Is This the Beginning of the End of MAGA?

Or Just Another Trump Cliffhanger?

If you’re reading this, I ask humbly: don’t scroll away. This independent outlet is under pressure especially with the holidays looming. I get it that money is tight. I also know it’s kinda weird to start an article like this (kind of like those appeals on Wikipedia), but XVOA need’s your support. If each reader with the means to do so chipped in with a paid subscription, I can keep devoting the time to keep this fearless journalism alive. I don’t have corporate sponsors or billionaire backers, just you. So if you find value in an unflinching truth tinged look at politics please consider upgrading to a paid subscription . Thank you for helping the XPLISSET Voice of America keep it real. 💙

The MAGA Movement

The MAGA movement, that populist wave that carried Donald Trump to power may finally be eating itself alive. Once a solid phalanx of “Make America Great Again” true believers, it’s now splintering into feuding factions, plagued by infighting and betrayal. Even Trump’s most ardent loyalists are asking uncomfortable questions after a series of dramatic developments: a public civil war between far-right figures Nick Fuentes and Ben Shapiro, the slaying of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, and Trump’s own head-spinning reversal on releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files . In 2016, mainstream media outlets infamously missed the populist anger that would propel Trump to the White House and they underestimated MAGA again in 2024 . Now, it looks like they might be missing another big story: the MAGA world cracking apart from within. This deep-dive report examines whether we’re witnessing the beginning of the end of MAGA.

Civil War on the Right: Nick Fuentes vs. Ben Shapiro (and the Daily Wire Fallout)

Ben Shapiro. /. Nick Fuentes

The drama between far-right agitator Nick Fuentes and conservative commentator Ben Shapiro has escalated into a full-blown family feud with “the Jew and the Jew-hater,” as one cheeky Redditor put it, referencing Shapiro’s Orthodox Jewish faith and Fuentes’ notorious antisemitism . It’s a feud so toxic and bizarre it could be a South Park subplot, and it has exposed a deep( rift in MAGA’s ranks over extremism and bigotry.

It all boiled over when Tucker Carlson (recently liberated from Fox News and veering hard right) decided to interview Fuentes in late October. Carlson gave the 30-year-old Holocaust denier a friendly platform, prompting Ben Shapiro’s public fury . Shapiro devoted an entire episode of The Ben Shapiro Show to torching Carlson and Fuentes, calling Carlson an “intellectual coward” who “takes other people’s hideous ideas… softens them… and then provides them with a massive signal boost” . Shapiro rattled off Fuentes’ greatest hits of hate which included Holocaust denial, racist rants, misogyny and warned that embracing such vile rhetoric is “a path to defeat and a path to moral oblivion” for the right . In classic Shapiro fashion, he insisted he’s not trying to cancel Carlson or Fuentes, just drawing a “moral line” . But make no mistake, this was a very public excommunication: Shapiro basically declared Fuentes persona non grata in any respectable conservative tent.

Fuentes, for his part, has reveled in the attention and fired back with characteristic venom. On his own streams and social posts, Fuentes accused “Benjy” Shapiro and The Daily Wire of colluding with left-wing hit jobs to destroy him . He crowed that Shapiro’s attacks only boosted his profile, bragging that years ago Shapiro’s criticism “helped propel [me] from online troll to a leading voice for the far right” . In other words, Fuentes is doing a victory dance in the smear he’s flinging at Shapiro.

Is The Daily Wire Losing Its Audience?

Shapiro’s media empire, The Daily Wire, is feeling the squeeze from these battles on its right flank. Subscriber growth has stalled and internal turmoil is mounting, by multiple accounts.

Candice Owens

In March 2024, the site’s bomb-throwing star Candace Owens very publicly quit (or was fired, depending whom you ask) after clashing with Shapiro over her anti-Israel and allegedly antisemitic commentary . Owens walked out the door posting “I am finally free” and many of her fans likely walked with her. That rift came amid the Israel–Gaza war, when Owens “mused” about “a very small ring of specific people who are using the fact that they are Jewish to shield themselves from any criticism,” a remark Shapiro blasted as “absolutely disgraceful” . The fallout was ugly with Owens even liking a tweet implying a rabbi was “drunk on Christian blood”, earning rebukes from the ADL and fueling Nick Fuentes’ praise of her “full-fledged war against the Jews” . By spring 2024, Shapiro had had enough.

Owens’ departure was a canary in the coal mine. Fast forward to 2025, and The Daily Wire has shed other talent and staff in what Oliver Darcy dubbed “The Daily Wire’s Woes.” The outlet’s co-founder and co-CEO Jeremy Boreing abruptly stepped down in March 2025, moving to an advisory role . Not long after, the communications chief quietly exited . These high-level departures which were framed as voluntary raised eyebrows. Darcy dryly noted that it “doesn’t take a Harvard MBA to know something is afoot” when the CEO and comms director suddenly vacate their posts . Sure enough, behind the scenes The Daily Wire has been laying off employees and scrapping grandiose plans. (This is the same company that once vowed to spend $100+ million to take on Disney with conservative entertainment but now that dream appears to be “unraveling” .) In other words, the subscriber-funded powerhouse that Shapiro built is showing cracks. When you brand yourself as the voice of the base but start purging popular hosts and feuding with influencers that part of your base loves, you’re gonna have a bad time.

Is The Daily Wire actually losing subscribers over the Fuentes/Candace controversies? There’s evidence of disillusionment. Users on Reddit and X (Twitter) openly talk about canceling their subscriptions, calling Shapiro a sellout or worse. And Shapiro himself is keenly aware that Carlson and others are eclipsing him among grassroots conservatives.

Tucker Carlson

Tucker Carlson’s reach now routinely tops Shapiro’s – Carlson’s new indie show is #1 on Spotify’s news podcasts (and high on Apple’s charts), while Shapiro lags at #10 on Spotify . Carlson boasts 16.7 million followers on X (Twitter) to Shapiro’s 5 million , and his video interviews often rack up millions more views. The feud has effectively pitted two conservative media titans against each other, and many MAGA fans are siding with Carlson/Fuentes. As one observer wryly noted, “may they tear each other’s souls apart” … a joke, but with an edge of truth. This civil war is not helping the MAGA cause.

Mainstream Media Misses the Story – Again

Mainstream outlets spiked briefly on “Epstein files” then mostly moved on, while independent media kept digging into Trump’s reversal, the Shapiro–Fuentes feud, and the broader influencer realignment. In other words, the messiest parts of the MAGA story were outsourced to indie press, again.

If the implosion of MAGA were a blockbuster movie, much of the mainstream press would be the oblivious audience member still waiting in the lobby for popcorn. This wouldn’t be the first time they missed the opening act. Back in 2016, major outlets treated Donald Trump’s candidacy as a sideshow, that is, until he won. In 2024, many pundits confidently predicted a repudiation of MAGA, only to watch Trump win the presidency back (an outcome they then struggled to process). As political analyst Scott Jennings admitted on CNN after the 2024 upset, “the story that was portrayed was not true” and the media chased the wrong narratives and completely misread voters . In the final weeks, they obsessed over gimmicks (a Puerto Rico statehood debate, Liz Cheney’s spoilers, etc.), while missing the MAGA ground-swell that delivered Trump’s victory .

Now in late 2025, the question is: Are they missing the MAGA meltdown? While independent and conservative outlets buzz about the feuds and falling-outs, much of the mainstream coverage has been tepid. Sure, the Epstein files saga has gotten some attention (any Trump scandal is hard to ignore completely), but the depth of MAGA’s internal crisis isn’t front-page news on every network. Major newspapers report the facts, for example, Trump’s clash with Marjorie Taylor Greene over Epstein files, but then they often downplay the significance. It’s eerily reminiscent of how they downplayed MAGA’s significance in 2016 and underestimated its resilience in 2024.

Consider the case of Charlie Kirk’s death: Charlie Kirk, one of the MAGA movement’s brightest young stars, was assassinated on a Utah college campus on September 10, 2025 . The news was covered, yes, but the mainstream narrative quickly moved on. To many Trump supporters, however, Kirk’s slaying was a seismic event, a martyrdom that sent shockwaves through the movement. Conspiracy theories bloomed in the far-right ecosystem (some extremists baselessly speculated about shadowy motives, even suggesting Israeli involvement or a “groyper” hate motive in the shooting ). The Guardian noted that Kirk had become the right’s “youth whisperer” and a close Trump ally , and his loss left a void. Did CNN run primetime specials on how the MAGA base was reacting or splintering after this tragedy? Not really. It barely pierced the broader news cycle.

The same pattern holds with the MAGA schism over the Epstein files. For months in 2025, a full-on revolt was brewing among some of Trump’s most fervent supporters over the administration’s secrecy around Jeffrey Epstein. MAGA influencers and even members of Congress were openly challenging Trump – an astonishing development, if you think about it. (This base stuck with Trump through everything: impeachments, insurrections, indictments. But Epstein’s black book? That was their bridge too far.) Yet many mainstream outlets treated it as a side note or a curiosity. They reported Trump’s flip-flop on releasing the files and the House vote, but often missed the context which is that this was perhaps the first time a significant chunk of MAGA world turned on Trump. It’s a huge story: the king’s own court is in rebellion, the very swamp-drainers are accusing Trump of a cover-up. It’s as if the media can’t decide whether to acknowledge MAGA’s importance or write it off as fringe drama, so they end up doing neither well.

Bottom line: The mainstream press has a blind spot when it comes to MAGA’s internal dynamics. They failed to grasp the movement’s rise, and now they might fail to grasp its potential fall. As one commentator put it, mainstream media’s pursuit of false balance and aversion to hard truths left it “a far diminished force” by 2024 . Those same failings could mean they again underestimate the story unfolding under their noses… a story that could reshape American politics if MAGA truly fractures.

MAGA Influencers Turn on Trump (Post-Charlie Kirk and the Epstein Files)

Pictured above, Influencer loyalty to Trump softened almost across the board after the Epstein email dump, with the sharpest drops from Nick Fuentes and Marjorie Taylor Greene while die-hards like Nick Adams barely moved. The movement is no longer a solid wall, it is a patchwork of uneasy allies and open defectors.

Perhaps the clearest sign of MAGA’s crack-up is that prominent MAGA influencers are openly rebelling against Donald Trump which was something once about as unthinkable as a Southern Baptist heckling the preacher. Since Charlie Kirk’s death in September, the knives have come out. And the immediate catalyst for much of this mutiny has been the Epstein files saga with a slow drip of revelations and emails linking Trump and his circle to Jeffrey Epstein that has driven a wedge between Trump and his die-hard base.

Let’s unpack the Epstein fiasco. During his 2024 campaign, Trump promised his followers full transparency on Epstein. “Oh, I’d release everything, sure, we have nothing to hide,” he said blithely at rallies and in interviews . He hinted that only he would expose the alleged Epstein “client list” of high-profile perverts supposedly protected by the Deep State . MAGA world ate it up as they had long framed Epstein as proof of a corrupt elite that only Trump could bring down . After all, Trump himself had floated conspiracies that Epstein’s death was an inside job to protect Bill Clinton . So the base firmly expected President Trump to unlock Epstein’s secrets.

But once back in office, Trump seemed to get cold feet. For months, Attorney General Pam Bondi (a Trump loyalist) slow-rolled the Epstein disclosure. She teased it – telling Fox News in February, “the list is sitting on my desk right now” and even invited a posse of MAGA influencers to the White House to show them binders labeled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” . Those lucky influencers (folks like Liz Wheeler, Chaya Raichik of LibsOfTikTok, Jack Posobiec, Rogan “DC Draino” O’Handley) strutted out triumphantly holding white binders marked “The Most Transparent Administration in History” . It was pure theater: the binders contained mostly documents already public , a fact the administration quietly admitted later. Still, Bondi hyped that more would come soon . Expectations were sky high.

Then… nothing. Months passed. By July 2025, Bondi’s DOJ abruptly announced that “no further disclosure would be appropriate” and even denied any “client list” existed . They tried to slam the door shut. The reaction in MAGA-world was volcanic. Remember, these are people who never trust the feds, and now Trump’s own DOJ looked like it was covering up Epstein’s dirt. Joe Rogan, the massively popular podcast host who often leans MAGA, blasted the Trump administration for “trying to gaslight” the public about Epstein . Rogan is no fringe figure. He has millions of listeners so his criticism stung. Charlie Kirk, before his untimely death, warned that “younger conservatives [are] flaming mad” and want to “get to the truth” on Epstein . Kirk even criticized Trump directly, an extreme rarity, though he later toned it down after Trump personally begged him to . (Yes, Trump apparently called Kirk to mollify him. That’s how serious the rift was.)

Two shot of President Trump, left, Marjorie Taylor Green, right.

Others didn’t tone it down at all. Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of Trump’s loudest congressional allies, effectively staged an intervention. She co-sponsored the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” to force the release of all Epstein records . Greene publicly said her falling-out with Trump “has all come down to the Epstein files” . When Trump lashed out at her – calling her a “traitor” and “lunatic” on Truth Social – Greene doubled down, saying the American people deserve full transparency and implying Trump was on the wrong side of this issue . She even told CNN that being smeared by Trump could “put her life in danger” given the vitriol . That’s an astonishing statement: Greene basically suggested Trump’s words might incite violence against her. Think about that for a minute. This is Marjorie “Jewish Space Lasers” Greene, a woman who once literally stalked survivors of school shootings, now positioning herself as the voice of reason against Trump’s excesses. What timeline are we living in? It’s one where the MAGA universe has inverted on itself.

The list of MAGA influencers breaking ranks is long and growing. Laura Loomer, a pro-Trump firebrand, went so far as to accuse Trump’s own Attorney General Pam Bondi of “covering up child sex crimes” that happened on her watch in Florida . Loomer sneeringly called her “Pam Blondi” and demanded Bondi be fired . When a tranche of 20,000 Epstein-related documents finally dropped in November including bombshell emails the MAGA online chorus split in two. Some stuck to denial and deflection (more on that in a moment), but some, like Nick Fuentes, let loose on Trump with undisguised rage. Fuentes declared the “Epstein Files” saga proved that “the liberals were right” and that history will regard the MAGA movement “as the biggest scam in history.” He mocked Trump as “fat, a joke, stupid, not funny” . Let that sink in: an influential figure in MAGA-world called Trump who is no doubt their erstwhile god-emperor, a scam and a joke. If that’s not a harbinger of MAGA’s demise, what is? (Fuentes also, characteristically, sprinkled in antisemitic conspiracy tropes, but that’s par for his course.)

Even Elon Musk, who had been chummy with MAGA at times and provided a friendly platform on X, flirted with turning on Trump over Epstein. Musk posted (then deleted) a claim that “Trump was named in Epstein’s files,” and mused “How can people trust Trump if he won’t release the Epstein files?” . Musk even recklessly speculated that “Bannon is in the Epstein files” (with zero evidence – Bannon’s name did not appear in released files , though Musk might have been referencing the newly revealed Bannon–Epstein texts, which we’ll get to). Musk later half-apologized, but the damage was done. When your movement’s tech billionaire hype man starts hinting your hero is compromised, you’ve got problems.

Steve Bannon

Then there’s Steve Bannon. For a while, Bannon’s War Room podcast largely stuck to boosting Trump and hammering Democrats. But Bannon, perhaps sensing the winds, also supported the grassroots demand for Epstein disclosure. Quietly, something else was lurking: text messages emerged in November showing that back in 2018, Jeffrey Epstein advised Steve Bannon on pro-Trump media strategy . Yes, the ultimate swamp creature was coaching Bannon ,the MAGA populist guru, on how to message for Trump. The House Oversight Committee released those messages, revealing Epstein and Bannon exchanged texts for six days in August 2018, with Epstein “coaching [him] on television appearances and political messaging” . It’s unclear how much mainstream MAGA fans absorbed this tidbit, but it undercuts Bannon’s credibility on Epstein significantly. Imagine Chris Rock narrating this: “You got Steve Bannon yelling about Epstein’s client list, while all along he was texting Epstein asking for PR tips? That’s like a preacher borrowing notes from the devil!” Bannon hasn’t publicly turned on Trump and he likely never will overtly but revelations like this sap the moral authority of MAGA’s old guard. Some followers are undoubtedly asking: if even Bannon had secret dealings with Epstein, who can we trust?

Changes in Tone and Language: From “Victims” to “Girls”

One striking aspect of this saga is how the tone and terminology have shifted among media and influencers – often in telling ways. When MAGA voices were demanding justice for Epstein’s underage victims, they used exactly that word: victims. Now, many pro-Trump commentators have subtly reverted to calling them “girls” or “young women” – language that downplays the severity of Epstein’s crimes. Meanwhile, those pushing for accountability continue to say “victims” or even “survivors”. This linguistic divide highlights the narrative split: one side minimizing, the other emphasizing.

Bar chart: Terms used to refer to Epstein’s victims in media coverage (Nov 2–16, 2025). Note the prevalence of “girls” vs “victims” or “survivors.”

As shown above, a recent analysis of news coverage and commentary from early November found that references to Epstein’s teenage targets as “girls” far outnumbered mentions of “victims” or “survivors.” The Justice Department itself in its much-derided July memo used clinical, sanitized phrasing about Epstein’s “death” and insisted there was no secret “client list,” even as it acknowledged Epstein abused “teen girls” . The DOJ downplayed the idea that other powerful men were involved, reinforcing the notion that Epstein acted largely alone . Right-wing media defending Trump have latched onto that tone. Megyn Kelly, for instance, went on her show to bizarrely argue that “Jeffrey Epstein… was not a pedophile… he liked 15-year-old girls – the barely legal type,” as if that somehow exonerates him . (Yes, really, she said that. The mental gymnastics would win an Olympic gold.)

Meanwhile, outlets critical of Trump or simply reporting neutrally often say “victims”. Al Jazeera, discussing the newly released emails, explicitly referred to Epstein’s “sex trafficking victim” in one email, and quoted Epstein’s line that Trump “knew about the girls” . This contrast reveals the agenda: Pro-Trump voices have shifted to minimizing language now that Trump himself is under scrutiny, whereas before, when they hoped Epstein’s secrets would nail Clinton or other enemies, they spoke of heinous crimes and victims. It’s cynical, and it hasn’t gone unnoticed. As one justice correspondent put it, the drawn-out clash over the Epstein files “underscores [that] transparency and accountability don’t always prevail” when the powerful are at risk . The language tells you who actually cares about the girls-victims-survivors and who cares about protecting their guy.

Trump’s Epstein Reversal: A Masterstroke or Too Little, Too Late?

Facing this revolt, Donald Trump finally blinked. In mid-November, with a House vote looming that would force the Epstein files into the light, Trump abruptly reversed his stance and urged Republicans to vote to release everything . The man who for months railed against the “Epstein files” as a Democratic hoax suddenly claimed “we have nothing to hide” . On Truth Social he wrote, “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files… it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax” . He framed it as clearing the air of false allegations against him. It was a stunning flip-flop, one that Reuters called “startling” and Al Jazeera dubbed a “sharp reversal” .

So, was this a savvy, manipulative strategy by Trump or a sort of “now I play the hero” move or an act of desperation? Probably a bit of both. Trump’s belated endorsement of transparency was likely aimed at undercutting his critics (Greene, Fuentes, etc.) by joining them. By saying “sure, release it all,” he attempts to rob the issue of its power. House Speaker Mike Johnson had suggested that a full release would “put to rest allegations that Trump had any connection” to Epstein’s crimes . Trump latched onto that logic, hoping that by finally green-lighting the files, he can claim vindication when nothing too damning emerges (and anything that does, he’ll call a hoax anyway). In effect, Trump decided to burn the furniture to save the house: give the base what they want on Epstein to stop the bleeding of support.

There is evidence this ploy is partially working at least among those who were looking for an excuse to come back into the fold. As soon as Trump ordered Bondi and the DOJ to cooperate, many right-wing influencers pivoted on a dime. By late November, pro-Trump voices on X were either silent about the new emails or twisting them into pretzels of counter-narrative. Rogan “DC Draino” O’Handley, one of the influencers who got the White House binders, dutifully echoed the White House line that the email dump was just a smear . When emails showed Epstein claiming Trump “spent hours” with an underage victim at his home and “of course [Trump] knew about the girls,” MAGA media personalities shrugged it off. They highlighted unrelated names in the files instead – “Hey look, a former NY Times journalist was corresponding with Epstein!” (Yes, that was a real talking point) . Jack Posobiec and Mike Cernovich both seized on the fact that author Michael Wolff (a Trump critic) had emails with Epstein, spinning that into the story: “Michael Wolff was seemingly helping Epstein lie about Trump” Posobiec fumed, claiming the release “blew up in Dems’ faces.” In short, they circled the wagons. Many in MAGA world are now treating the Epstein revelations not as a reason to doubt Trump, but as just another front in the partisan war, blaming Democrats and the media for supposedly twisting the story .

However, not everyone is appeased. As we’ve chronicled, Fuentes isn’t buying it. He scoffed at the partial DOJ release and Trump’s flip-flop: “Last week, DOJ claimed the Epstein Files don’t exist… Now they’re gonna unseal grand jury testimony? Not buying it,” he wrote . He and a segment of ultra-right activists –think Trump’s reversal is too convenient. They suspect he’s only doing it because “his name appeared numerous times in the files,” as Bondi reportedly warned him in May . In their view, Trump is trying to get ahead of a scandal and spin it, rather than genuinely seeking truth. And they might be right. Trump’s late embrace of transparency does not erase the months he spent blocking those files and smearing those who pushed for them. It’s worth noting: just weeks before his U-turn, Trump was belittling the Epstein issue. In July, frustrated by the questions, he snapped to reporters, “Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?… That is unbelievable… this creep… It’s a desecration [to even ask]” . He said he didn’t understand “why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody… It’s sordid, but it’s boring” . That contemptuous dismissal rang out across MAGA world – and many did not forget it. After all, these supporters had been promised the truth. Instead they got stonewalled, called “stupid” and “naïve” by Trump himself (he ranted on Truth Social that his “PAST supporters” fell for the Epstein “Hoax… bullshit, hook, line and sinker”, even calling them “weaklings” ). Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

Trump’s reversal may have stopped the immediate bleeding but the House will vote, files will trickle out, and he can claim “nothing to hide, move along.” A sense of betrayal lingers among some of his base. You can see it in the shifting tone of influencer content. For instance, Matt Walsh (Daily Wire host) was initially furious that Trump insulted those demanding Epstein transparency; he threatened to “keep talking about the subject” if Trump kept that up . But once Trump did a 180, Walsh and others pivoted to attacking the Wall Street Journal for its report on Trump’s bizarre 2003 birthday letter to Epstein (which Walsh insisted “screams fake”) . The cognitive dissonance is real: they went from “Trump better release the files or else” to “the files are out (thanks to Trump) and by the way they prove nothing!” in a span of weeks. It’s a textbook manipulation by Trump to rally the crowd, then convince them the thing they wanted actually exonerates him. It has worked on some, but not all.

The End of MAGA?

So, are we truly at the beginning of the end of MAGA? Possibly. The movement is clearly at its weakest point since its rise. Its figureheads are feuding. Its foot soldiers are confused and divided. The image of a unified “America First” army has given way to a circular firing squad. Charlie Kirk’s death removed a key unifier and organizer for young conservatives, and in the aftermath, factions have scrambled for dominance. Some of Kirk’s cohort (people like Isabelle Brown or Jayme Chandler Franklin, rising Gen-Z commentators) have reportedly pulled back on the relentless Trump boosterism. They saw a friend gunned down by a political extremist, and then watched their peers sling blame and hate rather than unity. It’s anecdotal, but insiders say a few Turning Point influencers quietly began exploring post-Trump conservatism and focusing on local issues, faith, or even other leaders like Vivek Ramaswamy.

Vivek Ramaswamy

Speaking of Vivek Ramaswamy, the brash young presidential candidate who once vied to out-MAGA Trump, he could be positioning himself to inherit any fractured base. Ramaswamy has been flirting with the disillusioned Trump crowd by echoing their distrust of institutions but without Trump’s personal baggage. If Trump stumbles further (say, if more Epstein revelations land or legal troubles escalate), Vivek could be there to catch the falling flag. Other opportunists like Florida’s governor (yes, Ron DeSantis is still hovering) or even Tucker Carlson (who many think harbors political ambitions) could also benefit.

However, let’s not write Trump’s obituary just yet. MAGA has been declared dead before and roared back. Trump’s ability to survive scandal is legendary. Many of his base may ultimately dismiss the Epstein stuff as “fake news” and rally around him harder, especially if they perceive that “the regime” (media, Dems, globalists, take your pick) is attacking him unfairly. Trump still commands a cult of personality; some influencers like Nick Adams (“Alpha Male” Twitter persona and professional Trump sycophant) will never abandon him. Adams tweets daily praises of Trump’s virility and genius in a tongue-in-cheek style and no doubt he’ll continue, Epstein be damned. The Hodge Twins (popular MAGA comedians) seem more interested in dunking on liberals than criticizing Trump; they largely ignored the Epstein affair on their channels, sticking to easier red-meat topics. And Steve Bannon, despite his own Epstein entanglement, is back on message warning of Democrat plots and urging MAGA voters to stick with Trump in 2028. In short, the core propagandists are doing damage control.

What we have now is a schism, not a total collapse at least not yet. A significant chunk of MAGA influencers have broken away or gone eerily silent. Another chunk has doubled down in Trump’s defense. The average MAGA voter is caught in between, hearing mixed messages from the voices they trusted. The true test will be upcoming events: the House Epstein files vote (will more damning info emerge?), the 2026 midterms (do MAGA voters stay loyal or splinter off, maybe depress turnout?), and the ongoing legal circus around Trump. If Trump looks vulnerable, more rats may jump ship. If he weathers this storm, the movement might congeal again though likely smaller and more radicalized (having purged the skeptics).

In 2016, the world underestimated MAGA. In 2024, they did so again at their peril. In 2025, we might be overestimating its demise just as prematurely. But make no mistake: the foundations are quaking. The MAGA movement is facing its greatest internal crisis ever, and even the Donald himself has been put on notice by his once-unquestioning flock.

MAGA always said they’d “drain the swamp.” Who’d have thought they’d start by draining their own? Trump now has to sleep in the bed he made and there might just be an Epstein-sized lump under the mattress.

Sources: Mainstream and independent news reports, social media data, and congressional records have been used to compile this analysis. Key references include Reuters , Al Jazeera , The Guardian , Wired , the International Bar Association’s investigation , and others as cited throughout. These illustrate the feud between Shapiro and Fuentes, internal strife at The Daily Wire , the mainstream media’s lapses , and the evolving positions of MAGA influencers from Charlie Kirk to Laura Loomer . https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-urges-us-house-republicans-vote-release-epstein-files-2025-11-17/

1. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/17/trump-backs-full-release-of-epstein-files-in-sharp-reversal

2. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/14/trump-congress-and-the-epstein-files-what-happens-next

3. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/16/us-lawmaker-marjorie-taylor-greene-blames-trump-for-threats-after-split

4. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/16/who-is-marjorie-taylor-greene-trumps-maga-ally-turned-critic

5. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/11/14/marjorie-taylor-greene-trump/

6. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/03/ben-shapiro-tucker-carlson-nick-fuentes-interview-00633323

https://www.status.news/p/daily-wire-jeremy-boreing-layoffs

1. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/22/candace-owens-leaves-daily-wire

2. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/police-search-sniper-who-killed-conservative-activist-charlie-kirk-utah-2025-09-11/

3. https://abcnews.go.com/US/visual-timeline-charlie-kirk-shooting-unfolded/story?id=125478526

4. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/utah-valley-shooting-updates

5. https://apnews.com/article/85cefc5ef2a64d3c33ebea6a444e0c52

6. https://www.ibanet.org/President-Trump-and-the-Epstein-scandal

7. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-trump-administration-responses-epstein-files-release-saga/story?id=127529275

8. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/right-wing-influencers-get-binders-labeled-the-epstein-files-phase-1-but-downplay-revelations/

9. https://www.wired.com/story/trump-epstein-maga-revolt/

10. https://www.wired.com/story/maga-wanted-epstein-files-now-theyre-ignoring-them/

11. https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/epstein-files-fallout-trump-maga-media-irony-backlash.php

12. https://apnews.com/article/jeffrey-epstein-client-list-bondi-memo-trump-03fbcd024f631440f7ed62b3c6927db3

13. https://time.com/7300378/epstein-client-list-suicide-blackmail-conspiracy-theories-doj-fbi-memo/

14. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/27/jeffrey-epstein-files-released

15. https://apnews.com/article/jeffrey-epstein-files-pam-bondi-trump-1a6af3e9fa1cfb6d267985a971a4929a

16. https://www.axios.com/2025/11/12/new-epstein-files-emails-released-doj-trump

17. https://www.newsweek.com/gen-z-maga-flaming-mad-trump-over-epstein-files-charlie-kirk-2100166

18. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-to-know-about-the-maga-faithfuls-anger-over-trump-and-the-epstein-case

19. https://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-influencer-denounces-trump-epstein-liberals-were-right-2100489

20. https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-epstein-files-public-records-project-47-newsletter-rcna218273

21. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/14/jeffrey-epstein-steve-bannon

22. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/15/steve-bannon-jeffrey-epstein-text-messages-publicity