Did ABC Suits Spike the Story?

In the cutthroat world of political journalism, the race for a scoop is a constant, high-stakes sprint. In early July, two of the biggest names in American media, the Wall Street Journal and ABC News, found themselves on the same track, chasing a story that intertwined President Trump with the sordid legacy of Jeffrey Epstein. But when the finish line came, only one media outlet crossed it, leaving a cloud of speculation hanging over the other.

The bombshell dropped when the Wall Street Journal published its story. The piece wasn't merely about Trump's name appearing in the Department of Justice's review of Epstein's documents—that was almost expected given their past association. The real news, the core of the scoop, was that former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi had personally briefed the President on this matter back in May. Suddenly, a motive seemed to crystallize for why the Trump administration, after promising transparency, had abruptly reversed course on releasing more information about the government's investigation into Epstein's crimes. The Journal's story, which had reportedly been in the works for over a week, sent a jolt of energy through its newsroom.

But buried within the Journal's reporting was a tantalizing clue: they weren't alone. The article noted that "on July 9, after ABC News reached out to the White House about Bondi's briefing to the president," a clash erupted between Bondi and former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino. This single sentence revealed that ABC News had the same explosive information. They were at the same door, ready to break the same story.

And yet, ABC’s story never aired. The scoop never appeared on their website.

In the fast-paced news cycle, stories are often pursued and abandoned for a multitude of valid editorial reasons. A source might get cold feet, a key fact might not stand up to scrutiny, or a competing outlet simply publishes first. In isolation, ABC’s decision not to run the story might have been an unremarkable footnote.

But nothing with this administration, or this network, was in isolation. The context was a massive, $15 million elephant in the room. Just last December, ABC News had settled a costly lawsuit with Trump. Now, with the network holding a story that would undoubtedly provoke the President's ire, reporters and media insiders began to buzz.

The central question became unavoidable: Did the bosses at ABC News "spike" the story?

Was the network, still stinging from a multi-million dollar legal payout, simply too gun-shy to poke the bear again? The financial and legal weight of their recent history with Trump created a powerful perception problem. Any decision to hold a negative story about him would inevitably be viewed through the lens of that settlement. To be clear, no concrete evidence has emerged that ABC killed the story for political or legal reasons. Indeed, on July 15, an ABC reporter directly asked Trump if Bondi had informed him about his name being in the Epstein files, a question that, while not the full story, generated its own headlines from the President's evasive answer.

Still, the question lingers. Was it a prudent editorial judgment call, or was it a calculated business decision made in the shadow of a $15 million check?