Going Deeper On Katie Johnson- Another Crazy Theory
Don’t worry. Not too deep, but just reading the case files more closely rather than relying on media reports. I wont bother detailing aspects of the case everyone is already familiar with
I only bother with this because this case is being played up here on Substack by the Advocates as being credible.
Katie Johnson in the first case seems to be presented as a real name in the filings as its not listed as a pseudonym anywhere in the initial case in California ,and lists a telephone number and address. Contrast that with the Jane Doe case filed in NY
Her lawyers say its a pseudonym.
This case was filed in April 2016 asking for $100 million in damages and was rejected by the Judge in June 2016 because her attorney failed to provide an actionable civil rights claim. Mail to her address was returned to the court.
Here is the property in 2016. It was put on the market on 5- 16-16 and sold on 6- 16-16. Sold for $21,000. Tiny house but fairly large lot (7,200 sq ft) , built in 1942 and had obviously seen better days. A real fixer upper.
Note the address number is missing the 4 (6634) and no mailbox. Was this the reason mail was returned or was it sent registered mail requiring a signature and nobody lived there?. No idea.
So thats interesting I guess, but its not exactly a vacant lot that Michael Cohen said was the address on his Jane Doe case.
The other interesting thing is Katie Johnsons recruiter to the Epstein-Trunp parties is someone called a Tiffany Doe (pseudonym). She claims to have worked for Epstein from 1990-2000 to recruit adolescent girls for Epsteins Parties held at 9 E. 71st St. in Manhattan. She was 22 when she met Epstein.
Problem with that is Wexner did not hand the property over to Epstein until 1995 and Epstein did not move in until Jan 1, 2006. As reported by Whitney Webb in her book
Beginning in 1992, Epstein was renting a mansion on East 69th Street that had previously been the residence of the Iranian consul general.The property, described as a “small castle” and as “palatial” in reports, had been seized by the US government in 1980. It was specifically the State Department, under president George H.W. Bush, that began leasing that property to Epstein for $15,000 a month and Epstein, per reports, “had moved out” by January 1996.
Oops
The other thing is Tiffany’s anonymity. Epstein would surely know her name. How many employees did he have in NYC that fit her description, and dates?. Also, Tiffany essentially admitted guily to sex trafficking. Why would she take that risk? Unlike Jane Doe/Katie Johnson, Epstein who allegedly threatened to kill her if she told anyone, would know who she was and what she looked like.
Then there is the description of the abuse attributed to Epstein. This does not fit Epsteins MO. As disgusting as he was he generally treated the girls ok and was not rough or mean to them. He has never been known to indulge with anal sex and him taking sloppy seconds (after Trump) does not seem like Epstein. Remember, in 1994 Trump was bankrupt and had to hitch rides on Epsteins plane, and Epstein was probably giving him financial advice, so if anyone got first dibs in Epstein’s house it was Epstein.
The same lawyer who screwed up the California case then filed in NY on June 20, but after the filing they failed to file affidavits summons of complaint were issued to Trump and Epstein ahead of the scheduled pre-trial hearing of September 9
Who is this lawyer?. Thomas F. Meagher. He is a top rated Intellectual Property Litigation attorney in Princeton, New Jersey. Also known as a patent attorney. Whats he doing handling the Katie Johnson case? Strange.
Lisa Bloom was hired by Katie Johnsons attorney to act as a public-facing attorney and organizer for “Katie Johnson”/“Jane Doe” in 2016., scheduling a press conference on Nov 2 days before the election, and saying the woman had received threats when the event was abruptly canceled. The lawsuit was dismissed on November 4, 2016 after earlier procedural dismissals . Reporting and later retrospectives say Bloom “disassociated” or ceased contact with the client after the case was dropped, while accounts differ about how involved she was in filing or re-filing the suit and about whether the plaintiff’s claims were credibly vetted
Katie Johnsons other lawyer in the NY case , Evan L. Goldman, was a New Jersey civil litigator. He said he couldn’t reveal Johnson’s true identity, but stressed that she “is and was a real person.” “There were real threats which forced her to drop the law suit,” he added. However, Goldman said he never actually met or spoke to Katie Johnson. He said he communicated with her through his co-counsels — Thomas F. Meagher, who introduced Goldman and Bloom
On the day Johnson was supposed to participate in the press conference arranged Lisa Bloom, Johnson’s car and cellphone were stolen and Goldman says “This freaked her out”.
Goldman said Meagher and Bloom were the ones to inform him that Katie Johnson wanted to drop the lawsuit in November 2016.
Goldman also named a journalist he said had interviewed Katie Johnson in California and found her “credible.”
“To me that was enough for me to be all in on it,” Goldman said. The journalist hasn’t published anything about Katie Johnson and stopped responding to emails in August
So who is this anonymous journalist given access to Katie Johnson?
Ellie Leanard perhaps helps us out here
Ellie Leonard: But I wanted to circle back to something when I was talking to Ed Opperman, who is the PI for Katie Johnson, kind of talking about some of this Mossad stuff. I asked him and I said, you know, she was threatened at the end, right? She had a press conference.
She pulled out of the press conference at the very last minute. Like what happened there? What do you know that happened there? And he said there was a hack to the system, to everything, the whole legal teams, their computers went down, all their information went down. They traced it back and it came from Israel. The hack came out of Israel and it freaked her out so bad that she pulled out of the case. …..
Lev Parnas And he said that one of the biggest thing is that the day when she was supposed to go, when we saw earlier, when she was to the press conference, all their computers, everything got shut down. They got hit really hard.
And she got really scared. That was one of the reasons.
Ellie Leonard: Yeah, because they could trace it back and it traced back to Israel.
Zev Shalev This was just as the elections were about to happen in 2016 that elected Donald Trump because Katie Johnson would have derailed that election completely. So if you’re asking if Israel was interfering in our elections... And if Russia was interfering in our actions during that one, then you got the answers right there.
So Ed Opperman might be the journalist Goldman is talking about. Maybe. I actually follow him on Twitter but rarely see his posts. Most of his stuff seems paywalled.
Here is what Grok says about him
Ed Opperman (@oppermanreport), a private investigator and host of The Opperman Report podcast, has frequently posted about the **Katie Johnson** case on X. This refers to the 2016 civil lawsuit (filed under the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” or “Jane Doe”) accusing Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein of sexually assaulting her when she was 13 years old in the mid-1990s at Epstein-related events. The case was filed in California and later refiled in New York but was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff in November 2016.
Opperman claims he served as the **private investigator** on the case starting around 2015–2016. He has repeatedly emphasized his direct involvement, shared details from the litigation (including the full complaint and witness affidavits), and promoted related podcast episodes. He argues the story has been misrepresented or suppressed by media on both sides.
Key posts and themes from his activity (primarily from late 2025 into early February 2026, amid renewed Epstein document releases and discussions):
- He states he worked on the Katie Johnson lawsuit as a PI, including signing a non-disclosure agreement initially.
- He has made the **real 2016 complaint and witness affidavits** available for free on his Patreon, describing them as the accurate primary sources often misreported by outlets like Fox, CNN, and MSNBC.
- He links the case to broader Epstein-Trump connections, including money laundering allegations and other Epstein-related figures.
- He has referenced the plaintiff’s withdrawal due to alleged intimidation, including a claimed “state-level” denial-of-service attack on related websites around a planned press event.
Examples of specific posts:
- One post shares: “This was my case. I was the private investigator in this lawsuit. You can read the full complaint and WITNESS Affidavits for free on my patreon.”
His posts generally present the case as credible and under-covered, while criticizing perceived cover-ups. He distinguishes it from other Epstein-related claims and ties it to his investigative work
So why would Katie Johnsons lawyer need a Private Investigator One reason is to build a stronger civil case. The Katie Johnson (”Jane Doe”) lawsuit was a civil action (seeking damages), not a criminal prosecution. Civil cases require the plaintiff to prove allegations by a preponderance of evidence, often relying on corroboration beyond the victim’s word. A PI can locate and interview potential witnesses, gather affidavits (as Opperman has shared from the case), verify timelines, track down records (e.g., party guest lists, travel logs, or financial ties), or find supporting documentation that police or prosecutors might not pursue aggressively in a non-criminal context.
The emphasis is on verification. But it could also be used to manufacture. Get it? Not accusing any one of anything. Just throwing it out there.
In any event Katie Johnsons lawyers reason for dropping the case is different than Ed Oppermans (threats, theft, etc)
But what if there was another reason. Before we get to that ask yourself why they file a law suit as Jane Doe and then decide to hold a Press Conference. Especially right before an important Presidential Election. And while I can understand dropping the suit due to threats, why not pursue a suit against Epstein alone and leave Trump out of it. Or at least file for Victims Compensation Fund after Epstein’s death. Epstein was dead. Ghislaine was in jail. Trump was around but she could leave him out of it. She wouldn’t even have to testify to collect. She could stay anonymous. We know she did not because the severity of her alleged abuse and young age would have made her the top receiver. Also the guy in charge of the fund described the more serious cases, none of which matched Katie Johnson. For context the Jane in the Maxwell case got $5 million from the Epstein Fund.
Some might say she got rubbed out, but if something happened to Katie Johnson surely her lawyers would have known and spoken out. Or at least her family or friends. You cant tell me the lawyers lost track of someone who could have been worth millions to them (they get a 30-40% cut of damages awarded) if she was legitimate.
Her cell phone was stolen in October but why did a man answer the phone in May when this reporter in the link below called?
Adding to the mystery is that some reports allege parts of the case’s organization to Norm Lubow who had a history of promoting sensational claims
Norm Lubow (aka Al Taylor) is a former television producer (Jerry Springer show) and media promoter whose background includes:
• Tabloid-style TV production
• Sensationalist media projects
• A long record of manufacturing or amplifying scandal narratives
• Prior legal trouble involving fraud and misrepresentation (including a federal conviction in the 1990s related to financial fraud).
Lubow allegedly was involved in organizing, promoting, and facilitating the 2016 lawsuit. He supposedly connected the plaintiff (“Katie Johnson”) with attorney Lisa Bloom.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/07/donald-trump-sexual-assault-lawsuits-norm-lubow
The mystery is, why Norm Lubow connected to a patent attorney?
This gives some clue about motive
Al Taylor (aka Norm Lubow) first reached out to Gawker.com in March [2016 or 2015] Gawker Media entered into a non-disclosure agreement barring the company from reporting on a particular item without the consent of that item’s owner. That agreement contained a clause explicitly permitting Gawker Media to report on the item if it obtained the information independently. As my story last month laid out, Steve Baer told me in an on-the-record conversation that he had seen a video, shown to him by Taylor, of Johnson recounting her explosive claims against Trump and Epstein. Shortly thereafter, a tipster who requested anonymity sent me a pixilated version of that video, a small portion of which I published. It has since been posted to YouTube. (To be very clear, we received the information unprompted and independently of anyone with whom Gawker.com entered into an NDA.)
In other words Al Taylor could not collect any money in return for permission.
My call with Taylor didn’t end pleasantly. “I think you’re a piece of shit and you can suck my d*ck, b*tch,” he concluded. He then hung up.
https://www.jezebel.com/the-source-pushing-the-trump-rape-lawsuits-may-not-be-w-1783270283
Gawker had published Epsteins Black Book in 2015 and exposed Peter Thiel’s gayness. Gawkerclosed by the end of 2016 due to Peter Thiels and apparently Epsteins financing of Hulk Hogans law suit that forced them into bankruptcy.
So looks like it was a failed attempt to make some money. If it was an Influence Operation, what was it influencing because it sure didn’t influence the election?
The coverage of the Katie Johnson case was limited to outlets like The Guardian, Politico, Vox, Courthouse News, and tabloids (e.g., Daily Mail, Radar Online), but it remained fringe or skeptical. Major networks and newspapers (e.g., NYT, WaPo, CNN) gave it little to no prominent play compared to other Trump-related stories like the Access Hollywood tape (October 2016) or the dozen+ women who came forward publicly with on-the-record claims of groping or harassment. Many reports highlighted red flags: anonymous plaintiff, ties to Norm Lubow (a former Jerry Springer producer linked to past dubious celebrity claims), promotional inconsistencies, and lack of corroboration.
Timing and withdrawal — A planned press conference with attorney Lisa Bloom was canceled days before the November 8 election due to alleged threats . The suit was voluntarily dismissed on November 4, 2016 (four days pre-election), with no trial or public testimony. This reduced any potential late-cycle impact. Trump’s team dismissed it as a “sham” and “politically motivated” to sway the vote. However, then why withdraw the lawsuit before the election? Did they take the threats that seriously or was there a secret settlement?
A settlement seems unlikely as no major polls from October–November 2016 (e.g., from YouGov, Quinnipiac, or aggregates like FiveThirtyEight) showed the Katie Johnson claims moving voter sentiment noticeably. The dominant late-campaign scandals were the Access Hollywood tape, FBI Director Comey’s email reopening (October 28), and WikiLeaks dumps. Trumps not parting with his money that easily. He has thick skin and the case wasn’t hurting him much.
The Katie Johnson case did have a polarizing influence on public sentiment regarding the credibility of other sexual assault victims (particularly those linked to Epstein) and Trump’s Epstein connections. The case’s anonymity, evidentiary gaps, promotional irregularities, and pre-election timing led to widespread skepticism, especially among those supporting Trump who might otherwise have taken Trumps connections to Epstein.
Could this have been the point all along. Could the Katie Johnson case have been an Influence Operation designed to help Trump and galvanize his base and immunize him from future allegations? Katie Johnson was the Vaccine. Sounds nuts unless you knew the MSM would pay little attention to the case due to credibility issues. But corporate media owners and advertisers were eager for Trumps promised tax cuts, so they had some leverage and motive.
Israel and its supporters were also interested in the outcome and Israel offered itself up as a scapegoat with a transparent hack. After all , they couldn’t disguise the hack and make it look like a Russian hack because that wouldn’t fit the Russia gate narrative.
So thats my theory.
End
A question for Congress to ask Les Wexner:
Was ownership of 9 East 71st St transferred to Jeffrey Epstein in 1996 because accountability for illegalities from Epstein's events and parties he had been hosting there might eventually fall on you as owner?