Revisiting Epstein's email - what if this was really about "Katie Johnson"?

[FakeNoose]

The name "Katie Johnson" is fictitious, we all know that. The real woman we're calling Katie Johnson has disappeared from sight ever since Chump ran for the Presidency in 2016. She tried to bring a lawsuit against him as a grown woman, she would have been 36 or 37 at the time, saying that she had been raped by Chump when she was 13 years old.

"Katie Johnson" suddenly disappeared from sight and nobody has seen or heard from her since then. But Jeffrey Epstein KNEW her, and so did Ghislaine Maxwell. Katie Johnson had either joined Epstein's group, or she considered doing so. The alleged rape would have taken place in 1994 (or 95) at a party at Epstein's house in Manhattan. Chump was a regular attendee and he could have easily spotted Katie Johnson among the other girls and young women at the party.

So here's the thing: This email is written by Epstein to Maxwell in 2011, maybe 17 years later. Since we don't know "Katie Johnson's" real name he could be referring to "Katie" and not to Virginia Giuffre. Am I right? It's at least a possibility.

Virginia Giuffre says she hardly knew Chump except that she met him at Mar-A-Lago. Virginia worked at MAL for about 2 weeks and then she was hired away to work for Epstein at the Palm Beach mansion. She had no way to afford a plane ticket to New York and I'm sure her parents wouldn't have allowed it anyway. I find it hard to believe that the redacted name on this email is actually Virginia Roberts Giuffre.

But what if it's "Katie Johnson" - whom Jeffrey Epstein was well aware was raped and deflowered by Chump? Epstein was quite angry about it, and it might have even destroyed their friendship. What if Epstein had photos or videos of the event? It would have been perfect blackmail material, or even kompromat that could be handed over to Putin.

Hmmmm....

[viva la]

1. Good point

Last edited Mon Nov 17, 2025, 01:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Leavitt immediately said that was Virginia, who coincidentally is no longer here to disagree.

In Katie Johnson's testimony, corroborated by another of the girls ("Tiffany), there were several details that rang true, like he said she looked like his daughter, as he did with Stormy Daniels.

Any one have a link to the transcript?

[Trueblue Texan]

3. Here it is:

https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Johnson_TrumpEpstein_Calif_Lawsuit.pdf

[FakeNoose]

4. Thanks TrueBlue ... I read this years ago and was horrified, but I forgot some of the details

Upon re-reading this today, I now realize that the witness "Tiffany Doe" was an actual employee of Jeffrey Epstein. I was thinking maybe it was Tiffany Trump, but of course that was incorrect. It's a different Tiffany.

When this complaint was filed in California, the court did have an address for "Katie Johnson" but she can no longer be located at that address. I believe there has been a complete name change as well as relocation for "Katie Johnson's" entire family.

[viva la]

5. Interesting sidepoint--

These were sworn, weren't they?
Did you see that the witness Tiffany said Epstein made her tell him everything she overheard the "clients" saying, because "knowledge is king' in finance-- presumably he could use that for blackmail material also.

[Bok_Tukalo]

2. That would explain why they quickly outed the redacted victim

I know of no other redacted victim they have revealed.

Virginia Giuffre is on record for saying Trump was not one of her rapists. She also cannot refute it. She is the perfect person to claim is under any redaction whether it is her or not.

[mzmolly]

6. I've wondered the same. It would be good to get "Katie" under oath,

before congress.

Perhaps Lisa Bloom can make arrangements in the future, if the fear for her life is quelled, somehow.

[FakeNoose]

7. I think the real "Katie Johnson" would have to come forward on her own

Whatever name she is using now, the court wouldn't know unless she identified herself and showed some kind of proof. Hopefully she still looks enough like that video, but even that wouldn't prove it's really her.