November 20, 2025 • 34 mins
- Supreme Court Ruling on Immigration and Presidential Authority
- A Supreme Court decision has granted President Donald Trump expanded authority under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.
- The ruling (described as 5–4) purportedly allows Trump to deport members of a violent gang (referred to as the “Trans Deragua Gang”) to a mega-prison in El Salvador.
- This as a major victory for Trump, law and order, and U.S. sovereignty, while criticizing activist judges—specifically Judge James Boasberg—for previously blocking deportations.
- Democrats are obstructing Trump’s constitutional powers and engaging in “legal warfare.”
2. Jeffrey Epstein Files and the Political Fallout
-
- The release of the Epstein documents follows a bipartisan congressional vote and Trump signing the “Epstein Files Transparency Act.”
- Democrats initially pushed for disclosure to harm Trump politically but now face backlash because the files allegedly implicate prominent Democrats.
- Specific figures mentioned:
- Stacey Plaskett (Democratic delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands) accused of texting Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing.
- Jamie Raskin criticized for hypocrisy in defending Plaskett while previously condemning Epstein as a “child sex trafficking mastermind.”
- Bill and Hillary Clinton are highlighted as refusing to comply with subpoenas from the House Oversight Committee regarding Epstein ties.
- Campaign finance records show Epstein donated heavily to Democratic causes and individuals.
- ABC News’ alleged suppression of an interview with Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts in 2019, framing it as media complicity to protect elites.
- Democrats have underestimated the consequences of releasing the files, calling it “one of the biggest political backfires in modern history.”
Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and Verdict with Ted Cruz Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening
X: https://x.com/benfergusonshow
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 (00:01):
We got to start with some big news. It's not
being covered by the media, but it's extremely important and
a massive win for the rule of law and also
the President of United States of America to do his
job as the commander in chief.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
You may remember that there.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Is a guy, a activist judge, who is constantly trying
to stop President Donald Trump from doing his job. The
judge's name is Judge Boseburg. We now know the Supreme
Court has said that Judge Bosberg has exceeded his authority
and Trump can now deport the train Deragua Gang under
(00:37):
the seventeen ninety eight Alien Enemies Act. It was a
five to four ruling the Supreme Court handing President Donald
Trump a massive, sweeping wartimes power victory, allowing mass deportations
of the gang members classified as an invasion force straight
(00:58):
to all Salvador's mega prison. Democrats losing their mind over
this because they believe that the activist judge was going
to continue to be able to hold Present back from
doing his job, the job of deporting the worst criminals
in this country, including those that are gang members from
a powerful brutal gang, the trans Derago Gang. I'll play
(01:24):
that audio for you in a second, but first, for
the next sixty seconds, can you hit pause on your
life and just think about this. Every day, millions of
children face a crushing reality, a constant defeating message, echoes
and their empty stomachs and their desperate eyes. It is
that you don't matter. Poverty doesn't just steal food and shelter.
(01:44):
It steals hope, dignity, and the fundamental belief that they
are loved. But there's another message, one of boundless love
and hope. Through Compassion International, you can change the child's
story forever. You can sponsor child just like I do.
You can introduce them to a loveing, heavenly father. You
can equip them with education, healthcare and the support to
(02:05):
overcome poverty.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
This isn't just about one child.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
It's about transforming families, revitalizing communities, and changing nations. It's
about proving that every child truly matters. So help give
a child a future, give them hope. Visit Compassion dot
com today, that's Compassion dot Com. I want you to
listen to when this came in and how is the
(02:28):
scribe on Fox News Channel with Jesse Waters.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Now we have Fox News Alert.
Speaker 3 (02:34):
The Supreme Court just cleared the way for Trump to
deport illegals even faster. The High Court rule that Trump
can use the Alien Enemies Act to send Venezuela and
gangbangers to a mega prison in El Salvador. This is
a huge ruling in Trump's favor and a major win
for the country after as you know, DC Judge James
Boseburg ordered a stop to the deportations, So this is
(02:56):
pretty significant. These deportations, Caroline can keep going.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
This is a massive legal victory, Jesse, a massive victory
for law and order and for our constitutional republic in
the sovereignty of the United States of America. We called
on the Supreme Court to reign in these activist judges
like Judge Boseburg, who was completely out of line and
trying to say that the President didn't have the executive
(03:19):
authority to deport foreign terrorists off of our soil. We
have always maintained the position at the White House that
the President was well within his constitutional authority to do so,
and this decision proves that President Trump in our administration
have always been right from the beginning. He will continue
to utilize the Alien Enemies Act to remove foreign terrorists
(03:41):
and trendy Iragua members, vicious gang members from American communities.
And because of this ruling, the United States of America
is a much safer place. Our team will get to
work tomorrow to deport these heinous, violent foreign terrorists from
our neighborhoods.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
And you had another couple.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
Now, this obviously is truly incredible that the President of
United States of America is now going to actually get
to do his job. It is a big win, and
it's a win that the left does not want you
to even know actually happen. That yet again another activist
judge has been struck down by the Supreme Court. Now,
what is the reality moving forward of this. We're now
(04:19):
going to get rid of these trans gang members immediately.
We're not going to have to be harassed by the
court system any longer to do what the president's directive is,
what the American people clearly elected him to do, which
was to get rid of the worst among us that
had come into this country illegally.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
That is the entire goal here.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
And now you're going to see the Democrats go back
to the courts on any other case they can to
try to stop the President from doing his job.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
It's warfare.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
That's what they're going to do, legal warfare every single
time to delay or stop the president, even if they
know the outcome is going all the way Supreme Court
and losing just like they did. Which brings me to
another big story, and that deals with Jeffrey Epstein. We
now know that the House and the Senate have moved
(05:11):
the Epstein files for full disclosure of those files to
the President's desk, and he is expected to sign it.
We also know now that the Democrats this may be
one of the biggest backfires in modern political history, as
what is in these files seems to be very damning
for the Democrats, and that's something I think they didn't expect,
(05:32):
was for these files to actually ever become public. Therefore
it would protect them and some of their shady business.
A great example of that is now Stacy Plasket. She
is a delegate, a Democrat from the US Virgin Islands.
She has gone to the for of the House after
being busted for actually texting with Jeffrey Epstein at a
(05:55):
time when they were trying to hurt Donald Trump in
real time during a Congression hearing. I want you to
hear what she had to say from the floor of
the House as she was quote standing up for herself
from a censure that dealt with her being removed from
the Intel Committee.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Take a listen, And I got a text from Jeffrey Epstein,
who at the time was my constituent, who was not
public knowledge at that time that he was under federal investigation,
and who was sharing information with me.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
No I heard recent.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Now she says, he was just sharing information with me.
There's a problem with what the delegate just said. It
was eleven years after he was first arrested for child
sex crimes, and Stacy just lied to you from the
floor of the House with a bunch of radical lefties
behind her defending her, acting like I didn't know Jeffrey
(06:56):
Epstein had ever done anything wrong.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
But that's not all that she had to say.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
She also decided to go on CNN, and here's what
she said is she tried to defend herself from this
pr nightmare.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
I believe that Jeffrey Epstein had information, and I was
going to get information to get at the truth. Having
a friendship with him is not something that I would
deem to have, and so I'm just looking forward. I'm
moving forward and I think that that's what we as
American people should do, is move forward. If individuals are
(07:32):
not involved in illegal activity extending his criminal enterprise or
his financial enterprise or all of those things, I think
that we need to look at what people are doing
moving forward.
Speaker 6 (07:46):
Wait, let me just better understand that. What is that
point Because at the time he was an sex offender
and it had been detailed all the sexual if there
are a lot.
Speaker 5 (07:52):
Of people who have done a lot of crimes, and
as a prosecutor, you get information from people where you can.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
So there you go, just gonna move forward and just
slide to the American people. And tried to defend the
fact that I was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein and
texting with him in real time for one reason, to
try to hurt Donald Trump. Now the new Democratic slogan
seems to be defend the indefensible.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
Here.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
This also happened in another scenario, as Raskin said that
Epstein coaching the congresswoman is just constituent services. I want
you to take a listen to what James Comer had
to say on Fox News Channel about this.
Speaker 7 (08:35):
It's Comer joining us now, Congressman, your reaction.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
To all this.
Speaker 8 (08:39):
Well, I've said many times, Jamie r Askin's full of crap.
He's the definition of congressional hypocrisy. Can you imagine if
that were Donald Trump or me, or some Republican that
Raskin doesn't like, that was texting with Jeffrey Epstein, a
convicted sex offender who the Democrats have now become a
(09:00):
cessed over because they hope and pray that he has
something to do with Donald Trump. If we were texting
with him during a committee hearing, I mean, it's preposterous.
Remember Jamie r Askin appointed Stacy Plaskett to be on
the impeachment to be an impeachment manager of Donald Trump,
and here we find out she was communicating with Jeffrey
(09:22):
Epstein in a plot to take down Donald Trump. So
for Jamie Raskin to try to defend that on the
House floor in front of America is par for the
course for Jamie r Askin. But it's the definition of hypocrisy.
Speaker 7 (09:35):
And mister Chairman, you were part of that committee when
all of this is going on. Delegate Plasket yesterday defending
herself saying this, listen, now.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
I heard recently from someone that I was taking advice
from him. Let me tell you something. I don't need
to get advice on how to question anybody from any individual.
I have been a lawyer for thirty years.
Speaker 7 (10:02):
There she has defending herself, ComRIS fin Is that satisfactory
to you?
Speaker 8 (10:07):
I mean, again, can you imagine what she would be
saying if Donald Trump was communicating with Jeffrey Epstein trying
to answer a question from Stacey Plaskett. I mean, the
hypocrisy is in full display here for the Democrats to
go all in over the last month over release the files,
release the files. I think one reason they were demanding
(10:30):
we released the files is they didn't think that President
Trump would release the files, or that I would subpoena
the estate files. What we know about Plasket and Hakeem
Jeffries came from my subpoena of the Epstein of State.
And again the Democrats were demanding that I would do
that months ago because they didn't think I would. No
(10:50):
one knew what was going to be in the documents.
And when we get the documents, low and behold, there's
a bunch of liability for Democrats. And I'm glad that
the hypocrisy is on full display and I don't think
those answers are satisfactory.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
All right, let's talk a little bit more about Raskin.
And you heard James Comber there say that he's full
of crap. I'm going to play for you, Jamie Raskin.
In two different times he said two very different things
about Jeffrey Epstein and the burden of innocence and truth
(11:22):
and sex trafficking and the mastermind. And here he is
in his own words.
Speaker 9 (11:27):
One thing he's clearly doing is changing the subject from
a different form of crime, which is child sex trafficking,
which Jeffrey Epstein was a mastermind of. Donald Trump's name
apparently appears throughout the Epstein file.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Dave, all right, So that is him talking about Donald Trump, right,
indicting Donald Trump and saying that Donald Trump was clearly
in the file. And I think Raskin thought this file
would never become public. It was easy to weaponize this
file if it didn't become publican now it is public
and Donald Trump's going to sign it. So now listen
to Raskin talking about the congresswoman, uh, the the representative
(12:05):
from the Virgin Islands, right and and and defending her
now again when he was talking about Trump, Epstein is
a child sex trafficking mastermind. But when Raskin's talking about plasket,
Epstein's just a constituent. Just just a did you just
talk into a constituent.
Speaker 10 (12:23):
They've arraigned a Democratic member for taking a phone call
from her constituent. Uh, Jeffrey Epstein in the middle of
the hearing. I still don't see what the charge is.
Where is the ethical transgression?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Where is the ethical transgression? Hold on, let's go back
and quote you. You said that Jeffrey Epstein is a
child sex trafficking mastermind, and you don't understand now where
the ethical transgression is. You cannot make this up. There's
also another part of this. It's very frustrating, and that
(12:58):
is uh, the fact that the media is still kind
of holding the hand of Stacy Plaskett to clear the
air as they described about her text with Epstein on
the morning of twenty nineteen the Michael Cohen hearing her defense,
he's a constituent. As a prosecutor, you get info from
baby all the time. And again she initiated the text
(13:20):
messages we've now learned early that morning. Let me say
it again, she initiated the text thread. So the idea
that like this was her unsolicited a constituent coming out
is a total lie. Listen now, CNN described it as
they were talking about the timeline.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
All right, well, we are just learning that the Senate
has now sent over that legislation on releasing the Jeffrey
Epstein files over to the President's desk. We're monitoring that. Also,
you have this ongoing Epstein soga wolf and there's.
Speaker 11 (13:52):
A lot of dramas though unfolding the Epstein saga hasn't
been without controversy for Democrats as well. The House last
night barly rejected a Republican effort to censure our next guest,
Democratic Delegate Stacey Plaskett over text she exchanged with Epstein
during a twenty nineteen congressional hearing with President Trump's former
attorney Michael Cohen. Three Republicans joined all Democrats to defeat
(14:17):
the effort to remove her from the House Intelligence Committee,
with another three voting present. Congressman Stacey Plasket of the
US Virgin Islands is joining us right now. You're a
delegate and non voting delegate. Right now, tell us a
little bit about your reaction to all these late developments.
Speaker 5 (14:32):
Well, you know, first, I want to thank the Democrats
the Democratic Caucus not only for voting with me, but
for speaking on my behalf during the general debate, as
well as those members in the Republican Party who voted
with the Democrats and those who tacitly voted with us
by either voting president or not voting at all during
(14:53):
the censure. And I'm hopeful that we can now get
back to the work that we do in Congress, rather
than the political theater that has been happening. The files
have been released, which I have been in favor of
all along, and let's let the victims get their justice
and let us get to the work of Congress. We've
been on over a seventy day paid time off. Democrats
(15:17):
have been doing town halls, coming back to Congress. Republicans
have been nowhere in sight, and the people of this
country are in need of our support and of the
work that needs to be done.
Speaker 11 (15:28):
We know that Epstein had what property in the Virgin Islands, right?
What was your relationship with Epstein?
Speaker 5 (15:33):
So, Jeffrey Epstein was a constituent, he was a resident
of the Virgin Islands, lived there. I guess more than
half of the year because he was registered there. I
had received donations from him. After the last investigation came out,
which was after this texting, I gave any donations that
(15:54):
I had previously received from him to women's organizations and
did not have any contact with him. But like many constituents,
individuals get your phone number, they text you about issues,
they speak with you. I have spoken with him about
issues that are relevant, things that are going on in
the Virgin Islands and elsewhere around the country.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Now that is where she screwed up.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
And even CNN is going to call her out because
she's saying, oh, I did nothing wrong. He just contacted
me as a constituent. There is a problem. She is
the one, as I mentioned a moment ago, that initiated
the text exchange. So Jeffrey Epstein did not contact her.
(16:41):
She contacted a sex offender. And why because she was
trying to hurt Donald Trump. Listen to even CNN saying
this doesn't add up right.
Speaker 6 (16:54):
But on that day that we're talking about, you initiated
the tax exchange at seven fifty five in the morning,
So why were you even texting with Epstein at the time?
He was a known sex offender.
Speaker 5 (17:05):
Then sure, you know, I explained to people, I've been
a prosecutor for many years, and there are a lot
of people who have information that are not your friends,
that you used to get information for to get at
the truth. This was seven years ago, and people need
to understand. This was a huge hearing that was taking
place with Michael Cohen finally coming forward to talk about
(17:28):
monies that he had with the hush money potential hush
money that had been paid to Stormy Daniels to keep
her quiet about the allegations against Trump. We were entering
a hearing. Lots of people were texting me, lots of
people were giving me information.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
By the way, notice I've just said quote, lots of
people were texting me. She's again lying. Jeffrey Epstein did
not text her. She initiated the text exchange. So she's
lying now multiple times. The faces of the two hosts
at CNN keep listening.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
And I find it really interesting and almost rich that
the Washington Post took thirty seconds one set of question
line that I did and say that Epstein was directing
me as to what to question Michael Cohen. I have
five minutes of questioning. I had a lot of questions
twenty years of experience that I had at the time,
(18:25):
along with other information I was getting from many sources
about issues that should have been raised. And I also
want to say that the issues that I raised in
that hearing related to individuals who were closest to the
president and who could know about money has never been
looked into.
Speaker 6 (18:42):
Right, we have the full transcript right here. But no
doubt you have an impressive resume. Right you're a former
federal prosecutor, you were an impeachment manager.
Speaker 5 (18:50):
But yes or no.
Speaker 6 (18:51):
If Epstein had not bought up Rona to you and
that text, would you have asked Michael Cohen about her independently?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Probably not.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
I asked about three other individuals as well. Everyone knew,
other people knew that this woman had been the president's assistant.
I talked about other individuals who were also close to
him that other people had given me information about that
I'd found other information about. And there were other issues
(19:20):
that I talked with him about as well, Michael Cohen,
that I brought up during that time. So as a prosecutor,
as an investigator, you glean information, get information where you can.
Some of it is relevant, some of it is not.
And you put it all together and you ask the question.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
And I understand, by the way, this is just pathological lying.
And this goes back to what I said earlier about Democrats.
I don't think ever thought that this would actually happen,
so therefore they doubled down on it again to try
to hurt Trump. Let me give you some other breaking
news that's happening right now. We're now being told that
Bill and Hillary Clinton are refusing and I hope every
(19:57):
one of you will share this, Okay, take the podcast,
share on social media. Right now, Bill and Hillary Clinton
are refusing to appear before the House Oversight Committee for
their depositions regarding Jeffrey Epstein. Now there's a second part
of that that you need to notice. Notice how House
Democrats suddenly have nothing to say about Bill and Hillary
(20:20):
Clinton refusing to appear before the House Oversight Committee on
the issue of Jeffrey Epstein, which they are demanding transparency on,
which also brings me back to twenty nineteen. And if
you want to know how much the media has been
protecting the Democratic Party and Epstein, let's go back to
(20:41):
twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
ABC News admitted to.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Deliberately bearing a key interview with Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts
for three years. That would have completely exposed and reshaped
the Epstein conversation. The interview, by the way, we now know,
exposed damning evidence against Bill Clinton, damning evidence against Prince
Andrew and other powerful figures. And knowing this, what did
(21:07):
ABC News do? They deliberately set on it for three years.
They even called it internally a stupid story, and they
buried it to protect their access to Number one, the Royalty,
Number two to the Clintons. And if ABC had aired it,
the victims would have had justice and the American people
would have had answers. So why is there no media
(21:28):
accountability here? You want to just go back to twenty nineteen,
take a listen to what Amy Robos said again, ABC
News anchor. She was caught saying this while on set.
This obviously never aired.
Speaker 12 (21:43):
I've had the story for three years. I've had this
interview with Virginia Roberts. We would not put it on
the air. First of all, I was told, who's Jeffrey Epstein.
No one knows who that is.
Speaker 5 (21:51):
This is a stupid story.
Speaker 12 (21:52):
Then the Palace found out that we had her whole
allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.
We were so afraid we wouldn't be able to interview
Kate as will that that also quashed the story. And
then and then Alan Dershowitz was also implicated it because
of the planes. She told me everything, she had, pictures,
(22:16):
she had everything. She wasn't hiding for twelve years. We
convinced her to come out. We convinced her to talk
to us. It was unbelievable what we had Clinton, We
had everything. I tried for three years to get it
on to no avail, and now it's all coming out
and it's like these new relevant revelations and I freaking
had all of it. I'm so pissed right now, Like
(22:38):
every day I get more and more pissed because I'm
just like, oh my god, it was what we had
was unreal.
Speaker 5 (22:45):
Other women backing it up.
Speaker 12 (22:47):
Brad Edwards, the attorney three years ago, saying like, like
we there will come a day when we will realize
Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has
ever known.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
It is official.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
US House had Represents voted four hundred and twenty seven
to one to release the Epstein Files, and then moved
to the Senate where they voted in favor of giving
it to the President of the United States of America.
And now the President has signed it, releasing what documents
we have that many have called the Epstein files. Really
(23:20):
they should be called the Epstein papers. Now this all
goes back to when the Democrats decided to actually give
a damn about Jeffrey Epstein. They didn't care about the victims,
but what they did care about was trying to hurt
President Donald Trump with the Epstein files. Why because in
July of this year, the US Department of Justice and
(23:41):
the FBI issued a memo stating that they found no
credible evidence that Epstein had a so called client list.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Yes, there were a lot of names.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
And there was a lot of paperwork, but there was
no actual client list. And they also said there was
no reason for an investigation against uncharged individuals.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
That would be supported.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
And that is when Democrats decided to actually act like
they cared about Jeffrey Epstein. Again, it wasn't to actually
protect victims or get to the bottom of anything. It
was to try to imply that Donald Trump was covering
up to protect himself. We all know that is a lie,
and it's official now because you can read it all you.
(24:27):
Fast forward to September of this year and the push
in Congress began to gain traction among Democrats via discharge
petition the House to force a vote on releasing Epstein
related documents. Notice it wasn't a client list. Then in November,
the House passed the bill, the Epstein Filed Transparency Act,
(24:48):
by a vote of four hundred and twenty seven to one.
The very next day, November nineteenth, they Senate passed the
bill by unanimous consent, and they sent it to the
present's death. That is where we are now. President Donald
Trump has signed the bill into law. Now, under the law,
once signed by the President, the DOJ must release two
(25:10):
Congress and publicly in a searchable, downloadable format, the unclassified records,
the communications and investigative materials related to Jeffrey Epstein, and
to the extent possible declassify and release classified materials within
thirty days.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Now.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
What President Trump and the White House have said publicly
is this. Trump posted on his platform True Social upon
signing saying this, I have just signed the bill to
release the Epstein files. He also claimed it encouraged the
House Speaker Mike Johnson and the Senate Majority Leader John
Thune to move the bill, leading to the near unanimous vote,
(25:53):
and the White House had also made it clear they
expected the President to sign the bill, which he has done,
even saying reporters earlier in the day quote, this will
be signed. The bill will be signed whenever it gets
to the White House. There's also the question of victim protection.
The White House and GOP leaders expressed major concerns about
(26:14):
protecting victim identities and ongoing investigations. For instance, Speaker Johnson,
while ultimately supporting the bill, said he had hoped for
amendments to better protect the victims now. President Trump also
made it clear about the politics behind all of this.
He referred to prior criticism as a democratic hoax, insisting
(26:37):
that his administration has nothing to hide and link the
matter politically, claiming, quote, all of the friends of Epstein's
were Democrats. Now, there's other important issues that you need
to understand. There's a scope and limitations. Even though the
bill mandates broad disclosure, it still allows for reactions or
(26:57):
withholding a material that would identify victimctims, reveal ongoing investigations
or compromise national security or classified information.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Now the other.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Question is this, is this maybe one of the biggest
political backfire in modern political history for the Democrats who
are demanding all of this. The answer seems to be
yes at this moment. We also know that newly released
campaign finance records are now showing that from nineteen ninety
(27:29):
to twenty eighteen, Jeffrey Epstein directed about eighty nine percent
of his political donations to democratic and progressive causes, with
notable individual recipients including Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer.
(27:49):
Now this also should be, I believe, the number one
fight for Republicans moving forward. We don't need to move
on from this. Let me explain why you literally had
Democrats in bed politically with Jeffrey Epstein at every corner.
For example, we had a Democratic member of Congress who
was caught texting Jeffrey Epstein during hearings and Republicans voted
(28:13):
again censoring her. That is insane and the Democrats should
have learned from this mistake. This is a cycle, by
the way, that keeps happening. It's a reason why Republicans
keep losing elections because when they have the opportunity to
stand up to the radical left. Many times they don't
really do it. And until Republicans grow a backbone and
(28:34):
demand more transparency from the Epstein files about what the
Democrats are doing, nothing will change. And I say it again,
this is why so many times Republicans keep losing.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
We don't fight.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
They've never demanded the release of all of Epstein files,
even though every shred of evidence points directly I believe
to mostly Democrats. You have massive Democratic names that we're
in bed with. Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reed Hoffman,
Stacy Plaskett, Bill Richardson, George Mitchell, Hakeem Jeffries was even
(29:14):
asking Jeffrey Epstein for money after he was convicted of
sexual crimes.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Michael Wolfe is another name.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
All of these names should be what Republicans should now
be talking about. Which brings me the two biggest names
that we know about so far that clearly don't want
you to know about what they were doing with Jeffrey Epstein,
and that was Bill and Hillary Clinton. Now we know
that there's a good chance that Bill and Hillary Clinton
(29:44):
are a literally risking prison time over Epstein's silence. How
do we know that it's coming from the House Oversight
Committee chairman James Comer. And Comer said that former President
Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary c could
face criminal exposure related to newly's surface Jeffrey Epstein documents,
(30:06):
saying this, we expect to hear from Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Comber said, Donald Trump answered questions for years about Jeffrey Epstein.
Every day he gets asked questions about Epstein and he
answers them in front of the American people. We've subpoenaed
Republicans and Democrats. Comber's comments underscore how the looming release
of these records related to Epstein, the disgraced financier who
(30:31):
died by suicide in jail awaiting sex traveicking charges, is
becoming a flashpoint in national politics, with the Democratic Party
now bracing for real fallout. Many in the Democratic Party
didn't believe that these documents would ever be made public,
and that's why they weaponize him to try to hurt
Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Now.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
Although there's no direct evidence that the Clintons committed any
crimes at this point, suggestions of possible legal exposure in
Jai new tension into an already charged debate over transparency
and accountability and the political weaponization of the Epstein files.
(31:11):
The Justice Department set on Friday that it is now
examining Epstein's purported connections to high profile Democrats, among them
the former president United States of America Bill Clinton, who
has repeatedly insisted that he was unaware of Epstein's criminal conduct.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
Now, as part of the investigation.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
James Comber issued the subpoenas to the Clintons and eight
other individuals that followed the release by Congress last week
of more than twenty thousand pages of documents connected to Epstein.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
And now we have a whole lot more now.
Speaker 1 (31:47):
That batch of newly released correspondence included messages involving Bill Clinton,
Hillary Clinton, and the question now is what will be
done with this moving forward. We also know that no
survivor or associate has ever accused Clinton of misconduct tied
to Epstein, though Trump has for years suggested Clinton's travel
(32:10):
on Epstein's jets was suspect. The Clinton Foundation has dismissed
the renewed attention, saying the emails that have been released
proved that Bill Clinton did nothing and knew nothing, and
argue the controversy is being used as a political distraction.
But here's what we do know. Flight records tell a
little bit different story. The flight records disclosed in earlier
(32:34):
civil litigation showed that Clinton took several trips on Epstein's
plane in two thousand and two in two thousand and three,
traveling with staff to destinations across Africa, Asia, and Europe.
James Comer argued that while some Democrats have formally stated
they had no knowledge of Epstein, the Clintons have never
(32:57):
responded to Congressional inquiries or to making questions from reporters
or investigators about their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. We also
know that other Democrats have sent letters saying they knew
nothing about Epstein, which would hold in court if something
ever comes out that they did know something. Comer said,
(33:17):
and he said this, and then they've committed perjury here.
But the Clintons have never responded. They're the one group
in this investigation that's never had to answer questions in
front of a credible reporter, and they've never certainly answered
questions from attorneys or members of Congress. So we expect
the Clintons to come in or I expect the Clintons
(33:40):
to be met with the same fate that Steve Bannon
and Peter Navarro were met with when the Democrats were
in control.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
House.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Democrats sought criminal charges you may remember against Steve Bannon
and former Trump White House strigists after he refused to
appear before the House committee investigating the January sixth attacks
on the USK capital. A federal jury ultimately found him
guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress and received
a four month jail term. In twenty twenty two, Navarro,
(34:10):
a senior trade advisor during Trump's first administration, faced a
similar outcome. He too given a four month federal prison
sentence after being found guilty of defying a subpoena from
Congress issued by the same January sixth investigation. So here
we are, as James Comer said, the Democrats have Trump
derangement syndrome. They're just hoping and praying that there's something
(34:31):
in these documents somewhere that they don't know where, but
somewhere that would implicate Trump. In reality, now that the
files are open, there's a very good chance that people
like Bill and Hillary Clinton are going to be in
a lot more trouble than they ever could have imagined.
Don't forget share this podcast please with your family and
your friends were whoever they are, and I will see
(34:54):
you back here tomorrow
We got to start with some big news. It's not
being covered by the media, but it's extremely important and
a massive win for the rule of law and also
the President of United States of America to do his
job as the commander in chief.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
You may remember that there.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Is a guy, a activist judge, who is constantly trying
to stop President Donald Trump from doing his job. The
judge's name is Judge Boseburg. We now know the Supreme
Court has said that Judge Bosberg has exceeded his authority
and Trump can now deport the train Deragua Gang under
(00:37):
the seventeen ninety eight Alien Enemies Act. It was a
five to four ruling the Supreme Court handing President Donald
Trump a massive, sweeping wartimes power victory, allowing mass deportations
of the gang members classified as an invasion force straight
(00:58):
to all Salvador's mega prison. Democrats losing their mind over
this because they believe that the activist judge was going
to continue to be able to hold Present back from
doing his job, the job of deporting the worst criminals
in this country, including those that are gang members from
a powerful brutal gang, the trans Derago Gang. I'll play
(01:24):
that audio for you in a second, but first, for
the next sixty seconds, can you hit pause on your
life and just think about this. Every day, millions of
children face a crushing reality, a constant defeating message, echoes
and their empty stomachs and their desperate eyes. It is
that you don't matter. Poverty doesn't just steal food and shelter.
(01:44):
It steals hope, dignity, and the fundamental belief that they
are loved. But there's another message, one of boundless love
and hope. Through Compassion International, you can change the child's
story forever. You can sponsor child just like I do.
You can introduce them to a loveing, heavenly father. You
can equip them with education, healthcare and the support to
(02:05):
overcome poverty.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
This isn't just about one child.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
It's about transforming families, revitalizing communities, and changing nations. It's
about proving that every child truly matters. So help give
a child a future, give them hope. Visit Compassion dot
com today, that's Compassion dot Com. I want you to
listen to when this came in and how is the
(02:28):
scribe on Fox News Channel with Jesse Waters.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Now we have Fox News Alert.
Speaker 3 (02:34):
The Supreme Court just cleared the way for Trump to
deport illegals even faster. The High Court rule that Trump
can use the Alien Enemies Act to send Venezuela and
gangbangers to a mega prison in El Salvador. This is
a huge ruling in Trump's favor and a major win
for the country after as you know, DC Judge James
Boseburg ordered a stop to the deportations, So this is
(02:56):
pretty significant. These deportations, Caroline can keep going.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
This is a massive legal victory, Jesse, a massive victory
for law and order and for our constitutional republic in
the sovereignty of the United States of America. We called
on the Supreme Court to reign in these activist judges
like Judge Boseburg, who was completely out of line and
trying to say that the President didn't have the executive
(03:19):
authority to deport foreign terrorists off of our soil. We
have always maintained the position at the White House that
the President was well within his constitutional authority to do so,
and this decision proves that President Trump in our administration
have always been right from the beginning. He will continue
to utilize the Alien Enemies Act to remove foreign terrorists
(03:41):
and trendy Iragua members, vicious gang members from American communities.
And because of this ruling, the United States of America
is a much safer place. Our team will get to
work tomorrow to deport these heinous, violent foreign terrorists from
our neighborhoods.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
And you had another couple.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
Now, this obviously is truly incredible that the President of
United States of America is now going to actually get
to do his job. It is a big win, and
it's a win that the left does not want you
to even know actually happen. That yet again another activist
judge has been struck down by the Supreme Court. Now,
what is the reality moving forward of this. We're now
(04:19):
going to get rid of these trans gang members immediately.
We're not going to have to be harassed by the
court system any longer to do what the president's directive is,
what the American people clearly elected him to do, which
was to get rid of the worst among us that
had come into this country illegally.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
That is the entire goal here.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
And now you're going to see the Democrats go back
to the courts on any other case they can to
try to stop the President from doing his job.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
It's warfare.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
That's what they're going to do, legal warfare every single
time to delay or stop the president, even if they
know the outcome is going all the way Supreme Court
and losing just like they did. Which brings me to
another big story, and that deals with Jeffrey Epstein. We
now know that the House and the Senate have moved
(05:11):
the Epstein files for full disclosure of those files to
the President's desk, and he is expected to sign it.
We also know now that the Democrats this may be
one of the biggest backfires in modern political history, as
what is in these files seems to be very damning
for the Democrats, and that's something I think they didn't expect,
(05:32):
was for these files to actually ever become public. Therefore
it would protect them and some of their shady business.
A great example of that is now Stacy Plasket. She
is a delegate, a Democrat from the US Virgin Islands.
She has gone to the for of the House after
being busted for actually texting with Jeffrey Epstein at a
(05:55):
time when they were trying to hurt Donald Trump in
real time during a Congression hearing. I want you to
hear what she had to say from the floor of
the House as she was quote standing up for herself
from a censure that dealt with her being removed from
the Intel Committee.
Speaker 5 (06:11):
Take a listen, And I got a text from Jeffrey Epstein,
who at the time was my constituent, who was not
public knowledge at that time that he was under federal investigation,
and who was sharing information with me.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
No I heard recent.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Now she says, he was just sharing information with me.
There's a problem with what the delegate just said. It
was eleven years after he was first arrested for child
sex crimes, and Stacy just lied to you from the
floor of the House with a bunch of radical lefties
behind her defending her, acting like I didn't know Jeffrey
(06:56):
Epstein had ever done anything wrong.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
But that's not all that she had to say.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
She also decided to go on CNN, and here's what
she said is she tried to defend herself from this
pr nightmare.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
I believe that Jeffrey Epstein had information, and I was
going to get information to get at the truth. Having
a friendship with him is not something that I would
deem to have, and so I'm just looking forward. I'm
moving forward and I think that that's what we as
American people should do, is move forward. If individuals are
(07:32):
not involved in illegal activity extending his criminal enterprise or
his financial enterprise or all of those things, I think
that we need to look at what people are doing
moving forward.
Speaker 6 (07:46):
Wait, let me just better understand that. What is that
point Because at the time he was an sex offender
and it had been detailed all the sexual if there
are a lot.
Speaker 5 (07:52):
Of people who have done a lot of crimes, and
as a prosecutor, you get information from people where you can.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
So there you go, just gonna move forward and just
slide to the American people. And tried to defend the
fact that I was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein and
texting with him in real time for one reason, to
try to hurt Donald Trump. Now the new Democratic slogan
seems to be defend the indefensible.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
Here.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
This also happened in another scenario, as Raskin said that
Epstein coaching the congresswoman is just constituent services. I want
you to take a listen to what James Comer had
to say on Fox News Channel about this.
Speaker 7 (08:35):
It's Comer joining us now, Congressman, your reaction.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
To all this.
Speaker 8 (08:39):
Well, I've said many times, Jamie r Askin's full of crap.
He's the definition of congressional hypocrisy. Can you imagine if
that were Donald Trump or me, or some Republican that
Raskin doesn't like, that was texting with Jeffrey Epstein, a
convicted sex offender who the Democrats have now become a
(09:00):
cessed over because they hope and pray that he has
something to do with Donald Trump. If we were texting
with him during a committee hearing, I mean, it's preposterous.
Remember Jamie r Askin appointed Stacy Plaskett to be on
the impeachment to be an impeachment manager of Donald Trump,
and here we find out she was communicating with Jeffrey
(09:22):
Epstein in a plot to take down Donald Trump. So
for Jamie Raskin to try to defend that on the
House floor in front of America is par for the
course for Jamie r Askin. But it's the definition of hypocrisy.
Speaker 7 (09:35):
And mister Chairman, you were part of that committee when
all of this is going on. Delegate Plasket yesterday defending
herself saying this, listen, now.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
I heard recently from someone that I was taking advice
from him. Let me tell you something. I don't need
to get advice on how to question anybody from any individual.
I have been a lawyer for thirty years.
Speaker 7 (10:02):
There she has defending herself, ComRIS fin Is that satisfactory
to you?
Speaker 8 (10:07):
I mean, again, can you imagine what she would be
saying if Donald Trump was communicating with Jeffrey Epstein trying
to answer a question from Stacey Plaskett. I mean, the
hypocrisy is in full display here for the Democrats to
go all in over the last month over release the files,
release the files. I think one reason they were demanding
(10:30):
we released the files is they didn't think that President
Trump would release the files, or that I would subpoena
the estate files. What we know about Plasket and Hakeem
Jeffries came from my subpoena of the Epstein of State.
And again the Democrats were demanding that I would do
that months ago because they didn't think I would. No
(10:50):
one knew what was going to be in the documents.
And when we get the documents, low and behold, there's
a bunch of liability for Democrats. And I'm glad that
the hypocrisy is on full display and I don't think
those answers are satisfactory.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
All right, let's talk a little bit more about Raskin.
And you heard James Comber there say that he's full
of crap. I'm going to play for you, Jamie Raskin.
In two different times he said two very different things
about Jeffrey Epstein and the burden of innocence and truth
(11:22):
and sex trafficking and the mastermind. And here he is
in his own words.
Speaker 9 (11:27):
One thing he's clearly doing is changing the subject from
a different form of crime, which is child sex trafficking,
which Jeffrey Epstein was a mastermind of. Donald Trump's name
apparently appears throughout the Epstein file.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Dave, all right, So that is him talking about Donald Trump, right,
indicting Donald Trump and saying that Donald Trump was clearly
in the file. And I think Raskin thought this file
would never become public. It was easy to weaponize this
file if it didn't become publican now it is public
and Donald Trump's going to sign it. So now listen
to Raskin talking about the congresswoman, uh, the the representative
(12:05):
from the Virgin Islands, right and and and defending her
now again when he was talking about Trump, Epstein is
a child sex trafficking mastermind. But when Raskin's talking about plasket,
Epstein's just a constituent. Just just a did you just
talk into a constituent.
Speaker 10 (12:23):
They've arraigned a Democratic member for taking a phone call
from her constituent. Uh, Jeffrey Epstein in the middle of
the hearing. I still don't see what the charge is.
Where is the ethical transgression?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Where is the ethical transgression? Hold on, let's go back
and quote you. You said that Jeffrey Epstein is a
child sex trafficking mastermind, and you don't understand now where
the ethical transgression is. You cannot make this up. There's
also another part of this. It's very frustrating, and that
(12:58):
is uh, the fact that the media is still kind
of holding the hand of Stacy Plaskett to clear the
air as they described about her text with Epstein on
the morning of twenty nineteen the Michael Cohen hearing her defense,
he's a constituent. As a prosecutor, you get info from
baby all the time. And again she initiated the text
(13:20):
messages we've now learned early that morning. Let me say
it again, she initiated the text thread. So the idea
that like this was her unsolicited a constituent coming out
is a total lie. Listen now, CNN described it as
they were talking about the timeline.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
All right, well, we are just learning that the Senate
has now sent over that legislation on releasing the Jeffrey
Epstein files over to the President's desk. We're monitoring that. Also,
you have this ongoing Epstein soga wolf and there's.
Speaker 11 (13:52):
A lot of dramas though unfolding the Epstein saga hasn't
been without controversy for Democrats as well. The House last
night barly rejected a Republican effort to censure our next guest,
Democratic Delegate Stacey Plaskett over text she exchanged with Epstein
during a twenty nineteen congressional hearing with President Trump's former
attorney Michael Cohen. Three Republicans joined all Democrats to defeat
(14:17):
the effort to remove her from the House Intelligence Committee,
with another three voting present. Congressman Stacey Plasket of the
US Virgin Islands is joining us right now. You're a
delegate and non voting delegate. Right now, tell us a
little bit about your reaction to all these late developments.
Speaker 5 (14:32):
Well, you know, first, I want to thank the Democrats
the Democratic Caucus not only for voting with me, but
for speaking on my behalf during the general debate, as
well as those members in the Republican Party who voted
with the Democrats and those who tacitly voted with us
by either voting president or not voting at all during
(14:53):
the censure. And I'm hopeful that we can now get
back to the work that we do in Congress, rather
than the political theater that has been happening. The files
have been released, which I have been in favor of
all along, and let's let the victims get their justice
and let us get to the work of Congress. We've
been on over a seventy day paid time off. Democrats
(15:17):
have been doing town halls, coming back to Congress. Republicans
have been nowhere in sight, and the people of this
country are in need of our support and of the
work that needs to be done.
Speaker 11 (15:28):
We know that Epstein had what property in the Virgin Islands, right?
What was your relationship with Epstein?
Speaker 5 (15:33):
So, Jeffrey Epstein was a constituent, he was a resident
of the Virgin Islands, lived there. I guess more than
half of the year because he was registered there. I
had received donations from him. After the last investigation came out,
which was after this texting, I gave any donations that
(15:54):
I had previously received from him to women's organizations and
did not have any contact with him. But like many constituents,
individuals get your phone number, they text you about issues,
they speak with you. I have spoken with him about
issues that are relevant, things that are going on in
the Virgin Islands and elsewhere around the country.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Now that is where she screwed up.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
And even CNN is going to call her out because
she's saying, oh, I did nothing wrong. He just contacted
me as a constituent. There is a problem. She is
the one, as I mentioned a moment ago, that initiated
the text exchange. So Jeffrey Epstein did not contact her.
(16:41):
She contacted a sex offender. And why because she was
trying to hurt Donald Trump. Listen to even CNN saying
this doesn't add up right.
Speaker 6 (16:54):
But on that day that we're talking about, you initiated
the tax exchange at seven fifty five in the morning,
So why were you even texting with Epstein at the time?
He was a known sex offender.
Speaker 5 (17:05):
Then sure, you know, I explained to people, I've been
a prosecutor for many years, and there are a lot
of people who have information that are not your friends,
that you used to get information for to get at
the truth. This was seven years ago, and people need
to understand. This was a huge hearing that was taking
place with Michael Cohen finally coming forward to talk about
(17:28):
monies that he had with the hush money potential hush
money that had been paid to Stormy Daniels to keep
her quiet about the allegations against Trump. We were entering
a hearing. Lots of people were texting me, lots of
people were giving me information.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
By the way, notice I've just said quote, lots of
people were texting me. She's again lying. Jeffrey Epstein did
not text her. She initiated the text exchange. So she's
lying now multiple times. The faces of the two hosts
at CNN keep listening.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
And I find it really interesting and almost rich that
the Washington Post took thirty seconds one set of question
line that I did and say that Epstein was directing
me as to what to question Michael Cohen. I have
five minutes of questioning. I had a lot of questions
twenty years of experience that I had at the time,
(18:25):
along with other information I was getting from many sources
about issues that should have been raised. And I also
want to say that the issues that I raised in
that hearing related to individuals who were closest to the
president and who could know about money has never been
looked into.
Speaker 6 (18:42):
Right, we have the full transcript right here. But no
doubt you have an impressive resume. Right you're a former
federal prosecutor, you were an impeachment manager.
Speaker 5 (18:50):
But yes or no.
Speaker 6 (18:51):
If Epstein had not bought up Rona to you and
that text, would you have asked Michael Cohen about her independently?
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Probably not.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
I asked about three other individuals as well. Everyone knew,
other people knew that this woman had been the president's assistant.
I talked about other individuals who were also close to
him that other people had given me information about that
I'd found other information about. And there were other issues
(19:20):
that I talked with him about as well, Michael Cohen,
that I brought up during that time. So as a prosecutor,
as an investigator, you glean information, get information where you can.
Some of it is relevant, some of it is not.
And you put it all together and you ask the question.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
And I understand, by the way, this is just pathological lying.
And this goes back to what I said earlier about Democrats.
I don't think ever thought that this would actually happen,
so therefore they doubled down on it again to try
to hurt Trump. Let me give you some other breaking
news that's happening right now. We're now being told that
Bill and Hillary Clinton are refusing and I hope every
(19:57):
one of you will share this, Okay, take the podcast,
share on social media. Right now, Bill and Hillary Clinton
are refusing to appear before the House Oversight Committee for
their depositions regarding Jeffrey Epstein. Now there's a second part
of that that you need to notice. Notice how House
Democrats suddenly have nothing to say about Bill and Hillary
(20:20):
Clinton refusing to appear before the House Oversight Committee on
the issue of Jeffrey Epstein, which they are demanding transparency on,
which also brings me back to twenty nineteen. And if
you want to know how much the media has been
protecting the Democratic Party and Epstein, let's go back to
(20:41):
twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
ABC News admitted to.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
Deliberately bearing a key interview with Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts
for three years. That would have completely exposed and reshaped
the Epstein conversation. The interview, by the way, we now know,
exposed damning evidence against Bill Clinton, damning evidence against Prince
Andrew and other powerful figures. And knowing this, what did
(21:07):
ABC News do? They deliberately set on it for three years.
They even called it internally a stupid story, and they
buried it to protect their access to Number one, the Royalty,
Number two to the Clintons. And if ABC had aired it,
the victims would have had justice and the American people
would have had answers. So why is there no media
(21:28):
accountability here? You want to just go back to twenty nineteen,
take a listen to what Amy Robos said again, ABC
News anchor. She was caught saying this while on set.
This obviously never aired.
Speaker 12 (21:43):
I've had the story for three years. I've had this
interview with Virginia Roberts. We would not put it on
the air. First of all, I was told, who's Jeffrey Epstein.
No one knows who that is.
Speaker 5 (21:51):
This is a stupid story.
Speaker 12 (21:52):
Then the Palace found out that we had her whole
allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.
We were so afraid we wouldn't be able to interview
Kate as will that that also quashed the story. And
then and then Alan Dershowitz was also implicated it because
of the planes. She told me everything, she had, pictures,
(22:16):
she had everything. She wasn't hiding for twelve years. We
convinced her to come out. We convinced her to talk
to us. It was unbelievable what we had Clinton, We
had everything. I tried for three years to get it
on to no avail, and now it's all coming out
and it's like these new relevant revelations and I freaking
had all of it. I'm so pissed right now, Like
(22:38):
every day I get more and more pissed because I'm
just like, oh my god, it was what we had
was unreal.
Speaker 5 (22:45):
Other women backing it up.
Speaker 12 (22:47):
Brad Edwards, the attorney three years ago, saying like, like
we there will come a day when we will realize
Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has
ever known.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
It is official.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
US House had Represents voted four hundred and twenty seven
to one to release the Epstein Files, and then moved
to the Senate where they voted in favor of giving
it to the President of the United States of America.
And now the President has signed it, releasing what documents
we have that many have called the Epstein files. Really
(23:20):
they should be called the Epstein papers. Now this all
goes back to when the Democrats decided to actually give
a damn about Jeffrey Epstein. They didn't care about the victims,
but what they did care about was trying to hurt
President Donald Trump with the Epstein files. Why because in
July of this year, the US Department of Justice and
(23:41):
the FBI issued a memo stating that they found no
credible evidence that Epstein had a so called client list.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Yes, there were a lot of names.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
And there was a lot of paperwork, but there was
no actual client list. And they also said there was
no reason for an investigation against uncharged individuals.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
That would be supported.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
And that is when Democrats decided to actually act like
they cared about Jeffrey Epstein. Again, it wasn't to actually
protect victims or get to the bottom of anything. It
was to try to imply that Donald Trump was covering
up to protect himself. We all know that is a lie,
and it's official now because you can read it all you.
(24:27):
Fast forward to September of this year and the push
in Congress began to gain traction among Democrats via discharge
petition the House to force a vote on releasing Epstein
related documents. Notice it wasn't a client list. Then in November,
the House passed the bill, the Epstein Filed Transparency Act,
(24:48):
by a vote of four hundred and twenty seven to one.
The very next day, November nineteenth, they Senate passed the
bill by unanimous consent, and they sent it to the
present's death. That is where we are now. President Donald
Trump has signed the bill into law. Now, under the law,
once signed by the President, the DOJ must release two
(25:10):
Congress and publicly in a searchable, downloadable format, the unclassified records,
the communications and investigative materials related to Jeffrey Epstein, and
to the extent possible declassify and release classified materials within
thirty days.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Now.
Speaker 1 (25:32):
What President Trump and the White House have said publicly
is this. Trump posted on his platform True Social upon
signing saying this, I have just signed the bill to
release the Epstein files. He also claimed it encouraged the
House Speaker Mike Johnson and the Senate Majority Leader John
Thune to move the bill, leading to the near unanimous vote,
(25:53):
and the White House had also made it clear they
expected the President to sign the bill, which he has done,
even saying reporters earlier in the day quote, this will
be signed. The bill will be signed whenever it gets
to the White House. There's also the question of victim protection.
The White House and GOP leaders expressed major concerns about
(26:14):
protecting victim identities and ongoing investigations. For instance, Speaker Johnson,
while ultimately supporting the bill, said he had hoped for
amendments to better protect the victims now. President Trump also
made it clear about the politics behind all of this.
He referred to prior criticism as a democratic hoax, insisting
(26:37):
that his administration has nothing to hide and link the
matter politically, claiming, quote, all of the friends of Epstein's
were Democrats. Now, there's other important issues that you need
to understand. There's a scope and limitations. Even though the
bill mandates broad disclosure, it still allows for reactions or
(26:57):
withholding a material that would identify victimctims, reveal ongoing investigations
or compromise national security or classified information.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Now the other.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Question is this, is this maybe one of the biggest
political backfire in modern political history for the Democrats who
are demanding all of this. The answer seems to be
yes at this moment. We also know that newly released
campaign finance records are now showing that from nineteen ninety
(27:29):
to twenty eighteen, Jeffrey Epstein directed about eighty nine percent
of his political donations to democratic and progressive causes, with
notable individual recipients including Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer.
(27:49):
Now this also should be, I believe, the number one
fight for Republicans moving forward. We don't need to move
on from this. Let me explain why you literally had
Democrats in bed politically with Jeffrey Epstein at every corner.
For example, we had a Democratic member of Congress who
was caught texting Jeffrey Epstein during hearings and Republicans voted
(28:13):
again censoring her. That is insane and the Democrats should
have learned from this mistake. This is a cycle, by
the way, that keeps happening. It's a reason why Republicans
keep losing elections because when they have the opportunity to
stand up to the radical left. Many times they don't
really do it. And until Republicans grow a backbone and
(28:34):
demand more transparency from the Epstein files about what the
Democrats are doing, nothing will change. And I say it again,
this is why so many times Republicans keep losing.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
We don't fight.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
They've never demanded the release of all of Epstein files,
even though every shred of evidence points directly I believe
to mostly Democrats. You have massive Democratic names that we're
in bed with. Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reed Hoffman,
Stacy Plaskett, Bill Richardson, George Mitchell, Hakeem Jeffries was even
(29:14):
asking Jeffrey Epstein for money after he was convicted of
sexual crimes.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
Michael Wolfe is another name.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
All of these names should be what Republicans should now
be talking about. Which brings me the two biggest names
that we know about so far that clearly don't want
you to know about what they were doing with Jeffrey Epstein,
and that was Bill and Hillary Clinton. Now we know
that there's a good chance that Bill and Hillary Clinton
(29:44):
are a literally risking prison time over Epstein's silence. How
do we know that it's coming from the House Oversight
Committee chairman James Comer. And Comer said that former President
Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary c could
face criminal exposure related to newly's surface Jeffrey Epstein documents,
(30:06):
saying this, we expect to hear from Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Comber said, Donald Trump answered questions for years about Jeffrey Epstein.
Every day he gets asked questions about Epstein and he
answers them in front of the American people. We've subpoenaed
Republicans and Democrats. Comber's comments underscore how the looming release
of these records related to Epstein, the disgraced financier who
(30:31):
died by suicide in jail awaiting sex traveicking charges, is
becoming a flashpoint in national politics, with the Democratic Party
now bracing for real fallout. Many in the Democratic Party
didn't believe that these documents would ever be made public,
and that's why they weaponize him to try to hurt
Donald Trump.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Now.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
Although there's no direct evidence that the Clintons committed any
crimes at this point, suggestions of possible legal exposure in
Jai new tension into an already charged debate over transparency
and accountability and the political weaponization of the Epstein files.
(31:11):
The Justice Department set on Friday that it is now
examining Epstein's purported connections to high profile Democrats, among them
the former president United States of America Bill Clinton, who
has repeatedly insisted that he was unaware of Epstein's criminal conduct.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
Now, as part of the investigation.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
James Comber issued the subpoenas to the Clintons and eight
other individuals that followed the release by Congress last week
of more than twenty thousand pages of documents connected to Epstein.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
And now we have a whole lot more now.
Speaker 1 (31:47):
That batch of newly released correspondence included messages involving Bill Clinton,
Hillary Clinton, and the question now is what will be
done with this moving forward. We also know that no
survivor or associate has ever accused Clinton of misconduct tied
to Epstein, though Trump has for years suggested Clinton's travel
(32:10):
on Epstein's jets was suspect. The Clinton Foundation has dismissed
the renewed attention, saying the emails that have been released
proved that Bill Clinton did nothing and knew nothing, and
argue the controversy is being used as a political distraction.
But here's what we do know. Flight records tell a
little bit different story. The flight records disclosed in earlier
(32:34):
civil litigation showed that Clinton took several trips on Epstein's
plane in two thousand and two in two thousand and three,
traveling with staff to destinations across Africa, Asia, and Europe.
James Comer argued that while some Democrats have formally stated
they had no knowledge of Epstein, the Clintons have never
(32:57):
responded to Congressional inquiries or to making questions from reporters
or investigators about their ties to Jeffrey Epstein. We also
know that other Democrats have sent letters saying they knew
nothing about Epstein, which would hold in court if something
ever comes out that they did know something. Comer said,
(33:17):
and he said this, and then they've committed perjury here.
But the Clintons have never responded. They're the one group
in this investigation that's never had to answer questions in
front of a credible reporter, and they've never certainly answered
questions from attorneys or members of Congress. So we expect
the Clintons to come in or I expect the Clintons
(33:40):
to be met with the same fate that Steve Bannon
and Peter Navarro were met with when the Democrats were
in control.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
House.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Democrats sought criminal charges you may remember against Steve Bannon
and former Trump White House strigists after he refused to
appear before the House committee investigating the January sixth attacks
on the USK capital. A federal jury ultimately found him
guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress and received
a four month jail term. In twenty twenty two, Navarro,
(34:10):
a senior trade advisor during Trump's first administration, faced a
similar outcome. He too given a four month federal prison
sentence after being found guilty of defying a subpoena from
Congress issued by the same January sixth investigation. So here
we are, as James Comer said, the Democrats have Trump
derangement syndrome. They're just hoping and praying that there's something
(34:31):
in these documents somewhere that they don't know where, but
somewhere that would implicate Trump. In reality, now that the
files are open, there's a very good chance that people
like Bill and Hillary Clinton are going to be in
a lot more trouble than they ever could have imagined.
Don't forget share this podcast please with your family and
your friends were whoever they are, and I will see
(34:54):
you back here tomorrow
Host
Ben Ferguson
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.
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
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