Michael Keesling
Overview
Michael Keesling is an internet marketing and search engine optimization consultant named in Jeffrey Epstein’s 2010 online reputation campaign. Released records assign Keesling a central operational role involving websites, domain names, hosting, search strategy, outside writers, design work, paid search, and the creation of favorable material intended to displace negative search results about Epstein.
The documents provide substantially stronger evidence of Keesling’s operational participation than they do for several people who were merely listed as unpaid advisers. They include a detailed assignment of responsibilities, Epstein’s statement that money had been sent, multiple wire records, and a later email in which Keesling described how project funds had been spent.
The reviewed evidence does not connect Keesling to Epstein’s trafficking operation, victim recruitment, or sexual abuse. His documented role concerned Epstein’s online reputation.
Profile Summary
- Name: Michael Keesling, also identified as Mike Keesling
- Profession: Search engine optimization and internet marketing consultant
- Documented Epstein connection: Paid operational member of Epstein’s 2010 reputation campaign
- Named project role: Team leader and search and reputation management specialist
- Stated project budget: $25,000, including certain outside expenses
- Documented wire records: Three transfers cited by The Verge, totaling $22,500
- Additional accounting statement: Keesling wrote that Al Seckel had given him more than $20,000 in cash without a receipt
- Primary activities described in the records: Website production, domains, hosting, content, outside writers, link distribution, paid search, design coordination, and search result displacement
- Evidence of trafficking involvement: None located in the records reviewed for this profile
Professional Background
Reporting by The Verge and Cronkite News identifies Keesling as a California search engine optimization consultant.
A current website bearing his name describes him as an SEO consultant with more than 25 years of experience. The site says that he works with a limited number of clients and develops custom search strategies for businesses. These are professional claims made on Keesling’s own website, not independent verification of every detail.
A public Alignable profile identifies Mike Keesling as a West Hollywood SEO and internet marketing consultant. The profile displays Local Business Person recognition for 2023 and 2024.
The Verge reported that messages sent to a Michael Keesling working in SEO in West Hollywood went unanswered. An archived professional record associated with the Epstein material appears in EFTA02416973.
How the Reputation Campaign Began
In September 2010, Al Seckel proposed an operation intended to make unfavorable Google results about Epstein effectively disappear. The proposal estimated a cost of approximately $20,000 to $25,000 and stated that Seckel and Pablos Holman knew people who could perform the work.
The exchange appears in EFTA02421209.
Epstein asked whether favorable articles would be needed to displace negative results. The ensuing plan called for a coordinated network of controlled websites, rewritten articles, outside links, search optimization, Wikipedia activity, and profiles of unrelated people who shared Epstein’s name.
Before Keesling became part of the project, Seckel contacted Gregory Markel of Infuse Creative. Markel declined the work after raising concerns about Epstein’s conviction and the truth of the underlying accusations. Keesling subsequently became the principal paid search specialist identified in the campaign documents.
The October 2010 Plan
An October 20, 2010 plan divided the campaign into two categories of websites.
The first category consisted of sites presented as substantive sources about Epstein’s philanthropy and scientific interests.
The second category consisted of what the plan called “pseudo sites.” Proposed subjects included sports, cooking, and photographs or videos.
The detailed plan appears across:
The records identify Keesling as a main team leader and an expert in search and reputation management. This was not merely an informal advisory designation. The plan assigned him a broad range of implementation duties and allocated him the campaign’s largest stated payment.
Responsibilities Assigned to Keesling
The October plan assigned or attributed the following responsibilities to Keesling:
- Analyze favorable and unfavorable search material concerning Epstein
- Develop the campaign’s basic search strategy
- Determine the pace and sequence of implementation
- Oversee a content group in the Philippines
- Oversee graphic design and website uploading
- Oversee a group described in the plan as “hackers”
- Develop or oversee the sports blog
- Build sites connected to Epstein’s science and foundation activities
- Develop proposed sites concerning cooking, sports, photographs, and videos
- Build websites or profiles for unrelated people named Jeffrey Epstein
- Purchase paid search placements
- Purchase Google advertising
- Purchase domain names
- Pay website hosting expenses
- Coordinate design and production expenses
These assignments appear most clearly in EFTA00778143 and EFTA00778144.
The plan’s use of the word “hackers” should be reported as language contained in the document. The assignment does not, by itself, prove that Keesling personally accessed a computer unlawfully or directed a specific unlawful intrusion.
The Philippines Content Group
The plan placed a group in the Philippines under Keesling’s oversight. It described the group as responsible for repeatedly rewriting favorable material, inserting links to primary campaign websites, distributing links on educational sites, and posting content across the internet.
The plan stated that the group’s compensation would be handled through Keesling’s project payment. Cronkite News Cronkite News reports that Keesling hired a team of writers in the Philippines.
The documents do not publicly identify every writer, the writers’ employer, or the author of every article produced through the arrangement.
This distinction matters because some campaign documents attributed writing responsibility to Keesling, while later correspondence indicated that actual sports content was being supplied by writers in the Philippines. The evidence supports an operational and supervisory role for Keesling. It does not establish that he personally wrote every post published under Epstein’s name.
JeffreyEpsteinSports.com
The sports website became the clearest example of the proposed pseudo site strategy.
Correspondence about its content appears in EFTA02421114. A separate exchange concerning the intended anonymity of the site appears in EFTA00751527.
The site published commentary about professional and college sports under the name Jeffrey Epstein. The broader campaign hoped that a regularly updated sports site containing Epstein’s exact name would rank prominently when users searched for him.
Cronkite News reports that the sports writing was supplied by the Philippines team because Seckel said he knew little about sports. This means that the name presented to readers did not reliably identify the actual writers.
The evidence connects Keesling to the site’s production and content system. It does not establish that he wrote every sports article himself.
The Websites That Launched
On October 29, 2010, Seckel reported the launch of three sites:
- JeffreyEpsteinScience.com
- JeffreyEpstein.org
- JeffreyEpsteinSports.com
The cooking site and the proposed photograph and video site do not appear to have reached the same documented launch stage. They should therefore remain classified as proposed properties unless additional archival or registration evidence is located.
One campaign document connected with the website material appears in EFTA00754643.
Search Result Strategy
The campaign did not depend on a single website. It attempted to create an interconnected body of material that search engines might interpret as multiple relevant sources.
The documented strategy included:
- Repeating Epstein’s full name throughout controlled articles
- Publishing content across several domains
- Creating favorable science and philanthropy material
- Producing unrelated or recreational content carrying Epstein’s name
- Obtaining links from established institutions and outside websites
- Rewriting favorable material into numerous secondary versions
- Building pages about unrelated people who shared Epstein’s name
- Purchasing advertisements and paid search placement
- Attempting to change Epstein’s Wikipedia presentation
- Monitoring new search results and responding to unfavorable material
The project’s purpose was described openly in the correspondence. It sought to push reporting about Epstein’s conviction and sexual offenses lower in search results by placing controlled or favorable material above it.
Evidence of Search Placement
On November 5, 2010, Seckel sent Epstein a screenshot of a Google search for his name. The captured results showed three campaign related properties on the first page.
That screenshot appears in EFTA00752512.
This provides evidence that the campaign achieved favorable placement in that particular search capture. It does not establish that the results were identical for every user, that the rankings remained stable, or that the campaign permanently suppressed unfavorable reporting.
Search results can vary by date, location, device, personalization, and changes to a search engine’s ranking system.
Payment Structure
The October plan listed the following proposed compensation:
- Al Seckel: No payment listed
- Isabel Maxwell: No payment listed
- Christine Maxwell: No payment listed
- Michael Keesling: $25,000
- Stephanie Horenstein: $2,500
- Group described as hackers: $2,500
The plan stated that Keesling’s $25,000 included domain names, hosting, the Philippines group, and web designers working on his side of the project. This breakdown appears in EFTA00778144.
In the October 20 correspondence, Epstein responded that money had been sent and asked how Seckel had found Keesling. That exchange appears in EFTA00778138.
Wire Transfer Evidence
The Verge identified three released wire records involving Keesling and reported that they totaled $22,500:
These records strengthen the evidence that Keesling’s participation progressed beyond a proposed role.
The $22,500 total should not automatically be treated as the full cost of the campaign. The project documents separately describe a $25,000 budget that included outside expenses. The available records do not provide a fully reconciled accounting for every payment, expense, refund, or transfer between the participants.
Keesling’s December 2010 Accounting Email
On December 8, 2010, Keesling emailed Epstein directly about the campaign’s finances.
Keesling wrote that Seckel had given him more than $20,000 in cash several months earlier and that no receipt had been created. He said he did not remember the exact amount.
He described an initial personal fee of approximately $7,500. According to his email, the remaining money had been spent on:
- The Philippines team
- A group described as a hacking team
- A survey
- Servers
- Initial designers
- A website template that he said was no longer being used
Keesling also referred to separate payments involving Stephanie Horenstein and other people described as hackers, although he said he could not remember the exact dates or amounts.
The complete exchange appears in EFTA00709316.
This email is important because it is a direct statement from Keesling about receiving and spending project money. It also demonstrates that the accounting was informal and incomplete.
Why the Payment Figures Must Not Be Added Together
The records contain several figures:
- A stated $25,000 project allocation
- Three wire records reported as totaling $22,500
- Keesling’s statement that he received more than $20,000 in cash from Seckel
- Keesling’s estimate that his own initial portion was approximately $7,500
These figures cannot safely be added together.
The cash could have originated from funds that were wired earlier. The $25,000 figure included expenses paid to other workers and service providers. Keesling’s email also indicates uncertainty about exact amounts and whether particular payments belonged to the initial funding.
Until a complete transaction chain is reconstructed, the responsible conclusion is that Keesling was allocated $25,000 for his role and associated expenses, that records cited by The Verge document $22,500 in transfers, and that he separately described receiving more than $20,000 in cash from Seckel. Whether these were overlapping or independent payments remains unresolved.
Evidence That Keesling Understood the Project’s Purpose
The written plan described the negative search problem, the desired favorable rankings, the production of controlled websites, the use of unrelated people sharing Epstein’s name, and the effort to move unfavorable reporting away from the first page.
Keesling was identified as a main team leader responsible for deep analysis and long term search strategy. His direct financial email also discussed how extensive the project had become and how the funds were used.
This supports the conclusion that Keesling understood that the work concerned Epstein’s unfavorable online reputation and search results.
The documents reviewed do not establish how much Keesling knew about Epstein’s broader conduct beyond information that was publicly available through Epstein’s conviction and the reporting the campaign was trying to displace.
Relationship With Al Seckel
The evidence identifies Seckel as the person who assembled and coordinated the initial team. Keesling’s December email indicates that Seckel provided him with cash and served as an intermediary during the project.
Cronkite News describes Keesling as a longtime friend of Seckel. In the released correspondence, Epstein asked Seckel how he had found Keesling, suggesting that Seckel introduced or recruited him into the campaign.
Their working relationship appears to have involved:
- Seckel developing the overall narrative and coordinating with Epstein
- Keesling implementing the technical and content strategy
- Seckel transmitting money and instructions
- Keesling coordinating outside production workers and infrastructure
- Both men reporting progress or problems to Epstein
The precise terms of any contract between Seckel and Keesling have not been located.
Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein
Keesling was not limited to communication through Seckel. The December 2010 accounting email was sent directly to Epstein, who questioned the relationship between the $25,000 allocation and an earlier description of a smaller payment.
This direct exchange shows that Epstein personally scrutinized the project’s cost and that Keesling provided him with an explanation of how the money had been used.
The records reviewed for this profile do not establish a broader financial advisory, social, scientific, or personal relationship between Epstein and Keesling outside the reputation project.
Current Status
Keesling appears to have continued working in search engine optimization and internet marketing.
His public website and Alignable profile advertise SEO services in California. Alignable displays community business recognition for 2023 and 2024.
The Verge reported that its messages to a West Hollywood SEO professional named Michael Keesling went unanswered. Cronkite News likewise reported on his continuing work in internet marketing.
No response from Keesling addressing the released Epstein records was located during this review.
Evidence Assessment
| Question | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Was Keesling named in the campaign plan? | Yes |
| Was he assigned an operational role? | Yes |
| Was he merely an unpaid adviser? | No. The plan allocated him $25,000 |
| Did Epstein indicate that money had been sent? | Yes |
| Are there transfer records? | Yes. Three records cited by The Verge total $22,500 |
| Did Keesling discuss receiving cash? | Yes. He wrote that Seckel gave him more than $20,000 without a receipt |
| Can the cash and wire amounts be added together? | No. Possible overlap has not been resolved |
| Did he oversee outside writers? | The plan placed the Philippines group under his oversight and included its costs in his allocation |
| Did he personally write every article? | Not established |
| Did he control every campaign domain? | Not established |
| Did the campaign obtain first page search placement? | A November 2010 screenshot documents first page placement at one captured moment |
| Did Keesling participate in trafficking or recruitment? | No evidence of that was located in the records reviewed |
| Did he know the campaign concerned negative reporting about Epstein? | The responsibilities and strategy described in the plan strongly support that conclusion |
| Did he know the full extent of Epstein’s crimes? | Not established |
Timeline
| Date | Event | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| September 13, 2010 | Seckel proposed making unfavorable Google results about Epstein effectively disappear for approximately $20,000 to $25,000 | EFTA02421209 |
| October 20, 2010 | A detailed reputation plan identified Keesling as a main team leader and assigned him website, search, content, hosting, domain, and outside worker responsibilities | EFTA00754635, EFTA00754636, EFTA00754637, EFTA00778143, EFTA00778144 |
| October 20, 2010 | Epstein responded that money had been sent and asked how Seckel found Keesling | EFTA00778138 |
| October 29, 2010 | Seckel reported that the science, foundation, and sports sites had launched | Cronkite News |
| November 5, 2010 | A captured Google search showed three campaign related properties on the first page | EFTA00752512 |
| December 8, 2010 | Keesling sent Epstein an accounting explanation describing cash from Seckel and spending on writers, servers, design, and other project costs | EFTA00709316 |
| 2010 payment period | Three released transfer records cited by The Verge totaled $22,500 | EFTA01581526, EFTA01584792, EFTA01581464 |
| 2026 | Major reporting identified Keesling’s role in the campaign and sought comment | The Verge, Cronkite News |
What the Evidence Establishes
The available evidence establishes that:
- Keesling was a named and paid operational participant in the 2010 reputation campaign
- The plan assigned him responsibility for major parts of the campaign’s technical and content infrastructure
- His responsibilities included domains, hosting, websites, paid search, design coordination, outside writers, and search strategy
- The plan allocated $25,000 to Keesling and expenses under his supervision
- Epstein stated that money had been sent
- Released transfer records cited by The Verge total $22,500
- Keesling directly described receiving and spending substantial project funds
- The sports site and other controlled websites formed part of an effort to displace reporting about Epstein’s conviction in search results
- At least one captured Google search showed several campaign properties on the first page
What the Evidence Does Not Establish
The available evidence does not establish that:
- Keesling participated in Epstein’s trafficking operation
- Keesling recruited, abused, or interacted with victims
- He personally wrote every article published by the campaign
- He personally performed any unlawful computer intrusion
- Every proposed pseudo site was launched
- He legally owned every domain used by the campaign
- The $22,500 in wires and the cash described in his email were separate payments
- The campaign permanently removed truthful reporting from Google
- The November 2010 search screenshot represented results seen by every user
- Keesling knew the complete scope of Epstein’s sexual abuse and trafficking activities
Unresolved Questions
Important questions remain:
- What were the exact amounts and dates of every payment to Keesling?
- Did the cash described by Keesling originate from the documented wire transfers?
- Who were the individual writers in the Philippines?
- Did those writers know the purpose of the campaign?
- Which domains did Keesling personally register or control?
- Who held the hosting accounts and administrative credentials?
- Who wrote each article published through the sports site?
- Which actions were performed by the group described as hackers?
- Did Keesling participate directly in Wikipedia activity, or was that handled by other members of the campaign?
- Were the websites later transferred to Epstein or another administrator?
- Did Keesling retain project records, invoices, domain receipts, analytics, or correspondence?
Conclusion
Michael Keesling was not simply a name appearing in Epstein’s address book or an outside professional mentioned in passing. The released records describe him as a principal paid operator in the 2010 reputation campaign.
His assigned role combined search analysis, website infrastructure, domain management, content production, outside writers, paid placement, and coordination of additional workers. Epstein stated that money had been sent. Financial records cited by The Verge document $22,500 in transfers. Keesling’s own email described receiving more than $20,000 in cash from Seckel and spending project funds on writers, servers, designers, and other campaign components.
The payment record remains incomplete, and the figures must not be double counted. The evidence also does not connect Keesling to Epstein’s trafficking crimes.
What it does establish is that Keesling occupied a significant operational position in an organized effort to influence what the public encountered when searching for Jeffrey Epstein online.
Primary Evidence
- EFTA02421209: Initial September 2010 search suppression proposal
- EFTA00754635: October 2010 campaign plan
- EFTA00754636: October 2010 campaign plan
- EFTA00754637: October 2010 campaign plan
- EFTA00778138: Plan discussion, Epstein response, and payment statement
- EFTA00778143: Team structure and assigned responsibilities
- EFTA00778144: Keesling’s responsibilities and $25,000 allocation
- EFTA00754643: Campaign website and content material
- EFTA02421114: Sports website content discussion
- EFTA00751527: Intended anonymity of the sports site
- EFTA00752512: November 2010 Google search capture
- EFTA00709316: Keesling’s December 2010 accounting email
- EFTA01581526: Transfer record cited by The Verge
- EFTA01584792: Transfer record cited by The Verge
- EFTA01581464: Transfer record cited by The Verge
- EFTA02416973: Professional profile record
Additional Sources
- The Verge: Jeffrey Epstein’s digital cleanup crew
- Cronkite News: How Jeffrey Epstein used a sports blog to suppress media reports about his sex offender past
- The Indian Express: How Jeffrey Epstein spent hundreds of thousands to make his Google results vanish
- Michael Keesling’s current professional website
- Mike Keesling’s Alignable profile
Editorial Note
This profile distinguishes between assignments described in campaign documents, actions independently supported by correspondence or financial records, and questions that remain unresolved. Inclusion in Epstein’s correspondence does not by itself establish participation in his trafficking crimes.
Last reviewed: August 12, 2026.