“Mormon Church Linked to Epstein Files?!” Nice Try Jorge Lopez
Bottom Line
This TikTok attempts to frame the LDS Church as morally culpable through unrelated financial investments. It’s dishonest, manipulative, and disrespects the complexity of modern investment systems.
| Platform | TikTok |
|---|---|
| Creator | Jorge Lopez (@jorgesanch333z) |
| Title/Hook | “Mormon Church Linked to Epstein Files?!” |
| Category | Financial Ethics & Political Manipulation |
| Quote | “So most people don’t know that Les Wexner, the former CEO of L Brands… gave Jeffrey Epstein full power of attorney… And on top of that, Ensign Peak (Mormon Church) was an investor in L Brands… through shell companies… And all four Utah representatives voted against releasing the Epstein files… This is all so suspicious…” — Jorge Lopez, |
| Core Claim | The LDS Church knowingly invested in L Brands (linked to Epstein) and covered it up via shell companies; Utah politicians helped hide Epstein’s crimes. |
| Conclusion | Misleading / Guilt by Association Fallacy |
| Logical Questions |
|
🔍 Core Rebuttal
1. Passive ≠ Complicit. Ensign Peak manages billions across diversified portfolios like most institutional investors. No evidence supports the Church having operational control over L Brands or knowledge of Epstein’s conduct through Les Wexner.
2. “Shell Companies” were regulatory, not criminal. The Church’s 2023 SEC settlement confirms failure to file correctly—not illegal behavior. Many nonprofits and religious groups use intermediaries for privacy and protection.
3. L Brands ≠ Epstein. L Brands was a global brand. Wexner’s poor personal judgment doesn’t taint every shareholder. Claiming so is emotional misdirection and guilt by association.
4. Utah Reps ≠ Church Plot. The Epstein vote (Roll Call 136) split by party, not religion. LDS Church did not direct or lobby the vote. Utah Republicans often vote with national GOP strategy.
🧠 Manipulation & Logic Check
- Fallacy: Guilt by association (Church → Wexner → Epstein).
- Emotional trigger: Weaponizes Epstein’s crimes to imply institutional corruption without evidence.
⚠️ Defamation Risk
While not direct, the accusation pattern may rise to reckless implication. Linking a religion to crimes without evidence introduces reputational harm risk.