Will the letter be shown to the public?
This market resolves YES if there is a picture of this letter available to the public (in any form) by the end of July, and there is a consensus of credible media reporting that the picture is genuine. Resolves NO otherwise.
The picture does not need to exactly the match the description of the letter in the article, it just needs to be sufficiently clear that it's the letter the article is describing.
Whether or not it is revealed that the letter is written by Trump does not matter for the purposes of this market. The WSJ is describing a physical letter. What matters is if there is a picture of that letter (not its author).
It's fine if some parts of the letter aren't visible in the picture, let's say the ~majority of the letter should be visible.
Update 2025-07-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to a user question, the creator has clarified how visibility will be judged:
Censored portions of the letter will be counted as not visible.
The market will resolve NO if 50% or more of the letter is not visible (including from censorship).
1,000
3.00OK here's a conspiracy theory for you folks: What if it's a setup?
It goes like this:
Murdoch has someone cook up the note with the drawing and signature and approach a WSJ journal reporter with it, Newscorp tells editorial staff to go with the story despite how explosive it is.
Trump uses the event to change the narrative, blaming the supposedly biased mainstream media for trying to frame and defame Trump and unifying his base.
Newscorp settles the defamation suit for a nominal amount, confirming to Trump's base that the evidence must have been fake and Trump innocent all along, and in the process taking the attention away from Epstein and all of his other links to Trump.
Murdoch and Trump remain pals who help each other out rather than being pushed into a confrontation.
Here's why maybe you should believe this:
It sounds like something that would happen in a TV show with a machiavellian news magnate character based on Rupert Murdoch... and Murdoch is supposedly a pretty smart and ruthless guy in real life too
If you had this note linking Trump and Epstein why would you go to WSJ, a paper with a famously right-wing editorial line, that is owned by Murdoch, rather than to a more left-leaning paper like the Times or the Post?
It's awfully like what happened with the Russian election interference scandal, where the media got suckered into reporting on an overextended inquiry about whether the Trump campaign actively coordinated with Russia (which they probably didn't) and lost sight of all the evidence that Russia was (independently) actively interfering with the election to get Trump to win.
Anyway, just a theory, presented as much for amusement as anything else.
@EvanDaniel yeah, i'll count anything censored as part of what's not visible. (it would be weird if they showed a pic of the letter with a full 50%+ of it censored, but i think it's better for the market to resolve NO in that case, because my curiosity here is "will i see this letter" and at 50%+ that's basically me not seeing the letter)