The July heat wrapped Mar-a-Lago in a sultry haze, palm trees sagging under the weight of a Florida evening. Inside a briefing room, President Donald Trump faced screens flashing with X posts and cable news tickers, all dominated by the relentless specter of Jeffrey Epstein. Newly unsealed documents — birthday letters, ’90s photos, and whispers of a “client list” — set the MAGA base ablaze. Loyalists cried deep-state sabotage, while others, spurred by Charlie Kirk’s fiery calls for transparency, demanded answers, some casting wary glances at Trump himself. The uproar hasn’t just been about Epstein. It has collided with raw anger over Trump’s other bold moves, such as bombing Iran’s nuclear sites and resuming arms transfers to Ukraine.
Recommended Stories
- Colonial ghosts and Arctic dreams: Trump's interest and Greenland's hard choices
- The anti-ICE rioters don't speak for Hispanic Americans
- Congress passes spending cuts — but the small savings may make for bigger budgeting troubles
The MAGA coalition, once an unbreakable force, is showing cracks. Can Trump hold it together? Or is this the prelude to a fracture that could reshape the movement’s future?
Over the past few months, I’ve been covering the saga of Trump’s second term, chronicling how his sportsman swagger has helped him defy impossible odds. He’s an indefatigable fighter, spinning scandals into rallies with a maestro’s touch. But this moment feels heavier. The persistence of Epstein’s ghost, tangled with Trump’s foreign policy pivots, has tested the limits of his charisma. MAGA’s loyalty to him has been fierce, but this moment is proving that it may not be invincible. The question isn’t just whether Trump can navigate this storm — it’s whether the coalition he’s forged can survive beyond his presidency.
Epstein’s ghost and Kirk’s crusade
The Epstein saga is the story of a ghost that refuses to go away. His 2019 death in a Manhattan cell has sparked endless theories: It was ruled a suicide, but charges of murder and elite cover-up are never far behind. In 2025, with Trump’s second term in full swing, new documents have landed like thunderbolts. The Wall Street Journal claims it has unearthed old Trump-Epstein ties, casual notes and shared “secrets” from Palm Beach’s glitzy circuit, causing X to erupt in a frenzy. Trump, ever nimble, fired back: “Epstein was a creep. Banned him from Mar-a-Lago. No ‘list’ exists — fake news!” His Justice Department, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, released a memo debunking the mythical client list. But the fire was already raging.
Charlie Kirk, the Turning Point USA founder and MAGA megaphone, poured fuel on it. On his podcast and in other media appearances, he has been demanding the release of all Epstein grand jury testimony, framing it as a test of “America First” principles. “Trump’s got to come clean on Epstein. We need every document out there, no excuses,” he said, rallying MAGA supporters who are hungry for truth. Insiders have whispered that Kirk’s pressure, amplified by online skeptics, pushed Trump to order the DOJ’s document dump, a move that briefly quieted critics but has sparked even more questions. Laura Loomer has doubled down, demanding that “we deserve the full files!” Steve Bannon, from his War Room, has called it a “mask-off moment.” Tucker Carlson has mused about possible cover-ups on his show. The base appears to have split, with the sides framing themselves as loyalists versus truth-seekers, with Kirk’s and Carlson’s crusades driving the wedge.
Trump’s past with Epstein undoubtedly muddied the waters. He’d partied with the financier decades ago, but he’d also cooperated with early investigations, unlike certain Democrats who were known to be regular passengers on the Lolita Express. His base knew this, yet doubts persisted. Though they may trust Trump, they’ve also been wondering why Trump hasn’t released all of the Epstein files — unless he’s had something to hide? Because of these concerns, podcaster Brian Allen has warned of a “full-blown MAGA mutiny” if transparency falters.
Meanwhile, the legacy media have been feasting on the discord. The Financial Times reported a “split in Trump’s MAGA base.” Politico called it a “rebellion metastasizing.” The New York Times podcast claimed Trump has lost control of the narrative. They aren’t wrong to sense tension, but they’re overplaying its depth. Trump’s counter, doubling down on transparency while dismissing conspiracies, has shown he’s still in the fight. Kirk’s role, though, has added complexity: If even loyalists aren’t satisfied with Trump’s handling of the Epstein files controversy, how strong is Trump’s grip on his own movement?
Foreign policy firestorms
Epstein’s ghost merged with two seismic foreign policy moves. First, Iran. In June, Trump ordered B-2 bombers to level nuclear sites at Fordow and Natanz. “Obliterated,” he boasted on social media, casting it as a decisive blow to a rogue regime. Hawks like Mark Levin cheered: “Trump’s keeping America safe!” But the isolationist wing, the backbone of MAGA’s “America First” ethos, recoiled. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) called it a betrayal of anti-war promises: “Iran? Really? Thought we were done with this.” Bannon warned of a “quagmire.” A Trump voter quoted in Politico summed it up: “I’m with Trump, but bombing Iran feels like we’re back to 2003. Where’s the America First in that?”
The media amplified the divide. CNN noted a “MAGA split” over the strikes. Axios quipped that Trump was giving his base “whiplash.” But context mattered: Trump had warned Iran for months. His strikes were surgical. No ground troops were involved. He wasn’t George W. Bush or Joe Biden, blundering into endless wars. Still, the grumbling persisted, especially among purists who saw any foreign action as a betrayal of “America First” principles.
Then came Ukraine. Trump flipped the script, resuming arms shipments to Ukraine through NATO, funded by allies rather than U.S. taxpayers. He paired it with a threat — tariffs on Russia if President Vladimir Putin doesn’t negotiate peace in 50 days. It’s classic Trump: using leverage in lieu of simply giving handouts. But purists have cried foul. “Ukraine’s a mess we didn’t sign up for,” Greene complained. “Trump’s gotta keep America First, not fund foreign wars.” Within MAGA circles, criticism is growing more vocal every day. “We’re about to arm people we have literally no control over,” Bannon railed on his podcast. “This is old-fashioned, grinding war in the bloodlands of Europe — and we’re being dragged into it.” Yet polls show Trump voters warming to the aid, especially since it isn’t on America’s dime. As Michaelah Montgomery, a conservative activist, said at an Atlanta campaign event: “If it’s not costing American taxpayers, I can live with it. But Trump better keep his promise — no more endless wars.”
The media have loved the chaos, framing MAGA as a house divided. But Trump isn’t just reacting — he’s rewriting the story. He’s forcing Europe to foot Ukraine’s bill while pressuring Russia economically. It’s a high-stakes gamble, and he’s playing it with swagger. Still, the dissent, amplified by Kirk’s push for transparency, is revealing a coalition under strain.
Cracks or growing pains?
The divide is palpable. Kirk has pressed hard on his podcast: “Trump’s got to come clean on Epstein. We need every document out there, no excuses.” Online, the tension has stretched. Dinesh D’Souza, a staunch Trump ally, has admitted on X that “the Epstein questions aren’t going away. We need clarity, even if it’s messy.” Kirk’s influence looms large, his calls for truth rallying skeptics while testing Trump’s patience. The president, undaunted, told an Ohio crowd, “We’re draining the swamp, not adding to it.” The cheers had been loud, but not universal. Carlson, speaking at Turning Point USA’s Student Action Summit, reflected the unease: “The fact that the U.S. government, the one that I voted for, refused to take my question seriously and instead said, ‘Case closed. Shut up, conspiracy theorist,’ was too much for me.”
The cracks are real. Epstein’s saga, fueled by Kirk, is exposing ideological rifts. “America First” purists — anti-elite, anti-intervention — are clashing with pragmatists who trusted Trump’s instincts. Iran and Ukraine deepened the divide, alienating isolationists who’d powered Trump’s 2016 rise. The media have been piling on. ABC News asked why MAGA obsessed over Epstein. CNN called it a “loyalty test.” They’re half-right: Kirk’s crusade risks alienating centrists who want results, not conspiracies. Foreign policy frayed the coalition’s edges, with some voters feeling that Trump had drifted from the promises that drew them.
But Trump can’t be counted out. His charisma, his ability to spin setbacks into victories, has held MAGA together. He’s the sportsman in chief, dodging punches like a UFC champ. Trump seems to have done enough to mollify his base — for now. His supporters have “largely rallied,” the Washington Post conceded. Megyn Kelly nailed it: “MAGA fights Trump, then moves on.” Like a married couple that has been deeply in love for years, they may have fights from time to time, even serious ones, but they never stay mad at each other forever.
The future: Unity or fracture?
Trump’s sui generis personality has been a shield like no other. It’s helped him survive impeachments, indictments, convictions, and assassination attempts. His battle-tested base has thrived on his defiance. But 2025 isn’t 2016, or even 2024. Kirk’s transparency push, coupled with foreign policy fights, signals trouble. Epstein’s ghost could continue to haunt Trump’s term, especially if no “list” emerges. Isolationists, riled by Iran and Ukraine, might drift to new voices — Greene, Bannon, and even Carlson — if Trump leans too globalist and continues to be perceived as not coming clean on the full nature of his ties to Epstein.
Post-2028, without Trump, the coalition faces real peril. “America First” purists, those who backed Trump the Isolationist, energized by unanswered questions about Epstein, could split from pragmatists who backed Trump the Deal-maker. Possible heirs, such as Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, might struggle to bridge that gap. Trump’s unique personality and his underestimated political instincts have held MAGA together. But without him, it risks fracturing into tribes — populists versus hawks, truth-seekers versus deal-makers. And without a way to banish Epstein’s ghost from the White House, the movement could splinter for good. As Jack Posobiec warned at Turning Point USA’s summit: “I will not rest until we go full Jan. 6 committee on the Epstein files. Every single client involved should have an FBI agent at their door.”
Even House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), who typically marches in lockstep with Trump, echoed Kirk’s calls for full disclosure: “It’s a very delicate subject, but you should put everything out there, let the people decide it.” Johnson has so far held off lawmakers seeking to preempt the administration and force the release of Epstein-related documents, but pressure is set to resume after recess.
Epstein, Iran, and Ukraine — these aren’t just headlines. They’re stress tests for a movement at a crossroads. Trump’s coalition, built on distrust of elites, is facing a reckoning. Kirk’s crusade and foreign policy fights are exposing fault lines that could widen. For now, Trump’s charisma is holding the MAGA movement together, however tenuously.
For the moment, he’s still the maestro, conducting a movement that thrives on his defiance. But the future? It’s being forged in that fire, destined to unite behind Trump’s chosen successor or splinter when his shadow fades.
Daniel Ross Goodman is a Washington Examiner contributing writer and the author, most recently, of Soloveitchik’s Children: Irving Greenberg, David Hartman, Jonathan Sacks, and the Future of Jewish Theology in America.