Who was present when Trump was measuring children’s vaginas?

1. What the released files actually say about who was present

The allegation about genital "measurements" comes from a complaint summary or email submitted to the FBI's National Threat Operations Center summarizing tips related to Jeffrey Epstein; the item quoted in several outlets describes children being brought to parties, an "auction" claim, and the assertion that "he measured the children's vulva and vaginas by entering a finger and rated the children on tightness" — but the document as published is an unverified summary of a tip from an unnamed caller or correspondent and does not supply a reliable roster of attendees verified by investigators ^{[1] [6] [2]}.

2. Who the documents name (and why those names are not proof)

Some media renderings of the files repeat passages that list purported attendees — with names such as Elon Musk and Trump’s eldest children, Don Jr., Eric and Ivanka — appearing in the same unverified threads or summaries; outlets explicitly describe those references as coming from these anonymous, third‑party tips inside the larger file release rather than from corroborated evidence ^{[4] [7]}. Reporting also notes the DOJ cautioned that the public production included submissions that could be "fake or falsely submitted" and therefore cannot be treated as validated accusations ^{[1] [2]}.

3. Official responses and the limits of the record

The White House and Trump’s team swiftly called the allegations false and "weaponized," and DOJ officials earlier said Epstein’s own communications in the releases did not show Epstein asserting criminal conduct by Trump; separately, DOJ removed and re‑examined certain items from the public cache, underscoring the partial and messy nature of the dump ^{[8] [1] [9]}. Those statements do not prove the allegations false — they only highlight that the publicly posted pages include raw, unvetted tips for which no corroborating investigative record has been published in the DOJ release cited by media ^[2].

4. How journalists and fact‑checkers treat these pages

News outlets and fact‑checkers covering the files have repeatedly emphasized that many of the most lurid snippets originated in anonymous tips with no contact information and that screenshots of removed documents circulated quickly on social media, sometimes without context; reputable debunking work on related images has also warned about fabricated content circulating alongside the files ^{[5] [10] [11]}. That pattern explains why multiple publications reproduce the same claim while also noting its unverified status.

5. Bottom line — who was present when the alleged measuring occurred?

The publicly released Epstein‑related documents quoted by the press include anonymous claims that name alleged attendees in the same unverified tips, but the files do not provide corroborated witness lists or evidence establishing who, if anyone, was present during the alleged act — therefore, based on the available released material and the DOJ’s own caveat, there is no verified record naming credible, proven witnesses to the alleged measuring ^{[1] [3] [5]}.

6. What to watch next and what would change the picture

Confirmatory evidence would require either authenticated victim testimony, investigatory records from law enforcement showing corroboration, or documents with verifiable provenance that link named attendees to the specific alleged incidents; absent that, the responsible journalistic stance reflected in the sources is to report the allegation and its provenance while also making plain its unverified, anonymous nature ^{[2] [1] [4]}.