11-19-25 - 10am - Epstein 427-1

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael, if we bring by a live turkey today, you
have a cage to put it in it, or give
you a cage.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
You can just keep it in your car. Since you
said you accept turkey donations things, we have a box
here we can put a live turkey in a box.
Or you know what, Shannon could just hold the turkey.
Channel Shannon will if you bring the turkey out, Shannon
will just hold the turkey. Or since you know, I

(00:27):
watched my grandmother when you know, I used to watch
her go out in the on the farm and just
grab the chicken and just rip its neck off. So
I could I could probably I could try that. I
mean you think King Supers are the food bank of
the Rockies of mine? If I tried to we had
a chicken right here and yeah yeah, and then we
got propane we could cook. We could cook the chicken

(00:50):
right here? Where set to go? How you kick? What
are you laughing at? We have a QR code now too,
we act, we act, I've been lying for the past hour.
Bet QR code. Boo. We really do have a QR
code out here now, So you can join us at
the King Supers in Colorado and Yale they'll be out
here until nine o'clock tonight. Not me, but they will
be to help those in neat with Kiowa's Holiday food drive.

(01:12):
It's benefiting the Food Bank of the Rockies. You can't
donate turkeys, maybe not a live one, but you know
if you want to try, it'll make for good radio
food or cash through the QR coat. This is presented
by Redbird Farms and their generous donation of four thousand
pounds of chicken breasts and the come out GMC dealers.

(01:33):
Visit your local GMC eialer for the full Sierra Family lineup.
If you want to bring some stuff out, I got
two boxes here in front of me that I need
you goobers, come and fill up. Bring your can goods
or bring things like peanut butter, apasta, tuna, be stewed chili,
baked bean soup, can fruit, canned vegetables, jelly. You know,
you know the routine. You've done this before. Come out
and do it now. There's no reason to keep putting

(01:55):
it off. Just come out and do it right now
because I'll be done at noon, and then Mandy'll be
here and then Logan and the other crew will be
here later this afternoon. Do not turn your radio off
when I use this word. Okay, Epstein. Yes, we're going
to talk about Epstein. I know I dragged it all

(02:16):
excited about it too, so Trump Sunday. The President on
Sunday directed the House Republican members to vote in favor
of the bill that was written by Congressman Thomas Massy,
the Republican from Kentucky, and Democrat Rocanna, and they got
two hundred and eighteen signatures on what's called a discharge petition.

(02:37):
A discharge petition is basically, in layman's terms, is a
petition where you need a majority, So you need two
hundred eighteen or more. You need this majority so that
a bill can be brought to the floor despite the
speaker or anybody else's objection. The bill has to come

(02:57):
to the floor and you have to have a a
vote on it. So they were able to gather the
two hundred and eighteen signatures on this discharge petition, and
under the House rules that requires that mandates the Speaker
to bring the bill to the floor for a vote
without first being voted out of committee. Then, once it
became obvious that the discharge petition that there were two

(03:20):
hundred and eighteen votes to pass Massey's bill, and all
the efforts that had been made and exhausted to try
to convince the GOP squad to remove their names from
the petition, which includes, let me think if I name
them all. You've got Lauren Bober, You've got Marjorie Taylor Green,
You've got Massey, and you've got who I don't want

(03:41):
to say, I a Stefanic or not. I forget who
the third one is who I'm not sure. I'm not
sure who it is. But anyway, that's the We have
a squad, just like the Democrats. Democrats have a squad.
Now it doesn't matter to the Trump administration whether there
are two hundred and eighteen votes or all four hundred
and thirty five members of Congress. So Trump told every

(04:02):
Republican member to vote however they needed to vote for
their own purposes back in their district. In other words,
he just released them and said, you go do whatever
you want to do. I don't care anymore. The vote.
The final vote was four thirty four to one in
favor only one member. Only one member voted no, and

(04:25):
that one member is a Republican. That gives the House
Democrats a chance to demagogue the vote in the midterm
elections next year. Now, I'll tell you in a minute
why that one person, a congressman from Texas, why he
voted no on the discharge petition. But set that aside
for a moment. Okay, just set that aside and we'll
come back to it. I know it's worked to follow along,

(04:47):
but you I think you can handle. You can do
it now. Shortly after the vote, and relying on Trump's
instructions to the House, the Senate Majority Leader John Thune
introduced the bill in the Senate, where it was asked
by unanimous consent without any amendments. What does unanimous consent mean?
They didn't debate it, they didn't do anything. They just

(05:09):
brought the bill on the floor of the Senate, and
whoever was presiding over the Senate at the time said,
is there any objection to the passage of this bill?
Nobody objected, which means they're not on record. It just
means that you assume that everybody that was there, they
had a quorum, and everybody voted for it. So it

(05:30):
goes through the he goes through the Senate. The Senate
Majority leader, Well, let me back up. This is true,
even though Speaker Mike Johnson said shortly after the House
vote on the bill that he was going to try
to get the Senate to amend it, and he mentioned

(05:51):
some very specific passages of the massive legislation that were
problematic to him and quite frankly, they're kind of problematic
to me. But Soon originally said he was going to
allow amendments on the Senate floor. Then he backed down
and said, no, we'll just let it pass with unanimous consent.
So that's where we are. The unstated subtext, in my opinion,

(06:17):
was this is Massey's language, and now he will have
to live with the consequences. Get it. So originally the
Speaker comes out and says, there are some really bad
parts of this bill. I'm going to try to convince
the Senate Majority Leader John Thun, another Republican, to try

(06:37):
to amend it before the Senate votes on it. That
would mean if they had amended it, then it would
go back to the House or go to a conference
committee to agree on those amendments before it would go
to the President. But John Thune decided, no, I'm not
going to do that. I'm just going to let it
fly through, and it just flew right through. Now I

(06:59):
said been pointed out by I would say almost everybody
in the cabal and every talking head that you can imagine,
All of this would have been unnecessary if President Trump
had simply directed the Attorney General to comply with the
terms of Massey's bill without it having to be passed
by Congress. Nobody's ever really talked about that before. I

(07:21):
haven't even talked about that before. But that is one
thing that Trump could have done. He could have just
gone to the Attorney General and said, look, here's what
the bill says, kiss comply with the provisions of the
bill without it being passed, and that we can just
get this wen just move on with it. But the President,
for whatever reason, did not do that. The Epstein files

(07:42):
are in the possession of the Department of Justice. There are, however,
a couple of restrictions, one which we talked about at
length yesterday, and somebody on X on my timeline at
Michael Brown USA, in fact, you should be following me
over an ex at Michael Brown USA. One person even said, Hey,
I was listening to Michael Brown today and I've reversed

(08:05):
my position and I've decided that the files should not
be released because of the danger it might cause to
some of the victims. Well, that's great, I'm going to
convince somebody. Although I did say at the end of
the of that segment yesterday, I'm beyond caring about this
because regardless of which way this thing was going to go,

(08:27):
someone was going to make a political issue out of it.
So we might as well just admit that this is
really nothing more than performative politics by both sides of
the aisle. Republicans and Democrats are both playing politics with this.
But back to the files themselves. The Epstein files, with
a couple of exceptions, are in the possession of the
Department of Justice. One group of files that is in

(08:51):
not in possession of or i should say not fully
in possession of the Department of Justice, or the grand
jury files are still in the Southern District of New York.
The Epstein files that are in the possession of the
Justice Department do have some restrictions on it. For example,
some of the information in those files is classified at

(09:12):
the top secret at higher level. Now Trump could clear
those if he wanted to, and the sealing orders or
other restrictions imposed by various judges over time. Now those
could be minimized, and in some cases they might be
eliminated by the Department of Justice, again with the exception
being the grand jury files. So it seems, at least

(09:35):
on face value, it seems that President Trump gave Congressman
Massey what he wanted, and that likely takes massing the
Democrats off the field by putting this issue on the
shelf for the next thirty days. The operative language of
the bill gives the Department of Justice thirty days that
period of time to put together the documents into a

(09:57):
searchable and download down law down loadable format. So they'll
probably put it in some sort of PDF file, some
gigantic you know, who knows how many megabytes or terabytes
of data it will be, but a huge PDF bill
that they will put up onto a website, either as
a subset of the DOJ website or a separate website altogether,

(10:21):
and it will be word searchable. That's the requirement in
the bill. This is why, in my opinion, Trump opted
on Sunday night to simply choose to simply close the
tent on this circus that Congressman Massey had created once
it was clear that nobody and none of the three

(10:42):
female Republicans were going to remove their names off the
discharge petition. I'm really confident that the Trump administration lawyers
have studied the language of Massey's bill and are indeed
prepared to deal with it. The bill is barely longer
than six pages. It's twenty five lines a page, about

(11:04):
eight words per line. Here's an outline of the language.
In sequence the resolution bringing the bill forward to as
is and waiving all motions that would normally be used
to derail consideration and a vote. It provided for one
hour debate divided equally one and one motion to recommit,

(11:26):
which would have been a vote to send the bill
back to committee if a majority had voted in favor
of that. But of course we now know in hindsight
that did not happen. Section two, I'm not going to
give you all the clauses and all of that, says
that certain House rules will not apply to the bill.
These two rules give the Speaker the authority to postpone

(11:49):
a vote under certain circumstances. Again, we know that didn't
happen because we now know the bill has been passed.
There was a third section. The clerk is required to
communicate to this send at the passage of the bill
within seven days, and we now know, obviously du that
has happened. Then you get to the fourth section, and
this this fourth section is where the operative provisions of

(12:12):
the bill are located. Not later than thirty days after enactment.
So we still have to wait for the presidents to
sign it, because remember Schoolhouse rock House has passed it,
Senators passed it. It's the same version, and now it
goes to the President's desk. I haven't checked the timelines
to see if he's signed it yet today, but I

(12:33):
doubt he will sign it today because he has the
Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia in town. So you may
not sign it today. He might sign it tonight. He
might sign it tomorrow. But and here's the butt, not
less than thirty days after enactment. The Attorney General shall,
subject to restrictions in another paragraph, make available in a

(12:56):
searchable and downloadable format all of all unclassified records, documents, communications,
investigating materials in the possession of the Department of Justice,
including the FBI and the US Attorney's Offices, now unclassified.

(13:20):
Is not declassified, so that specific provision limits the reach
of the built of material to material what was when
it was received unclassified. Declassified material is treated separately. So
Section four that I just told you about lists eight

(13:42):
categories of materials that are subject to the thirty day
disclosure requirement. Here are I made a list. I've got
nine things. Everybody, who's all these? Oh my gosh, we're
gonna find out who the pedophiles are. Oh my gosh,
we're gonna find out who the lesters are. Oh my gosh,
we're gonna find out all these details. Are you ready

(14:05):
to listen closely? Be prepared to be a little disappointed
or to have some new questions. These are the materials
subject to the thirty day disclosure requirement. One Jeffrey Epstein
all investigations, prosecutions, or custodial materials. Two same thing for

(14:31):
Gislaine Maxwell. Three fight logs or travel records including manifests, itineraries,
pilot records, customs or immigration documentation for any aircraft, any vessel,
any vehicle owned, operated, or used by Jeffrey Epstein, or

(14:52):
any related entity. Of course, my question is what's a
related entity? They're gonna have to decide that for themselve
else what is a related entity? So for everybody, and
I want you to think about what I said yesterday
about innocent people are gonna get caught up in this
in this controversy, a flight log, a travel record, a

(15:13):
manifest an itinerary, customs documentation that doesn't prove anything. All
it proves is that Joe Schmoe was on a aircraft
or on a boat, or on a in a car
or a bus or what. It does not prove they
did anything wrong, But that's what everybody wants. So that's

(15:36):
what you're going to get. Then you get to number
four individuals, including government officials named or referenced in connection
with Epstein's criminal activities, his civil settlements, immunity or plea
agreements or investigatory proceedings, And again I would ask the
question about the hell is an investi investigatory proceeding as

(15:58):
opposed to an investment negation. So now you're gonna get
the names of every government official that is named or
referenced in connection with those criminal activities, with the civil settlements,
with immunity or any plea agreements. Again, that may or
may not tell you anything. So when I look on

(16:18):
my ex timeline, I see all I see people claiming that,
Oh my gosh, if you're against this, then you're trying
to hide a pedophile. Okay, we're you're gonna get these names.
What does it prove? Not a damn thing. Then there's
the fifth category, entities like a corporation, nonprofit and academic

(16:40):
entity or governmental entity that has a known or alledged
tized Epstein's trafficking or financial networks. My question is what
is a tie and how is a network defined or identified?
But that's what they're going to disclose. Again, it doesn't
prove any thing, is just going to provide you. And

(17:03):
I even hesitate to use the word list because people
keep saying, oh, I want to see a list. I
want to see a list. I want to see a
list of clients. Okay, what does that prove to you?
It depends on what you define as a client, because
a client could have been someone who had hired Epstein
for consultation for advice. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm

(17:26):
not trying to justify any criminal activity. I'm just telling
you that the reality is what everybody's begging for. I
don't think you're necessarily going to get it. And when
you do get these names and these documents and these entities,
I'm cautioning you that it may not prove anything. And
what I don't want people to do is to start

(17:46):
jumping to some conclusion that, oh, because somebody was named here,
that means therefore they must be guilty. In other words,
what I was arguing for yesterday is being proven by
the language of this agreement. Now I've got one, two, three,
I've got four more to go through that this bill
requires to be disclosed.

Speaker 1 (18:07):
Next Michael, Every morning at five o'clock, i'd get up,
take the dogs out. The rooster started crowing me and
the dogs had come back in sit down in front
of the radio, waiting for you to start at six.
You've screwed everything up. Now the rooster don't start growing

(18:29):
until nine thirty, and my dogs don't get out of
bed untill ten.

Speaker 2 (18:37):
You've become a welfare listener. Your dog and your rooster
are just they're lazy, and you need to slip them
around a little bit. You need you need to wake
them up. You need to you need to get them
acclimated to the new schedule. We can't you cannot be
on the Googer list unless you comply with the rules.
And if you're not going to comply with the rules,

(18:58):
we get a lineup. I get line of people right here.
There's Noel, there's maybe two or three yere. I got
a line of people lined up that are just waiting
to get on the goober list. So you know you
need to you need to shape up. So Dragon mark that,
mark that down. We'll we'll have to check back with
him and maybe now this whole. I truly am sick

(19:22):
of this Epstein story, but not for reasons that you
may think. Do I have empathy and sympathy for the victims,
those known and unknown? Absolutely do I feel badly at
all for or do I care at all whether Epstein

(19:45):
offed himself or somebody did it, other than the fact
that if somebody else did it, it was a crime,
and I want people to held accountable for crimes. I
really don't care if he offed himself. I don't care.
Just laying maxwell, she has been tried and convicted, she's
received her due process, she's now serving prison time, and

(20:06):
the system is working with her as the way it
is supposed to. What drives me crazy is how so
many people have been sucked into this story and won't
let it go because they have convinced themselves beyond any
reasonable doubt whatsoever, that there are still people out there.

(20:26):
And apparently, although you'll, you know, occasionally all hear like
Bill Clinton's name thrown out, or if you're a true artisan,
you'll throw Donald Trump's name out. But when I ask people,
who who do you really think is on this list?
That you're so you're so wound up, and you have

(20:48):
so much vested in this that you think that if
these files released, that some be Do you think George
Soros is on the list? Do you think Jeff Bezos
is on the list? Do you think Elon Musk is
on the list? Do you think Bill Gates is on
the list? Do you think you know the Pope is
on the list? Who the hell do you think is
on this list? That you're spending so much of your time,

(21:09):
energy and mental you're neurons, that you're convinced that somebody
somewhere is hiding something and the entire world is conspiring
to keep us away from you, I say, get a life.
The world's going to hell in a handbasket. And if
I had to list the ten top things that I'm

(21:29):
more concerned about than this. I have been bam, bam, bam,
bam bam. Let me name those. The only reason that
I am going through this is to try to convince
you to one you need to prepare yourself to be
let down. Two you need to stop and think. And
I'm not talking about you necessarily, but I am talking

(21:51):
about you that you need to convince yourself that maybe
you've been sucked into some political performative art going on,
some politics going on, that's really nothing more than just
trying to distract you from the very real issues that
are facing this country. That does not mean that we
don't want people con who have committed pedophilia, who have

(22:16):
who have abused or trafficked in children, that they shouldn't
be held accountable. Absolutely, they should be held accountable. This
is not going to get you there, and if it does,
I'll be the first to say, well, I was wrong.
The documents proved or the documents don't prove anything, But
the documents might give evidence of somebody that might need

(22:40):
to be charged, go through a trial and either found
guilty or not guilty by a jury of their peers.
But that's all I would do. It's not necessarily going
to be the smoking gun that everybody's all having an
orgasm overthinking that it's going to. So let's go so
let's go back to Let's go back to the list

(23:00):
of what's required to be disclosed by this bill. We've
gone through the general You've got all the investigative files
of both Epstein and Maxwell. You got the flight logs,
the travel records, the so called lists. You got that.
In number four again, you have a list individuals, government officials,

(23:21):
anybody that is named or reference in connection with any
of his criminal activities. The civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements. Well,
that's going to be a thousands and thousands of people
that may have no criminal activity whatsoever. You've got the entities,
you have, the immunity deals, the non prosecution agreements, the
plea bargains, you have the sealed settlements involving Epstein or

(23:45):
as associates. What's an associate? Are the associates defined? Is
that someone that worked for him as a housekeeper? Is
that somebody that worked for him as a driver. Are
the pilots associates? It's wide open? Number seven are the
Internal Department of Justice communications that includes emails, memos, meeting

(24:06):
notes concerning decisions to charge or not to charge, investigating documents,
or declinations to investigate epstein Or's associates. Okay, well that's
gonna tell you this what we looked at. And do
you really want if if somebody was investigated. Let's think

(24:27):
about number seven for a moment about internal communications. Let's
say that somebody called the FBI hotline and they gave
them your name and they said that, you know, Joe
blow Is has been engaged in Ptophelia with Jeffrey Epstein. Well,
they're going to want to know how you know, what's

(24:49):
your name, what's your phone number? They're gonna know, you know,
are you willing to come in and talk to us.
They're gonna vet you a little bit. And let's say
they decide, well, you know, they seem believable, they seem credible,
so I think let's open an investigation. So the FBI
opens an investigation, and within one day they shut it
down because there's nothing there. That person will be in

(25:12):
these documents, unless, of course, the Attorney General makes a
decision in order to protect innocent people, she'll redact those names. Now,
Let's say she does that. Let's take the example I
just gave, and she redacts a name. Are those of
you who are convinced that there's a cover up going

(25:33):
on now going to even further put on a double
tin foil hat and say, oh my gosh, look they
redacted the name. That must be somebody they're trying to protect.
I would say, yeah, they probably are trying to protect
them because they found no evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever.
And why should their name? Why should your name be

(25:55):
dragged through this mud? This whole story is really starting
to irritate me. Number eight. Listen to this one closely.
All communications, memorandum, directors, logs, metadata concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement,
or concealment of documents, recordings, or electronic data related to
Epstein as associates, his detention and death, or any investigative files. Well, okay,

(26:21):
that's about as wide as the Eyes and Hairrow tunnel.
That's about as white as the Lincoln Tunnel. That is bad.
That's about as white as the Mississippi River. I hope
the as white as a break, Yes, as white as
a break. Let me do number nine real quickly Number
nine is documentation of Epstein's detention and death and all

(26:42):
the incident reports. Now, when we get back, what's it
going to tell you?

Speaker 1 (26:47):
Hey, Michael, you thought it was noise to hear at
the car factory. I haven't heard a word you're saying today.
All I'm hearing all that background noise behind you.

Speaker 2 (26:54):
Can you repeat that last night? If you dragon? Is
the background noise coming through it all? I can tell
you that from my advantage point, I can't even hear myself.
There is so much noise out here. It's amazing. I
just like hearing the grocery carts back into each other.

(27:16):
That's that's fun. Oh, I know it's that. And they're
and they're trying to put up some of their Christmas
decorations and it's just like a total zoo out here today.
It's just hilarious. We're at the King Supers at Colorado
and Yale. We're doing the fifth annual Kowe Food Drive
for the Food Bank of the Rockies. How are you doing?
Good to see you and if you want to stop
by and say hello, I'll be here for another hour.

(27:37):
And then the Blonde Chicks that you should be across
the hall she'll be showing up, but we've had some
people dropping off. We're starting to fill up the boxes,
so we need your help. Beans of any kind, canned
corn or other vegetables, canned fruit, rice, pasta, all types pasta, sauce,
cereal peanut, butter, tuna, whole frozen turkeys, all those things
to help the food Bank of the Rockies. So come

(27:58):
out to Colorado. And by the way, don't let me
forgive to thank Red Bird Farms their generous donation of
four thousand pounds of chicken breasts and the Colorado GMC dealers.
Visit your local GMC dealer for the full c family lineup.
Back to Epstein, and then I really don't want to
talk about Epstein anymore. Can we just stop? I'm begging you,

(28:21):
let me stop, Please, let me stop. A few things
to keep in mind before moving on. It doesn't matter
what Congress wants. Congress cannot command or demand the Department
of Justice take any action where that command violates the
constitutional separation of powers. We don't have an imperial legislature

(28:46):
any more than we have an imperial presidency. The ability
of Congress to command and demand and require the public
disclosure of internal Department of Justice communications is not part
of congres oversight, and the fact that Trump might there
during the break. I look, most alets are reporting that

(29:06):
Trump is expected to sign the bill sometime today. If
he does sign the bill, that does not constitute a
waiver on his part with respect to his presidential authority
to move forward and contest the constitutionality or the legality
of any individual precesion provision in this bill. He has
an obligation, remember the oath he takes, to see that

(29:28):
the laws are faithfully enforced and these The reverse corollary
of that is that he has an obligation to not
enforce laws that he believes are unconstitutional. And since we
don't have a line item veto, his only choice is
to sign the bill has passed or to veto it.
Now presidents have not adopted that the practice the practice

(29:50):
in some situations of issuing so called signing statements where
they identify certain parts of the bill they believe are
not constitutional. But I don't think those of statements are necessary.
So if he signs the bill today, I think what
will happen is that the Department of Justice in Pam
BONDI will start going through and they will probably follow

(30:13):
what Representative Clay Higgins wrote over on X. If you
look at his account on X, he wrote this twenty
two hours ago. I have been a principal no on
this no on this bill from the beginning. What was
wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today.
It abandons two hundred and fifty years of criminal justice

(30:34):
procedure in America. As written this bill, this bill reveals
and injures thousands of innocent people, witnesses, people who provided alibis,
family members, etc. If enacted in its current form, this
type of broad reveal of criminal investigating files released to

(30:54):
a rabid media will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt.
Not by my I vote. The Oversight Committee is conducting
a thorough investigation that has already released well over sixty
thousand pages of documents from the Epstein case. He continues
that effort will continue in a manner that provides all

(31:16):
due protections for innocent Americans. If the Senator mends the
bill will properly address the privacy of victims and other
Americans who are named but not criminally implicated, then I
would vote for that bill when it comes back to
the House. But we know that did not happen, which
is why I thoroughly believe that what Pam Bondi will

(31:39):
do is her staff. She'll have, She'll bring in aney,
some US attorneys, some lawyers specialize in reaction and reviewing documents,
and they'll go through it as much as they can
to make certain that people who are innocent of any
wrongdoing are not embarrassed or implicated or then subjected to

(32:00):
a crazy media that will be sticking cameras in their faces,
asking well, you were, your name was in there, what'd
you do, what you do, what'd you do? So please,
can I just ask everybody deep breath inhale, exhale, and
we'll talk about Chinese farmland in America next