Speaker 1: What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to
this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon
to three on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you
want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream,
my daily show prep with all of the links, become
a patron, go to vpeakclendarshow dot com. Make sure you
hit the subscribe button. Get every episode for free right
to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so
much for your support. Alrighty, so big reveal of some
Epstein files. Well, all right, well emails, a bunch of
Epstein emails. Democrats release them. Okay, there were only three,
but they released them. They were redacted as well, with
the redacted information is actually stuff that we already knew,
but they redacted it. Anyway, redacted three emails, and the
redactions actually undermine the entire point of the emails. But
they released three dare I say, selectively edited emails proving
that Epstein did not like Donald Trump? And that guy
Wolf what is with these Dickensian names in these stories?
You know, the author, what's his first name, It's like
Michael Wolf or something, was basically coaching Epstein on how
to take down Donald Trump. So a very big reveal
for the Democrats yesterday. Oh my goodness, this changes everything.
The Republicans responded by releasing tens of thousands of emails,
which undermined the Democrats three selectively edited emails, which then
prompted Democrats to be outraged at the release of all
of the rest of the documents because they're all about
transparency or something. Okay, I'm not really following the strategy
on this, but I think the key here is we're
not talking about the democrats terrible shut down strategy, and
they're folding and caving at the same time as they
released all of these Epstein, well the three emails that
were selectively edited, because otherwise it would undermine their case
that Trump is somehow a pedophile or something. Okay, so
let's first start. I've got a lot of stuff on this.
So all of you lefties that are where, don't you
jug about Epstein. We're doing it. This is your moment
to shine. Seven oh four, five, seven oh eleven, ten.
If you want to weigh in on the conversation, this
is your opportunity. So this is Matt Margolis at PJ Media.
Democrats thought they had a winning hand when they released
three carefully select did Jeffrey Epstein emails on Wednesday morning.
The timing was no accident. With their caucus still reeling
from their base turning on them for caving on the
government shutdown, they needed a distraction. He's exactly right, by
the way, this was obvious to like everybody, even the media.
The legacy media outlets could not deny that the timing was.
As the kids would say, sus or suspicious to us
older people who use full words. And they believe these
emails would deliver a distraction, but they may have miscalculated.
The so called bombshell consisted of three email exchanges. The
crown jewel of their selective leak was a twenty eleven
email between Jeffrey Epstein and Gilline Maxwell, in which Epstein
described Trump as quote the dog that hasn't barked okay.
He noted that a victim had spent hours with Trump
at Epstein's house. Democrats redacted the victim's name in their release,
but we actually know who they were talking about the emails.
The victim was Virginia Jeffrey or Jeffrey or Jeffrey. She
is now deceased. The reason for the redaction becomes clear
when you learned that Jeffrey was actually has actually said
what she's actually said under oath, and what she has
said under oath is that she never actually did witness
Donald Trump engage in any wrongdoing. So yeah, there's that.
So is that why you redacted her name? That seems
to be the most obvious explanation. And you know me,
I'm an Akham's raiser kind of a guy, despite me
having a goateee, I do believe that the most obvious
explanation is usually the correct one. And in this case,
you know, I hear the hoof beats and I think horses,
not zebras, And so I suspect that is why the
Democrats redacted her name, because if you had her name
out there, everybody would be like, oh, but didn't she
testify that she never did witness Trump saying or doing
anything illegal or with anybody like that. Yeah, she stated
that Trump never acted inappropriately with her, and that she
never saw Trump and Jeffrey Epstein together, and that she
never saw Trump at any of Epstein's houses, and she
actually says that in her memoir as well. So yeah,
I would suspect that's why they redacted her name. It
wasn't doubt of some sort of you know, we're trying
to protect the victims, survivors and all that. Once again,
she has already died, so there isn't anything like there's
no legal prohibition about using her name or anything like that.
So yeah, yeah, it's obviously they're trying to gin up
a smear campaign, right with these three emails. Now, this
is Look, you can believe that Donald Trump was involved
in Epstein's affairs and all of this other stuff and
still recognize the play that the Democrats did yesterday on this. Okay,
they are exclusive things like you don't have to accept
one and therefore the other. You can believe that both
of those things are true at the same time. Okay,
Democrats redicted her name for political purposes. I think that's
pretty clear. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt said that
quote the Democrats selectively leaked emails to the liberal media
to create a fake narrative to smear President Trump. I
think that's pretty obvious. The fact remains. She says that
President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club mar
A Lago decades ago for being a creep to his
female employees, including Virginia Giffrey. This is, by the way,
from the from PJ media. Republicans on the House Oversight
Committee decided to respond by releasing the entire trove of
twenty thousand documents they obtained from the estate of Jeffrey Epstein,
all of them, every single page. You guys should be happy, right,
Democrats should be celebrating. You have gotten the Epstein files
right from his estate. You got twenty thousand files. Now
pour through them, go find the stuff that the Biden
administration obviously could not locate, because had they located them,
they surely would have released this stuff to prevent Orange
Hitler from once again assuming control of the government. Right,
I mean, that's what you would do if you are
trying to thwart the murderer of democracy. No, see, to me,
this is speaking of dogs that don't bark like this is.
This to me is the most obvious counterfactual for the
theory that somehow or another, Trump is implicated in all
this illegal activity and that's why he's not releasing all
of this. Now, look, there is some evidence that, you know,
Trump is behaving in a way that does make you
scratch your head, and you're like, why wouldn't you just
release everything? Where I tend to lean on this and
I don't know this. I have no inside knowledge, but
just looking from the outside like you are, it seems
to me that there may be some other people's names
in some of these files, and he wants to protect
them that And I don't know what those names are
in the files for right, Like they could just be
email correspondents. They could be you know, meetings or lunches,
or they could be you know, trips on the Lolita expressed,
you know, like Bill Clinton took multiple times that the
Democrats don't ever seem to care about asking him about.
But you know, like because they could do that, they
could say, Hey, Bill, were you ever on these flights
with other people who were on the flights with you? Oh, actually,
we do have the flight logs. We've had those for years.
So I suspect that that might be part of the
reason why. So you would expect Democrats to be very,
very very happy at the release of the twenty thousand documents.
According to the New York Times, though Democrats are not
actually happy about this. They are quote livid, the very upset.
They claim the sheer volume of the release was intended
to distract attention from their distraction I mean, sorry, from
their revelations about Trump's actions. So you don't want all
the documents, you know. Stories are powerful. They help us
make sense of things, to understand experiences. Stories connect us
to the people of our past while transcending generations. They
help us says the meaning of life and art. Stories
are told through images and videos. Preserve your stories with
Creative Video started in nineteen ninety seven and Minhill, North Carolina.
It was the first company to provide this valuable service,
converting images, photos and videos into high quality produced slide shows,
videos and albums. The trusted, talented and dedicated team at
Creative Video will go over all of the details with
you to create a perfect project. Satisfaction guaranteed. Drop them
off in person or mail them. They'll be ready in
a week or two. Memorial videos for your loved ones,
videos for rehearsal, dinners, weddings, graduations, Christmas, family vacations, birthdays,
or just your family stories all told through images. That's
what your photos and videos are. They are your life
told through the eyes of everyone around you and all
who came before you, and they will tell others to
come who you are, visit creative video dot com. Democrats
released three whole emails with the redacted name of a
victim who's actually Virginia Giffrey, who said under oath that
she never actually saw Donald Trump do anything or with
Jeffrey Epstein at any point. They released the three emails.
The Republicans respond by releasing the entire trove of twenty
thousand documents they obtained from the estate of Jeffrey Epstein,
and according to The New York Times, Democrats are mad
about this, saying that's too much. You release too many documents. Yeah, So,
as Matt Margolis says at PJ Media, Democrats cherry picked
three emails to manufacture a narrative scandal, and when Republicans
counter by releasing everything, that's the problem. That's the problem. Also,
one of the emails literally states that Donald Trump demanded
Gilain Maxwell to stop what they were doing regarding quote
the girls. So that's not exactly I don't think that's
a smoking gun. And remember Trump has said that Epstein
was he kept hiring away mar A Lago staff, and
he was coming into the club and he was like
recruiting these girls away from mar A Lago, and that
was one of the reasons why he was why they
had a falling out. Also the land deal where Trump
outbit him on some property and Epstein got mad about it.
So there's that. There's more because other outlets are going
through some of the thousands of emails and documents from
the estate and they're finding some other stuff that and
I have some of their reports about it. But first,
let's go over and talk to Jackie. Hello, Jackie, how
are you. I haven't heard from you in a while.
Speaker 2: Hey, buddy, how you doing. I'm doing fine.
Speaker 1: How are you? I'm good, I'm good.
Speaker 2: Hey. I just want to say, man, I think there's
I've always thought that this this Epstein thing, maybe Trump's watergate. Uh.
I don't know if he participated in this, in these things,
but I am fairly confident that he knew what was
going on. He knew why Epstein was recruiting these young
ladies away from uh from marl Igo. I also think,
you know, when you look at those emails that that
Epstein said where he mentioned Trump, there's all that can
it can only be one of two things he could be.
Speaker 1: I'm going to tell you right away. When you tell
me that I only have two choices, my radar goes
up because that's usually a false choice inbound.
Speaker 2: No, I'm working on that. No. What I'm saying is
he can He's either telling the truth or he's telling
a lie. Right, it can only be one of two things.
I mean about what about about Trump knowing you know
is involvment in it, and he mentioned something about Trump
that something had to landed. I forget the Za quote yesterday,
but I just think there's there's more to this than
then Trump is letting on. I don't know. Again, I
don't know if he participated in it, but I believe
he knows what was going on.
Speaker 1: And then we hang on a second. Everybody now knows.
Everybody knows, now, right, Your your accusation is that he
knew at the time and or participated.
Speaker 2: Right, Yes, Okay.
Speaker 1: Right, And so there is no evidence. There is no
evidence of that, and so let me come back to
the let me come back. So hang on, but let
me let me come back to the one. Let me
come back to the one. Uh counterfactual. I mentioned this
in the last segment. If there's evidence in the files
in the you know, in the emails or anywhere. If
there is evidence that ties Trump to Epstein in the
way that you allege, why wasn't the Biden d o
J able to to leak or release that that proof.
Why didn't they do that?
Speaker 2: I believe there's a cover.
Speaker 1: Up by the by the bid in d o J.
Speaker 2: Bye, Yeah, by by the by the by both administrations.
Speaker 1: But specifically the specifically the Biden d o J. You're
you're you're making another accusation, then that the Biden d
o J with Merrick Garland that went after Trump in
all of the various ways they went after Trump for
the better part of eight years. This was this was
something that they did not want to go after him on.
Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely absolutely, because because my my opinion is it's
like a I don't know if there's a good analogy,
but it's like like somebody gets caught with a big
bag of drugs and you have to determine if he
was trafficking the drugs or if they were for for
for personal consumption. I don't believe that all these women
that uh that that Epstein was was was was was
dealing with and trafficking that it was all for personal consumption.
It was there were other people involved in this.
Speaker 1: I really believe that, So I'm open to that possibility.
I've i've i've suggested as a theory that he was
a middleman, a cutout for or a bag man for
foreign governments, for the for the US government to do
things that they didn't want on the books, and so
they would they would use him a compromised financier with
you know, access to a lot of money that would
then he would be able to uh, you know, to
essentially launder it or hide it from prying eyes. Yeah,
that that's possibility. A honeypot operation is another possibility. But
there there hasn't been a lot of well hang on,
but there hasn't been a lot of There hasn't been
a lot of confirmation or prove to support these theories,
and so I don't I don't launch them as accusations.
Speaker 2: But we've already seen the connection with the Prince in
Great Britain.
Speaker 1: With the press, with the press in Great Britain, the press.
Oh well yeah, yeah, Prince Andrew.
Speaker 2: We've already seen We've already seen that connection.
Speaker 1: Right, That's a connection that doesn't but that doesn't prove
that he was he was like an eye operator or
cut out for the C. I A. Again, I'm open
to the possibility that that is the case, but that
would also indicate them about the CIA.
Speaker 2: But I think that shows that there are other prominent
people involved in US.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, the guy moved in prominent circles. Yeah, he
moved in prominent circles, and.
Speaker 2: The press happened to be one of them. Have you
seen that video when that Epstein and Trump are apparently
at a party and they're women dancing.
Speaker 1: I don't think so.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a video where Trump is at a social
event and there's some there he and he and Epstein
are standing beside each other, you can easily find it,
and they're women dance and they're looking out into the
to the crowd of the women, and then Epstein and
Trump are having a private conversation.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, that means he's a child rapist. You
totally got it. You salved the case, Jackie.
Speaker 2: No, no, no, I didn't say that. No, I said,
but it's obvious that they're they're they're googling at the women.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, they're now you proved it. Sorry, Yeah,
I mean you have jumped the gun.
Speaker 2: That doesn't prove anything. What I'm saying is there's obviously
a very personal relationship between there was a person, there.
Speaker 1: Was we already knew that though. Yeah, but we already
knew that. But we already knew that and nobody And
that's the thing is all of that predated, all of
that predated any of the charges. Look, Epstein was this
high flying guy who lived down in the same town
as like a mile or something from mar A Lago.
They they knew each other. They would go to events together.
He was a member of mar A Lago, but they
had a falling out. Trump kicked him out of the club.
They so like all of that was no.
Speaker 2: But when you have a personal relationship with someone, you
know what's.
Speaker 1: Going on, and no you don't. No, that's not true.
Speaker 2: Trump knew about the thing.
Speaker 1: You I know, I know you want to believe that.
Hang on, Jackie and I got a run. I appreciate
the call. I know you want to believe that. I
require the proof because we already knew that they knew
each other, they moved in the same circles and everything.
But again, I keep coming back to this idea that
if the people who spent almost a decade trying to
destroy Donald Trump, his business, and his family, and they
had this information that was the smoking gun. I find
it completely implausible that they would not have produced the
evidence leaked it out somehow in order to save the democracy.
Here's a great idea. How about making an escape to
a really special and secluded getaway in western North Carolina.
Just a quick drive up the mountain and Cabins of
Asheville is your connection. Whether you're celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon,
maybe you want to plan a memorable proposal, or get
family and friends together for a big old reunion. Cabins
of Asheville has the ideal spot for you where you
can reconnect with your loved ones and the things that
truly matter. Nestled within the breath taking fourteen thousand acres
of the Pizga National Forest, their cabins offer a serene
escape in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally
located between Asheville and the entrance of the Great Smoky
Mountain National Park. It's the perfect balance of seclusion and
proximity to all the local attractions, with hot tubs, fireplaces,
air conditioning, smart TVs, Wi Fi, grills, outdoor tables and
your own private covered porch. Choose from thirteen cabins, six cottages,
two villas, and a great lodge with eleven king sized bedrooms.
Cabins of Ashville has the ideal spot for you for
any occasion, and they have pet friendly accommodations. Call or
text eight two eight three six seven seventy sixty eight
or check out all there is to offer at cabins
Offashville dot com and make memories that'll last a lifetime.
Republican Representative Tim Burchett from Tennessee went to the House
floor and requested unanimous consent, which me, being the expert
that I am, I can convey to you that unanimous
consent requires all of the members to agree. It's a
it's a very I know, I know, it's getting sort
of jargony there. It's a very so teek kind of rule.
But yes, unanimous consent requires every member of the House
to agree unanimously. Okay. So this procedural move would have
fast tracked the release of all of the remaining Epstein files.
Burchett said that he requested the UC or unanimous consent
in an attempt to cut out all of this nonsense.
So this is what the Democrats wanted. They want unanimous
or they wanted the release of the Epstein files. Right,
They've been talking about it over and over. In fact,
hang on a second, I have here in the old
inbox from the North Carolina Democrat Party attacking Michael Wattley.
Michael Wattley complicit in covering up the Epstein files. That's
their press release from this morning. Am. Carolinians deserve to
know what does former RNC chair Wattley know and how
long has he known it? I feel like this deserves
a gosh, he's obviously guilty. Right, So obviously the Democrats
would be in favor of the unanimous consent, and then
you just got to get those you know, pedophile loving
and covering Republicans on board for unanimous consent. And so Burchette,
he introduces the UC. He requests the UC to cut
out all of this nonsense. And it failed. It was
blocked by Democrats. Why see, here's one of the things.
Let me let me jump on over to. This is
the from the American Prospect American Prospect dot calm or
Prospect dot org, sorry, Prospect dot or by Ryan Cooper,
How on earth are we just now hearing about Trump's
hours with an Epstein victim? And then he lays out
a timeline here where, of course he omits that Trump
kicked Epstein out of mar A Lago, out of the club,
so we banned him from coming back. That's not in
his handy little timeline. But he's asking, like, why are
we only hearing about these emails now? He points out
that Democrats were in control of the Oversight Committee for
several years. They could have subpoenaed this stuff. Epstein was
long dead. Why didn't they do anything? And what about
Merrick Garland? And so this is the narrative that Democrats
are telling themselves, is that Garland's behavior is chalked up
to this gentlemanly agreement that you don't go after your
political opponents. That's so, that's why he's just stodgy, you know,
he's just a stodgy old man from a bygone era
and all of this. It's unsporting not to give your
high profile political opponents every possible benefit of the legal
doubt to the point where they can get away with
grotesque violations of legal procedure and skate on many crimes.
So that's that's what they're telling themselves as to why
the Democrats under the Biden doj Why Merrick Garland didn't
go after Trump with this stuff, didn't leak it, Why
Democrats in the House, you know, didn't go after Trump
on this stuff, didn't release or leak this stuff. It's
because you don't do this stuff so close to an election,
and you don't you know, you don't weaponize the government
against your political opponents because you don't want to set
that kind of precedent. Yeah, exactly, when you don't understand
the conclusions, right, when you have difficulty drawing a logical conclusion,
go back and reassess your assumptions. Your assumption is that
Trump is guilty, Your assumption is that he's been covering
all of this up, and your assumption is that Democrats
want to get all of the files out. Those assumptions
obviously are not correct, because the conclusion that you're seeing
the reality of what you've seen doesn't make any sense
based on those primary assumptions. But this is what the
Democrats are telling themselves. You heard a little bit of
it there from Jackie as well. There's a narrative crafting
going on, and they hope that if they say it
enough times that it calcifies. And this is why they
were upset when the Republicans released the twenty thousand plus
documents in response to the selective edited release of three
emails by Democrats. You know, their attempt there is to
craft a narrative and have it calcify before there can
be a response. But by releasing twenty thousand documents, that
swamps the release of the selectively edited emails. And that's
why Democrats were complaining, because they wanted their narrative to calcify.
All Right, if you're listening to this show, you know
I try to keep up with all sorts of current events,
and I know you do too, and you've probably heard
me say get your news from multiple sources. Why Well,
because it's how you detect media bias, which is why
I've been so impressed with ground News. It's an app
and it's a website and it combines news from around
the world in one place so you can compare coverage
and verify information. You can check it out at check
dot ground dot news slash Pete. I put the link
in the podcast description too. I started using ground News
a few months ago and more recently, chose to work
with them as an affiliate because it lets me see
clearly how stories get covered and by whom. The blind
Spot feature shows you which stories get ignored by the
left and the right. See for yourself. Check dot Ground,
dot News slash Pete. Subscribe through that link and you'll
get fifteen percent off any subscription. I use the Vantage
plan to get unlimited access to every feature. Your subscription
then not only helps my podcast, but it also supports
Ground News as they make the media landscape more transparent.
Here's a story out of the New York Post Victor Nava.
New York Post reports convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein urged a
former foreign leader to pitch Vladimir Putin on the quote
insight that Epstein could provide about Donald Trump. This according
to some of the emails that were released by the
Republicans on the House Oversight Committee. This was June twenty eighteen,
so the first term of Trump email exchange between Epstein
and the former Norwegian Prime Minister thorpe Jorn Jaggayan, I
think is how he pronounces that, who was then Secretary
General of the Council of Europe Epstein claimed to have
previously advised a high level Russian diplomat on how to
deal with Trump as he pushed for a meeting with
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. So here you have Epstein
reaching out to the Norwegian Prime minister saying, arrange a
meet with me with Lavrov because I've got info that
Putin might want. He said, quote, I think you might
suggest to Putin that Lavrov can get insight on talking
to me. The Tali Cherkin used to talk to me,
but he died. That was the Russia's foreign the former
ambassador to the UN. So random question here, but why
would Russia need insight into Donald Trump in twenty seventeen,
if he was a Russian asset or a puppet, Why
why would Epstein be offering this information up right? Because
Trump's already in the pocket of Putin, He's already compromised,
he's already working for the Kremlin. He's got all these
connections right, all of this stuff that the Democrats were alleging.
Why would Epstein be reaching out prior to all of
the crossfire hurricane stuff. Why would he be working with
the Russians. It almost sounds like Trump may have been
the victim of a Russian disinformation campaign. Oh that's right.
He was orchestrated by Hillary Clinton, whose husband was a
pal of Jeffrey Epstein. Interesting, Epstein said, Cherkin, who is
the dead guy? Now, he was great. He understood Trump
after our conversations. It's not complex. He must be seen
to get something. It's that simple. So here's Epstein trying
to tell the Russians, this is how the mind of
Trump works. I'm going to advise the Russians on how
to get one over on the president of the United
States of America. You guys realize Epstein's a lying pedophile, right, Like?
Is that escaping everybody at some point? Like, I feel
like people don't internalize that when they're weighing these words.
And then there's Michael Wolfe, the journalist quote unquote who
was advising Epstein before he was charged and then through
and after and trying to figure out a way to
take down Trump. He said, there's an opportunity to come
forward and talk about Trump in such a way that
could garner you great sympathy and help finish him. Interested
wolf is acting as a like pr agent for Epstein.
Michael Wolfe the guy wrote the book about Trump, and
there are all these lies in the book. Although the
you know, official Trump administration work with them on the
book as they're morons, and they keep wanting this approval
from legacy media types. I don't know why. Yeah, like guys,
shady operators, all of them. Let me jump over. Well,
hang on a second, let me do that, and now
let me jump over and get Ernest on. Hello, Ernest,
Welcome to the show. I have about a minute, Pete.
Speaker 3: Thanks for taking my call. The old saying is believe nothing,
you hear half of what you see. Bring me some
context here. Yesterday I was reading that the victim in
the email that Epstein the email at Epstein victim that.
Speaker 1: She's dead, correct, Guinia Jeffree.
Speaker 3: She was alive, denied that Trump had had any sexual
relationship with her.
Speaker 1: Correct, And that she had and she had said under
she said that under oath, and she also testified under
oath that she never even saw him at Marla or
at Epstein's house.
Speaker 3: So the two most two witnesses that would be most
important are no longer with us. You can't believe any
of these emails due to motivation, So can you put
some context as to what we're really looking at here
with these releases.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I said at the beginning of the hour, it's
quite clear to me that the release of these three
emails were designed to distract and take attention off of
the failure of the Democrats in the shutdown, so everybody
would talk about these emails. And then that's why they're
so angry that the Republicans released then twenty thousand emails
out of the House Oversight Committee. I think that it's
pretty obvious by their reaction and the fact that when
a unanimous consent motion was brought to release all of
the Epstein files in the House, that Democrats blocked that
as well, so they obviously are not actually interested in
getting all the Epstein files released. I appreciate the call ernest.
All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you
so much for listening. I could not do the show
without your support and the support of the businesses that
advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support
them too and tell them you heard it here. You
can also become a patron at my Patreon page or
go to thepetecleanershow dot com. Again, thank you so much
for listening. And don't break anything while I'm gone.