July 19, 2025 • 28 mins
-
Media Coverage & Political Spin
- Criticism of the Wall Street Journal for its reporting on Trump’s alleged connection to Epstein.
- Chris Cuomo and other media figures are quoted criticizing the media's handling of the story.
- Accusations that the media is using the Epstein case to damage Donald Trump politically.
-
Calls for Transparency
- Repeated demands for the full release of the Epstein files, with redactions only to protect victims.
- Frustration over perceived government cover-ups and lack of accountability.
- Emphasis on the idea that only Ghislaine Maxwell has been punished, despite widespread abuse.
-
Political Hypocrisy
- Claims that Democrats ignored the Epstein case when they had power but are now exploiting it for political gain.
- Criticism of figures like AOC and Hakeem Jeffries for allegedly using the issue opportunistically.
-
Pam Bondi & the Trump Administration
- Bondi is accused of overselling the significance of the Epstein files.
- Trump is portrayed as supportive of transparency but limited by legal constraints.
- Discussion of legal limitations on releasing sealed or redacted documents.
-
Alan Dershowitz’s Commentary
- Dershowitz, Epstein’s former lawyer, argues that most important information has already been released.
- He denies Epstein was connected to intelligence agencies like Mossad or the CIA.
- Emphasizes that many accusations are based on conspiracy theories or incomplete information.
-
Conservative Frustration
- Many conservatives feel betrayed by the lack of revelations in the files.
- The document reflects a broader distrust in institutions like the FBI and DOJ.
- Suggests that the Epstein case has become a political football rather than a pursuit of justice.
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. Thanks for Listening
#seanhannity #hannity #marklevin #levin #charliekirk #megynkelly #tucker #tuckercarlson #glennbeck #benshapiro #shapiro #trump #sexton #bucksexton
#rushlimbaugh #limbaugh #whitehouse #senate #congress #thehouse #democrats
#republicans #conservative #senator #congressman #congressmen #congresswoman #capitol #president #vicepresident #POTUS #presidentoftheunitedstatesofamerica
#SCOTUS #Supremecourt #DonaldTrump #PresidentDonaldTrump #DT #TedCruz #Benferguson #Verdict
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):
All right, let's deal comprehensively with the entire epscene scandal,
the papers, what should be put out there, and the
media obsessing over this story. On top of the fact
that the Wall Street Journal has come out with a
massive hit piece on Donald Trump, He's now threatening to
(00:22):
sue the Wall Street Journal. Now you want to know
how crazy this article is. Even Chris Cuomo speaking out
about the Wall Street Journal's reporting, and I want you
to listen to what he had to say.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
But I get that he's pissed off, okay, and he's
not wrong. This Wall Street Journal piece is a hack job, okay.
And he says he's suing Rupert Murdoch, who he you know,
is his buddy.
Speaker 3 (00:50):
They have, you know, Fox kind.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Of made Trump, you know, And he's suing the Journal,
He's suing everybody. He says he didn't write the birthday
letter that there is describing to him to Epstein for
his fiftieth birthday. I mean, it's so stupid, Okay.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
The Epstein story is.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
About abusing kids who didn't have the power or agency
to do anything about it. That rich and powerful people
may have known it was going on and they.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Got away with it. That's the story.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Okay, it's not that Trump liked a scumbag. Okay, now
I get that. In the media, this is great because
it's bad for Trump and he's going crazy and he's
gonna pump and move the story for the Wall Street
Journal right now by saying it's fake and it's wrong.
But it doesn't move the needle in the country. It's
gonna make you some money, Rupert, Great for you, just
what you need. But this is why we can't get anywhere.
(01:43):
The guy says, I didn't write the letter. The letter
is meaningless. You put out the piece anyway, and there's
no light on what really matters. Now.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
The point that Cuomo, not a conservative, is making there
is absolutely right. Politics should not be involved in this.
This is the reason why so many magat conservative like
myself have been saying we want total transparency. Why because
we don't trust the government. Why because they've given us
reasons to not trust them. We have watched them weaponize
(02:11):
the government to go after Donald Trump. We've watched them
weaponized the government to sell lies like the Russian collusion story,
to try to undermine the American people and overthrow the
will of the people. We have witnessed them lie about
the Hunter Biden laptop. We've witnessed the deep state and
all the leaders were supposed to trust the CIA and
other intelligence organizations sign a letter saying that the Hunter
(02:33):
Biden laptop was a lie. We have witnessed them lie
about the money that was coming into the Biden crime family.
We now have witnessed the media cover for the president
units it's America, Donald Trump. Let me rephrase that Joe
Biden with his massive cognitive cline. But they said over
and over again it wasn't happening. So this story is
(02:55):
about transparency, whether there's a list or not. I want
to see it all with making sure that we protect
the victim's identities. I want to make sure that I
don't have to trust the deep state. I believe as
a citizen, I deserve to know what happened. I also
(03:15):
want to know why no one else went to jail.
Can we just go over that again? Why is it
that no one has gone to jail except for one person?
That's it, Maxine, all of this abuse. That is why
conservatives are angry right now.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Now. Notice what the left is doing.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
They're going all in on Epstein because they think it
hurts Donald Trump. They're going in not because they want
to protect kids, not because they want justice, not because
they care about whoever abused children being outed and exposed
and maybe even indicted or arrested, which again only one
(03:59):
person's gone to jail. No, no, no, they think this
now hurts Donald Trump. And again I go back to
Chris Cuomo. Chris Cuomo, a lefty, saying this on his
show about the left, he believes is also making a
huge mistake.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Making a mistake going all in on this. Epstein bs,
you did nothing to release any information about this case
on your watch, okay, And you watched a woman go
down for Epstein's crimes and did nothing to add to
any sense of accountability for anybody else. Then, so going
all in now is obvious and gratuitous and ugly. Okay,
(04:40):
And look, I get the play. This is bad for Trump,
so we got to be all in there. You need
to give the majority reason to believe that you would
be better, not that just he is worse. Do you
understand That's the key? Not MAGA sucks, okay, not that
(05:00):
they lied to you. MAGA, soill vote for us because
MAGA was formed in part out of desperation for feeling
that you on the left lie and don't deliver. So
this battle of attrition is just going to create two losers.
My suggestion is be less about your opponent and more
about restoring opportunity, less about who is woke, and more
(05:23):
about who is broke.
Speaker 1 (05:25):
And I agree, by the way, with nine percent of
what Coomo said there. The left is making a mistake
going all in on Epstein, and you need to give
a reason why you're better and they're not. I'll give
you another example Joe Scarborough calling out Raskin today saying
you could have gotten the Epstein files from twenty twenty
one to twenty twenty five when Democrats controlled the DOJ.
(05:48):
Why didn't the Democrats call for the release then?
Speaker 5 (05:52):
Right?
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Because this is not about actual justices, about attacking Donald Trump.
And Raskin's response was, well, there were other cases going on.
I don't know there are pictures of Trump and Epstein.
That's literally his response. So, in other words, Democrats didn't
care because Democrats are pos's that's what this boils down to.
(06:14):
They only care now because they think this is going
to hurt Donald Trump. Now, I also want to be clear,
why so many conservatives are frustrated right now.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
I am one of them.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I am not demanding that you give me something that
doesn't exist. I'm not demand that you fabricate something, not
demand that you go out and arrest innocent people. I
am demanding transparency. This should be about the victims. And
the point I would say to President Trump right now
if I was sitting with him, is, mister President, you
(06:47):
promise transparency. You did it on rfk assassination, you did
it on Martin Luther King, You've done it on many
other issues. The American people want the same level of transparency,
even if the transparency shows us nothing. I don't know
if there's an Epstein list. I've been told there is
an Epstein list. I've been told that this was there
(07:12):
for a long time now. If that was a lie
and I was lied to, then show me what you
do have, show me that there is maybe not as
much there as we thought. And look, I think one
of the reasons why Democrats talked about the Epstein list
is because they kept saying over and over again, donald
Trump's in the Epstein files, Donald Trump's in the Epstein list.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
Donald.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
They used that to attack Donald Trump. If there is
nothing in there, then fine. There's a point that's been
made by as lawyers. Most criminals don't keep records of
their crimes. That may be true, but there's a lot
of information that's been redacted.
Speaker 4 (07:51):
Now.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
I want to protect the victims, as many conservatives do,
but I also think that I deserve to see more
then what we are seeing right now now. I think
the presence moving towards that. I also want to be
clear about one other thing that's been a lie. There
have been people that have been saying that Donald Trump
can release everything, all of it instantly. Is the president
(08:13):
United It's America. That is a lie. If you talk
to judges and lawyers, they will tell you no. Much
of what would be released would have to be approved
by judges or by a judge. A great example of
that is all of the witnesses and all the people
that went before the grand jury. That information would have
(08:34):
to be approved by a judge. So when they tell
you that Trump can give you everything, they are lying
to you. That is not true. He cannot give you everything.
What am I asking for? In so many other conservatives,
total transparency, whether it's nothing or whether it's something. We'll
figure that out, and that is the point that many
(08:57):
Americans say they want and also why they voted for
Donald Trump. This is a colossal pr failure by the Republicans.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
I want to be very clear about this.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
The fact that the White House and Pambondi brought a
bunch of conservative influencers to the White House, gave them
what was the Epstein files, you know, part one binders,
which was all information we already knew before, sent them
out in front of the media, and had them walking
out of the White House holding these binders up like
it was some amazing thing.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
That was just a dumb move.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
The reason why I say it's a dumb move is
because of what we are now witnessing, which is they're
now saying like, all right, well, there may not be
anything there.
Speaker 3 (09:42):
I don't buy that for a second.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
I also want to be clear about that, like, I
don't believe that there's nothing there yet. I think much
of the Epstein files that have been redacted have need
to be unredacted, and we need to see what's there.
I also think this goes back to one of the
basic issues, and the f BI deputy senior national intelligence
officer was caught on tape confessing that the FBI turned
(10:06):
blind eye in the Epstein case.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
So that's the other reason why I want more answers.
I'm not willing to let it go. Listen, I'm well,
this is shows I do.
Speaker 6 (10:16):
A lot of kind of encountering white supremacy. You think
the last the last two and a half years, I
was at the White House. Yeah, and they kind of
got moved back after the whole with the new administration
coming in. But yeah, small places kind of been watching
the documents and.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
They were trying to.
Speaker 6 (10:35):
Trying to release some of the files, like the White
House losses. Oh yeah, oh yeah, it's just a messy.
But because they even invited some of like the block,
like like the influencers and like right wing bloggers and
so release the files, I guess seems a little weird.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Just release it on.
Speaker 6 (10:52):
Let's see where the law enforcement kind of either turn
a blind eye or like miss miss things, and there's
opportunities from hearing and listening.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I mean, you listen to that.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
This is an FBI deputy senior intellig National intelligence officer
confessing the FBI turned a blind eye and the Epstein
case caught on OMG. James O'Keefe undercover video and you
look at this and you're like, really, now, I'm not surprised.
And the problem now is many conservatives are angry over
this because we were promised the Epstein file, and I
(11:27):
do believe the White House should release whatever they do have,
and they oversold it, PAMBONDI oversold it. I think that's
pretty clear now. And if there is not a big
thing there, then I want to know about the cover
up of it, because I don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein
got to where he was without being able to blackmail
people to make all of his money and abusing young girls,
(11:48):
and that there was a client list Jeffrey Epstein. Is
this whole issue now that the president made an issue
when he was running for president. People are like, I
want the payoff, right, I want I want to see
this now. I want to know what's going on now. Well,
let me also let you understand what Democrats are doing.
And this is very smart politically, Okay, I want to
(12:08):
be clear about that. This is extremely smart politically. Hi
came Jeffries came out today and just ripped Republicans and
now Democrats like, we demand the Epstein file, something They
don't give a crap about when Joe Biden was president,
but now they want it. And the reason why is
(12:28):
because they want to make the president look like he's
covering for conservatives, or he was a liar, or that
Pambani's a liar. And they understand that there's blood in
the water on this one with conservative voters, and they're
they're now like, let's exploit it.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Listen carefully to his words.
Speaker 7 (12:44):
The American people deserve to know the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth as it relates to this whole,
sordid Jeffrey Epstein matter. Democrats didn't put the Jeffrey Epstein
thing into the public domain. This was a conspiracy that
Donald Trump, Bondi and these MAGA extremists have been fanning
the flames of for the last several years, and now
(13:08):
the chickens are coming home to roost. The American people
deserve to know the truth. What, if anything, is the
Trump administration and the Department of Justice hiding.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
What are you hiding?
Speaker 7 (13:21):
If you're not hiding anything, prove that to the American people.
And if you are trying to hide something, as many
of Donald Trump's MAGA supporters apparently believe, then the Congress
should actually work hard to try to uncover the truth
for the American people. There are only two things that
(13:43):
are possible here. Option one, Donald Trump, Panbondy, and the
MAGA extremists intentionally lied to the American people for years
about the Jeffrey Epstein situation. Option one. Option two is
that in fact, there's reason for the American people to
(14:07):
be concerned as it relates to what information has not
been released that could be damaging to the Trump administration
and the friends and family of the Trump administration. And
they're billionaire, corrupt supporters, and so they're actively engaging in
(14:27):
a cover up. Option one, they lie for years. Option two,
they're engaging in a cover up.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
Now, let me go back to the politics. This This
is like one of the smartest political moves I've seen
by Democrats and Hakeem Jeffreys. I'll give credit where credits
due on this one, Like this is a smart political move.
The Republicans overplayed their hand and under delivered, and now
people that are supporters of Donald Trump are angry and
(14:58):
it looks like there is some sort of cover up here.
Whether there is or not, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
It looks like it.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
And so what they're doing is they're seizing this opportunity.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
To do this. I'll give you this.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Mark Mark Theessen, by the way, on Fox News Sunday,
said this about the fallout over the doj Epstein memo.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Some damage from this. That's that to me is the
reality here.
Speaker 7 (15:22):
Ninety one indictments, the Mueller probe, two impeachments, civil suits
to bankrupt him.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
But the Biden people had had the Epstein files with
Trump's name in it, and they didn't use it.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Give me a break.
Speaker 8 (15:33):
I want to make sure.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
I love that, by the way.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
I love the fact he's like, Biden's people have the
Epstein files with Trump's name in it and they didn't
use it.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Give me a break. He's right.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
And the point is like, don't get yourself in a
bad situation for no reason. And I think Republicans need
to fight back on this one, and they need to
they need to put it out there, whatever it is,
and and and get the reactions out of the Epstein files.
Whatever we do have to show the American people. I
(16:04):
think it's time for the American people to see it.
But if again Democrats smell blood in the water, on
ABC this week, they were like, Wow, the White House
needs to come clean about the Epstein files, implying that
there's a bunch of Republicans or Donald Trump's name in
the Epstein file. Again using this politically, it's scumbaggery, but
it's brilliant.
Speaker 8 (16:24):
I mean, the Attorney General, Pam Bondi went to the
public and said all kinds of things about this. She
said there was a list, there was files, they had people,
and that was in front of the White House, in
front of the West Wing, that they had the influencers
out there. So, I mean, there's a very legitimate question here.
Number one, was she lying then or is she lying now?
(16:46):
She's the Attorney General. I do think she should go
in front of Congress and sort of just explain the
facts here, because ultimately it is a big question. Was
she just prancing around making things up? You're not really
supposed to do that as the jorney Jeffers And then
second of all, they say, you know that everyone's acting
(17:07):
like they don't know what the conspiracy theory is. The
conspiracy theory is that the client list has Donald Trump
on it, and that's why his government is holding it back.
And I think you should just we need to have
people honestly answer questions in front of Congress or the press,
to just have this out once in front of the
overall problem.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
Like they're they're playing into this beautifully because it was
over sold and you can't oversell it and then all
of a sudden just run away from it like it
never happened. Democrats are going to seize this moment until
you get it all out there and you show all
of it. And they're going to keep quoting Pambondi, and
(17:51):
they're going to keep quoting Dan Bongino, and they're going
to keep quoting everybody that's made any quote about Epstein.
And you know, yeah, I'm glad there's somehow out there
that are actually attacking also the hypocrisy on the left.
Chris Cromo, for example, blasted AOC this week for suddenly
caring about the Epstein files because she didn't care about
(18:11):
him before, only because she's going to score political points
on Republicans.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Now, AOC has had nothing to say about the attacks
on the ICE agents. Can you believe that? But the
Epstein fiasco gets her attention. You see what she posted today? Wow,
who'd have thought that electing a rapist would have complicated
the release of the Epstein files.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
Hope it goes viral, because that's all you're about.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
What have you ever done to fight for the release
of the Epstein files?
Speaker 4 (18:36):
Huh?
Speaker 3 (18:36):
You sent out a few tweets over the years, just
to try to what ride the wave?
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Where are your resolutions, Where are your speeches on the floor,
where are your demands? Nothing, just like the rest of
your propaganda and your false promises. It's great for you
for being developing a following, but it's not much in
terms of being a leader when you get nothing done
and you just play the game of advantage, you know
better than the people you think you oppose.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
On the right, I couldn't agree with Chris crooma more
for blasting AOC for suddenly caring about the Epstein files
when she never cared about before all because she wants
to score a political point, not protect kids, not protect
people that were abused by Jeffrey Epstein and his friends.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
No, no, no, no, no, none of that matters.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
There are a lot of conservatives, a lot of terms
sports are very upset by this idea of like there's
nothing there, let's just move on and they're not taking
that answer and saying, Okay, we'll just move on now.
Alan Dershowitz went on Newsmax. Who is Alan Dershowitz. He
is a Harvard law professor who also was the lawyer
(19:42):
for Jeffrey Epstein, And he came out and he said
some very interesting things about the Epstein files and the jurisdiction.
He said, Number one, redacted or sealed materials in connection
with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are in fact
under the court's jurisdiction to release, he says, not the
(20:05):
Attorney General, Pam Bonding, or the Department of Justice. The
Harvard law professor who helped secure a plea deal in
two thousand and eight for Epstein, had a lot more
to say about the Epstein files. His friends, who is
he working with and I want you to hear this.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
Listen very closely.
Speaker 9 (20:23):
Drschwitz Joys. Be nice to see you, sir. And just
for starters, in terms of I assume that much of
the information that's in the Justice Department possession is grand
jury testimony and that can't be released, right. That's as
we sort of sort through what would be released through
I couldn't.
Speaker 5 (20:42):
Yeah, some of it's grand jury testimony, some of it
is material that's been redacted, some of it sealed by
the court, and it comprises several things. There are some
that include accusations made by people I know the people
who have been accused, and it involves negative material about
(21:04):
the accusers, and the courts have redacted those in order
to quote protect the victims. But are they Are they
victims or are they mixed? Some of them mixed victims
and false accusers. So everything should come out, but you know,
this is a nothing burger. Almost everything that's important has
come out. I've seen the names. There's nobody currently serving
(21:28):
in office or who's at all names?
Speaker 9 (21:31):
What names? Is it just names of people on an
airplane that went to his island or are there names of
people doing something wrong?
Speaker 5 (21:41):
Well, yeah, there are names of people who are accused
of doing something wrong by accusers. But the information about
the accusers and negative information about the accusers has also
been suppressed. The public doesn't really have a fair opportunity
to decide whether the those who are accused were fairly accused.
Speaker 4 (22:02):
They're not fairly accused.
Speaker 5 (22:04):
Now the media can actually file applications to the judges
to try to open up this information. I don't think
you can fall pambond You the Justice Department, they don't
have the authority to release these redacted material or the
sealed material. I think I can't know this for sure
that they've released everything that they are able to release.
(22:27):
The rest of it is up to the judges, and
so the application should be made to the judges, not
to the Justice Department. Once the information is unredacted, then
the Justice Department can release it. Now this information includes,
for example, videotapes. There are all kinds of claims about
sex tapes. I happen to know what the facts are
and what happened is one day Epstein was robbed by
(22:49):
an employee, and so the Palm Beach police installed video
cameras in his living room, not in his bedrooms.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
And so there are video tapes, but they're not sex tapes.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
And you know, there's no plausibility to the claim that
have worked for the Mozad that's just total nonsense.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Well see, actually, let me tell you.
Speaker 9 (23:08):
That's what I'll tell you. That's one of the things
that's most distressing to me. And that claim has been
made by two former colleagues of mine from another network.
We are no longer at that network, by the way,
one I was a lawyer and should know better. I mean,
like they ever started just pulling things out and if
they have facts, present them put them with some witnesses.
But it's so electrifying the topic and with social media
(23:31):
and everybody picking sides that it has really gone haywire.
Speaker 5 (23:35):
Yeah, no, I agree with you. Look, I have sources
in Israel. I once represented the MOSAD. I helped get
four or five Mozart agents out of Cyprus who had
been improperly arrested.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
And believe me, if he had ever.
Speaker 5 (23:49):
Worked for the MOSAD, the first person he would have
told that to is me, because he would have wanted
me to use that to help him get an even
better deal than he got. So I am one hundred
percent based on my information and what he told me
and didn't tell me that there's no conceivable claim that
he actually worked for the most SADE or the CIA,
(24:10):
and so people just make this stuff out of whole cloth.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
But it's profoundly dangerous, you know, it's I mean, whatever
the facts are, the facts are, you know, and transparency
is great and things should be released. It's consistent with
transparency that don't violate any rules or anything's been redacted
by the court or by Gregorick. But when you have
people out there saying there are all these conspiracies and
there are all these things going on in saying that
I have it on good information, Well you know, have
(24:36):
ad it. Tell us where your information is instead of
instead of lighting the town on fire.
Speaker 5 (24:41):
But you know, all these things have a kernel of
a basis in fact. For example the mossade. Yes, in fact,
his girlfriend Glaine Maxwell's father Robert Maxwell, probably did work
for the most side, But that has nothing to do
with Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
Yes there were videotapes.
Speaker 5 (24:59):
Yes there are lists of names, but they're not lists
of names devised or designed by Epstein. Yes, there are
lists of people who are on his planes. Bill Clinton
was on his plane, Bill Gates was on his planes.
Speaker 4 (25:15):
Lots and lots of people.
Speaker 5 (25:16):
Remember, he had a life way before he was ever
charged with any crime. That life include the president of Harvard,
heads of this corporation, that corporation. I know, my wife
and I went to his home for several events where
he had some of the world's greatest scientists. He had
astronauts who had just come back from out of space,
and so of course he attracted very, very prominent people.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
None of them knew he was doing anything wrong.
Speaker 5 (25:42):
It's when he was first arrested for doing something wrong
that everybody terminated their relationship. Not everybody, and people who
didn't can be called into account. But I don't think
there's much here, you know, as they say in the movies,
move on, there's nothing to say here. I think almost
everything that has to be released has been released.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
I've seen everything, and I don't see any but.
Speaker 9 (26:08):
The other, the other alternative, the other alternative, although it takes,
it takes forever. I've been doing this with the Natalie
Holloway cases getting documents under FOYA is that you can
make a Freedom of Information Act request. The government does
have to comply with it by law. Unfortunately, the government
takes forever, as as I.
Speaker 4 (26:26):
Don't think, not very much.
Speaker 5 (26:27):
It would turn up some material that's redacted, and FOYA
doesn't unredact.
Speaker 4 (26:31):
They just give you the redacted material with all the blackouts.
And why do I know tell me about who the
people are whose names have been blacked out?
Speaker 5 (26:41):
Because I did all the investigations and I was able
to put together from all the evidence.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Oh, this guy, this person, and I know who it is.
Speaker 9 (26:50):
And with that, I've got to go Professor, Professor Dershowitz,
Thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
You can hear Alan there just saying a lot of
what you're seeing and a lot of it's conspiracy theory.
And he said this is I know. I learned this
speaking there regret of Ancestorum over at Newsmax. And I
think the point he was making is what you may
be angry about may not even be based in reality.
(27:14):
I want to know what there is. I want to
know it was redacted. I want to protect the victims,
but I also think that there needs to be real
transparency on this one. The President, by the way, coming
out and again blaming his predecessors for creating files related
to the high profile client, so the Late six offender
Jeffrey Epstein. The President praised Pam Bondi, by the way,
(27:37):
who is kind of under intense criticism within Trump's own
base for handling of the files, and during a press
briefing outside the White House that aired live, Trump was
asked whether body told them if his name appeared in
the documents. No, no, she's given us just a quick
a very quick briefing, and in terms of the credibility
(27:59):
of the different things that they've seen. Trump said he's
also denied numerous times any association with Epstein's criminal activity.
He said, quote and I would say that, you know,
these files were made up by James Comy, they were
made up by Barack Obama, they were made up by
the Biden team. You know, we went through this, years
(28:20):
of this with the Russia Russia Russia hoax, with all
the different things that we had to go through.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
We've gone through years of it.
Speaker 1 (28:27):
But she's handled it very well, referred to Bondi, and
it's going to be up to her. Whatever she thinks
is credible, she should release.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
So this is the.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
President on the record now on the issue of the
Epstein files, saying he's going to allow Pam Bondi to
do her job and decide what is best. Don't forget
share this podcast please with your family and your friends
where whoever they are, and I will see you back
here tomorrow.
All right, let's deal comprehensively with the entire epscene scandal,
the papers, what should be put out there, and the
media obsessing over this story. On top of the fact
that the Wall Street Journal has come out with a
massive hit piece on Donald Trump, He's now threatening to
(00:22):
sue the Wall Street Journal. Now you want to know
how crazy this article is. Even Chris Cuomo speaking out
about the Wall Street Journal's reporting, and I want you
to listen to what he had to say.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
But I get that he's pissed off, okay, and he's
not wrong. This Wall Street Journal piece is a hack job, okay.
And he says he's suing Rupert Murdoch, who he you know,
is his buddy.
Speaker 3 (00:50):
They have, you know, Fox kind.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Of made Trump, you know, And he's suing the Journal,
He's suing everybody. He says he didn't write the birthday
letter that there is describing to him to Epstein for
his fiftieth birthday. I mean, it's so stupid, Okay.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
The Epstein story is.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
About abusing kids who didn't have the power or agency
to do anything about it. That rich and powerful people
may have known it was going on and they.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Got away with it. That's the story.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
Okay, it's not that Trump liked a scumbag. Okay, now
I get that. In the media, this is great because
it's bad for Trump and he's going crazy and he's
gonna pump and move the story for the Wall Street
Journal right now by saying it's fake and it's wrong.
But it doesn't move the needle in the country. It's
gonna make you some money, Rupert, Great for you, just
what you need. But this is why we can't get anywhere.
(01:43):
The guy says, I didn't write the letter. The letter
is meaningless. You put out the piece anyway, and there's
no light on what really matters. Now.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
The point that Cuomo, not a conservative, is making there
is absolutely right. Politics should not be involved in this.
This is the reason why so many magat conservative like
myself have been saying we want total transparency. Why because
we don't trust the government. Why because they've given us
reasons to not trust them. We have watched them weaponize
(02:11):
the government to go after Donald Trump. We've watched them
weaponized the government to sell lies like the Russian collusion story,
to try to undermine the American people and overthrow the
will of the people. We have witnessed them lie about
the Hunter Biden laptop. We've witnessed the deep state and
all the leaders were supposed to trust the CIA and
other intelligence organizations sign a letter saying that the Hunter
(02:33):
Biden laptop was a lie. We have witnessed them lie
about the money that was coming into the Biden crime family.
We now have witnessed the media cover for the president
units it's America, Donald Trump. Let me rephrase that Joe
Biden with his massive cognitive cline. But they said over
and over again it wasn't happening. So this story is
(02:55):
about transparency, whether there's a list or not. I want
to see it all with making sure that we protect
the victim's identities. I want to make sure that I
don't have to trust the deep state. I believe as
a citizen, I deserve to know what happened. I also
(03:15):
want to know why no one else went to jail.
Can we just go over that again? Why is it
that no one has gone to jail except for one person?
That's it, Maxine, all of this abuse. That is why
conservatives are angry right now.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Now. Notice what the left is doing.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
They're going all in on Epstein because they think it
hurts Donald Trump. They're going in not because they want
to protect kids, not because they want justice, not because
they care about whoever abused children being outed and exposed
and maybe even indicted or arrested, which again only one
(03:59):
person's gone to jail. No, no, no, they think this
now hurts Donald Trump. And again I go back to
Chris Cuomo. Chris Cuomo, a lefty, saying this on his
show about the left, he believes is also making a
huge mistake.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
Making a mistake going all in on this. Epstein bs,
you did nothing to release any information about this case
on your watch, okay, And you watched a woman go
down for Epstein's crimes and did nothing to add to
any sense of accountability for anybody else. Then, so going
all in now is obvious and gratuitous and ugly. Okay,
(04:40):
And look, I get the play. This is bad for Trump,
so we got to be all in there. You need
to give the majority reason to believe that you would
be better, not that just he is worse. Do you
understand That's the key? Not MAGA sucks, okay, not that
(05:00):
they lied to you. MAGA, soill vote for us because
MAGA was formed in part out of desperation for feeling
that you on the left lie and don't deliver. So
this battle of attrition is just going to create two losers.
My suggestion is be less about your opponent and more
about restoring opportunity, less about who is woke, and more
(05:23):
about who is broke.
Speaker 1 (05:25):
And I agree, by the way, with nine percent of
what Coomo said there. The left is making a mistake
going all in on Epstein, and you need to give
a reason why you're better and they're not. I'll give
you another example Joe Scarborough calling out Raskin today saying
you could have gotten the Epstein files from twenty twenty
one to twenty twenty five when Democrats controlled the DOJ.
(05:48):
Why didn't the Democrats call for the release then?
Speaker 5 (05:52):
Right?
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Because this is not about actual justices, about attacking Donald Trump.
And Raskin's response was, well, there were other cases going on.
I don't know there are pictures of Trump and Epstein.
That's literally his response. So, in other words, Democrats didn't
care because Democrats are pos's that's what this boils down to.
(06:14):
They only care now because they think this is going
to hurt Donald Trump. Now, I also want to be clear,
why so many conservatives are frustrated right now.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
I am one of them.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
I am not demanding that you give me something that
doesn't exist. I'm not demand that you fabricate something, not
demand that you go out and arrest innocent people. I
am demanding transparency. This should be about the victims. And
the point I would say to President Trump right now
if I was sitting with him, is, mister President, you
(06:47):
promise transparency. You did it on rfk assassination, you did
it on Martin Luther King, You've done it on many
other issues. The American people want the same level of transparency,
even if the transparency shows us nothing. I don't know
if there's an Epstein list. I've been told there is
an Epstein list. I've been told that this was there
(07:12):
for a long time now. If that was a lie
and I was lied to, then show me what you
do have, show me that there is maybe not as
much there as we thought. And look, I think one
of the reasons why Democrats talked about the Epstein list
is because they kept saying over and over again, donald
Trump's in the Epstein files, Donald Trump's in the Epstein list.
Speaker 3 (07:35):
Donald.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
They used that to attack Donald Trump. If there is
nothing in there, then fine. There's a point that's been
made by as lawyers. Most criminals don't keep records of
their crimes. That may be true, but there's a lot
of information that's been redacted.
Speaker 4 (07:51):
Now.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
I want to protect the victims, as many conservatives do,
but I also think that I deserve to see more
then what we are seeing right now now. I think
the presence moving towards that. I also want to be
clear about one other thing that's been a lie. There
have been people that have been saying that Donald Trump
can release everything, all of it instantly. Is the president
(08:13):
United It's America. That is a lie. If you talk
to judges and lawyers, they will tell you no. Much
of what would be released would have to be approved
by judges or by a judge. A great example of
that is all of the witnesses and all the people
that went before the grand jury. That information would have
(08:34):
to be approved by a judge. So when they tell
you that Trump can give you everything, they are lying
to you. That is not true. He cannot give you everything.
What am I asking for? In so many other conservatives,
total transparency, whether it's nothing or whether it's something. We'll
figure that out, and that is the point that many
(08:57):
Americans say they want and also why they voted for
Donald Trump. This is a colossal pr failure by the Republicans.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
I want to be very clear about this.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
The fact that the White House and Pambondi brought a
bunch of conservative influencers to the White House, gave them
what was the Epstein files, you know, part one binders,
which was all information we already knew before, sent them
out in front of the media, and had them walking
out of the White House holding these binders up like
it was some amazing thing.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
That was just a dumb move.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
The reason why I say it's a dumb move is
because of what we are now witnessing, which is they're
now saying like, all right, well, there may not be
anything there.
Speaker 3 (09:42):
I don't buy that for a second.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
I also want to be clear about that, like, I
don't believe that there's nothing there yet. I think much
of the Epstein files that have been redacted have need
to be unredacted, and we need to see what's there.
I also think this goes back to one of the
basic issues, and the f BI deputy senior national intelligence
officer was caught on tape confessing that the FBI turned
(10:06):
blind eye in the Epstein case.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
So that's the other reason why I want more answers.
I'm not willing to let it go. Listen, I'm well,
this is shows I do.
Speaker 6 (10:16):
A lot of kind of encountering white supremacy. You think
the last the last two and a half years, I
was at the White House. Yeah, and they kind of
got moved back after the whole with the new administration
coming in. But yeah, small places kind of been watching
the documents and.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
They were trying to.
Speaker 6 (10:35):
Trying to release some of the files, like the White
House losses. Oh yeah, oh yeah, it's just a messy.
But because they even invited some of like the block,
like like the influencers and like right wing bloggers and
so release the files, I guess seems a little weird.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Just release it on.
Speaker 6 (10:52):
Let's see where the law enforcement kind of either turn
a blind eye or like miss miss things, and there's
opportunities from hearing and listening.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I mean, you listen to that.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
This is an FBI deputy senior intellig National intelligence officer
confessing the FBI turned a blind eye and the Epstein
case caught on OMG. James O'Keefe undercover video and you
look at this and you're like, really, now, I'm not surprised.
And the problem now is many conservatives are angry over
this because we were promised the Epstein file, and I
(11:27):
do believe the White House should release whatever they do have,
and they oversold it, PAMBONDI oversold it. I think that's
pretty clear now. And if there is not a big
thing there, then I want to know about the cover
up of it, because I don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein
got to where he was without being able to blackmail
people to make all of his money and abusing young girls,
(11:48):
and that there was a client list Jeffrey Epstein. Is
this whole issue now that the president made an issue
when he was running for president. People are like, I
want the payoff, right, I want I want to see
this now. I want to know what's going on now. Well,
let me also let you understand what Democrats are doing.
And this is very smart politically, Okay, I want to
(12:08):
be clear about that. This is extremely smart politically. Hi
came Jeffries came out today and just ripped Republicans and
now Democrats like, we demand the Epstein file, something They
don't give a crap about when Joe Biden was president,
but now they want it. And the reason why is
(12:28):
because they want to make the president look like he's
covering for conservatives, or he was a liar, or that
Pambani's a liar. And they understand that there's blood in
the water on this one with conservative voters, and they're
they're now like, let's exploit it.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Listen carefully to his words.
Speaker 7 (12:44):
The American people deserve to know the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth as it relates to this whole,
sordid Jeffrey Epstein matter. Democrats didn't put the Jeffrey Epstein
thing into the public domain. This was a conspiracy that
Donald Trump, Bondi and these MAGA extremists have been fanning
the flames of for the last several years, and now
(13:08):
the chickens are coming home to roost. The American people
deserve to know the truth. What, if anything, is the
Trump administration and the Department of Justice hiding.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
What are you hiding?
Speaker 7 (13:21):
If you're not hiding anything, prove that to the American people.
And if you are trying to hide something, as many
of Donald Trump's MAGA supporters apparently believe, then the Congress
should actually work hard to try to uncover the truth
for the American people. There are only two things that
(13:43):
are possible here. Option one, Donald Trump, Panbondy, and the
MAGA extremists intentionally lied to the American people for years
about the Jeffrey Epstein situation. Option one. Option two is
that in fact, there's reason for the American people to
(14:07):
be concerned as it relates to what information has not
been released that could be damaging to the Trump administration
and the friends and family of the Trump administration. And
they're billionaire, corrupt supporters, and so they're actively engaging in
(14:27):
a cover up. Option one, they lie for years. Option two,
they're engaging in a cover up.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
Now, let me go back to the politics. This This
is like one of the smartest political moves I've seen
by Democrats and Hakeem Jeffreys. I'll give credit where credits
due on this one, Like this is a smart political move.
The Republicans overplayed their hand and under delivered, and now
people that are supporters of Donald Trump are angry and
(14:58):
it looks like there is some sort of cover up here.
Whether there is or not, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
It looks like it.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
And so what they're doing is they're seizing this opportunity.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
To do this. I'll give you this.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Mark Mark Theessen, by the way, on Fox News Sunday,
said this about the fallout over the doj Epstein memo.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
Some damage from this. That's that to me is the
reality here.
Speaker 7 (15:22):
Ninety one indictments, the Mueller probe, two impeachments, civil suits
to bankrupt him.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
But the Biden people had had the Epstein files with
Trump's name in it, and they didn't use it.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Give me a break.
Speaker 8 (15:33):
I want to make sure.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
I love that, by the way.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
I love the fact he's like, Biden's people have the
Epstein files with Trump's name in it and they didn't
use it.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Give me a break. He's right.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
And the point is like, don't get yourself in a
bad situation for no reason. And I think Republicans need
to fight back on this one, and they need to
they need to put it out there, whatever it is,
and and and get the reactions out of the Epstein files.
Whatever we do have to show the American people. I
(16:04):
think it's time for the American people to see it.
But if again Democrats smell blood in the water, on
ABC this week, they were like, Wow, the White House
needs to come clean about the Epstein files, implying that
there's a bunch of Republicans or Donald Trump's name in
the Epstein file. Again using this politically, it's scumbaggery, but
it's brilliant.
Speaker 8 (16:24):
I mean, the Attorney General, Pam Bondi went to the
public and said all kinds of things about this. She
said there was a list, there was files, they had people,
and that was in front of the White House, in
front of the West Wing, that they had the influencers
out there. So, I mean, there's a very legitimate question here.
Number one, was she lying then or is she lying now?
(16:46):
She's the Attorney General. I do think she should go
in front of Congress and sort of just explain the
facts here, because ultimately it is a big question. Was
she just prancing around making things up? You're not really
supposed to do that as the jorney Jeffers And then
second of all, they say, you know that everyone's acting
(17:07):
like they don't know what the conspiracy theory is. The
conspiracy theory is that the client list has Donald Trump
on it, and that's why his government is holding it back.
And I think you should just we need to have
people honestly answer questions in front of Congress or the press,
to just have this out once in front of the
overall problem.
Speaker 1 (17:28):
Like they're they're playing into this beautifully because it was
over sold and you can't oversell it and then all
of a sudden just run away from it like it
never happened. Democrats are going to seize this moment until
you get it all out there and you show all
of it. And they're going to keep quoting Pambondi, and
(17:51):
they're going to keep quoting Dan Bongino, and they're going
to keep quoting everybody that's made any quote about Epstein.
And you know, yeah, I'm glad there's somehow out there
that are actually attacking also the hypocrisy on the left.
Chris Cromo, for example, blasted AOC this week for suddenly
caring about the Epstein files because she didn't care about
(18:11):
him before, only because she's going to score political points
on Republicans.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Now, AOC has had nothing to say about the attacks
on the ICE agents. Can you believe that? But the
Epstein fiasco gets her attention. You see what she posted today? Wow,
who'd have thought that electing a rapist would have complicated
the release of the Epstein files.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
Hope it goes viral, because that's all you're about.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
What have you ever done to fight for the release
of the Epstein files?
Speaker 4 (18:36):
Huh?
Speaker 3 (18:36):
You sent out a few tweets over the years, just
to try to what ride the wave?
Speaker 2 (18:41):
Where are your resolutions, Where are your speeches on the floor,
where are your demands? Nothing, just like the rest of
your propaganda and your false promises. It's great for you
for being developing a following, but it's not much in
terms of being a leader when you get nothing done
and you just play the game of advantage, you know
better than the people you think you oppose.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
On the right, I couldn't agree with Chris crooma more
for blasting AOC for suddenly caring about the Epstein files
when she never cared about before all because she wants
to score a political point, not protect kids, not protect
people that were abused by Jeffrey Epstein and his friends.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
No, no, no, no, no, none of that matters.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
There are a lot of conservatives, a lot of terms
sports are very upset by this idea of like there's
nothing there, let's just move on and they're not taking
that answer and saying, Okay, we'll just move on now.
Alan Dershowitz went on Newsmax. Who is Alan Dershowitz. He
is a Harvard law professor who also was the lawyer
(19:42):
for Jeffrey Epstein, And he came out and he said
some very interesting things about the Epstein files and the jurisdiction.
He said, Number one, redacted or sealed materials in connection
with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are in fact
under the court's jurisdiction to release, he says, not the
(20:05):
Attorney General, Pam Bonding, or the Department of Justice. The
Harvard law professor who helped secure a plea deal in
two thousand and eight for Epstein, had a lot more
to say about the Epstein files. His friends, who is
he working with and I want you to hear this.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
Listen very closely.
Speaker 9 (20:23):
Drschwitz Joys. Be nice to see you, sir. And just
for starters, in terms of I assume that much of
the information that's in the Justice Department possession is grand
jury testimony and that can't be released, right. That's as
we sort of sort through what would be released through
I couldn't.
Speaker 5 (20:42):
Yeah, some of it's grand jury testimony, some of it
is material that's been redacted, some of it sealed by
the court, and it comprises several things. There are some
that include accusations made by people I know the people
who have been accused, and it involves negative material about
(21:04):
the accusers, and the courts have redacted those in order
to quote protect the victims. But are they Are they
victims or are they mixed? Some of them mixed victims
and false accusers. So everything should come out, but you know,
this is a nothing burger. Almost everything that's important has
come out. I've seen the names. There's nobody currently serving
(21:28):
in office or who's at all names?
Speaker 9 (21:31):
What names? Is it just names of people on an
airplane that went to his island or are there names of
people doing something wrong?
Speaker 5 (21:41):
Well, yeah, there are names of people who are accused
of doing something wrong by accusers. But the information about
the accusers and negative information about the accusers has also
been suppressed. The public doesn't really have a fair opportunity
to decide whether the those who are accused were fairly accused.
Speaker 4 (22:02):
They're not fairly accused.
Speaker 5 (22:04):
Now the media can actually file applications to the judges
to try to open up this information. I don't think
you can fall pambond You the Justice Department, they don't
have the authority to release these redacted material or the
sealed material. I think I can't know this for sure
that they've released everything that they are able to release.
(22:27):
The rest of it is up to the judges, and
so the application should be made to the judges, not
to the Justice Department. Once the information is unredacted, then
the Justice Department can release it. Now this information includes,
for example, videotapes. There are all kinds of claims about
sex tapes. I happen to know what the facts are
and what happened is one day Epstein was robbed by
(22:49):
an employee, and so the Palm Beach police installed video
cameras in his living room, not in his bedrooms.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
And so there are video tapes, but they're not sex tapes.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
And you know, there's no plausibility to the claim that
have worked for the Mozad that's just total nonsense.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
Well see, actually, let me tell you.
Speaker 9 (23:08):
That's what I'll tell you. That's one of the things
that's most distressing to me. And that claim has been
made by two former colleagues of mine from another network.
We are no longer at that network, by the way,
one I was a lawyer and should know better. I mean,
like they ever started just pulling things out and if
they have facts, present them put them with some witnesses.
But it's so electrifying the topic and with social media
(23:31):
and everybody picking sides that it has really gone haywire.
Speaker 5 (23:35):
Yeah, no, I agree with you. Look, I have sources
in Israel. I once represented the MOSAD. I helped get
four or five Mozart agents out of Cyprus who had
been improperly arrested.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
And believe me, if he had ever.
Speaker 5 (23:49):
Worked for the MOSAD, the first person he would have
told that to is me, because he would have wanted
me to use that to help him get an even
better deal than he got. So I am one hundred
percent based on my information and what he told me
and didn't tell me that there's no conceivable claim that
he actually worked for the most SADE or the CIA,
(24:10):
and so people just make this stuff out of whole cloth.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
But it's profoundly dangerous, you know, it's I mean, whatever
the facts are, the facts are, you know, and transparency
is great and things should be released. It's consistent with
transparency that don't violate any rules or anything's been redacted
by the court or by Gregorick. But when you have
people out there saying there are all these conspiracies and
there are all these things going on in saying that
I have it on good information, Well you know, have
(24:36):
ad it. Tell us where your information is instead of
instead of lighting the town on fire.
Speaker 5 (24:41):
But you know, all these things have a kernel of
a basis in fact. For example the mossade. Yes, in fact,
his girlfriend Glaine Maxwell's father Robert Maxwell, probably did work
for the most side, But that has nothing to do
with Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
Yes there were videotapes.
Speaker 5 (24:59):
Yes there are lists of names, but they're not lists
of names devised or designed by Epstein. Yes, there are
lists of people who are on his planes. Bill Clinton
was on his plane, Bill Gates was on his planes.
Speaker 4 (25:15):
Lots and lots of people.
Speaker 5 (25:16):
Remember, he had a life way before he was ever
charged with any crime. That life include the president of Harvard,
heads of this corporation, that corporation. I know, my wife
and I went to his home for several events where
he had some of the world's greatest scientists. He had
astronauts who had just come back from out of space,
and so of course he attracted very, very prominent people.
Speaker 4 (25:39):
None of them knew he was doing anything wrong.
Speaker 5 (25:42):
It's when he was first arrested for doing something wrong
that everybody terminated their relationship. Not everybody, and people who
didn't can be called into account. But I don't think
there's much here, you know, as they say in the movies,
move on, there's nothing to say here. I think almost
everything that has to be released has been released.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
I've seen everything, and I don't see any but.
Speaker 9 (26:08):
The other, the other alternative, the other alternative, although it takes,
it takes forever. I've been doing this with the Natalie
Holloway cases getting documents under FOYA is that you can
make a Freedom of Information Act request. The government does
have to comply with it by law. Unfortunately, the government
takes forever, as as I.
Speaker 4 (26:26):
Don't think, not very much.
Speaker 5 (26:27):
It would turn up some material that's redacted, and FOYA
doesn't unredact.
Speaker 4 (26:31):
They just give you the redacted material with all the blackouts.
And why do I know tell me about who the
people are whose names have been blacked out?
Speaker 5 (26:41):
Because I did all the investigations and I was able
to put together from all the evidence.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Oh, this guy, this person, and I know who it is.
Speaker 9 (26:50):
And with that, I've got to go Professor, Professor Dershowitz,
Thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
You can hear Alan there just saying a lot of
what you're seeing and a lot of it's conspiracy theory.
And he said this is I know. I learned this
speaking there regret of Ancestorum over at Newsmax. And I
think the point he was making is what you may
be angry about may not even be based in reality.
(27:14):
I want to know what there is. I want to
know it was redacted. I want to protect the victims,
but I also think that there needs to be real
transparency on this one. The President, by the way, coming
out and again blaming his predecessors for creating files related
to the high profile client, so the Late six offender
Jeffrey Epstein. The President praised Pam Bondi, by the way,
(27:37):
who is kind of under intense criticism within Trump's own
base for handling of the files, and during a press
briefing outside the White House that aired live, Trump was
asked whether body told them if his name appeared in
the documents. No, no, she's given us just a quick
a very quick briefing, and in terms of the credibility
(27:59):
of the different things that they've seen. Trump said he's
also denied numerous times any association with Epstein's criminal activity.
He said, quote and I would say that, you know,
these files were made up by James Comy, they were
made up by Barack Obama, they were made up by
the Biden team. You know, we went through this, years
(28:20):
of this with the Russia Russia Russia hoax, with all
the different things that we had to go through.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
We've gone through years of it.
Speaker 1 (28:27):
But she's handled it very well, referred to Bondi, and
it's going to be up to her. Whatever she thinks
is credible, she should release.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
So this is the.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
President on the record now on the issue of the
Epstein files, saying he's going to allow Pam Bondi to
do her job and decide what is best. Don't forget
share this podcast please with your family and your friends
where whoever they are, and I will see you back
here tomorrow.
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.