Hugh Hefner Warned FBI About Jeffrey Epstein in 2005, Survivors Allege in Lawsuit 17AUG26

 

THIS proves just how disgusting epstein and his friends and clients were and are, the fact Hugh Hefner reported epstein to the fbi for rape and trafficking women for sex. ALL the epstein files and the client list has to be released and charges need to be brought against all these perverts starting with NOT MY pres drumpf/trump. This from Law Commentary.....

Hugh Hefner Warned FBI About Jeffrey Epstein in 2005, Survivors Allege in Lawsuit

by Bridget Luckey | Aug 17, 2026

A group of Jeffrey Epstein survivors suing the federal government claims Playboy founder Hugh Hefner repeatedly contacted the FBI in 2005 after former Playmate Audra Christiansen told him she had been raped and trafficked by Epstein, adding a new allegation to a broader negligence case over the bureau’s handling of warnings about the financier.

Christiansen, who was 23 at the time, told Hefner about the alleged abuse while she was living at the Playboy Mansion in California, according to the amended complaint. She asked Hefner to contact federal authorities because she believed his name and connections would make the FBI more likely to take her account seriously. The filing claims Hefner called the agency multiple times on her behalf.

The survivors allege the FBI agreed to assist Christiansen and investigate her claims but failed to follow up for about 15 years. Federal agents contacted her in October 2020, according to the filing, more than a year after Epstein died while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges and three years after Hefner’s death.

Christiansen claims Epstein raped her and trafficked her over a period of years. Her allegations are now part of a federal lawsuit accusing the United States of negligence over what the survivors describe as repeated failures by FBI personnel to act on information about Epstein’s abuse. The case also cites other alleged warnings to federal authorities, including a report made by Maria Farmer in 1996.

In April, U.S. District Judge David S. Leibowitz dismissed an earlier version of the complaint without prejudice, allowing the women to amend their allegations. He found that the filing had not identified enough facts showing a comparable situation in which a private person or organization could be held liable under Florida negligence law.

That requirement comes from the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows certain lawsuits against the United States for negligence by federal employees. The federal government is generally protected from lawsuits by a principle known as sovereign immunity, but Congress created limited exceptions through the FTCA. To bring a negligence claim under the law, a person generally must point to comparable conduct that could make a private party liable under applicable state law.

One theory discussed in the April ruling is known as a voluntary undertaking. Under Florida negligence law, a person or organization that chooses to take on a responsibility can face liability in some circumstances if the work is handled negligently and another person reasonably relies on the promised help. The rule applies broadly and does not automatically create liability whenever someone agrees to provide assistance.

Leibowitz found that the earlier complaint did not allege enough specific facts showing that federal agents undertook such a responsibility and that someone relied on a promise that the FBI would act. The court also pointed to a lack of detail about what information was given to agents and what assurances, if any, were made in response.

The amended complaint now provides more detail about Christiansen’s alleged interaction with the FBI, including the claim that the bureau agreed to assist her and investigate after Hefner made contact on her behalf. Whether those allegations are enough to establish a legal duty under Florida law has not been decided by the court.

The government has also argued that decisions about whether and how to investigate reports are protected under an FTCA exception covering certain discretionary government decisions. Leibowitz declined to dismiss the earlier complaint on that basis, finding that the survivors had sufficiently alleged that mandatory FBI policies may have governed some of the conduct they challenged.

The United States continues to seek dismissal of the amended lawsuit and disputes that the alleged investigative failures create liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Bridget Luckey

Bridget studied Communications and Marketing at California State University, Long Beach. She also has experience in the live music events industry, which has allowed her to travel to festivals around the world. During this period, she acquired valuable expertise in branding, marketing, event planning, and public relations.

Related Articles

Jeffrey Epstein Survivors’ $320 Million FBI Negligence Lawsuit Moves Closer to Surviving Dismissal

More than 30 Jeffrey Epstein survivors suing the federal government over the FBI’s alleged failure to act on years of warnings about the financier have cleared another hurdle, after a federal magistrate judge recommended denying the government’s latest attempt to dismiss their negligence claims.U.S. Magistrate Judge Ryon M. McCabe issued... Read More »

New Mexico Sues DOJ for Access to Epstein Files in Zorro Ranch Investigation

New Mexico sued the U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday, asking a federal judge to intervene after the agency refused to provide unredacted records sought for the state’s renewed criminal investigation into alleged sexual abuse at Jeffrey Epstein’s former Zorro Ranch.The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the... Read More »

Federal Judge Dismisses Trump’s $10 Billion Defamation Lawsuit Against Wall Street Journal Over Epstein Letter

A federal judge in Florida has dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against media executive Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal, finding the complaint did not meet the legal standard required to proceed. In an order issued Monday, U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles ruled that Trump... Read More »

Trump Threatens Suit Over Report He Doesn’t Like, Aiming to Intimidate a Critic 21AUG26

 

Neera Tanden, the president and chief executive of the Center for American Progress, said that the center would “neither cower nor bend in the face” of legal action.Credit...Jason Andrew for The New York Times

NOT MY pres drumpf/trump is a fat diaper wearing pants shitting stinking neo-nazi fascist pig drippings. He is a corrupt repulsive selfish greedy authoritarian narcissistic psychotic sociopathic child raping sexual predator. He is a cowardly draft dodging genocidal war criminal also guilty of crimes against humanity. He is a misogynist bigot racist compulsive liar fear monger. Don't ever be cowed by him or his ass licking cabal minions so that you are afraid to remind America and  the world just what he really is, no class trash. As I have said before I do not wish any harm on him but I know we and the rest of the world will be better off when he is gone. This from the New York Times.....

Trump Threatens Suit Over Report He Doesn’t Like, Aiming to Intimidate a Critic

It was the latest example of President Trump’s bid to use the legal system against those who voice unflattering facts and opinions generally protected by the First Amendment.

By Alan Feuer

Aug. 21, 2026Updated 10:51 a.m. ET

President Trump has opened a new front in his campaign to intimidate political foes, threatening a prominent liberal think tank with a $5 billion defamation lawsuit over a report concluding that his deployment of the National Guard to cities across the country has had little effect on reducing violent crime.

The threats against the think tank, the Center for American Progress, were Mr. Trump’s latest effort to use the legal system to punish critics for voicing unflattering facts and opinions generally protected by the First Amendment. And while it is unclear how far any suit the president might ultimately file will get in court, it could force the organization to spend money fighting it off and make it even more of a target of his allies and supporters.

On Monday, one of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyers, Alejandro Brito, wrote a letter to the center warning that he would file the suit if the group did not fully retract the report, which was published on its website on July 13. The letter, viewed by The New York Times, was addressed to the group’s president and chief executive, Neera Tanden, a longtime Democratic official who served as a senior adviser to President Joseph R. Biden Jr., and to several of its board members.

Mr. Brito claimed that the report about the National Guard was full of malicious and false statements. He gave Ms. Tanden and members of her board until 5 p.m. on Friday to retract it and apologize to Mr. Trump.

Ms. Tanden pushed back, saying in a statement that the center would “neither cower nor bend in the face” of legal action. She also defended the report, asserting that while its findings might have been “inconvenient to the Trump administration,” they were “grounded in rigorous, evidence-based research and analysis.”

“This threatened lawsuit’s attack on facts and evidence is baseless,” she added. “A fundamental protection of the First Amendment is to allow for the publication of facts and analysis that is contrary to the arguments and claims of any administration. A lawsuit is a transparent attempt to silence us.”

Mr. Trump has often lashed out at scholars and commentators for reproaching or critiquing him in the news media. And since winning re-election, he has filed a flurry of lawsuits against news organizations like the BBC and The Times, claiming they defamed him. He has even filed suit against the Des Moines Register, arguing that a poll the paper published before the 2024 election indicating that he would lose the vote in Iowa amounted to consumer fraud and election interference.

(The Times has filed its own suits against the administration, including two seeking increased access for its reporters at the Pentagon.)

The president has repeatedly claimed that his administration is the most transparent in American history. But he and his aides have used lawsuits and executive actions to go after law firms, universities and television networks. They have also used criminal tactics such as search warrants and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to pry loose sensitive information from reporters.

Many of these efforts have faltered once they reached court and faced judicial scrutiny. Mr. Brito himself has filed multiple failed suits on behalf of Mr. Trump. Last month, a federal judge in Florida referred Mr. Brito for potential disciplinary proceedings after ruling that a suit he filed for the president against the Internal Revenue Service amounted to an improper exercise in self-dealing.

The Center for American Progress report accused Mr. Trump of seeking to take credit for a nationwide decline in violent crime that began before he returned to the White House. The report determined that there was “no evidence” that the National Guard deployments had affected the crime rate, adding that they were poised to cost taxpayers more than $1.7 billion if they continued through the end of 2026.

The report asserted that the “primary goal” of the deployments was “never to stop crime.” Instead, it said they amounted to “a dangerous power grab by the Trump administration.”

The team that put the report together used an analysis based on homicide, violent crime and gun victimization data in cities where the National Guard was deployed — Washington, Los Angeles and Memphis — over the period from January 2023 to this February.

“This approach was employed to identify any statistical changes in crime trends associated with the deployment of the National Guard in specific cities,” its authors wrote.

Mr. Trump referred to the report on social media last week after watching a television segment about the report, which he described as “another Radical Left SCAM.” In the post, he threatened to sue the center and several of its funders, including the liberal financier George Soros, who has long served as a boogeyman for the administration.

A week later, Mr. Brito’s letter arrived at the center, saying that the president would sue if Ms. Tanden and her colleagues did not retract the report, issue an apology and give Mr. Trump unspecified financial compensation.

The letter ended with an all-caps salutation: “PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.”

On Friday, a lawyer for the center fired back in a letter of his own, deriding Mr. Trump’s accusations that he had been defamed.

“This is utterly absurd,” the lawyer, Kevin H. Metz, wrote to Mr. Brito. “Truth is not and cannot be defamation.”

Mr. Metz went on to say that the center welcomed the opportunity to make its case in court and receive more information on the National Guard deployments through the process of discovery.

Other think tanks of various political stripes have rallied to the center’s side.

“Independent organizations across the ideological spectrum must be free to express their analysis and opinions, and to challenge those in power without fear of political retaliation or legal intimidation,” said Peter Goettler, the president and chief executive of the libertarian Cato Institute. “Disagreements on matters of policy should be settled through open inquiry, evidence, and debate — not threats designed to silence criticism.”

Alan Feuer is a reporter for The Times who covers the effects President Trump has had on the courts, the Justice Department and the broader rule of law.

The Latest on the Trump Administration

---

• U.S. Cuts Back Military Drills With South Korea: President Trump had ordered the Defense Department to reduce joint exercises with the key U.S. ally, declaring the drills “hostile” toward North Korea. Current and former military officials say the move is likely to undercut U.S. military readiness in the region.

• Slaughtering Wild Horses: A legal loophole allows the federal government to sell mustangs on the cheap, stripping them of protections and clearing their path to destruction.

• F.D.A. Commissioner: The president nominated Dr. Heidi Overton, a White House domestic policy official and a proponent of the administration’s Make America Healthy Again agenda, to serve as the next commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. The chairman of the Senate health committee expressed “strong concerns” about her nomination.

• Trump’s Most Devoted Aide: Trump’s White House aide Natalie Harp is always by his side. What, exactly, does she do?

• University Investigations: A former Justice Department lawyer says Trump administration leaders ignored findings that elite schools, including Brown and Columbia, hadn’t broken the law as they pressed them into deals.