Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Epstein Chronicles. The brainy acts over at the Department of
Justice rolled out their latest publicity stunt like a late
night infomercial, promising miracle results with absolutely zero effort, Act
now and will unseal grand jury documents. They shout, as
if the world hasn't already figured out that grand jury
paperwork is a legal equivalent of an empty cereal box,
crinkly noise, zero nutrition, and crumbs of nothing. And I
don't know about you, but I'm pretty tired of watching
them pretend that this is the key to unlocking the truth.
It's more like banging a bunch of pots and pans
thinking that they're conducting the New York Philharmonic. And meanwhile,
the real problem, the rancid, festering corpse called the non
prosecution Agreement, sits in the center of the room like
a bloated whale carcass covered by a beach towel, and
everyone in government's just pretending they can't smell it. They're
buying time, hoping that the public loses interest, waiting for
another shot. I need distraction to walk by wearing a
sequined outfit and big sunglasses. They want to be the
heroes in a story where they're the villains wearing cheap
Halloween masks. Every time they announced something like this, you
think Jesus himself just ascended from the heavens carrying stone tablets. Instead,
it's some assistant deputy bureaucrat with the charisma of a
wet paper napkin, explaining why releasing redacted transcripts of already
known testimony is a revolutionary act. The reporter's nod like
bobbleheads in a rental corolla, scribbling notes They don't believe
because their editors already picked the headline before they left
the office. The whole performance smells like somebody for breathing
a murder scene instead of cleaning it. Everyone pretends not
to notice the blood's soaking through the carpet. Everyone pretends
the flowers on the table hide the stench. Everyone pretends
this is justice instead of theater. These fools aren't opening doors,
they're polishing the doorknobs. But don't worry. They insist the
truth is near. The truth just needs one or a carefully
scheduled legal maneuver. One more procedural dance Number one more
round of sorry, we can't comment on ongoing investigations, sung
in four part harmony by people whose souls ran away
years ago. It's a joke, but nobody laughs because laughing
means acknowledging just how absurd this really is. Instead, we
grit our teeth until they crack. Meanwhile, the NPA sits
like an unexploded bomb. Everyone tiptoes around, pretending it's just
an oddly shaped decoration. It should have been incinerated the
moment evidence surface proving the government was deceived, manipulated, and
flat out defrauded by Jeffrey Epstein and his band of
legal creeps. But of course that would require courage, and
courage is extinct in Washington unless it comes with a
sponsorship deal and a logo backdrop. The NPA is a
fortress built to protect reputations, not justice. It's the emergency
parachute for powerful parasites who can't afford to hit the ground.
It's the firewall between the truth and the people who
burn for it. And here's the part they won't tell you,
but I will. Trump doesn't need Congress, he doesn't need
the courts, he doesn't need the DJ's permission, slip or
a magic spell from a federal judge. All he needs
is a pen and ten seconds of spine density. But
every time the subject comes up, he calls it a hoax.
If he can launch missiles during dessert and brag about it,
if he can fire cabinet members the way teenagers delete
text messages, if he can rewrite policy by tweeting half
drunk at two am, then he can rip up a
fraudulent agreement signed in the shadows to protect predators. But
he doesn't. And that's the part nobody wants to say
out loud because it burns going up. He won't touch
the NPA because it's the skeleton key to every lock
room in this whole rotten mansion. They're rearranging rotten hay
while pretending the river is coming any minute now. They
schedule meetings to schedule meetings about meetings. They love process
because process delays consequence. Process is their religion. Process is
their weapon, Process is their shield, and every announcement is
a rerun. They show it like a sitcom episode from
ninety eight, where everyone already knows the punchline, but collapse anyway. Tonight,
on a very special episode of Justice theater. The DOJ
pretends to on earth hidden truth while hiding the real
truth somewhere else. Q applause, Q dramatic music, Q credits,
Q nothing. It's a slow motion con and we're expected
to admire the artistry. And if you listen closely, you'll
notice that nobody in power ever even uses the letters
NPA in public. It's Voldemort level forbidden. Say it out
loud and the wall starts sweating. Mention it in a hearing,
and microphones mysteriously malfunction. Ask a direct question and watch
pupils dilate like cornered animals. You'd think the document contained
the launch codes for nuclear warheads instead of the truth
about a child trafficker and the collection of famous ghouls
who rode the gravy train. They think they can outrun time.
They think they can outrun the survivors. They think they
can outrun the Internet. They really think that you're going
to forget. They genuinely believe if they keep dropping shiny
distractions like breadcrumbs, the public won't notice the wolves. But
they don't understand how much is changed. They don't understand
rage with direction. They don't understand what happens when ordinary
people stop believing in fairy tales. They want a bury
history alive. They want silence to be permanent. They want
closure without accountability, because the second the NPA dies, everything
else goes with it. Every show collapses, every secret becomes evidence,
every name becomes oxygen, and they know it. That's why
they fight like drowning men. So instead we get this
song and dance routine about grand jury papers, like there's
some sacred relic that will change civilization, while the real
weapon sits on touch behind glass. They're trying to sell
knockoff justice to people who already paid full price. And
if they were smart, they'd rip up the themselves and
pretend they always wanted to. But they're not smart. They're arrogant,
and they think that time is on their side. Today's
article was published by CNN and the headline Justice Department
again asked judge to unseal Epstein grand jury testimony after
Congress passes law. This article was authored by Alison Maine
and this is just to give that red meat out right. Hey, look,
we told the courts to give us this information and
they refused, So it's their fault, not Donald Trump's. But
we all know that the grand jury process is a
lot more difficult than that. Maybe later i'll post the
episode where I explain why it's so difficult, because you
don't just get grand jury documentation when you ask for it.
There is a whole process, and if you don't fit
the parameters of that process, you're not going to get
the information. But even more importantly, that information from the
grand jury is not going to lead us down any
paths where we're going to get to the truth or
any kind of justice. Now, look, I'm not saying I
wouldn't want to see it. I want to see everything.
But they're doing this on purpose when they could be
focused on, oh, I don't know the NPA. Instead, they're
over here focused on grand jury documents that they know
they're not going to get. The Justice Department is asked
a federal judge in Florida to reconsider unsealing grand jury
material related to an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, as the
agency faces a congressionally mandated deadline to release all documents
related to the accused sex trafficker next month. A judge
in the Southern District of Florida previously denied a request
by the DOJ to make public transcripts from the case,
which federal prosecutors asked for due to extensive public interest,
but not as part of a judicial proceeding. Epstein committed
many of his crimes in Florida. When a Florida judge
denied the DOJ's original request, she said her hands are
tied because the Justice Department sought to release the sealed
evidence due to extend of public interest, not as part
of a judicial proceeding, which is the usual standard in
a filing. On Friday, the Justice Department cited the passage
of a law early last week of a law mandating
the release of all of its Epstein files within thirty days,
arguing public production of the grand jury material is therefore required. Yo,
this is like, very very ridiculous. They're over here demanding
that this grand jury shit gets released and not doing
the things that are in their power to do. Now,
if you are doing it all at the same time, great,
but they're not. This is nothing more than performative. This
is looking for a scapegoat. This is looking to direct
the outrage somewhere else, and I'm not buying it. In
light of the acts clearer mandate the Court should authorize
the Department of Justice to release the grand jury transcripts
and lift any pre existing protective orders that would otherwise
prevent public disclosure. The filing says, and look again, I'm
not saying that I don't want to see it. I do,
but they're trying to pitch it as something it's not.
It's not going to be this key that leads us
to victory. It's not going to show us things we
don't know. All it's gonna do is add a little context.
And while that's important, I think the main thing should
be the NPA, and I've said that from the very beginning.
That is the most restrictive document in this whole entire thing.
But the legislation, which President Donald Trump signed into law
last week does not specifically mention grand jury material. The law,
formerly titled the Epstein Files Transparency Act, was passed by
the House of Representatives almost unanimously earlier this month. The
Senate then passed the bill through unanimous consent. It's not
clear what files the Justice Department will release, or if
it won't be released due to some of the ongoing investigations.
What a bunch of bs If they don't release documents
because of that investigation. Folks, you know the fixes in now.
I'm sure most of you know the fixes in already,
but you get my drift. There's no denying it. If
that's the case, Trump is asked the DOJ to investigate
Epstein's ties to many other high profile figures associated with
the Democratic Party, including Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reed Hoffman, J. P.
Morgan Chase, and many other people and institutions. Pretty sure
all those people, as far as institution wise, are wrapped
up with everybody. You think JP Morgan Chase or the
rest of them are just doing banking with one person.
They're just doing banking with one side of the aisle.
These sons of bitches have their fingers and everybody's pie,
including yours. The grand jury testimony that the Department seeks
to release, however, is only a small portion of the
thousands of documents related to the Epstein investigation and criminal case.
Many of those documents are already in the Justice Department
custody and may not have been presented to the jury
in Florida. Look, the whole entire thing about Florida too,
has to be examined, and in fact, we're going to
have another episode about that, because it's important. The players
that were down there need to be held accountable. Everybody
that was involved in this non prosecution agreement held accountable
at the very least answer for why they did what
they did. And I don't mean some stupid ass OIG report.
I mean something with teeth. And for me, the best
way to go from here is a special investigator. That
is the only way to get to the bottom of it.
We can't trust the Justice Department, we can't trust the
powers that be, so we have to make a different move.
And I think that a special investigator ticks off all
the boxes. But as far as the Grand Jerry documents go,
they're not going to be the be all end all,
And in my opinion, the only reason that they're even
bringing them up is because they know it's going to
be in l because they want to redirect anger, so
instead of people being mad at Trump or the administration,
instead they turn their rage at the court. It's nothing
more than more distraction and more deflection, and unfortunately for them,
that's not gonna work. So cool story, bro, But we're
still going to need all those Epstein files, all of
the information that goes with this episode can be found
in the description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome to
another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. As the Jeffrey Epstein
maelstrom rages around Donald Trump and his administration, his Justice Department,
led by Pam Bondy, has filed a motion with the
court to get the grand jury testimony from Jeffrey Epstein's
arrest in twenty nineteen unsealed. And on his face, that
sounds like a good idea, right, the more information we have,
the better, So I certainly won't turn down getting a
look at the grand jury documents. But the problem is
it's not that easy. And that's because there's a process
that's put into place that makes it very difficult for
these records, these documents to ever be released. And down
in Florida for like twenty years over the grand jury
records down there, And you know that when you're dealing
with the federal government, you're dealing with and even more
bureaucratic mess than anything else. So anybody who thinks that
these records are going to be available and available in
a short amount of time, they're crazy. And in this episode,
I'm going to explain why. And the first thing you
have to understand is the legal standard. And what you
have to understand first is that the grand jury proceedings
are secret by default. Rule sixty outline strict limits on disclosure,
and the main reason that secrecy is preserved is to
protect the reputation of people not indicted, encourage full and
frank testimony, prevent flight or tampering with witnesses, and to
protect jurors from external influence. So to get the records unsealed,
you have to show a particularized need that outweighs the
need for continued secrecy, and that standard was laid out
in the Douglas Oil Company versus Petrol Stops of Northwest
four forty one US two eleven in nineteen seventy nine.
So that's the ruling that governs the grand jury transcripts
being released or not. So who can petition for the disclosure? Well,
the following people can petition the court to disclose the
grand jury material, prosecutors, defendants in related criminal cases, civil
litigants in related proceedings, journalists, or members of the public.
Though rare and much harder. What's the process to get
them un sealed? First, you have to file a motion
in federal district court. A formal motion must be filed
in the court that impaneled the grand jury. The motion
must cite Rule six E three E, which lists exceptions
to secrecy, including judicial proceedings grounds for a defendant to
challenge an indictment civil litigation where the grand jury material
is relevant. And then you have to demonstrate a particularize need.
You have to show that the material is needed to
avoid a possible injustice. You have to show that the
disclosure outweighs the need for secrecy. A request is structured
to cover only what is necessary. Then after that we
go to court review. Then the judge may review the
grand jury materials and camera privately before he decides. The
court's going to weigh whether the grand jury investigation has concluded,
the relevance of the material and the impact on witnesses, jurors,
and subjects not charged. And if the motion's denied, you
can appeal and look for a higher court to review.
They can appeal to relevant US courts to appeal, and
in rare and historical significant cases, the issue has been
brought before the US Supreme Court. So is there any
precedent for grand jury documents to be released. While the
courts have granted access in major historical or public interest
cases Watergate, Rosenberg, and the Chicago eight. Congress has sometimes
obtained grand jury material for oversight under special circumstances, but
this usually requires judicial approval or legislative request with separation
of power scrutiny. What are some of the challenges in pitfalls. Well,
if the government opposes the request, it becomes far more difficult. Witness,
privacy and national security issues often block on sealing, and
there's no automatic right to unseal, even for victims or journalists.
So can the president or the Attorney General ask for
this stuff to be disclosed? The answer is yes, But
the grand jury secrecy is controlled by the judiciary, not
the executive So Donald Trump cannot ask for this to
be unsealed himself. He has to use his Department of
Justice to do so. Grand jury secrecy is governed by
Rule sixty and that rule gives a judiciary, not the
executive branch, final say over whether the records can be released.
The President or Attorney General can ask, but they cannot
override the court. The Attorney General, through the Department of Justice,
can file a Rule sixty three E motion with a
federal court. This motion as the judge to allow disclosure
for reasons such as use in a judicial proceeding, at
the request of a defendant, at the request of Congress,
and this was done for example during the Watergate investigation
and the Mueller probe, where the DOJ filed motions to
allow limited disclosure to Congress or to the public, but
again a judge must approve it. The AG has no
independent power to unseal without judicial sign off, and the
president he has no formal role in unsealing. The president
has even less authority here. He cannot order grand jury
material to be released, cannot access them directly, cannot override
Rule six E. The only thing a president can do
is encourage the DOJ to file emotion or to classify
related material if national security is involved, but grand jury
material is not classified. It's sealed under judicial secrecy rules,
so declassification does not apply. Understand that there are no
national interest exceptions. There's no provision in Rule six y
that says the public's right to know or executive interest
is enough to release grand jury material. The standard remains
particularized need judicial review, court authorization. Even if the entire
country demands release. Only the courts can break grand jury secrecy.
Well what about Congress. Congress or a congressional committee can
request grand jury material as part of an investigation, But
even Congress must go to court and prove the material
is relevant to the legislative purpose, it's tailored, it satisfies
legal exceptions under Rule sixty. The process is slow, heavily litigated,
and highly controversial, as seen during both the Watergate and
Mueller era fights over access to sealed materials. But listen,
when it comes down to covering the truth behind federal
criminal investigations. Few things are as tightly locked away as
grand jury records. These proceedings are designed to be secret.
The reason to protect witnesses, shield a reputation of those
not indicted, and preserve the integrity of criminal prosecutions. But
what if the public interest demands access? What if there
is reason to believe those records contain vital information about corruption,
cover ups or miscarriages of justice? Can anyone unseal them?
The answer is yes, but the path is narrow, steep,
and guarded by federal law. The secrecy of grand jury
proceedings is governed by Rule six of the Federal rules
of criminal procedure. This rule establishes that grand jury material,
including testimony, exhibits, transcripts, and jury deliberations, are confidential, not
just temporarily, not just until the trial ends their secret
by default, often indefinitely. Only under very specific circumstances can
the secrecy be broken, and even then it's not easy.
Rule sixty isn't a suggestion, it's a firewall, and breaching
it takes more than curiosity. It takes a compelling legal case.
So who can ask for the grand jury records to
be unsealed? The short answer is almost anyone, including journalists, historians, victims,
or even members of the public. But the real question
is whether they can convince a federal judge that their
need is strong enough to override the default of secrecy.
This is where the standard of particularized need comes in.
That phrase comes from the Supreme Court precedent and is
the key to any requests for grand jury disclosure. Without it,
the judge won't even consider emotion. A particularized need means
that you're not just hoping to find something interesting. You
must prove that a specific grand jury material your requesting
is necessary to avoid significant injustice. For example, you might
need it to support your defense in a criminal trial,
or to prove wrongdoing in a related civil lawsuit, or,
in rare cases, to reveal historical information that serves the
public good, such as what happened with Watergate tapes. But
even then the burden is entirely on the person making
the request. The next step is procedural. You must file
a formal motion in federal court. This motion has to
be submitted to the same court that oversaw the grand
jury in the first place. It must clearly identify which
material you want, why you want them, and how releasing
them would not unduly harm the grand jury process. This
is informality. The court takes these motions seriously, and if
they're vague, overbroad, or a poorly justified, they'll be denied outright.
Once a motion is filed, the federal judge will weigh
several factors. First, is the grand jury investigation still ongoing.
If it is, your chances drop significantly. Judges are extremely
reluctant to expose an active process to outside scrutiny. But
if the investigation is ended and the reasons for secrecy
have diminished, the judge will look at the merits are
the materials central to your case? Is your request narrowly tailored?
Will disclosure in danger witnesses or harm the reputations of
those not charged. If the judge thinks the risk outweighs
the reward, the door stays shut. Even when a judge
agrees to disclosure, it's almost never a full release. The
court may allow access to us only a subset of
the material, or attact names, or replace the material under
a protective order that means the person receiving it can't
share it publicly. They can use it in their case,
but remain sealed from broader public view. In short, even
a victory in court often means a limited win, because
the court's goal is always to balance transparency with the
integrity of the justice system. Now let's talk about power.
Can the Attorney General order grand jury records to be unsealed?
The answers no. The Attorney General can request disclosure, and
often does through a formal DOJ motion, but the decision
still rests with the federal judge. Even the highest law
enforcement official in the country must go through the same
legal channels as anyone else. The DOJ may argue that
the release is in the interest of justice or national interest,
but it can't force the court's hand. And what about
the President of the United States. Surely the president can
access anything right wrong. The President has no legal authority
to unilaterally access or order the release of grand jury material.
These records are protected not just by department policy, but
by judicial authority. That means even the President must go
through the courts. Now most the President can urge the
Justice Department to file a motion or express support for transparency,
but they cannot make it happen on their own. The
structure reflects the balance in the US system. Grand Jury
secrecy is not under the control of the executive branch.
It belongs to the judiciary, and that's by design. It's
meant to prevent political interference in criminal investigations, even in
high profile cases, even when the public is demanding answers.
The process doesn't bend for political pressure. It holds the
line for better or worse. Congress, too, must go through
the courts. Legislative committees can request access to grand jury
material if they believe it's necessary for oversight or lawmaking,
but they must prove that the materials are directly relevant
and that their request meets the criteria laid out under
Rule six E. Even then, it's not guaranteed. Courts will
scrutinize whether the request is truly legislative or merely political.
Congress may have subpoena power, but when it comes to
grand jury secrecy, that power hits a wall. There have
been rare moments in American history where grand jury materials
were released to the public. The most famous examples include Watergate,
where the Court allowed Congress to access Nixon related grand
jury material, and the Mueller investigation, where limited, redacted testimony
was shared with Congress and later made public. But those
cases involved extraordinary circumstances and careful judicial review. There were
the exception, not the rule, and it's important to understand
that even after decades, courts don't automatically unseal grand jury records.
Historians seeking access to records from the forties or fifties
have still had to go through formal litigation, sometimes unsuccessfully.
The courts remain fiercely protective of the idea that secrecy
is essential to the functioning of the grand jury, even
long after the fact. So where does that leave the victims, journalists,
and the public. It leaves them with a long, difficult road,
but not a hopeless one. If you can identify a
specific injustice, build a narrow, evidence based case, and show
that the need for disclosure outweighs the damage secrecy would cause,
a judge can and sometimes will, authorize release. But the
system is designed to make you prove it, not once,
not vaguely, not emotionally, but precisely, egally and convincingly. And
yet the legal wall is what makes the subject so
explosive In high stakes, high profile cases, when the public
sees powerful individuals skating past accountability, or when critical facts
are locked behind sealed testimony, suspicion grows. That suspicion isn't
always paranoia. It often stems from history. From Watergate to
Iran Contra to Jeffrey Epstein, the American public has seen
time and time again that secrecy can be abused just
as easily as it can be justified. So while the
law favors confidentiality, the human instinct to demand answers doesn't
go away. It sharpens, it festers, And when grand jury
records are the remaining source of truth, people rightly want access.
But the law is not about what feels fair. It's
about what can be proven. That's the burden anyone seeking
disclosure must meet. You can't just say the public deserves
to know. You must articulate why that knowledge is essential,
what in justice it would correct, and how releasing the
material will not compromise the rights of others. If that
sounds like a high bar, that's because it is. The
law presumes secrecy, and you have to flip that presumption.
It's not enough to point to headlines or outrage or speculation.
You need a legal argument with teeth. You need specificity,
You need purpose. Otherwise the court will close the door
before you even get your foot in. Even when access
is granted, there are trade offs. Judges might approve release
with conditions, redactions, limited sharing, or restrictions on use. In
some cases, only attorneys may view the material, and others
the court might allow certain parts to be introduced as evidence,
but bar them from being made public. This means even
a successful motion may not result in total transparency. The
judiciary still holds the pen and edits cautiously. The process
is more surgical than sweeping, designed to balance competing rights,
not to serve public curiosity. This tension between secrecy and
accountability is one of the most persistent dilemmas in American law.
On one hand, secrecy protects the innocent and ensures cooperation.
On the other, it can shield wrongdoing if left unchecked.
The courts have to walk this tightrope. With every rule
six y request, they consider not just what's at stake
in one case, but what precedent they're setting for all
future ones. If they swing the door to wide, they
risk gutting the grand jury system. If they never open it,
they risk enabling silence where justice demands speech. That's the
judicial burden, balancing trust in the system with the people's
right to know. Ultimately, grand jury secrecy is a test
of democratic patients. It demands restraint from the press, discipline
from the courts, and faith from the public. It offers
no shortcuts. It protects as much as it withholds. But
in a climate of distrust where institutions are under constant
in suspicion, that secrecy often feels like silence, and silence
when justice is in question rarely satisfies anyone. That's why
the process to unseal exists not to determine the system,
but to provide a controlled legal escape valve when the
truth can no longer stay buried. But make no mistake,
it's not a shortcut. It's a crucible and only the
strongest claims can survive it. And yet, for all of
its legal formality and high minded rhetoric, the process to
unseal grand jury records often feels less like a path
to justice and more like a bureaucratic dead end, intentionally
designed to keep the truth buried under layers of red tape,
judicial deference, and institutional self preservation. The courts demand to
particularize need, but in practice, what they're really demanding is
an airtight excuse to not get involved. They cite the
integrity of the grand jury system, but rarely confront how
the same secrecy can be weaponized to conceal a prosecutorial misconduct,
shield the powerful, or erase the voices of victims. The
promise of transparency is dangled like a carrot, but when
you reach for it, the system reminds you that secrecy
isn't the exception, it's the rule. So while technically yes,
there is a legal mechanism to request disclosure, most people
will never succeed. Even the rare victories are off empiric,
heavily redacted, tightly controlled and strategically delayed until the political
urgency is faded. It's a system that pretends to value truth,
but only when the truth is no longer dangerous, and
when public confidence collapses and conspiracy fills the vacuum. The
courts and the Justice Department act bewildered, as if they
don't understand how faith the roads. When institutions treat transparency
like a threat, the real verdict here is silent but deafening.
Some doors aren't meant to open, no matter who's knocking,
and so we're left staring out a system that claim
to serve justice but operates more like a fortress, one
where the truth is barricaded behind legal procedure and accountability
is filtered through a lens of caution, delay, and institutional
self interest. When Grand Jerry's secrecy protects the innocent, it
serves a purpose, but when it protects the powerful, it
becomes a tool of silence. The courts may insist that
the process is fair, the Justice Department may claim it's
in good faith, but from the outside looking in, it
too often looks like a stall tactic in slow motion.
The question is will this be another exercise a controlled
disclosure and calculated delay, or will the gates finally crack
open in the name of real transparency? All right, folks,
that's going to do it for this one. And coming up,
we're going to be taking a look at Jeffrey Epstein's
initial request for a bell and the letter that was
sent by his lawyers to the judge, and then we're
going to take a look at the order denying that
bell as well. And then you can see for yourself
inside of that letter, and then in side of the
order denying the bell request, what the court has to
say about co conspirators. You know, considering we've been hearing
that Jeffrey Epstein's a lone wolf and nobody else was involved,
I figured it was time to show up with some receipts,
so that process begins today. All of the information that
goes with this episode can be found in the description box.
What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Epstein Chronicles. Stop the Presses. The Department of Justice has
graced us with an earth shattering revelation. The grand jury
transcripts in the Glenn Maxwell case contain nothing new zip,
not a just a recycled pile of the same old
filth that we've all seen smeared across core documents, media leaks,
and survivor testimony for years. What a shocker, What a twist?
Who could have possibly predicted that the doj our fearless
gatekeeper of justice would waste everyone's time confirming the obvious?
So let's just call this what it is, a nothing
burger with extra distraction sauce, a theatrical shrug from the
very agency that sat on its hands for decades while
Jeffrey Epstein was trafficking children like he was running a carpool.
This is the doj popping out of its Heidi hole
like a groundhog to tell us, don't worry, folks, no
bombshells here, As if anyone was expecting them suddenly to
grow a spine and admit they buried half the case
to protect their buddies in high places. And what exactly
do we think they were going to say that the
transcripts contained smoking guns, that maybe there were names, important
names they forgot to prosecute. Please, these people couldn't find
a conspiracy if it bit them on the face, signed
a non disclosure agreement and gave them a campaign donation
and that's because this isn't about transparency. Instead, it's a
sleight of hand act. Look over here at the grand
jury transcripts, they say, while the real crimes, financial crimes,
intelligence ties, institutional rot remain untouched, uninvestigated, and can nveniently ignored.
The DOJ's job at this point seems less about prosecuting
predators and more about laundering public outrage into procedural dead ends.
And let's not forget this entire nothing new stunt is
their way of patting themselves on the back for keeping
the vault sealed, Because if there's nothing new, then surely
there's no reason to keep asking questions right, no reason
to keep digging, no reason to unseal records, track money trails,
or god forbid, interrogate the fact that half the people
who orbited Epstein are still out there, free as birds,
counting money and sleeping easy. You want to talk about
an insult wrapped in bureaucracy, this is it. The survivors
have bled in public for years, They've named names, they've
given dates, they've endured cross examinations, in public doubt and
courtroom trauma, and now instead of justice, they get this
little DOJ press puff. We checked nothing new here, as
if justice was a checklist, as if closure was a formality.
So congratulations, DOJ, You've confirmed what everyone already knew. You
open the closet, took a peek inside, and shouted to
the world, no new skeletons. Meanwhile, the mansion is still
full of corpses. You never bother to exzoom, clap for yourselves.
That's the performance you're running now. Justice Theater tickets available
on Pacer Popcorn sold a JP Morgan and the Curtain
Never closes. Today's article is from ABC News and the
headline grand jury transcripts in Glene Maxwell's case contain nothing
new according to a DOJ filing. This article was authored
by Aaron Katerski. Much of what the Justice Department wants
a federal judge to unseal from the Glenn Maxwell grand
jury investigation is already known, and at least so far,
the Attorney General is seeking to unseal nothing else according
to new court filings on Tuesday, and I'll have that
core filing for you in full, either today or to
that way, you can take a look at it yourself
and see what the DOJ has to say. The Justice
Department turned over a version of the Maxwell grand jury
transcripts that identifies which information is not already publicly known.
That annotated version shows that much of the information provided
during the course of the grand jury testimony, with the
exception of the identities of certain victims and witnesses, was
made publicly available at trial or has otherwise been publicly
reported through the public statements of victims and witnesses. The
filing said, well, no shit. The whole entire point of
what the dj was doing was obfuscation, trying to show you, hey,
look we care, we're concerned, we're doing something about this,
we're investigating. But the truth is, if they were investigating,
they would have come out without memo. They wouldn't have said, look,
there's nothing left to see here and no more information
for any of you. The truth is Trump didn't expect
the blowback that he got, so they had to scramble
and try to figure things out on the fly. And
this is not the story to do that with. There's
way too much information out there and way too many
people know the scoop, and we're not talking about a
JFK kind of situation. The people who are involved a
lot of them are still alive. So if you want
the truth, all you have to do is listen to
what they're saying. But instead the DOJ decides to go
get in bed with a serpent, bend over backwards for her,
and give her accommodations. Does that sound like justice to you?
Does that sound like the DOJ cares about the victims
and the survivors of Epstein and Maxwell? It certainly doesn't
look like that to me. Instead, it looks like the
DOJ is trying to cover their own ass. The Justice
Department is asking two federal judges in New York to
unseal grand jury transcripts in the Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein cases.
It's not asking the judges to unseal the grand jury exhibits,
though the Attorney General asks for several more days to
consider its position with respect to unsealed of the grand
jury exhibits. The filing said, they have no desire to
show you anything that's real or anything that's of note.
They want to recycle information and give you shit. We
already know what they're counting on is a lot of
people not understanding the story and thinking they're getting something new,
And it's just like with that first phase release they
did with the White Binders. They have no idea what
they're talking about with this story. They tried to use
it for political gain and it blew up directly in
their face, and now they're in scramble mode to try
and save face as much as possible. But at this point,
I don't think it's possible. They just keep digging the
hole deeper for themselves. The Epstein grand jury met twice
on June eighteenth, twenty nineteen and July second, twenty nineteen,
before he was indicted on charges accusing them of sexually
exploiting and abusing dozens of minor girls. The Maxwell grand
jury he met on June twenty ninth, twenty twenty, July eighth,
twenty twenty, and March twenty ninth, twenty one, before she
was indicted on charges she conspired with Epstein to entice
miners to travel so they could engage in illegal sex acts.
And not only that, we all know she was abusing them.
And I got to keep bringing that up, obviously, because
these articles leave it out. And while trafficking human beings
is one of the most horrible things you could ever do,
abusing children in my opinion is the most heinous act
one can engage in, and if you're engaging in that
kind of behavior, you should be put under the jail,
not sent to camp. Brian. Maxwell was convicted and is
serving a twenty year prison sentence at an all female
federal prison camp in Brian, Texas, where she was recently
moved from a minimum security prison in Tallahassee, Florida. The
Justice Department said it has provided notice of the unsealing
motions to all but one of the victims who are
referenced in the grand jury transcripts. Federal prosecutors have been
unable to contact the remaining victim, probably in hiding, probably
doesn't want to talk to the DOJ because the DOJ
keeps screwing them. Imagine if it was your daughter who
was abused by Maxwell, and you wake up to this news, Oh,
Glen Maxwell, the DOJ's new darling has been moved to Brian, Texas.
What am I dreaming? Did I take LSD before I
went to bed last night? How's that even possible? Well,
it's possible because you have a DOJ that's more concerned
with protecting its donors and the people that are friendly
to the administration than they are when it comes to
pursuing justice in the matter of Jeffrey Epstein and Glenn
Maxwell's crimes. And that's been proven to us time and
time again. That's not speculation, that's not hyperbole. It's a fact.
With respect to the victims who are not identified in
the grand jury transcripts but who have previously received victim
notification in the Maxwell and Epstein matters, the government will
over the coming days alert those victims to the fact
of the unsealing motions, the filing said. On Monday, the
court placed on the docket letters from anonymous, purported Epstein
victims criticizing the Trump administration's approach. Look, I've heard directly
from survivors, and none of them are happy with what's
going on. None of them, not one of them. And
that's because there were promised transparency and instead they get
more roadblocks, more obfiscation, and more bullshit. This should be
a really easy matter. All the informations there classify whatever's
classified as far as victim names victim identification. But besides that,
everybody else who's named in those documents should be outed.
And of course it doesn't mean that you were taking
part in what Epstein was up to, But that doesn't
erase the fact that you had a relationship with them,
that you were friendly with them, and you might have
some information that's important to blow in the doors off
the whole case. Maybe some of these people saw some
of those unnamed girls from Eastern Europe. Maybe some of
them know some of these Brazilian girls that were brought
in through mc squared, Or what about the girls in
Guatemala or Ecuador, or what about the girls in Yugoslavia,
what about the girls in Ukraine. These are all the
hunting grounds, the fertile hunting grounds that Jean Luke Brunel
was using to bring girls in for Epstein. And if
you think any of them are confident in what's going
on as far as the way the DOJ is handling things,
you're crazy. There's no way. So if the DOJ is
handling things like this, why would anyone come forward at
this point and add their name and their voice to
the growing storm? Just going to cause them more trouble.
And obviously nobody's interested in any kind of justice, So
why should anyone come forward? Now, if you flip the
script and the DOJ was bringing in survivors and victims
of Epstein and Maxwell and talking to them, well, we'd
have a different conversation, but unfortunately we don't, and in
my opinion, that's all by design. All of the information
that goes with this episode can be found in the
description box