The credibility of that supposed birthday note to Jeffrey Epstein just took a big hit.
And the chief clue is something the creator of a fraud might never consider.
According to the conservative news site Just the News, which commissioned the study, former FBI analyst Wayne Barnes pored over the lewd note, which contains snippets of a screen play inside a sketch of a nude woman.
“Barnes, a 29-year FBI veteran who mastered signature analysis while unmasking Soviet spies during the Cold War, currently works as a private investigator” and has concluded it’s “highly unlikely” President Donald Trump placed his signature on a lewd note congratulating the notorious financier on his 50th birthday.
(Trump’s supposed signature appears in the woman’s nether regions.)
Barnes conclusion?
For one thing, the screen play is completely out of character for Trump: “There is absolutely nothing in his correspondence history that smacks of anything even remotely similar to the dialogue page,” Barnes wrote.
More importantly, Just the News reported, “the signature appears similar to ones in letters that Trump signed for personal friends over the years when using only his first name. But the expert said he noticed a stunning clue when looking at the copy released by Congress and other personal letters: the coloration of the paper.”
“Whoever created the dialogue page seems to have put a good deal of thought into it, but something was overlooked,” Barnes wrote.
Is the supposed Trump birthday letter to Epstein a fraud?
In informal correspondence where he only signs his first name — such as congratulatory notes or birthday greetings — Trump appears to invariably use a colored paper, “off-white or yellow-to-beige,” Barnes wrote.
“That means that if someone cut out an appliqué of the ‘Donald’ signature and tried to affix (paste or tape) it to a piece of white paper, the difference in color around the ‘Donald’ would stand out,” he wrote.
“So, the colored paper had to be photocopied onto a white page, so the trimming around the signature could take place and not be observed because of a different tone of the paper. This would mean that the ultimate color of the target paper used, on which to place the applique, would also have to be white, which is the case with the dialogue page in the birthday book. …
“It is unlikely that the culprit thought this far outside of the box, but as a professional investigator, it is in my wheelhouse to consider such things.”
It’s important to note that Barnes doesn’t claim the signature is a forgery. Trump’s distinctive style of signing his name, even in informal correspondence, makes that unlikely, he wrote.
But is its placement on the Esptein note authentic?
The circumstances surrounding the Epstein note make it likely that it’s a “fraudulent signature” — taken from one place and affixed to another where Trump never intended it, according to Barnes.
Barnes’ analysis isn’t without flaws. He wrote that the Trump and Epstein relationship ruptured in the 1990s, when Trump himself has indicated it was in the 2000s. Talking to reporters in 2019, he said it had been “maybe 15 years” since the two had a falling out.
But as an experienced investigator, his conclusions should carry a great deal of weight. He’s been in the political arena before.
In 2021, Just the News founder John Solomon asked Barnes to analyze the signature on the receipt left for a laptop computer at a Wilmington computer repair shop in 2019.
That signature, of course, matched first son Hunter Biden’s.
In 2023, again on a Just the News commission, Barnes delivered a scathing assessment of the process for verifying mail-in ballot signatures in Maricopa County, Arizona, the largest county by population in a crucial swing state.
Now, he’s raising very serious questions about the authenticity of a document that Democrats and their establishment media allies are using to try to smear the Trump White House with the specter of Jeffrey Epstein, with a note on a birthday card that matches exactly nothing in the publicly known past about Trump’s life.
(Why this supposedly damning relic of the past never surfaced until now no one seems to be able to explain.)
Obviously, this is more than an academic issue. Trump has put his reputation on the line with his adamant denial that he wrote the Epstein note or signed it. He has even filed a $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over an article it published with a headline that stated as fact that Trump was the note’s author.
(The article included Trump’s denial. Its headline disregarded it: “Jeffrey Epstein’s Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump.”)
Americans who’ve been paying attention are by now all too familiar with the depth of Democratic desperation when it comes to Trump:
They created the “Russia collusion” hoax, then spent millions of taxpayer dollars on an investigation that ended up proving there was nothing to it. They launched an impeachment trial in the final year of Trump’s first term based on nothing but disgruntled deep state operatives.
They spent the four years of the Biden presidency engaging in lawfare against Trump at the federal and state level, including efforts to actually keep him off the ballot.
Now, they’re trying to raise Jeffrey Epstein from the dead to damage Trump even more with a note Trump denies ever writing.
That note has taken a serious credibility hit from Barnes’ report. But it’s nothing compared to what Democrats have already done to their own credibility.
It’s zero. And a good part of the American people know it.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
