"We completely failed to manage media communication regarding the Epstein files, that's what really happened. But do I think that the reason we fail is because we want to hide something? No."
Afrasianet - In a lengthy interview with popular American podcast host Joe Rogan, Vance accused parties that "manipulate American public opinion and try to change it in order to continue the war [with Iran] indefinitely.
Vance cited a Time magazine article that named people who received money from a former official in President Donald Trump's campaign "who was receiving money from certain elements within the Israeli government," and linked Vance to the receipt of the money to the harsh attacks they launched on him and press leaks against him "simply because I'm trying to reach a settlement that achieves the goals set by the president of the United States."
The TIME report did document a contract for an Israeli influence campaign led by Brad Parscale that specifically targets young people, social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and podcast hosts.
One striking expression in Vance's interview was that he was bothered by "Americans allowing this to influence their decisions," and as far as decisions are concerned, Vance is more likely referring not to the general American people but to some of his colleagues in the U.S. administration, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who visited the UAE and Kuwait The interview indicates a shift from spontaneous U.S. support for Israel to a relationship related to the question of who determines U.S. interests in the Middle East, Washington or the government of Israel, a shift that is accelerating deeper within the Democratic Party but more sensitive to Republicans as it strikes at the traditional alliance between the security establishment, evangelicals, neoconservatives, and the "MAGA" (America First) trend.
The importance of Vance's statements is that they challenge the legitimacy of a supposed Israeli intervention within the American political and media sphere, and his sentence that he said in the interview, "I represent the Americans first," expresses the direct connection of the Israel file to the founding slogan of the "America First" trend within the base of supporters of the Republican Party and Trump in particular.
It does not want to endanger U.S. forces and bases, or to be dragged into a permanent regional war or a war of regime change to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The interview also shows a shift in traditional Republican rhetoric that presents Israel as an extension of the West and an exceptional "moral" and security ally.
That rhetoric is being eroded within a growing wing of Republicans who are troubled by the question of what Israel offers for the U.S. interest, and what cost it imposes. In contrast to the perceived support for Israel among older Republicans and evangelicals, the gap has widened with the younger generation, with a Pew poll showing that 57% of Republicans under 50 hold a negative view of Israel.
The high prevalence of interviews between Rogan and his counterpart Tucker Carlson suggests that the center of influence has shifted from Congress and television to private platforms and podcasts, and Vance's interview shows a trend to invest in this younger generation, less connected to Republican institutions, and more skeptical of traditional media, think tanks, and intelligence services.
The Israeli-funded campaign indicates concern about this trend, and of the loss of political legitimacy that makes American support non-negotiable, which will also be reflected in Israel's behavior towards the burning files, which explains the acceleration of settlement procedures in the West Bank, and the attempt to achieve its goals quickly, as well as the pressure on Israel in the Lebanese and Syrian files.
What did Vance say about Epstein and the intelligence?
Vance's remarks reinforced the widespread belief about Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with the intelligence services, with the vice president asserting during the interview that Epstein had connections at the highest levels of Israeli and U.S. intelligence.
One of the interesting details that Vance touched on about this relationship is the nature of the political orientation of Epstein's network of contacts inside Israel, where he explained that Epstein's connections within the elements of the Israeli deep state were remarkably inclined towards personalities and entities affiliated with the "center-left," even though the right governs Israel.
Known for his penchant for conspiracy theories, Rogan asked about the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein files, noting that many Americans were concerned about the administration's reservation and "sheer volume of resistance to the release of those files," and that some believe the files were used to blackmail the Trump administration into going to war against Iran.
Vance responded by saying that he was a believer in conspiracy theories regarding the Epstein files, but made it clear that he considered the Epstein Files to be a conspiracy theory Trump's blackmail is a "crazy" idea in his view.
The vice president said the White House had "mishandled" the Epstein files, stressing that the U.S. government should have released them earlier.
Vance explained: "We completely failed to manage media communication regarding the Epstein files, and that's what really happened. But do I think that the reason we fail is because we want to hide something? No."
A mobilizing speech flirting with the pulse of the street
Commenting on these statements, Dr. Hosni Abedi, a professor of political science at the University of Geneva, said that the US vice president is talking as if he is on an early election campaign, referring to the ongoing debate between Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who shows reservations about negotiating with Iran.
According to Abedi, Vance has picked up the pulse of the American street, with the latest polls showing that 60 percent of Americans reject this war and believe that Israel has dragged the United States into it.
The political science professor points out that the US vice president is trying to defend Trump's final position, and his personal choices because he has invested heavily in these negotiations, as he believes that the United States cannot go far in this war.
Former U.S. diplomat Marilyn Hardinger said that what is happening in the United States today is a conflict between hardliners and those who prefer to negotiate with Iran, noting that Vance is "smartly trying to reaffirm that Washington can act independently of Israel if it decides to do so."
He explained that relations between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are strong, and that Vance was "surprised by the harsh statements made by the Israeli media against the American position and the memorandum of understanding, which Israel clearly opposed."
But what is important about Vance's words, in the opinion of the former U.S. diplomat, is that he clearly expressed the fact that the United States will do what serves its interests with Iran, without prejudice to Israel's interests.
Epstein Island that Revealed Western Modernity
To be sure, the Jeffrey Epstein case has gone from a criminal case involving the exploitation of minors to one of the most profound questions about the nature of political and financial influence in the United States, and how the networks of money and power can operate for years without actual accountability.
Epstein built a vast network of contacts that included former heads of state, princes, businessmen, academics, and influential officials. This network was not much of a suspicion before his ethics issues were exposed, but after his arrest it raised questions about how he could gain access to these sensitive circles.
It all started in 2008, when Epstein struck a controversial deal with the Florida prosecutor's office, under which he received a remarkably reduced sentence, despite the large number of victims. The deal was later described as one of the most criticized judicial deals in the history of the U.S. judiciary, and raised questions about whether his influence and connections played a role in mitigating his accountability.
With the reopening of the investigation in 2019 and his arrest again in New York, broader details about the nature of his network began to emerge, especially through victim testimonies, his plane's flight records, correspondence, and close ties to influential figures.
One of the central names in the case was Ghislaine Maxwell, his close partner, who was later convicted of charges related to recruiting minors for him. Her trial shed light on the network's organizing structure, and that what happened was not isolated individual behavior, but organized activity that lasted for years.
The case is no longer just a trial of a man who has died, but has become a mirror that reflects the overlap of money, power, and personal relationships at the highest levels of influence, and how these networks can operate in the shadows away from public scrutiny.
The appearance of the names of well-known figures in the aviation records or in the vicinity of his relationships was not legal evidence of their involvement, but it did reveal the extent of Epstein's closeness to decision-making circles and influential elites, which made the case go beyond its criminal dimension to a broader political and institutional dimension.
The most mysterious moment in the case was Epstein's death inside his cell in August 2019. The official narrative speaks of a suicide, but the circumstances of the death, the failure of the cameras, and the failure of surveillance procedures have opened the door to doubts in American and international public opinion, and increased the sense that the case hides details that have yet to be revealed.
Since then, Epstein's case has become a symbol in the public debate about the lack of transparency, the limits of accountability, and the possibility of prolonged impunity for powerful people. With every document published or testimony revealed, the same questions come back: Who knew, who kept silent, and why did it go on all these years?
Epstein's case is alive because it was not morally closed in the eyes of the public, even if it was judicially closed by his death, and it is a constant reminder that transparency and accountability are not guaranteed, even in the oldest democracies.
