cite historical ties between the two men ^{[2] [1]}.

3. Media Accounts Capture Conflicting Narratives — Praise, Denial, and Verification Gaps

Contemporaneous accounts show a split between firsthand anecdotes suggesting social contact with Trump and official denials from the White House. One former model described an early meeting arranged by Epstein where she found Trump “gracious,” a portrayal that contrasts sharply with the White House label of such ties as severed and inappropriate ^[3]. These conflicting narratives underline a verification gap: few new documentary records or definitive timelines were produced in the immediate coverage to settle whether the Mar-a-Lago ejection was singular, when it occurred, and what degree of ongoing acquaintance existed.

4. Broader Legal and Political Context — Epstein Files and Congressional Pressure

The statue episode arrived amid renewed political scrutiny over the Epstein saga, including calls by some Republicans for the release of investigative files and a pending Supreme Court question tied to Ghislaine Maxwell’s legal appeals. Republican lawmakers publicly accused Trump of withholding potentially significant documents, while others emphasized prosecutorial and investigative responsibilities. This situates Trump’s remark within a wider dispute over transparency and accountability rather than as an isolated public relations riposte ^{[4] [5]}.

5. Sources and Their Agendas — Who’s Reporting and Why It Matters

Coverage came from outlets ranging from tabloid and local-focused outlets to national political reporting, each with different editorial priorities: some framed the statue as satire and a provocation, others as evidence requiring serious inquiry into past elite networks. The White House response functioned as a strategic message to deflect liability and negative optics. Observers should note that the same facts are being used for divergent political ends — denial and distancing by Trump allies versus demands for fuller disclosure by critics ^{[1] [2]}.

6. What Remains Unresolved — Evidence, Timing, and the Extent of Ties

Despite the repeated White House claim that Trump ejected Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, reporting in September 2025 did not produce a comprehensive public record clarifying the exact timing, reasons documented contemporaneously, or any subsequent contacts. Anecdotal recollections and legal filings connected to the broader Epstein investigations continue to fuel debate. The lack of a clear documentary trail in the immediate aftermath of the statue’s unveiling leaves room for divergent interpretations and further requests for release of investigative files ^{[3] [4]}.

7. Bottom Line: A Political Rebuttal, Not a Definitive Accounting

The statements attributed to Trump and the White House after the Mar-a-Lago-related attention operate primarily as a political rebuttal to visual protest and renewed scrutiny. Multiple outlets reported the same core lines — mocking the statue as liberal spending and asserting that Trump removed Epstein from his club — but did not converge on additional corroborating evidence in those reports. The episode underscores an ongoing information gap that makes the remark a contested piece of narrative rather than a settled factual resolution ^{[1] [2]}.