>>511074974
Note: this is answering your question and not a reflection of my personal views.
Trump is calling it a “hoax” in the same way he labeled past investigations like “Russiagate” or the impeachments — not necessarily because the Epstein scandal itself is fake, but because he believes the narrative being pushed about his involvement is misleading or politically motivated.
In his view, there was no substantial evidence in the files the FBI had — mainly illegal content (CP) that couldn’t be released or used to implicate high-profile figures without further admissible proof. He’s suggesting Democrats set a trap: they urged him to “expose everything” knowing the material wouldn’t yield public charges or names, and that the Department of Justice (under their control for years) wouldn’t follow through. So the “hoax,” from his perspective, is that he was made to look like he was covering up for elites, when in reality, there was nothing actionable he could release.
There’s also the complication of Epstein’s 2008 plea deal, which included unusually broad immunity for any unnamed “potential co-conspirators.” That deal, while legally controversial and likely unenforceable under normal standards, created a legal gray area. So even if there was evidence implicating others, Trump could argue he was bound — or at least limited — by the scope of that agreement and DOJ constraints.
So to Trump and his defenders, the “hoax” isn’t that Epstein’s crimes didn’t happen, but that Trump was falsely portrayed as hiding evidence, when legally and practically, he may have had very little room to act.