Academy Award winner and The View moderator Whoopi Goldberg has gone on the record to dismantle a viral narrative tying her to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
During Tuesday’s broadcast of The View, the 70-year-old star addressed the rumors directly, offering a detailed, line-by-line explanation of why her name appears in newly unsealed court documents.
The File Mention That Sparked the Firestorm
The controversy ignited after the release of a sweeping batch of U.S. Department of Justice records. As social media users combed through the documents for recognizable names, Goldberg’s surfaced — quickly fueling speculation.
But according to Goldberg, the reference stems from a single 2013 email regarding travel logistics for a Monaco charity event hosted by Julian Lennon.
Reading the entry aloud for transparency, Goldberg explained that a third party had inquired whether Epstein or an associate might have access to a private jet to help her attend the event. The charity, she noted, would have covered travel costs.
Her response was unequivocal:
She never took the flight.
She never met Epstein.
And she had no relationship with him.
“In the name of transparency, my name is in the files. Yes. And what does it say? It says ‘Whoopi needs a plane to get to Monaco…’” she told viewers.
She was equally firm about drawing boundaries between a logistical email and a fabricated romance. “I wasn’t his girlfriend, I wasn’t his friend,” she said, even joking that her well-documented fear of flying makes the rumor especially implausible.
“Honey, Come On”: Pushing Back on Online Assumptions
Goldberg’s frustration was palpable as she addressed how quickly online speculation can snowball into accepted “fact.” She reminded viewers that her personal life has been highly public for decades — hardly fertile ground for a secret relationship.
“People actually believe that I was with him. It’s like ‘honey, come on,’” she remarked.
Co-host Joy Behar reinforced the broader context, pointing out that the document release includes countless names mentioned in passing — from witnesses to service providers — not just individuals accused of wrongdoing.
“So in other words, anyone can be on this list,” Behar observed.
Addressing the “Island” Rumors
This isn’t the first time Goldberg has confronted Epstein-related claims circulating online. She has previously denied allegations that she visited his private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, another recurring talking point in conspiracy-driven discussions.
Legal analysts and federal officials have repeatedly emphasized that being mentioned in investigative documents does not imply misconduct — or even a personal connection.
In Goldberg’s case, the reference appears to be a logistical footnote in the world of high-profile philanthropy — not evidence of a social bond.
As millions continue to sift through Epstein-related files, Goldberg’s public rebuttal underscores a crucial distinction: there is a vast difference between appearing in paperwork and being involved in wrongdoing.