Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Epstein Chronicles. Over the past week or so, there's been
a huge debate about the roughly fifty thousand files that
were missing from the Epstein Files drop, and of course
those files, a lot of them had to do with
Donald Trump, and considering the issues surrounding transparency here and
the issues when it comes to a cover up, you'd
think they'd want to be on point. But the fantastic
people over at the DOJ thought it would be a
good idea to just take these files down. Well now,
according to the DOJ, they're back up. So the question
is why'd they take them down in the first place.
And in my opinion, that's one of the biggest problems
with this whole entire job. They didn't offer any context whatsoever,
so they left a fertile ground for all kinds of
weird the sprout up. And that was part of the plan.
Remember when this all first started, and I told you
they wanted you confused, that they wanted you to get
exhausted and feel like you're chasing your tail. This is
what I was talking about. This is what they always do.
And now they got their new shiny object right the
war in Iran, Make no mistake, that is something that
is certainly helping them out. When you have a situation
like we have over in Iran, people are going to
be interested in that, right. People are going to be
following along as the world teeters on the edge of
World War III. So it certainly works to the advantage
of the Trump administration. And whether it's by design or not,
who knows. We can't prove it one way or the other.
But it's certainly beneficial to the Trump administration and to
the people who want to keep all this stuff under
rap still. So today we have an article from CNN
and the headline Justice Department posts FBI interview memos related
to Trump sex abuse allegation. This article was authored by
Hannah Rabinowitz, Casey Tolin, Paula Reid, and Isabelle Chapman. The
Justice Department has posted online three FBI memos describing interviews
related to unverified sexual assault allegations against President Donald Trump
that had been missing from the massive trove of Epstein
files released by the Department of Justice. And of course
people are going to have questions if you pull that
stuff down, what do you expect is going to happen,
especially considering the environment, Like there's a bunch of unanswered
questions as it is, and you want to go and
cause more confusion. A CNN analysis discovered dozens of Winnes
interviews were missing from the online archive of evidence related
to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, all of which were memorialized
in so called three to two memos laying out what
an interview we told FBI agents. The three O twos
do not include other corroborating information or agent's opinions. Well,
I wonder why not? Again, more confusion, and they thrive
on it. The more you're confused, the more you're frustrated,
the more likely you just throw your hands up in
defeat and say, to hell with it. Right, we've all
been there. But the problem is the law calls for
this stuff to be included. There was no carve out
for three O twos. So I hope that Pam Bondi
is asked these questions when she is deposed in front
of Congress, when her number is called. But I have
a funny feeling she's not going to answer very many questions.
Like I said before, I think that all of these
people feel like they're going to be protected by pardons,
so they're gonna do and say whatever they want. Among
the missing records were three memos about interviews with a
woman who told agents that Epstein had repeatedly abused her
physically and sexually decades ago, starting when she was approximately
thirteen years of age, and who also accused Trump of
sexually assaulting her. And look, these are accusations, right, allegations.
We don't know what's real and what's not. But the
problem is there should have been an investigation, and obviously
there wasn't, or if there was, it was just a
cursory investigation and not a serious one. And that would
have been the best case scenario for Donald Trump, right,
because now he could point back and say, look, they
investigated this, and here's all the documentation that shows I
had nothing to do with it. But instead of doing that,
once again, they try and be sneaky and they hide things,
pull things down, and cause an optics firestorm for themselves
that was avoidable. Well, if Trump is innocent, right, it's
really what it comes down to. And again, I don't know,
I wasn't there. These are the allegations that are being made,
and from my perspective, I think that the real issue
here is the way that it was handled and the
cover up that came after, because I don't think there's
any way to prove one way or the other the
allegations that are being made by this young lady against
Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. Now does that mean they're
not true? Of course not. I don't put anything out
of the realm of possibility when we're talking about Jeffrey
Epstein and as disgusting friends. But there's certainly a lot
of gray area. There's no smoking gun. But when it
comes to this cover up, I don't think there's any
doubt about what's going on, and I think it's important
to stay on target right. If we want real accountability,
we obviously need to have concrete evidence, and I think
as this continues to play out, there's going to be
plenty of evidence when all is said and done, that
this was in fact a cover up. And I think
that if anyone gets in trouble for anything here as
far as the administration goes, that'll be it. But the
caveat always is the pardon. And if you don't think
these people are getting a blanket pardon, the same way
Biden gave a blanket pardon. You're crazy one percent. So
that means no accountability, that means no oversight. We have
a bunch of tenured professors running the government. Isn't that nice?
Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. In
a statement on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt
described the claims from the FBI interviews as completely baseless,
backed by zero credible evidence. She also questioned the credibility
of the accuser, whose name is redacted in the files,
pointing to her criminal record. Yikes, that is not a
good look. Even if she has a criminal record, Does
that mean she couldn't have been abused? Is that what
that really means? And if you were wondering why Jeffrey
Epstein targeted people like these girls, this is why. Because
there's vile people out there, like Caroline Leavitt that don't
understand that not everybody was born rich and with a
silver spoon in their mouth. I know that's the way
she grew up, and she never had any need to
do anything like this to make a couple of bucks.
But when you're poor and you come from a broken home,
things are different. And it's real courageous for the White
House Press secretary to question this girl's credibility. Could easily
just said the FBI reports say what they say. I
have no other comment on that. We're moving on, but no,
they have to get a dig in right, And that's
just the mo of this administration. And boy, I fucking
hate bullies. If there's anything your boy hates, it's bullies.
And the way that they're trying to bully their way
through this situation is just absolutely absurd and it's not
gonna work. And if she's worried about criminal records, maybe
she should talk to her boss about his criminal record.
The total baselessness of these accusations is also supported by
the obvious fact that Joe Biden's Department of Justice knew
about them for four years and did nothing with them
because they knew President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong. Levit added, well,
I guess that's one way to look at it. My
perspective is Biden's old school, right, the old guard. He
wasn't gonna light this on fire. He knew what the
deal was, and how many people that were part of
the Biden administration had connections to Epstein, A whole fucking lot, right,
So if anyone thinks that Biden's willing to burn the
whole house down just to get Trump, you're crazy. Don't
think that these politicians hate each other as much as
they make you hate each other. They do not. It
is all KFA, folks, It's all a big joke to them.
And Junior Soprano, Biden was never going to release these files.
He was never going to burn his own people, even
if that man getting Trump. FBI agents conducted four interviews
with a woman, but only one memo memorializing an interview
in July twenty nineteen was available in the DOJ database
that was made public earlier this year. In that interview,
the woman alleged that she was repeatedly abused by Epstein
when she was a miner living in South Carolina. She
did not make any allegations about Trump in that interview.
And boy, people have really fallen into the trap making
it all about Trump, and it's given ammunition to the
people that want to call this a hoax, just like
I predicted it would. And then of course we have
what yesterday, two days ago, the whole entire hush fund
that is run by Congress in the Senate, which I taught,
talked about oh, I don't know five years ago here
on the podcast, and about how our tax dollars are
being used to cover up all kinds of crazy shit. Well,
there was a bill that was put forward, and the
bill would have released all the information about who had
used that hush fund to pay people off. Well, all
these people in Congress, a lot of Democrats included, voted no.
Why would you vote know on that bill? Shouldn't that
be something that the American people have access to, especially
right now with the conversation we're having. So if you're
not serious about that, why should we believe you're serious
about anything over here? And again, it gives people ammunition
to say that this is all a hoax and politically driven,
when of course we know it's not. And if you
were wondering why I criticize people like Robert Garcia and
Jasmine Crockett as being wholly unserious, this is it. If
they were serious about this issue, every single person in
Congress and Senate would have voted for that hush fund
to be open to the public. And I don't want
to go off the rails too much here, but we're
going to have an episode talking about that hush fund
once again, because it's absolutely ridiculous. There is no way
in hell that our tax dollars should ever be involved
in anything like that. The newly released files cover three
additional interviews conducted with the woman in August and October
of twenty nineteen. In the second interview, the woman described
additional abuse by Epstein and several of his male associates.
She said that Epstein drove her and or flew her
to either New York or New Jersey sometimes when she
was between thirteen and fifteen years old, and she was
taken to a very tall building. It was there that
she said, Epstein introduced her to Trump. Trump asked everyone
to leave the room where they met and mentioned something
to the effect of, let me teach you how little
girls are so supposed to be. According to the description
of the woman's comments in the interview, he then unzipped
his pants and put her head down to his penis,
she told the agents, and now, look, I don't know
if that's true or not, but none of that should
have been hidden, none of that should have been redacted.
That should have all been part of the files. So
again my question is Why wasn't it, why was it
pulled down? And why is it getting extra attention? Is
it because Donald Trump's name is involved? Well, you're breaking
the law, and for me, any minor infraction by these
people at this point needs to be amplified because we're
not going to get them on the things you think
we're going to get them on. There is no smoking
gun here. Show me the smoking gun. I certainly haven't
seen one. However, there is a ton of circumstantial evidence.
And that's how you build a case. You don't just
start off with a small looking gun, right. You have
to do the legwork. You have to put everything together,
build a foundation, and then you build the house. And
that was never done here. And that's the biggest problem.
There was no investigation from the very beginning, no real investigation,
and that was all by design. So whoever made those decisions,
they need to be held accountable. The woman told agents
that she bit Trump, who then struck her and said
words to the effect of get this little bitch the
hell out of here. Later in the interview, the woman
told agents she heard Trump and Epstein talking about Epstein
blackmailing people, and also heard Trump talking about washing money
through casinos. Well, that tracks you think these dudes aren't
involved in money laundering, Trump and the rest of them,
I got bad news for you. In the woman's third
interview with the FBI about three weeks later, agents wrote
that she described receiving threatening telephone calls from what she
believed had to do with that or Trump, as well
as several incidents where she was almost run off the
road by other cars. During the fourth interview, about two
months after her last meeting with FBI agents, the woman
did not have an attorney president unlike the previous meetings.
She told law enforcement agents she was uncomfortable being recorded
and asked them what's the point of coming forward with
allegations after the statute of limitations had likely passed. The
agents wrote, well, there's no doubt it's an uphill climb.
Somebody is making these allegations from so long ago. It's
definitely difficult, right, So I understand her frustration there, And
of course, when you have these kinds of allegations, especially
in the environment we were in, people don't take you serious.
But I think, knowing everything we know now, everything has
to be looked at, Everything has to be examined, Everything
must be investigated, including this. The memo noted that the
the agents encouraged her to go home and take as
much time as she needed to think about speaking with
the agents. Further, it's unclear what became of the FBI
investigation into the woman's claims. An email sent between FBI
agents last summer and included in the DOJ files note
that one identified victim claimed abuse by Trump but ultimately
refused to cooperate, although it doesn't specify if that's the
same person as the accuser. A lawsuit against the Epstein
estate includes a victim who made claims about the financier
pedophile that he had abused her in South Carolina and
brought her to a gathering in New York City with
prominent wealthy men that match some of the claims the
woman made in the FBI interviews. She does not name Trump.
In the lawsuit, The victim, identified as Jane do four,
was deemed ineligible to receive compensation by the Epstein Victims
Compensation Program, a system set up to independently review claims
by victim. According to a court record from May twenty
twenty one, it's not clear why she was deemed ineligible,
well that certainly goes to the favor of Donald Trump. Right,
Let's be clear, let's be honest, let's call balls and strikes.
When you have a credibility issue, it's going to be
a tough cell. Now again, I'm not saying that she's lying.
I don't know. I'm just giving you the facts, and
the facts are. It's a tough sell. But you know,
it's not a tough cell. That there's a cover up
happening right now. And I know, I know it's not
as flashy, it's not what everybody wants. But if you
want some justice, even a little sliver of it, you
guys got to get on board because once you have
that kind of investigation started, it opens the door for
investigators to look at other things. She voluntarily dismissed her
lawsuit in December of twenty twenty one, and her lawyer
told The Post and Curry Your newspaper in January that
she received the financial settlement from the estate. Her lawyer
declined to comment to CNN last week. The Justice Department
has not explained why the Trump related witness interviewed descriptions
were not released, but said in a statement last week
that it had initiated a review to see whether any
documents were improperly tagged in the review process. Translation, this
embarrasses Trump. We better get rid of it. That's what
it means. If that happened, the Department said it would
release them. The statement said under the law, the DOJ
can withhold files that are duplicates, privileged, or part of
an ongoing federal investigation. The Department has been fiercely criticized
for its redaction process and has had to repeatedly take
down documents, editor actions and republish them. Among the most
egregious issues reported were victims whose identities or photos were
made public without their knowledge. The Justice Department also republished
images to the Epstein file library on Wednesday that had
been temporarily taken down after being flagged for potential nudity.
There are still several thousand images left to repost, a
Department official told CNN, which will also be done by Thursday.
Three months after their release, Justice Department employees are still
spending several hours a week on the files, fixing reaction
and posting mistakes. A senior Justice Department official told CNN
about one percent of the three million documents had issues
with redactions. The official said, normally in life, getting ninety
nine percent of things right is pretty good. But that's
a lot of mistakes. The person said, oh, well, just
close enough is good enough. I guess right. Then again,
we are talking about the government, you know, the saying
well it's good enough for government work. I guess that's
how this guy lives his life. You know, we were
almost there. No big deal that there's you know, one
hundred thousand documents that are screwed up, but we're working
on it. The Justice Department is not currently investigating any
individual connected to Jeffrey Epstein, a senior Justice Department official
said on Thursday, of course not. Why would they. They
don't give a shit about this. They don't care, None
of them do. At this point, without any new information,
the official does not expect anyone will be charged in
connection with Epstein. It's time for state investigators to get
into motion, especially in New York. All that big talk
from the Democrats in New York, no action. I mean,
are you just gonna talk or you're gonna do something.
Trump previously directed the Department to open an investigation into
Epstein's ties to prominent Democrats. That investigation was opened under
Manhattan US Attorney Jay Clayton, but has not resulted in
any new cases. Okay, so no investigations. Great, one less
excuse for holding files back. Give us everything, because you're
not investigating anybody, so you can't use that as an excuse.
So what is it? National security? Probably considering Jeffrey Epstein,
at least in some capacity, was working for the United
States government, makes sense that they wouldn't want those files released, right,
and it certainly tracks with them not wanting to investigate
this any further. But here's the problem for them. No
matter how many wars they start, no matter how many
distractions they try and throw up in our path, it's
not gonna work because the more you tell us to
move on, the more we dig in. All right, folks,
that's going to do it for this one. All the
information that goes with this episode can be found in
the description box.