Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good morning, Michael. Hey, great show yesterday.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
I think we got three big laughs out of your
buddy Kelly out there, So that's uh, you're really killing it.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Good job, keep up the good work.
Speaker 4 (00:13):
Yeah, that's that's my goal. If I if I can
just get her to laugh, well, then you know, my
life is completed.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
But I think those lasts were accredited to me, not you,
because out of.
Speaker 4 (00:23):
The two of us, I'm clearly the funnier one.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
I'm not gonna argue with that. I just find you hilarious.
I just like to laugh at you.
Speaker 5 (00:35):
Looking.
Speaker 4 (00:38):
I was just quickly trying to find I thought I
had it here now and now, of course, speaking of laughs,
mister prepared here, I thought I had bookmarked a Yes,
I did here it is. I just had to go
find it. Let me get it pulled up. But let
me pause it. I don't to the certain degree care
(01:03):
about Jeffrey Epstein. I don't care other than the fact
that he may have committed horrendous crimes with underage girls.
It's too bad that he offed himself. No, I don't
think Hillary Clinton killed him. I mean, you know, we're
(01:24):
going to dabble into an out of conspiracy theories, but
only because I'm going to try to present an objective
point of view about Jeffrey Epstein Epstein or Epstein Epstein.
I think Epstein, I never Yeah, and I'm glad he's dead.
(01:47):
I just wish that, you know, he'd been put to death,
you know, after a trial by Jurvis Peers.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
But what does bother me is this kind of running loose.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
With language and words and answers to questions and misleading.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Do you recall.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
The time that those so called influencers all went to
Washington to visit with Apparently it was to visit with
the Vice president. It was not, as a matter of fact,
to visit with the Attorney General. She just happened to
(02:32):
show up. Yesterday, I'm scrolling through and I find that, Yeah,
I think I do follow this individual on x d
C DRAINO. Let me see why if I can find
(02:53):
the part where he talks about here it is they
show up. It's I don't have any of there, but
they show up, and the meeting is with the vice president.
(03:13):
Remember they all walked out of the White House, and
they had the white binders and supposedly it was the
Epstein files. Well apparently it was not the Epstein Files.
So there's a lot of there are a lot of
games being played with language. And while I'm not prone
(03:38):
to conspiracy theories, I am, however, a pretty somewhat of
a stickler about language. I always advise my clients, whether
you whether we're in a deposition or a trial, if
you don't understand the question, ask them to repeat the question,
(03:59):
ask them to explain what they mean. If you need
to think about your answer, I don't care whether you're
in a courtroom or in a deposition, you take the
time to think about your answer, and then be very particular.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
It was kind of a balancing act because I didn't
want to scare them.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
I just wanted to make them comfortable that if you
need to think about your answer, take the time to
think about the answer, because if you just blurt something out,
you may say something that they're going to twist around
and come back and use against you. And I only
I think it gave clients a sense of ease that
(04:41):
they're already under pressure, whether you know I don't whether
you've ever testified from in a trial or not. I've
testified in trials. I've been called as a witness in cases,
and even as a lawyer, I found it somewhat intimidating
to walk up to the witness stand to be sworn
(05:02):
in the you know, the federal judges standing there, sitting there,
you know, on the bench to your right, and opposing
counsel stands up, particularly if you're going to be a
hostile witness and you know they're going to come at you.
And I had to think to myself, all right, just
you know, one, make sure you tell the truth, listen
(05:22):
to the question, and if you need to think about it,
you know, at some point the judge, you know, it depends.
You can't think about it forever. At some point the
judge is going to say, mister Brown, you need to
answer the question. Well, I might say, yes, your honor,
I'm thinking about the proper response, and he might at
some point say you need to answer the question. I'd
(05:43):
answered the question, but I would I would never hesitate
to stop and think about what I was going to say.
I say all of that because we're going to hear
in a minute something that was said yesterday about the
Epstein files, said by Caroline Levitt, who I have the
greatest respect for, even though I disagree with what she
said in terms of an answer, the way she was
(06:05):
able to take her answer and just swerve without any
I mean it was like it was like she was
making a ninety degree turn on an interstate highway which
does not exist, and just able to just just eighty
miles an hour Z make that right. Intern I was impressed,
(06:29):
although I thought it was all BS. Nonetheless, I was impressed.
Back to d C Dreno, So DC Draino, who let
me just tell you what his profile says, rogan o'handley
Lawyer America. First, he has two point two million followers,
he writes. As one of the influencers who was given
(06:49):
the now infamous quote Epstein Binder, I went to share
a few thoughts. One, I understand the rage people have
for demanding Epstein client lists and arrests. Every influencer there
that day feels the same anger watching pedal elites get
away with the most heinous crimes. We want justice, and
(07:11):
almost all of us have called for the client list
and arrest for years.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
Number two.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
We had no idea we would receive in quote Epstein
Binders that day. We were originally invited for a meeting
with Vice President JD. Vance in the White House and
that was it. We all paid for our flights and
hotels out of pocket and carved out time to go.
None of us even knew who else was invited. We
(07:39):
ended up meeting with President Trump, Marco Rubio, RFK Cash, Pttel,
Caroline Levitt, and basically half a Trump's cabinet in the
Oval Office. We were honored to be invited, and most
of these meetings were surprise events. There was no evidence,
no advance notice about binders or any other meetings, except
for our meeting with the Vice president number three. But
(08:02):
before I get number three, that's a fairly routine event.
The Bush White House would often invite donors. We didn't
call them influencers at the time, but we would invite
people that you know, had influence in the community, influence
in the party. We would invite people who had been
(08:24):
you know, contributors or who had you know, volunteers, who
had done yeomen's work. We would invite all sorts of
people to come to the White House. Now, when I
say the White House, I'm talking about the eighteen acres
and so it might be in the West wing, it
might be in the East room, but more than likely
(08:44):
it was in an auditorium held that is in the
old Executive Office Building just to the right, next door,
right across the West Executive Drive, So just west of
the West Wing there is that ornate old it was
originally the War building. It's now called the EEO B,
the the OEO B, the Old Executive Office Building. And
(09:09):
for example, the Vice President's official office is in there,
the map Room, Famous Room is in there. Secret Service
has offices there, a lot of the staff for the
National Security Council, they have offices there. But there's this
really nice auditorium, and so we would invite people there
much like I think these influencers were invited, and so
(09:29):
we would, you know, have presentation. So the White House
would invite, you know, the White House Political Office, the
White House Comms Office would invite you know, maybe five
of us to come be in to make a presentation.
You know, give these people something, you know, give them
some little insider tidbits about what's going on, so that
you know, we keep them actively involved in the in
(09:49):
the party and actively actively involved in the campaign. So
I was involved in numerous of those, and occasionally the
President would wander over and make a surprise of it.
I think this is what these people were invited to,
and it turned out that, oh they got to go
to the Oval Office to meet the president. Oh and
(10:10):
while they were there, several people swung by. So that's
why he says, we ended up meeting with the President,
Marco Rubio, RFK, Cash, Betel, Caroline Levitt, and basically half
a trap Trump's cabinet. That was the second paragraph. The
third point he makes is this, we had a surprise
meeting with the Attorney General and she handed us Epstein
(10:30):
file binders. We all heard on the news the night
before that she would be releasing the Epstein files that day,
so it was surreal, he says, to have a copy
in our hands. Number four, The photo shoot was not planned.
We were walking from the White House to the Eisenhower
(10:52):
Building that's the old Executive office building, and about fifty
plus photographers were waiting outside for the UK Prime Minister
to arrive and meet with Trump. Myself and others held
up the binders because we were enthusiastic about justice finally
coming for the pedo elites after living for four years
under a rigged and stolen presidency. Number five, we were
(11:16):
told a lot of the info in the binders was
not new, but that there was some new information. None
of us were able to immediately cross reference almost four
hundred pages of flight logs and other info with a
decade of previously released info to verify what was new
and if there were any bombshells. Some of us maybe
(11:39):
naively thought that there was at least some good new info,
because otherwise, why even say you were releasing anything.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Number six.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
If it weren't for Mike Cernovich, we wouldn't even be
having this conversation. He single handedly filed a lawsuit to
unseal Epstein records that soon thereafter led to his arrest.
He was there at the White House and given a
binder to say that he or other influencers are involved
in a cover up of Epstein defies logic seven. Influencers
(12:14):
do not control the Epstein files. We aren't the federal government.
We're just regular people who became outspoken activists who to
help save America, and we were roped into this messaging
exercise without any prior planning or coordination. Again, he says,
I understand everyone's anger because we all want answers and
(12:35):
accountability too. In fact, all of us are still calling
for the files to be released, just like we did
for years beforehand. But for some reason, some people think
influencers control the Epstein files. We do not number eight.
We cannot rewrite history, but we can help fight to
get these files released. I know that myself and others
(12:58):
will continue calling for accountability for the Epstein pedals, just
like we have done for many years. He concludes with
if you've made it this far, thank you. Thank you
for your time and concern for the actual truth. He
then says, when I was invited back to the White
House two months later, I asked about releasing the Epstein files,
(13:21):
and I will continue to follow up until these pedal
elites are held accountable, and he attaches there a little
audio clip from Florida's voice, so they must have been
recording this meeting. Here's what he said.
Speaker 6 (13:42):
My question is about the Epstein files. And a couple
months ago, the DOJ released what they called Phase one
of the Epstein files, and they announced that a lot
of those files, the remaining files, probably the bulk of
the files, are actually in the New York Field office.
They requested that they'd be returned the day after, and
(14:04):
some legacy media reports show that not only were those
files returned to the DOJ, but that hundreds of FBI
agents are going through them day after day and getting
them ready for public reliefs. Do you have any updates
from the DJ or the FBI and when those files
are expected to be released and also when we might
(14:24):
start seeing some arrests of the client lists.
Speaker 4 (14:27):
Sure I can assure this is the Attorney General, Pam Bondi,
this is back on April twenty eight, for you.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
That the Attorney General and her team at the Department
of Justice are working on this diligently for a specific timeline.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
I'm sorry, it's not the Attorney General, it's Caroline Levitt.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
I apologize. Let me back up when we.
Speaker 6 (14:47):
Might start seeing some arrests of the client lists.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
Sure, I can assure you that the Attorney General and
her team at the Department of Justice are working on
this diligently for a specific timeline.
Speaker 7 (14:57):
I'd have to check in.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
With them, and we can do that for you, Rogan,
in the effort of transparency. But I will tell you
the Attorney General is a bulldog. She is someone you
want on your team, and when she wants to get
something done, she gets it.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Done.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
I've seen her do it in various instances already in
her time as Attorney General. And when she makes a promise,
she keeps it. So I think I don't have a
specific timeline on you for that, but I do know
that they're working on it over there.
Speaker 4 (15:24):
Okay, all right, so there's where we are. They're working
on it. Now, let's fast forward to Fox News. This
is a TikTok video posted by Fox News February twenty. First,
(15:47):
this is John Roberts of America Reports. It's a midday
news show on Fox News, and he's speaking to Attorney
General Pam BONDI.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Will that really happen? I want you to listen to
the question again.
Speaker 8 (16:10):
EOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Will that really happen?
Speaker 7 (16:16):
It's sitting on my desk right now.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
It's sitting on my desk right now. What what is
she responding.
Speaker 8 (16:26):
To the question, EOJ maybe releasing the list of Jeffrey
Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:31):
Will that really happen?
Speaker 7 (16:32):
It's sitting on my desk right now. To review.
Speaker 9 (16:35):
That's been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (16:38):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (16:39):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (16:49):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet. Okay, Well, we'll
check back with you.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
Okay, Well, we'll check back with you. He specifically ask
I'm going to beat this dead horse because again going
back to my listen to the question, what's your answer?
Speaker 8 (17:09):
The question is EOJ may be releasing the list of
Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
You may be releasing the DOJ may be releasing the
list of Epstein's clients.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Well, that really happened.
Speaker 7 (17:22):
It's sitting on my desk right now.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
It the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients are sitting on
my desk.
Speaker 9 (17:33):
That's been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (17:35):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (17:36):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (17:47):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet.
Speaker 4 (17:51):
Okay, Well, we'll check back with you, Fox News, February
twenty one.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
If this is all I had.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Right now, I would say, and I have for the
past several months, believe that the Attorney General is reviewing
the client lists and doing cross referencing to see if
they match with flight logs, if they match with some
of the original charges of sexual abuse, rape whenever you what,
(18:26):
all the charges were against Jeffrey Epstein, and they're looking
to see if any charges need to be brought.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
That's my impression. So Ebstein did kill himself and he
didn't have a client list. Hm, I'm throwing the BS flag.
Speaker 5 (18:43):
On that one.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
The other thing I found interesting scrolling through x and
kind of researching the story last night, and I can't
ascertain whether it's true or fault. But one account and
a couple of news outlets they've released the video, the
(19:10):
overnight video of the high security unit that Epstein was in,
and one shows you know, it shows the time stamp.
It's a security camera. You can't actually see the door
to his unit, but it shows a couple of prisoners,
I mean a couple of guards escorting the prisoner in
and then them leaving, and then there's another check around
(19:32):
ten thirty at night, and that guard leaves, and then
it goes through and the fast forwards. You don't see
anything until the next morning when the guards are serving
breakfast and they discover him. Other outlets show a shortened
version of that, where the time lap skips for maybe
(19:55):
one or two minutes somewhere between I don't remember, you know,
somewhere between ten and one o'clock, ten pm and one am.
But I can't ascertain through any verifiable means that is
legitimate or not legitimate. So those questions remain. But back
(20:17):
to how we got to where we are right now.
The Attorney General, in response to John Roberts who said,
I understand that the Department of Justice has the client
list and it's being reviewed, and she says it's on
my desk. The only inference you can take from that
(20:38):
is that the client list is on her desk. Now,
someone's already jumped ahead to a point that is I
think noteworthy.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
If there is no.
Speaker 4 (20:51):
Client list or if there were no clients, which are
two separate issues. You could have clients but not have
a list. But if you had a list, isn't it
rational to believe that then those are actually clients?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
But if there is no list and there were no clients.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
Other than his own actions himself, what was he charged with?
Speaker 1 (21:18):
Why was he charged with.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Anything else other than the rape and sex with you know,
with minors. Why was he charged with anything other than that?
And if that's all, you know, just again playing this
out in your head, if that's all that he did, man,
was he prolific? There's there's more than a thousand victims. Wow,
(21:44):
that's that's a lot of criminal activity. So now let's
go to yesterday. Yesterday, after hearing that there was well,
there was a letter released, and the letter that was
released basically said there is well, there's nothing year see,
(22:06):
nothing at all for you to worry about. Just nothing
has happened. It was a fascinating letter primarily because of
because of the fact that we've been hearing all this
(22:27):
time about the client list, the conspiracy, you know, Prince Andrew,
Bill Gates not saying that any of them were involved
in me in just saying that their names appear on
flight logs. Alan Dershowitz, who's basically said Professor Dershowitz, has
come out and said, yeah, you know, I went, I
(22:48):
went to the island. I didn't do anything. You know,
if you think so, let's get it on. Sue me
or charge me, because I can, I can prove my innocence.
It just seems to me that they've they've way overstepped
they're they've got in front of their skis, and by
(23:16):
issuing this letter that they have reviewed everything and not
found anything. Really kind of hmm, it seems to me
they have gone way beyond what they ever intended to
go beyond in the first place. Yesterday at the press conference,
(23:38):
this occurred.
Speaker 5 (23:39):
An if I have now concluded there was no Jeffrey
Epstein client lists, what do you tell maggot supporters who
say they want anyone involved in Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes
to be held accountable.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
This administration wants anyone who has ever committed a crime
to be held accountable. And I would argue this administration
has done more to lock up bad guys than certainly
the previous administration, and it's administration is committed to truth
and to transparency. That's why the Attorney General and the
FBI Director pledged, at the President's direction, to do an
exhaustive review of all of the files related to Jeffrey
(24:12):
Epstein's crimes and his death, and they put out a
memo in conclusion of that review. There was material they
did not release because, frankly, it was incredibly graphic and
it contained child pornography, which is not something that's appropriate
for public consumption. But they committed to an exhaustive investigation.
Speaker 7 (24:30):
That's what they.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
Did, and they provided the results of that. That's transparency.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
Now, as she is answering, this is Caroline Lovett. As
she is answering that question, you see a hand in
the video go up. It's just a hand shoots up.
Almost immediately turns out it's Peter Deucey the Fox News.
Speaker 5 (24:52):
Okay, so the FBI looks at the circumstances founding the
death of Jeffrey Epstein. According to the report, this systematic
review revealed no incriminating client list.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
So what happened to the Epstein client list that the
Attorney General said she had on her desk?
Speaker 3 (25:12):
Well, I think if you go back and look at
what the attorney general said.
Speaker 4 (25:16):
Oh wait a minute, if you go back and look
at what the attorney general said, Okay, well you know what,
maybe we should do that. Let's go back again and
see what the Attorney General.
Speaker 8 (25:25):
Said, DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Speaker 1 (25:31):
Well, that really happened.
Speaker 9 (25:32):
It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's
been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (25:38):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (25:39):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (25:49):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
All right, got it back to Caroline Love.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
It revealed no incriminating client list. So what happened to
the Fstein client list that the Attorney General said she
had on her desk.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Well, I think if you go back and look at
what the Attorney General said in that interview, which was
on your network on Fox News, go.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Ahead, and Roberts said, DOJ maybe releasing the list of
Jeffrey Epstein's clients? Will that really happen? And she said,
it's sitting on my desk right now to review.
Speaker 3 (26:22):
Yes, she was saying the entirety of all of the paperwork,
all of the paper in relation to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
That's what the Attorney General was referring to, and I'll
let her speak for that, But again, when it comes
to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are
more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put
behind bars. They have an operation going on right now
called Summer Heats.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
And here's the swerve. Here's the swerve.
Speaker 4 (26:47):
We know, Okay, the FBI is kim committed to putting
bad people in jail who commit crimes.
Speaker 7 (26:54):
Jeems crimes.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
That's what the Attorney General was referring to, and I'll
let her speak for that. But again, when it comes
to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are
more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put
behind bars. They have an operation going on right now
called Summer Heats, which has our murder rate trending in
the lowest direction in United States history.
Speaker 7 (27:14):
Their emphasis on.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Violent crime and locking up violent criminals has led to
the arrest of fourteen thousand violent criminals. That's a sixty
two percent increase from the same time period last year.
So this Attorney General and the FBI director are committed
to putting bad people behind bars where they belong. That
they promised an exhaustive review.
Speaker 7 (27:33):
That's what they did.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
For any further details, I would refer you to the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Wow, what a great swerve.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
So we we're committed to justice and putting bad people
in jail bay, we get an operation going on, and
so this is you know, here's spruce that we're actually
doing what we're saying we're going to do, all of
which raises more questions than it answers, way more quiquestions
(28:00):
that it answers.
Speaker 5 (28:04):
You know, we.
Speaker 4 (28:07):
Stand at a critical juncture in this country's history. I've
talked before about legitimacy, trust, transparency, the integrity of institutions.
The Epstein files, the allegation surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's activities, and
(28:27):
what they reveal about the need for accountability in government.
I'm not advocating for any political faction, not any political conspiracy,
or any conspiracy theory. I just want the truth. I
want the government committed to the principles of truth and
(28:49):
constitutional governance. I'm not here to provide clarity for those
who might be uncertain about what to believe, because I'm
not sure what to believe. We can focus on some
verified facts and the implication of those facts. Let's back
up just a little bit and think about the deep state,
(29:10):
the administrative state, a hidden network of intel and law
enforcement officers wielding unchecked power that gets dismissed by the cabal,
and he gets dismissed as conspiracy theories. All of those
members of the kabal would argue that accusations of any
(29:32):
political bias or covert influence by agencies like the CIA,
or the FBI or Department of Homeland Security, they would
always argue that those allegations were baseless and they would
attribute those to partisan rhetoric. But when you look over
the past decade, we do have evidence that complicates the
(29:53):
dismissal outright of any sort of conspiracy. It doesn't mean
it proves the conspira. It just means that it raises questions,
and nobody seems to want to answer answer the questions.
Investigative reporting, official disclosures have shown instances of government overreach.
(30:13):
We've talked about.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
Those instances on this program.
Speaker 4 (30:17):
The FBI surveillance of a twenty sixteen presidential campaign, relying
on unverified information that they leak to the media, and
then when the media reports it, they use that information
to go get a PISA warrant. That's the deep state.
And then you fast forward to twenty twenty.
Speaker 11 (30:37):
Michael, if there actually was a list, why wouldn't either
Merrick Garland or James call me, both of whom would
have had access to it, come out and call bs
on the claim that there is no list.
Speaker 4 (30:49):
Thanks, And speaking of that, if Trump had been on
that list, and Merrick Garland and Biden's doj knew that
true name was on there.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
Why would they not have leaked? That also.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Go back to the foundation for why I think so
many people grasp onto conspiracy theories. We talked about the
fact that federal agencies, including the FBI and Home Land
Security actually collaborated with social media platforms so they could
(31:30):
fly and suppress certain content under the guise that it
was so called misinformation. All that is documented. There's lawsuits,
congressional inquiries, declassified records, all of which suggests a pattern
of influence that aligns with concerns about institutional overreach within
the government.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
Even if they.
Speaker 4 (31:51):
Don't prove some sort of coordinated conspiracy. Nonetheless, each stands
on its own as being factually proven. And then you
fast forward to last November, you get the reelection of
trump three hundred and twelve electoral votes. Popular vote majority
challenges the notion of some sort of a fully controlling
(32:12):
deep state. Yet Trump campaigns on reforming the intelligence agencies,
promising he's going to root out partisan influence, he's going
to restore accountability, and his victory despite all the opposition
from parts of the national security apparatus itself demonstrates that
our processes, our election processes, can still prevail. But then
(32:38):
you get this occurring. The Jeffrey Epstein case is probably
one of the most troubling scandals of our time. He
gets convicted back in eight for sex trafficking and related charges,
He gets a lenient plea deal down in Florida, then
(33:00):
suddenly the subsequent death in twenty nineteen, all of which
feels speculation about his ties to all these powerful figures
around the world. And then these new developments just intensify
those concerns, you know. Back on April twenty eight, the
(33:21):
Attorney General, in an off the record comment that was
captured on video, referenced tens of thousands of videos involving
Epstein and minors. On May seven, she reiterated the existence
of those materials. Those statements alone suggest the potential to
identify individuals involved in serious crimes, but the Justice Department
(33:44):
has since then claimed that there is no client list
and no need for any further disclosures, contradicting her remarks
and showing efforts and slowing efforts to release the Epstein files.
I guess that if there's child pornography you don't want
to release that. You go back to the document itself
(34:08):
where they say this systematic review revealed no incriminating client list.
There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmail
pent individuals as part of his actions. No credible evidence
(34:29):
or no evidence. When you say there's no credible evidence,
that tells me there must have been some evidence. You
just didn't find it credible
Good morning, Michael. Hey, great show yesterday.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
I think we got three big laughs out of your
buddy Kelly out there, So that's uh, you're really killing it.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Good job, keep up the good work.
Speaker 4 (00:13):
Yeah, that's that's my goal. If I if I can
just get her to laugh, well, then you know, my
life is completed.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
But I think those lasts were accredited to me, not you,
because out of.
Speaker 4 (00:23):
The two of us, I'm clearly the funnier one.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
I'm not gonna argue with that. I just find you hilarious.
I just like to laugh at you.
Speaker 5 (00:35):
Looking.
Speaker 4 (00:38):
I was just quickly trying to find I thought I
had it here now and now, of course, speaking of laughs,
mister prepared here, I thought I had bookmarked a Yes,
I did here it is. I just had to go
find it. Let me get it pulled up. But let
me pause it. I don't to the certain degree care
(01:03):
about Jeffrey Epstein. I don't care other than the fact
that he may have committed horrendous crimes with underage girls.
It's too bad that he offed himself. No, I don't
think Hillary Clinton killed him. I mean, you know, we're
(01:24):
going to dabble into an out of conspiracy theories, but
only because I'm going to try to present an objective
point of view about Jeffrey Epstein Epstein or Epstein Epstein.
I think Epstein, I never Yeah, and I'm glad he's dead.
(01:47):
I just wish that, you know, he'd been put to death,
you know, after a trial by Jurvis Peers.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
But what does bother me is this kind of running loose.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
With language and words and answers to questions and misleading.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Do you recall.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
The time that those so called influencers all went to
Washington to visit with Apparently it was to visit with
the Vice president. It was not, as a matter of fact,
to visit with the Attorney General. She just happened to
(02:32):
show up. Yesterday, I'm scrolling through and I find that, Yeah,
I think I do follow this individual on x d
C DRAINO. Let me see why if I can find
(02:53):
the part where he talks about here it is they
show up. It's I don't have any of there, but
they show up, and the meeting is with the vice president.
(03:13):
Remember they all walked out of the White House, and
they had the white binders and supposedly it was the
Epstein files. Well apparently it was not the Epstein Files.
So there's a lot of there are a lot of
games being played with language. And while I'm not prone
(03:38):
to conspiracy theories, I am, however, a pretty somewhat of
a stickler about language. I always advise my clients, whether
you whether we're in a deposition or a trial, if
you don't understand the question, ask them to repeat the question,
(03:59):
ask them to explain what they mean. If you need
to think about your answer, I don't care whether you're
in a courtroom or in a deposition, you take the
time to think about your answer, and then be very particular.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
It was kind of a balancing act because I didn't
want to scare them.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
I just wanted to make them comfortable that if you
need to think about your answer, take the time to
think about the answer, because if you just blurt something out,
you may say something that they're going to twist around
and come back and use against you. And I only
I think it gave clients a sense of ease that
(04:41):
they're already under pressure, whether you know I don't whether
you've ever testified from in a trial or not. I've
testified in trials. I've been called as a witness in cases,
and even as a lawyer, I found it somewhat intimidating
to walk up to the witness stand to be sworn
(05:02):
in the you know, the federal judges standing there, sitting there,
you know, on the bench to your right, and opposing
counsel stands up, particularly if you're going to be a
hostile witness and you know they're going to come at you.
And I had to think to myself, all right, just
you know, one, make sure you tell the truth, listen
(05:22):
to the question, and if you need to think about it,
you know, at some point the judge, you know, it depends.
You can't think about it forever. At some point the
judge is going to say, mister Brown, you need to
answer the question. Well, I might say, yes, your honor,
I'm thinking about the proper response, and he might at
some point say you need to answer the question. I'd
(05:43):
answered the question, but I would I would never hesitate
to stop and think about what I was going to say.
I say all of that because we're going to hear
in a minute something that was said yesterday about the
Epstein files, said by Caroline Levitt, who I have the
greatest respect for, even though I disagree with what she
said in terms of an answer, the way she was
(06:05):
able to take her answer and just swerve without any
I mean it was like it was like she was
making a ninety degree turn on an interstate highway which
does not exist, and just able to just just eighty
miles an hour Z make that right. Intern I was impressed,
(06:29):
although I thought it was all BS. Nonetheless, I was impressed.
Back to d C Dreno, So DC Draino, who let
me just tell you what his profile says, rogan o'handley
Lawyer America. First, he has two point two million followers,
he writes. As one of the influencers who was given
(06:49):
the now infamous quote Epstein Binder, I went to share
a few thoughts. One, I understand the rage people have
for demanding Epstein client lists and arrests. Every influencer there
that day feels the same anger watching pedal elites get
away with the most heinous crimes. We want justice, and
(07:11):
almost all of us have called for the client list
and arrest for years.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
Number two.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
We had no idea we would receive in quote Epstein
Binders that day. We were originally invited for a meeting
with Vice President JD. Vance in the White House and
that was it. We all paid for our flights and
hotels out of pocket and carved out time to go.
None of us even knew who else was invited. We
(07:39):
ended up meeting with President Trump, Marco Rubio, RFK Cash, Pttel,
Caroline Levitt, and basically half a Trump's cabinet in the
Oval Office. We were honored to be invited, and most
of these meetings were surprise events. There was no evidence,
no advance notice about binders or any other meetings, except
for our meeting with the Vice president number three. But
(08:02):
before I get number three, that's a fairly routine event.
The Bush White House would often invite donors. We didn't
call them influencers at the time, but we would invite
people that you know, had influence in the community, influence
in the party. We would invite people who had been
(08:24):
you know, contributors or who had you know, volunteers, who
had done yeomen's work. We would invite all sorts of
people to come to the White House. Now, when I
say the White House, I'm talking about the eighteen acres
and so it might be in the West wing, it
might be in the East room, but more than likely
(08:44):
it was in an auditorium held that is in the
old Executive Office Building just to the right, next door,
right across the West Executive Drive, So just west of
the West Wing there is that ornate old it was
originally the War building. It's now called the EEO B,
the the OEO B, the Old Executive Office Building. And
(09:09):
for example, the Vice President's official office is in there,
the map Room, Famous Room is in there. Secret Service
has offices there, a lot of the staff for the
National Security Council, they have offices there. But there's this
really nice auditorium, and so we would invite people there
much like I think these influencers were invited, and so
(09:29):
we would, you know, have presentation. So the White House
would invite, you know, the White House Political Office, the
White House Comms Office would invite you know, maybe five
of us to come be in to make a presentation.
You know, give these people something, you know, give them
some little insider tidbits about what's going on, so that
you know, we keep them actively involved in the in
(09:49):
the party and actively actively involved in the campaign. So
I was involved in numerous of those, and occasionally the
President would wander over and make a surprise of it.
I think this is what these people were invited to,
and it turned out that, oh they got to go
to the Oval Office to meet the president. Oh and
(10:10):
while they were there, several people swung by. So that's
why he says, we ended up meeting with the President,
Marco Rubio, RFK, Cash, Betel, Caroline Levitt, and basically half
a trap Trump's cabinet. That was the second paragraph. The
third point he makes is this, we had a surprise
meeting with the Attorney General and she handed us Epstein
(10:30):
file binders. We all heard on the news the night
before that she would be releasing the Epstein files that day,
so it was surreal, he says, to have a copy
in our hands. Number four, The photo shoot was not planned.
We were walking from the White House to the Eisenhower
(10:52):
Building that's the old Executive office building, and about fifty
plus photographers were waiting outside for the UK Prime Minister
to arrive and meet with Trump. Myself and others held
up the binders because we were enthusiastic about justice finally
coming for the pedo elites after living for four years
under a rigged and stolen presidency. Number five, we were
(11:16):
told a lot of the info in the binders was
not new, but that there was some new information. None
of us were able to immediately cross reference almost four
hundred pages of flight logs and other info with a
decade of previously released info to verify what was new
and if there were any bombshells. Some of us maybe
(11:39):
naively thought that there was at least some good new info,
because otherwise, why even say you were releasing anything.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Number six.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
If it weren't for Mike Cernovich, we wouldn't even be
having this conversation. He single handedly filed a lawsuit to
unseal Epstein records that soon thereafter led to his arrest.
He was there at the White House and given a
binder to say that he or other influencers are involved
in a cover up of Epstein defies logic seven. Influencers
(12:14):
do not control the Epstein files. We aren't the federal government.
We're just regular people who became outspoken activists who to
help save America, and we were roped into this messaging
exercise without any prior planning or coordination. Again, he says,
I understand everyone's anger because we all want answers and
(12:35):
accountability too. In fact, all of us are still calling
for the files to be released, just like we did
for years beforehand. But for some reason, some people think
influencers control the Epstein files. We do not number eight.
We cannot rewrite history, but we can help fight to
get these files released. I know that myself and others
(12:58):
will continue calling for accountability for the Epstein pedals, just
like we have done for many years. He concludes with
if you've made it this far, thank you. Thank you
for your time and concern for the actual truth. He
then says, when I was invited back to the White
House two months later, I asked about releasing the Epstein files,
(13:21):
and I will continue to follow up until these pedal
elites are held accountable, and he attaches there a little
audio clip from Florida's voice, so they must have been
recording this meeting. Here's what he said.
Speaker 6 (13:42):
My question is about the Epstein files. And a couple
months ago, the DOJ released what they called Phase one
of the Epstein files, and they announced that a lot
of those files, the remaining files, probably the bulk of
the files, are actually in the New York Field office.
They requested that they'd be returned the day after, and
(14:04):
some legacy media reports show that not only were those
files returned to the DOJ, but that hundreds of FBI
agents are going through them day after day and getting
them ready for public reliefs. Do you have any updates
from the DJ or the FBI and when those files
are expected to be released and also when we might
(14:24):
start seeing some arrests of the client lists.
Speaker 4 (14:27):
Sure I can assure this is the Attorney General, Pam Bondi,
this is back on April twenty eight, for you.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
That the Attorney General and her team at the Department
of Justice are working on this diligently for a specific timeline.
Speaker 4 (14:41):
I'm sorry, it's not the Attorney General, it's Caroline Levitt.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
I apologize. Let me back up when we.
Speaker 6 (14:47):
Might start seeing some arrests of the client lists.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
Sure, I can assure you that the Attorney General and
her team at the Department of Justice are working on
this diligently for a specific timeline.
Speaker 7 (14:57):
I'd have to check in.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
With them, and we can do that for you, Rogan,
in the effort of transparency. But I will tell you
the Attorney General is a bulldog. She is someone you
want on your team, and when she wants to get
something done, she gets it.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Done.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
I've seen her do it in various instances already in
her time as Attorney General. And when she makes a promise,
she keeps it. So I think I don't have a
specific timeline on you for that, but I do know
that they're working on it over there.
Speaker 4 (15:24):
Okay, all right, so there's where we are. They're working
on it. Now, let's fast forward to Fox News. This
is a TikTok video posted by Fox News February twenty. First,
(15:47):
this is John Roberts of America Reports. It's a midday
news show on Fox News, and he's speaking to Attorney
General Pam BONDI.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Will that really happen? I want you to listen to
the question again.
Speaker 8 (16:10):
EOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:14):
Will that really happen?
Speaker 7 (16:16):
It's sitting on my desk right now.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
It's sitting on my desk right now. What what is
she responding.
Speaker 8 (16:26):
To the question, EOJ maybe releasing the list of Jeffrey
Epstein's clients?
Speaker 1 (16:31):
Will that really happen?
Speaker 7 (16:32):
It's sitting on my desk right now. To review.
Speaker 9 (16:35):
That's been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (16:38):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (16:39):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (16:49):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet. Okay, Well, we'll
check back with you.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
Okay, Well, we'll check back with you. He specifically ask
I'm going to beat this dead horse because again going
back to my listen to the question, what's your answer?
Speaker 8 (17:09):
The question is EOJ may be releasing the list of
Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Speaker 4 (17:14):
You may be releasing the DOJ may be releasing the
list of Epstein's clients.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
Well, that really happened.
Speaker 7 (17:22):
It's sitting on my desk right now.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
It the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients are sitting on
my desk.
Speaker 9 (17:33):
That's been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (17:35):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (17:36):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (17:47):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet.
Speaker 4 (17:51):
Okay, Well, we'll check back with you, Fox News, February
twenty one.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
If this is all I had.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Right now, I would say, and I have for the
past several months, believe that the Attorney General is reviewing
the client lists and doing cross referencing to see if
they match with flight logs, if they match with some
of the original charges of sexual abuse, rape whenever you what,
(18:26):
all the charges were against Jeffrey Epstein, and they're looking
to see if any charges need to be brought.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
That's my impression. So Ebstein did kill himself and he
didn't have a client list. Hm, I'm throwing the BS flag.
Speaker 5 (18:43):
On that one.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
The other thing I found interesting scrolling through x and
kind of researching the story last night, and I can't
ascertain whether it's true or fault. But one account and
a couple of news outlets they've released the video, the
(19:10):
overnight video of the high security unit that Epstein was in,
and one shows you know, it shows the time stamp.
It's a security camera. You can't actually see the door
to his unit, but it shows a couple of prisoners,
I mean a couple of guards escorting the prisoner in
and then them leaving, and then there's another check around
(19:32):
ten thirty at night, and that guard leaves, and then
it goes through and the fast forwards. You don't see
anything until the next morning when the guards are serving
breakfast and they discover him. Other outlets show a shortened
version of that, where the time lap skips for maybe
(19:55):
one or two minutes somewhere between I don't remember, you know,
somewhere between ten and one o'clock, ten pm and one am.
But I can't ascertain through any verifiable means that is
legitimate or not legitimate. So those questions remain. But back
(20:17):
to how we got to where we are right now.
The Attorney General, in response to John Roberts who said,
I understand that the Department of Justice has the client
list and it's being reviewed, and she says it's on
my desk. The only inference you can take from that
(20:38):
is that the client list is on her desk. Now,
someone's already jumped ahead to a point that is I
think noteworthy.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
If there is no.
Speaker 4 (20:51):
Client list or if there were no clients, which are
two separate issues. You could have clients but not have
a list. But if you had a list, isn't it
rational to believe that then those are actually clients?
Speaker 1 (21:07):
But if there is no list and there were no clients.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
Other than his own actions himself, what was he charged with?
Speaker 1 (21:18):
Why was he charged with.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
Anything else other than the rape and sex with you know,
with minors. Why was he charged with anything other than that?
And if that's all, you know, just again playing this
out in your head, if that's all that he did, man,
was he prolific? There's there's more than a thousand victims. Wow,
(21:44):
that's that's a lot of criminal activity. So now let's
go to yesterday. Yesterday, after hearing that there was well,
there was a letter released, and the letter that was
released basically said there is well, there's nothing year see,
(22:06):
nothing at all for you to worry about. Just nothing
has happened. It was a fascinating letter primarily because of
because of the fact that we've been hearing all this
(22:27):
time about the client list, the conspiracy, you know, Prince Andrew,
Bill Gates not saying that any of them were involved
in me in just saying that their names appear on
flight logs. Alan Dershowitz, who's basically said Professor Dershowitz, has
come out and said, yeah, you know, I went, I
(22:48):
went to the island. I didn't do anything. You know,
if you think so, let's get it on. Sue me
or charge me, because I can, I can prove my innocence.
It just seems to me that they've they've way overstepped
they're they've got in front of their skis, and by
(23:16):
issuing this letter that they have reviewed everything and not
found anything. Really kind of hmm, it seems to me
they have gone way beyond what they ever intended to
go beyond in the first place. Yesterday at the press conference,
(23:38):
this occurred.
Speaker 5 (23:39):
An if I have now concluded there was no Jeffrey
Epstein client lists, what do you tell maggot supporters who
say they want anyone involved in Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes
to be held accountable.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
This administration wants anyone who has ever committed a crime
to be held accountable. And I would argue this administration
has done more to lock up bad guys than certainly
the previous administration, and it's administration is committed to truth
and to transparency. That's why the Attorney General and the
FBI Director pledged, at the President's direction, to do an
exhaustive review of all of the files related to Jeffrey
(24:12):
Epstein's crimes and his death, and they put out a
memo in conclusion of that review. There was material they
did not release because, frankly, it was incredibly graphic and
it contained child pornography, which is not something that's appropriate
for public consumption. But they committed to an exhaustive investigation.
Speaker 7 (24:30):
That's what they.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
Did, and they provided the results of that. That's transparency.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
Now, as she is answering, this is Caroline Lovett. As
she is answering that question, you see a hand in
the video go up. It's just a hand shoots up.
Almost immediately turns out it's Peter Deucey the Fox News.
Speaker 5 (24:52):
Okay, so the FBI looks at the circumstances founding the
death of Jeffrey Epstein. According to the report, this systematic
review revealed no incriminating client list.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
So what happened to the Epstein client list that the
Attorney General said she had on her desk?
Speaker 3 (25:12):
Well, I think if you go back and look at
what the attorney general said.
Speaker 4 (25:16):
Oh wait a minute, if you go back and look
at what the attorney general said, Okay, well you know what,
maybe we should do that. Let's go back again and
see what the Attorney General.
Speaker 8 (25:25):
Said, DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients.
Speaker 1 (25:31):
Well, that really happened.
Speaker 9 (25:32):
It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's
been a directive by President Trump.
Speaker 7 (25:38):
I'm reviewing that.
Speaker 9 (25:39):
I'm reviewing JFK files, MLK files. That's all in the
process of being reviewed because that was done at the
directive of the president from all of these agencies.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
So have you seen anything there?
Speaker 10 (25:49):
You said, Oh, my gosh, not yet.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
All right, got it back to Caroline Love.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
It revealed no incriminating client list. So what happened to
the Fstein client list that the Attorney General said she
had on her desk.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Well, I think if you go back and look at
what the Attorney General said in that interview, which was
on your network on Fox News, go.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Ahead, and Roberts said, DOJ maybe releasing the list of
Jeffrey Epstein's clients? Will that really happen? And she said,
it's sitting on my desk right now to review.
Speaker 3 (26:22):
Yes, she was saying the entirety of all of the paperwork,
all of the paper in relation to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
That's what the Attorney General was referring to, and I'll
let her speak for that, But again, when it comes
to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are
more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put
behind bars. They have an operation going on right now
called Summer Heats.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
And here's the swerve. Here's the swerve.
Speaker 4 (26:47):
We know, Okay, the FBI is kim committed to putting
bad people in jail who commit crimes.
Speaker 7 (26:54):
Jeems crimes.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
That's what the Attorney General was referring to, and I'll
let her speak for that. But again, when it comes
to the FBI and the Department of Justice, they are
more than committed to ensuring that bad people are put
behind bars. They have an operation going on right now
called Summer Heats, which has our murder rate trending in
the lowest direction in United States history.
Speaker 7 (27:14):
Their emphasis on.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Violent crime and locking up violent criminals has led to
the arrest of fourteen thousand violent criminals. That's a sixty
two percent increase from the same time period last year.
So this Attorney General and the FBI director are committed
to putting bad people behind bars where they belong. That
they promised an exhaustive review.
Speaker 7 (27:33):
That's what they did.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
For any further details, I would refer you to the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Wow, what a great swerve.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
So we we're committed to justice and putting bad people
in jail bay, we get an operation going on, and
so this is you know, here's spruce that we're actually
doing what we're saying we're going to do, all of
which raises more questions than it answers, way more quiquestions
(28:00):
that it answers.
Speaker 5 (28:04):
You know, we.
Speaker 4 (28:07):
Stand at a critical juncture in this country's history. I've
talked before about legitimacy, trust, transparency, the integrity of institutions.
The Epstein files, the allegation surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's activities, and
(28:27):
what they reveal about the need for accountability in government.
I'm not advocating for any political faction, not any political conspiracy,
or any conspiracy theory. I just want the truth. I
want the government committed to the principles of truth and
(28:49):
constitutional governance. I'm not here to provide clarity for those
who might be uncertain about what to believe, because I'm
not sure what to believe. We can focus on some
verified facts and the implication of those facts. Let's back
up just a little bit and think about the deep state,
(29:10):
the administrative state, a hidden network of intel and law
enforcement officers wielding unchecked power that gets dismissed by the cabal,
and he gets dismissed as conspiracy theories. All of those
members of the kabal would argue that accusations of any
(29:32):
political bias or covert influence by agencies like the CIA,
or the FBI or Department of Homeland Security, they would
always argue that those allegations were baseless and they would
attribute those to partisan rhetoric. But when you look over
the past decade, we do have evidence that complicates the
(29:53):
dismissal outright of any sort of conspiracy. It doesn't mean
it proves the conspira. It just means that it raises questions,
and nobody seems to want to answer answer the questions.
Investigative reporting, official disclosures have shown instances of government overreach.
(30:13):
We've talked about.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
Those instances on this program.
Speaker 4 (30:17):
The FBI surveillance of a twenty sixteen presidential campaign, relying
on unverified information that they leak to the media, and
then when the media reports it, they use that information
to go get a PISA warrant. That's the deep state.
And then you fast forward to twenty twenty.
Speaker 11 (30:37):
Michael, if there actually was a list, why wouldn't either
Merrick Garland or James call me, both of whom would
have had access to it, come out and call bs
on the claim that there is no list.
Speaker 4 (30:49):
Thanks, And speaking of that, if Trump had been on
that list, and Merrick Garland and Biden's doj knew that
true name was on there.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
Why would they not have leaked? That also.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
Go back to the foundation for why I think so
many people grasp onto conspiracy theories. We talked about the
fact that federal agencies, including the FBI and Home Land
Security actually collaborated with social media platforms so they could
(31:30):
fly and suppress certain content under the guise that it
was so called misinformation. All that is documented. There's lawsuits,
congressional inquiries, declassified records, all of which suggests a pattern
of influence that aligns with concerns about institutional overreach within
the government.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
Even if they.
Speaker 4 (31:51):
Don't prove some sort of coordinated conspiracy. Nonetheless, each stands
on its own as being factually proven. And then you
fast forward to last November, you get the reelection of
trump three hundred and twelve electoral votes. Popular vote majority
challenges the notion of some sort of a fully controlling
(32:12):
deep state. Yet Trump campaigns on reforming the intelligence agencies,
promising he's going to root out partisan influence, he's going
to restore accountability, and his victory despite all the opposition
from parts of the national security apparatus itself demonstrates that
our processes, our election processes, can still prevail. But then
(32:38):
you get this occurring. The Jeffrey Epstein case is probably
one of the most troubling scandals of our time. He
gets convicted back in eight for sex trafficking and related charges,
He gets a lenient plea deal down in Florida, then
(33:00):
suddenly the subsequent death in twenty nineteen, all of which
feels speculation about his ties to all these powerful figures
around the world. And then these new developments just intensify
those concerns, you know. Back on April twenty eight, the
(33:21):
Attorney General, in an off the record comment that was
captured on video, referenced tens of thousands of videos involving
Epstein and minors. On May seven, she reiterated the existence
of those materials. Those statements alone suggest the potential to
identify individuals involved in serious crimes, but the Justice Department
(33:44):
has since then claimed that there is no client list
and no need for any further disclosures, contradicting her remarks
and showing efforts and slowing efforts to release the Epstein files.
I guess that if there's child pornography you don't want
to release that. You go back to the document itself
(34:08):
where they say this systematic review revealed no incriminating client list.
There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmail
pent individuals as part of his actions. No credible evidence
(34:29):
or no evidence. When you say there's no credible evidence,
that tells me there must have been some evidence. You
just didn't find it credible
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.