December 24, 2025 • 18 mins
After the Department of Justice announced they were investigating an alleged suicide letter signed by J. Epstein to Larry Nassar, it followed up confirming the FBI deemed the letter a “FAKE.” The letter, which claims “our President likes young nubile girls too”, was one of the more incendiary files released in the DOJ Epstein file drop on Tuesday. This latest back and forth has made the entire process even more confusing and frustrating, with the DOJ now eroding any trust in what we are reading or seeing.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, December twenty fourth, Christmas Eve,
and we assure you you have a better chance of
seeing Santa Claus the night than ever seeing all the
Epstein files. And with that, welcome to this episode of
Amy and TJ Robes. What's the point we're hopping on
here because we need to update I guess correct some
(00:34):
reporting we had yesterday that we got from the DOJ
that's now come back and said one of the biggest
things in the Epstein files that everybody saw is fake.
You know.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
The problem with that is that if there is ever
anything negative or anything they don't like, or anything they
don't want to be taken as truth, they'll just say
it's fake. That has been the response to everything. And
it gets to a point where, now, what's the point
of releasing any file If any file that's damaging or
(01:06):
negative towards the administration is just duped or deemed fake?
Speaker 1 (01:11):
What you're going with that you think that that's all
this is, And you immediately were dismissive and thought that
that's all this.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Is as a human, as a journalist, Yes, And the
reason being the past has also shown this exact same
result when we had the Epstein birthday book, and Trump's clear,
you know, imaging of breasts and his little poem or
whatever to Jeffrey Epstein. That certainly insinuated something that we
(01:42):
don't want to think about with Trump and his love
of girls.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
He said it not my signature. So what are you
supposed to do?
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Everything that is shown or revealed that has anything.
Speaker 3 (01:53):
To do with Trump not my signature.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
You even had Prince Andrew saying that photos a fake
of me in Virginia.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Do you pray if everyone just says that's fake? How
are we supposed to actually consider any of this.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Evidence when you say it that way? This is a
clear it's a pattern we have seen. This isn't a
one off, right, Okay, So when you do that, it's
hard you do and it's of their own doing that.
Maybe we take things they say with a grain of salt,
but this robes. Here we are and we're hopping on.
Yesterday another dump of Epstein files. I think it was
(02:28):
the third major dump, but it's kind of a trickle
that's come out. All of it was supposed to be
out last Friday based on law, but it wasn't. So
they're continuing to read act and put stuff out. One
of the things we got yesterday Robes was a letter
the text of a letter purportedly sent from Jeffrey Epstein
in the days surrounding his death to Larry Nasser. Of
all people, Larry Nasser is in jail in where is
(02:51):
he being kept in Arizona's he moved?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
I believe I don't know where he's moved to.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Obviously, many of these crimes happened in Arizona he's from.
He has obviously committed plenty of crimes in the Michigan
State University campuses.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
A reminder, but people know who he is by now.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
He is probably well.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I would say he is one of the most notorious pedophiles.
Convicted of two hundred plus girls of sexually abusing young girls,
but more than three hundred and thirty girls have come
forward over a two decade period saying he sexually assaulted me.
He was not only a physician at the university, sorry,
at the Michigan State University, dealing with gymnasts, but also
(03:28):
was with the Olympian teams, the girls who were all
training to become our.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Olympians.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
He was in charge of their healthcare and was just
sexually abusing most off, not all of them.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
So big deal, big scandal, big time criminal, spending the
rest of his life in prison. So in this batch
of Epstein files that were released, we were all like,
what in God's name why is Epstein writing to Larry Nasser?
And then the text of what he wrote again, this
is a postcard, we see, this is just some here's
(04:01):
this is supposed to be Epstein's handwriting. So this letter
comes out, the text of the letter from Epstein to NASA.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
You have it in front of him, yes, okay, it
reads as you will know by now, I have taken
the short root home. That's him referencing his suicide. That
would happen, I guess within days.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Good luck.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
We shared one day our love and caring for young
ladies and the hope they reached their full potential. Our
president also shares our love of young Newbile girls. When
a young beauty walked by, he loved to grab snatch,
whereas we ended up snatching grub in the mess halls
of the system. Life is unfair, yours, Jay Epstein.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
Okay, that's explosive if true. And it's in these files
that we've been waiting to see, so they're coming out now, Wow,
we're seeing this for the first time. That's huge, is
how we took it. And a lot of people took
it at the time.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
Yes, And look, I'm sure plenty of people who are
into this and have been following the story have read
a lot of Jeffrey Epstein's letters, and he did write
a lot. Look, obviously have no way of knowing now
because the FBI will get to what they said and
what their statement was. But this does have the same
(05:17):
tone and the same like poetic the way he wrote.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
That's why it seemed legit to me.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Initially, I didn't even question it because everything I've seen
that sounds like how Jeffrey Epstein talks or writes. When
you look at how he has written other folks, he
is poetic like that and speaks like that.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
Wow, Okay, so this letter gets out, it is buzzing.
There were a couple of things. Look, you got journalists
all over this country, organizations pouring over thousands and thousands
of these documents, and as they were pouring over them,
certain things start to come out. And it's interesting to
see what news organization thinks what is important or of note.
(05:55):
All of them thought this was of note. Yeah, this
was the headline everywhere. So as that news starts going out,
which appears to be a suicide note from Jeffrey Epstein
Epstein referencing the president liking young girls. So the DALJ
first tweet yesterday to kind of explain things said, the
(06:17):
DLJ is currently looking into the validity of this alleged
letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry NASA. We will follow
up as soon as possible in the meantime. Three facts
stand out. The postmark on the envelope is Virginia, not
New York, where Epstein was jailed. The return address listed
the wrong jail where Epstein was held and did not
include his inmate number, which is required for outgoing mail.
(06:37):
And the envelope was processed three days after Epstein's death.
That's the first tweet they sent out, kind of setting
us up to say, hold on, we're looking into this.
Isn't question number one rodes. Why did it come out?
If they were looking over documents, somebody was supposed to
have been going through stuff to make sure if anything
needs to be redacted. Why is a fake letter in there?
Speaker 3 (07:00):
Yeah, that is puzzling to me.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
Oversight.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Maybe, Yeah, what a huge oversight. They've had a lot
of time. I would think anytime they see anything with Trump,
it would be flagged and then they would look at
it and say yeah, no or redact this. So I
don't know how the process works. I just know that
the level of trust, unfortunately, that most Americans have right now,
(07:22):
and certainly a lot of journalists with the information coming
out of the administration.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
It's tough to know.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Because if you're told one thing and then another thing
happens and they say, never mind, I'm so confused as
to what I should believe and what I should not.
It's really it numbs you to the whole thing, and
you just don't believe anything.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
So they follow up after that first one saying that
they were looking into it. You have a follow up
one in front of the eye as well.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Yes, it says yes a follow up tweet. The FBI
has confirmed this alleged letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry
Nasser is fake. The letter was received by the jail
and flagged for the FBI at the time. The FBI
made this conclusion based on the following facts. So at
(08:09):
the time, how did it then get into the files
all right. The writing does not appear to match Jeffrey Epstein's.
The letter was postmarked three days after Epstein's death out
of Northern Virginia, when he was jailed in New York.
The return address did not list the jail where Epstein
was held and did not include his inmate number, which
is required for outgoing mail. This fake letter serves as
(08:31):
a reminder that just because a document is released by
the Department of Justice does not make the allegations or
claims within the document factual. Nevertheless, the DOJ will continue
to release all material required by law. Are they required
to release documents that have been deemed fake?
Speaker 3 (08:47):
That doesn't seem possible.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
But they're supposed to release all they have. This is
still in a pile of files somewhere. Okay.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
But if you're an if you're any sort of an
agency where you're you're collecting evidence you collect, if something
is ruled a fake or a fake document, you wouldn't
keep it in your files.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
You would remove it, you would trash it.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
It was received by the jail and flagged for the
FBI at the time, So that means this letter is
He died in twenty nineteen, nineteen. So we're talking six
years ago, a jail received a letter and they flagged
(09:34):
that letter to the FBI at the time that determined
it was fake six years ago. Is that statement? Am
I reading that saying?
Speaker 2 (09:42):
That is what they are saying. That is what they're saying.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
So fresh off of Jeffrey Epstein's death, someone somewhere had
the thought to write a fake letter and send it
three days after he died. Is what I'm now supposed
to believe. Yes, please tell me if I'm missing that is.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
What they are claiming.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
That is what But the problem is, Look, I would
say before, Look, we've always as journalists had to be
skeptical of every organization, the FBI, the government, whatever. You
can't just take what someone tells you and says sure.
But I've never felt like at a point now where
as a journalist, the FBI comes out and says something,
we have done the investigation, we can tell you this
is fact, and me still question it is. It's sad
(10:30):
to me as an American and as a journalist, I
don't I don't trust what I'm hearing because I know
what I'm seeing, and I know what I'm reading, and
I know their tactics with how they're releasing the information,
when they're releasing the information, how much they're releasing. Look,
they had an entire file that was released with pretty
(10:53):
much complete and total reactions talking about co conspirators that
they were investigating.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
Okay, ah ah, this is what we've been looking for.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Right, forget even trying to look at Trump or look
at anyone whose name we already know may be associated.
People want to hear these new names, these other powerful
businessmen who were co conspirators, who who participated in some
of these file acts with underage girls. We actually have
a document showing names of people who they were investigating,
(11:24):
and they're all blacked out.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
There are reasons for that. I don't know. These folks
been accused of any crime. I don't know, but rodes
this was the transparency moment. It's called the Epstein Files
Transparency Act. This is what everybody is upset that hasn't
gotten justice for these victims. This was the stuff that
(11:49):
is going to change the game. And we finally get transparency.
And the DOJ is telling us don't believe anything in
these files, so that that is the standard they're giving us.
Don't believe any of it. So what am I supposed
What do you want to do with this letter? What
are we supposed to how are we supposed to take it?
This is just another thing where two sides fight about
what they're seeing. I think it's this, you think it's that,
(12:12):
and nothing is resolved. There is not a fact in
this case. This makes the case worse in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Yeah, because if you have that premise, now that the
FBI and the dj are asking you to view all
of these documents through, if you're supposed to look through
that lens, that some of this or all of us
could just be fake, well then I can't believe. Then
why release anything? Because anything you release, you'll just say
is fake. So what am I supposed to do with
any of the information you're releasing? Believe any of it
(12:41):
there are no facts or just some of it or
what you tell me to believe. It's frustrating, it's beyond frustrating.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Well, folks, they are so you think we could possibly
possibly one day soon, Look, maybe Robes, this was just
a step. This is just a part of the process,
a step along the way to get closer to real transparency.
Is that fair to hold on to that hope maybe
here on this Christmas Eve.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
I'm sorry, I've lost hope about that. I hope for
a lot of other things on this Christmas Eve, but
not in the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
We'll stay here. We'll tell you what Chuck Schumer is
hoping for. We'll tell you what a couple of members
of the House of Representatives, a Democrat and a Republican,
are hoping for on this Christmas Eve as well. And
it might involve seeing one Pam Bondy in jail. All right, folks,
(13:38):
will continue on this Christmas Eve. Wow, we had to
hop on and give the update. We had to correct
some reporting that we had here yesterday, right, Robes. All
of the reporting comes from the same source, but they're
telling us now that the story is different. The DOJ
gave us a document that said that this was a
letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry Nasser. DJ came back
(14:02):
later Robes and told us, Hey, that letter we put
out earlier, it's fake. Don't believe it. Move on.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Yeah, And so that just undermines the whole process, the
entire file release, because now anything that is untoward or
anything they don't like, that's all they have to.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Say, so what do we do now? How long did
that fight go on? I mean, the President and Marjorie
Taylor Green fell out over this whole issue of the
Epstein files. Right, We've been fighting over this all year
to get this release. We finally get the release. They
didn't come out on time, like the law require, things
are heavily redacted, and so you got plenty of folks
(14:39):
on Capitol Hill that are pissed. And is it inherent
what was it called inherent contempt? It's a specific Okay,
this is what the two lawmakers bipartisan group wants to
hold Pam Bondy an inherent contempt, which robes I think
you looked into it more than I did. It's essentially
saying go arrest her.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Yes, it would call for I think the sergeant at
arms to arrest Attorney General Pambondi and put her behind
bars until all of the files are released. And it
was noted that this inherent contempt has never been used
in modern times, So I don't know where they went
(15:18):
into the to dig up this potential thing they could
throw at her and say, yeah, we're going to threaten
you with prison time until you actually follow through and
produce what the law requires.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
And clearly that threat is working totally. Okay. The other
option here, which is the one that's just just why
Chuck Schumer is now introducing a resolution in which would
compel the Senate to what some take some legal action
against the dj for not releasing these items.
Speaker 3 (15:52):
Yeah, exactly exactly what you just said there.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Okay, Yeah, what's the point. So that was the one
robes that we thought it was ridiculed that you have
to make legislation to enforce the legislation you already passed.
He wants to.
Speaker 2 (16:04):
Pass another law to enforce another law, which if we
start doing that, oh my god, what's the point of
passing the law in the first place. Why don't you
go ahead and then give a punishment if the law
that you're passing isn't enforced and just put it all
in one bill, because that's where we are. And even
when you threaten that or say they even got a
law passed that created some sort of punishment that was
(16:28):
going to happen if you didn't follow through with the
initial law, then you'd have to get another law to
enforce the enforcement.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
I I'm just saying, like, where does it end? This
is all buffoonery.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
It's a circus, it's silly, and this is why people
get frustrated with their government.
Speaker 3 (16:43):
This is why people.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Don't vote, because they think, what does it matter anyway,
because this is where we end up. But this is
a colossal mess and has eroded trust that was hanging
on by a thread anyway when it comes to it. Really,
it's true though, between I think the American public and
the people who represent us, what is the trust level
(17:07):
right now?
Speaker 1 (17:08):
I know I'm laughing because I think that I might
use that as our quote of the day in the
morning Run from Amy Robock. It erodes trust that was
only hanging on by a thread anyway. With that, folks,
we just wanted to hop on give you that update
because we were told by the people who gave us
information yesterday that the information we passed along to you
from them is now wrong. So I just wanted to
(17:28):
give you that update more. Yes, I hope you are
getting your Christmas Eve off to a good start. And yes, folks,
we mean it. You do have a better chance to
seeing Saint Nick than ever seeing an unredacted full Epstein
file release. That's I feel pretty.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
Good about that, yes, And With that, everyone, Merry Christmas,
all right, folks.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Oh my dear Amy, I have TJ Holme. Then we
will be talking y'all soon. Each space the two tents
Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, December twenty fourth, Christmas Eve,
and we assure you you have a better chance of
seeing Santa Claus the night than ever seeing all the
Epstein files. And with that, welcome to this episode of
Amy and TJ Robes. What's the point we're hopping on
here because we need to update I guess correct some
(00:34):
reporting we had yesterday that we got from the DOJ
that's now come back and said one of the biggest
things in the Epstein files that everybody saw is fake.
You know.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
The problem with that is that if there is ever
anything negative or anything they don't like, or anything they
don't want to be taken as truth, they'll just say
it's fake. That has been the response to everything. And
it gets to a point where, now, what's the point
of releasing any file If any file that's damaging or
(01:06):
negative towards the administration is just duped or deemed fake?
Speaker 1 (01:11):
What you're going with that you think that that's all
this is, And you immediately were dismissive and thought that
that's all this.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Is as a human, as a journalist, Yes, And the
reason being the past has also shown this exact same
result when we had the Epstein birthday book, and Trump's clear,
you know, imaging of breasts and his little poem or
whatever to Jeffrey Epstein. That certainly insinuated something that we
(01:42):
don't want to think about with Trump and his love
of girls.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
He said it not my signature. So what are you
supposed to do?
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Everything that is shown or revealed that has anything.
Speaker 3 (01:53):
To do with Trump not my signature.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
You even had Prince Andrew saying that photos a fake
of me in Virginia.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Do you pray if everyone just says that's fake? How
are we supposed to actually consider any of this.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Evidence when you say it that way? This is a
clear it's a pattern we have seen. This isn't a
one off, right, Okay, So when you do that, it's
hard you do and it's of their own doing that.
Maybe we take things they say with a grain of salt,
but this robes. Here we are and we're hopping on.
Yesterday another dump of Epstein files. I think it was
(02:28):
the third major dump, but it's kind of a trickle
that's come out. All of it was supposed to be
out last Friday based on law, but it wasn't. So
they're continuing to read act and put stuff out. One
of the things we got yesterday Robes was a letter
the text of a letter purportedly sent from Jeffrey Epstein
in the days surrounding his death to Larry Nasser. Of
all people, Larry Nasser is in jail in where is
(02:51):
he being kept in Arizona's he moved?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
I believe I don't know where he's moved to.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
Obviously, many of these crimes happened in Arizona he's from.
He has obviously committed plenty of crimes in the Michigan
State University campuses.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
A reminder, but people know who he is by now.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
He is probably well.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I would say he is one of the most notorious pedophiles.
Convicted of two hundred plus girls of sexually abusing young girls,
but more than three hundred and thirty girls have come
forward over a two decade period saying he sexually assaulted me.
He was not only a physician at the university, sorry,
at the Michigan State University, dealing with gymnasts, but also
(03:28):
was with the Olympian teams, the girls who were all
training to become our.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Olympians.
Speaker 2 (03:35):
He was in charge of their healthcare and was just
sexually abusing most off, not all of them.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
So big deal, big scandal, big time criminal, spending the
rest of his life in prison. So in this batch
of Epstein files that were released, we were all like,
what in God's name why is Epstein writing to Larry Nasser?
And then the text of what he wrote again, this
is a postcard, we see, this is just some here's
(04:01):
this is supposed to be Epstein's handwriting. So this letter
comes out, the text of the letter from Epstein to NASA.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
You have it in front of him, yes, okay, it
reads as you will know by now, I have taken
the short root home. That's him referencing his suicide. That
would happen, I guess within days.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Good luck.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
We shared one day our love and caring for young
ladies and the hope they reached their full potential. Our
president also shares our love of young Newbile girls. When
a young beauty walked by, he loved to grab snatch,
whereas we ended up snatching grub in the mess halls
of the system. Life is unfair, yours, Jay Epstein.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
Okay, that's explosive if true. And it's in these files
that we've been waiting to see, so they're coming out now, Wow,
we're seeing this for the first time. That's huge, is
how we took it. And a lot of people took
it at the time.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
Yes, And look, I'm sure plenty of people who are
into this and have been following the story have read
a lot of Jeffrey Epstein's letters, and he did write
a lot. Look, obviously have no way of knowing now
because the FBI will get to what they said and
what their statement was. But this does have the same
(05:17):
tone and the same like poetic the way he wrote.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
That's why it seemed legit to me.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Initially, I didn't even question it because everything I've seen
that sounds like how Jeffrey Epstein talks or writes. When
you look at how he has written other folks, he
is poetic like that and speaks like that.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
Wow, Okay, so this letter gets out, it is buzzing.
There were a couple of things. Look, you got journalists
all over this country, organizations pouring over thousands and thousands
of these documents, and as they were pouring over them,
certain things start to come out. And it's interesting to
see what news organization thinks what is important or of note.
(05:55):
All of them thought this was of note. Yeah, this
was the headline everywhere. So as that news starts going out,
which appears to be a suicide note from Jeffrey Epstein
Epstein referencing the president liking young girls. So the DALJ
first tweet yesterday to kind of explain things said, the
(06:17):
DLJ is currently looking into the validity of this alleged
letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry NASA. We will follow
up as soon as possible in the meantime. Three facts
stand out. The postmark on the envelope is Virginia, not
New York, where Epstein was jailed. The return address listed
the wrong jail where Epstein was held and did not
include his inmate number, which is required for outgoing mail.
(06:37):
And the envelope was processed three days after Epstein's death.
That's the first tweet they sent out, kind of setting
us up to say, hold on, we're looking into this.
Isn't question number one rodes. Why did it come out?
If they were looking over documents, somebody was supposed to
have been going through stuff to make sure if anything
needs to be redacted. Why is a fake letter in there?
Speaker 3 (07:00):
Yeah, that is puzzling to me.
Speaker 1 (07:02):
Oversight.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Maybe, Yeah, what a huge oversight. They've had a lot
of time. I would think anytime they see anything with Trump,
it would be flagged and then they would look at
it and say yeah, no or redact this. So I
don't know how the process works. I just know that
the level of trust, unfortunately, that most Americans have right now,
(07:22):
and certainly a lot of journalists with the information coming
out of the administration.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
It's tough to know.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
Because if you're told one thing and then another thing
happens and they say, never mind, I'm so confused as
to what I should believe and what I should not.
It's really it numbs you to the whole thing, and
you just don't believe anything.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
So they follow up after that first one saying that
they were looking into it. You have a follow up
one in front of the eye as well.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Yes, it says yes a follow up tweet. The FBI
has confirmed this alleged letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry
Nasser is fake. The letter was received by the jail
and flagged for the FBI at the time. The FBI
made this conclusion based on the following facts. So at
(08:09):
the time, how did it then get into the files
all right. The writing does not appear to match Jeffrey Epstein's.
The letter was postmarked three days after Epstein's death out
of Northern Virginia, when he was jailed in New York.
The return address did not list the jail where Epstein
was held and did not include his inmate number, which
is required for outgoing mail. This fake letter serves as
(08:31):
a reminder that just because a document is released by
the Department of Justice does not make the allegations or
claims within the document factual. Nevertheless, the DOJ will continue
to release all material required by law. Are they required
to release documents that have been deemed fake?
Speaker 3 (08:47):
That doesn't seem possible.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
But they're supposed to release all they have. This is
still in a pile of files somewhere. Okay.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
But if you're an if you're any sort of an
agency where you're you're collecting evidence you collect, if something
is ruled a fake or a fake document, you wouldn't
keep it in your files.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
You would remove it, you would trash it.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
It was received by the jail and flagged for the
FBI at the time, So that means this letter is
He died in twenty nineteen, nineteen. So we're talking six
years ago, a jail received a letter and they flagged
(09:34):
that letter to the FBI at the time that determined
it was fake six years ago. Is that statement? Am
I reading that saying?
Speaker 2 (09:42):
That is what they are saying. That is what they're saying.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
So fresh off of Jeffrey Epstein's death, someone somewhere had
the thought to write a fake letter and send it
three days after he died. Is what I'm now supposed
to believe. Yes, please tell me if I'm missing that is.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
What they are claiming.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
That is what But the problem is, Look, I would
say before, Look, we've always as journalists had to be
skeptical of every organization, the FBI, the government, whatever. You
can't just take what someone tells you and says sure.
But I've never felt like at a point now where
as a journalist, the FBI comes out and says something,
we have done the investigation, we can tell you this
is fact, and me still question it is. It's sad
(10:30):
to me as an American and as a journalist, I
don't I don't trust what I'm hearing because I know
what I'm seeing, and I know what I'm reading, and
I know their tactics with how they're releasing the information,
when they're releasing the information, how much they're releasing. Look,
they had an entire file that was released with pretty
(10:53):
much complete and total reactions talking about co conspirators that
they were investigating.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
Okay, ah ah, this is what we've been looking for.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Right, forget even trying to look at Trump or look
at anyone whose name we already know may be associated.
People want to hear these new names, these other powerful
businessmen who were co conspirators, who who participated in some
of these file acts with underage girls. We actually have
a document showing names of people who they were investigating,
(11:24):
and they're all blacked out.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
There are reasons for that. I don't know. These folks
been accused of any crime. I don't know, but rodes
this was the transparency moment. It's called the Epstein Files
Transparency Act. This is what everybody is upset that hasn't
gotten justice for these victims. This was the stuff that
(11:49):
is going to change the game. And we finally get transparency.
And the DOJ is telling us don't believe anything in
these files, so that that is the standard they're giving us.
Don't believe any of it. So what am I supposed
What do you want to do with this letter? What
are we supposed to how are we supposed to take it?
This is just another thing where two sides fight about
what they're seeing. I think it's this, you think it's that,
(12:12):
and nothing is resolved. There is not a fact in
this case. This makes the case worse in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
Yeah, because if you have that premise, now that the
FBI and the dj are asking you to view all
of these documents through, if you're supposed to look through
that lens, that some of this or all of us
could just be fake, well then I can't believe. Then
why release anything? Because anything you release, you'll just say
is fake. So what am I supposed to do with
any of the information you're releasing? Believe any of it
(12:41):
there are no facts or just some of it or
what you tell me to believe. It's frustrating, it's beyond frustrating.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Well, folks, they are so you think we could possibly
possibly one day soon, Look, maybe Robes, this was just
a step. This is just a part of the process,
a step along the way to get closer to real transparency.
Is that fair to hold on to that hope maybe
here on this Christmas Eve.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
I'm sorry, I've lost hope about that. I hope for
a lot of other things on this Christmas Eve, but
not in the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
We'll stay here. We'll tell you what Chuck Schumer is
hoping for. We'll tell you what a couple of members
of the House of Representatives, a Democrat and a Republican,
are hoping for on this Christmas Eve as well. And
it might involve seeing one Pam Bondy in jail. All right, folks,
(13:38):
will continue on this Christmas Eve. Wow, we had to
hop on and give the update. We had to correct
some reporting that we had here yesterday, right, Robes. All
of the reporting comes from the same source, but they're
telling us now that the story is different. The DOJ
gave us a document that said that this was a
letter from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry Nasser. DJ came back
(14:02):
later Robes and told us, Hey, that letter we put
out earlier, it's fake. Don't believe it. Move on.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Yeah, And so that just undermines the whole process, the
entire file release, because now anything that is untoward or
anything they don't like, that's all they have to.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Say, so what do we do now? How long did
that fight go on? I mean, the President and Marjorie
Taylor Green fell out over this whole issue of the
Epstein files. Right, We've been fighting over this all year
to get this release. We finally get the release. They
didn't come out on time, like the law require, things
are heavily redacted, and so you got plenty of folks
(14:39):
on Capitol Hill that are pissed. And is it inherent
what was it called inherent contempt? It's a specific Okay,
this is what the two lawmakers bipartisan group wants to
hold Pam Bondy an inherent contempt, which robes I think
you looked into it more than I did. It's essentially
saying go arrest her.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
Yes, it would call for I think the sergeant at
arms to arrest Attorney General Pambondi and put her behind
bars until all of the files are released. And it
was noted that this inherent contempt has never been used
in modern times, So I don't know where they went
(15:18):
into the to dig up this potential thing they could
throw at her and say, yeah, we're going to threaten
you with prison time until you actually follow through and
produce what the law requires.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
And clearly that threat is working totally. Okay. The other
option here, which is the one that's just just why
Chuck Schumer is now introducing a resolution in which would
compel the Senate to what some take some legal action
against the dj for not releasing these items.
Speaker 3 (15:52):
Yeah, exactly exactly what you just said there.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Okay, Yeah, what's the point. So that was the one
robes that we thought it was ridiculed that you have
to make legislation to enforce the legislation you already passed.
He wants to.
Speaker 2 (16:04):
Pass another law to enforce another law, which if we
start doing that, oh my god, what's the point of
passing the law in the first place. Why don't you
go ahead and then give a punishment if the law
that you're passing isn't enforced and just put it all
in one bill, because that's where we are. And even
when you threaten that or say they even got a
law passed that created some sort of punishment that was
(16:28):
going to happen if you didn't follow through with the
initial law, then you'd have to get another law to
enforce the enforcement.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
I I'm just saying, like, where does it end? This
is all buffoonery.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
It's a circus, it's silly, and this is why people
get frustrated with their government.
Speaker 3 (16:43):
This is why people.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Don't vote, because they think, what does it matter anyway,
because this is where we end up. But this is
a colossal mess and has eroded trust that was hanging
on by a thread anyway when it comes to it. Really,
it's true though, between I think the American public and
the people who represent us, what is the trust level
(17:07):
right now?
Speaker 1 (17:08):
I know I'm laughing because I think that I might
use that as our quote of the day in the
morning Run from Amy Robock. It erodes trust that was
only hanging on by a thread anyway. With that, folks,
we just wanted to hop on give you that update
because we were told by the people who gave us
information yesterday that the information we passed along to you
from them is now wrong. So I just wanted to
(17:28):
give you that update more. Yes, I hope you are
getting your Christmas Eve off to a good start. And yes, folks,
we mean it. You do have a better chance to
seeing Saint Nick than ever seeing an unredacted full Epstein
file release. That's I feel pretty.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
Good about that, yes, And With that, everyone, Merry Christmas,
all right, folks.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Oh my dear Amy, I have TJ Holme. Then we
will be talking y'all soon. Each space the two tents
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.