Trevor Is Back! More on the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Verdicts With Fresno Attorney Roger Bonakdar

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
To explain the quick charges and how they equited him
on it.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
Thanks for having me. Yeah, So they started off with
some of the heaviest charges you can see rico charges.
So Rico charges are typically used to prosecute offenses that
are happening across state lines or coming over our border.
They use them often against drug cartels MS. Thirteen. It's

(00:24):
a primary tool for the fence to be able to
grab the worst of the worst that are causing some
serious harm across the country. It's pretty rare. I actually
cannot think of the last time where a prominent person's
I'm going to call it a sex life to be kind,
you know, people can characterize it otherwise was used as

(00:46):
grounds to prosecute them in federal court. Here they had
charged them with the RICO violation, and they had charged
them with two counts of trafficking a person for the
purposes of prostitution. Important to know about this is that
in federal court, when the US attorney charges you, there's
always some plea negotiations up front. Why does that matter

(01:09):
for sentencing on the back end, which is what is
going to end up happening in this case in the
next two to three months, The reason that matters is
because in federal court, which God forbid, the federal system,
or really the state system, gets a hold of you.
Once they get on get on you, it's worse than
a pitbull with a vice grip. They have unlimited resources,
they have unlimited manpower, and the rules are set up

(01:32):
to make it exceedingly difficult to avoid a conviction in
federal court. So in this case, they found him guilty
of the two lower, lesser charges which were human, which
were the trafficking for prostitution. Didty was never offered a
plea deal where he could have avoided trial on the
recoach case. The Rico charges were what they wanted. The

(01:55):
Rico charges are the reason that Diddy was not charged
in the various states where he committed the domestic violence
where he would have committed the alleged prostitution, because it
just wasn't enough. You know, there's a there's a saying
that you know, pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. Right
going into this child, they wanted that big hog. They
wanted that that Rico conviction. That's what the that's what

(02:18):
dj was after, and.

Speaker 1 (02:20):
They went in. They went into it knowing though they
didn't have the evidence that would be needed, didn't they.

Speaker 2 (02:25):
They thought they could sell it, is what it looks
like to me. They thought that that Diddy was so vile,
so hate herble, so contemptible, and it would just make
such a visceral ep.

Speaker 1 (02:35):
We'll have Cassie crying and will win them.

Speaker 2 (02:38):
I mean they put a pregnant woman up on the
stand with the testify, with her husband and children out there,
and I I mean, I feel she was up there
for two days talking about how she was used as
a punching bag and a human toilet. I mean, how
do you how do you not loathe the guy that
was involved in that with her? I mean that that

(02:59):
has to have left to mark with everybody on that jury.
There is no way that Cassie's ever going to recover
from this Diddy where however this ends up, sentencing wise.
I mean, there were some horrid, horrid things that were
testified to there and there's no undoing that. And I frankly,

(03:19):
it's very clear to me that the prosecution was laser
focused on this and they thought we can technically prove
Trot prostitution on a technical basis, and that we can
make them hate ditty enough to where we can use
the prostitution as the what's called predicate offense or foundation
offense to hang our hat on the RICO violation. But

(03:42):
they couldn't prove a criminal enterprise, right, because what do
you need an enterprise somebody to play with, you need
a partner, you need a group to which this benefits. Instead,
all they got were a bunch of perverse videos and
what they described to be perverted video of sexual abuse,
which did he allegedly enjoyed. Now, you don't have to

(04:05):
like what the man did, you don't have to think
that it was right. But in many circles, in legal circles,
it's questionable to see why the US government or a
prosecutor in general, is interested in what's happening in someone's bedroom. Because,
as this verdict proves, the jury to some degree or
another believe that these some of these events were consensual.

(04:26):
And that's because of the text messages. That's because of
the descriptions that were given by these victims. Now, I
don't diminish anything that these women went through. There's no
question that each of them were victims of domestic violence
at some point, but that's not what was that issue
in this case. This was always a rico case, and
that's what they were after. And so now he faces
sentencing only on these two lesser charges, which take life

(04:49):
completely off the table. And you can see from what
the government's saying, they're already realizing we missed the bus
on this.

Speaker 1 (04:58):
My guess is Attorney Rodger Banagdar Roger, if I'm picking
up what you're throwing down here, I a domestic abuser, yes,
drug problems yes, swinger lifestyle yes, sick behavior yes. But
outside of beating her, there's really nothing else illegal. I

(05:18):
guess I got the two prostitution charges. Is that kind
of what it boils down to.

Speaker 2 (05:22):
Right, But even the prostitution part was something not as
clear as anybody would expect prostitution and to most folks,
and in most context, is I'm going to pay you
X amount of dollars for this sex act. And it's
a discrete sex act, and maybe it reoccurs often, but
it's transactional. And here Jane Doe, for example, one of
the victims, the other victim other than Cassie, she testified

(05:44):
that she was never paid for any one of these instances.
But she said that Diddy was supporting her, that he
was paying her rent, that he paid for her car,
that he paid for travel expenses, clothes, jewelry, et cetera,
et cetera, and that she understood and that she believed
that if she didn't comply, and she didn't engage in
these acts, that the well will dry up. Now, that

(06:06):
apparently is what the jury found to be prostitution. Not
here to argue with it. The jury is spoken. But
for most folks, that's not what you would typically expect
in the context of prostitution. You would expect fee for service.
I don't mean to be crass, but that is the
mechanical nature of that charge. So here they found that

(06:27):
these women were used, were applied using financial tools to
engage in sex acts that they did not want to,
but for the financial tools. So now, as a consequence,
the sentencing guideline, meaning the risk that he has going forward,
has plummeted. He went from looking at potentially life and
consecutive counts of twenty years or greater to a maximum

(06:50):
of twenty years.

Speaker 1 (06:51):
Pert Now, what about the threatening of one's life that
I heard in the testimony that did he you know,
driving around with guns? But they would say you know,
you better shut up or or you might not be around.
Did they use the right words to get any kind
of charges on that?

Speaker 2 (07:06):
So far, the prosecution hasn't argue that. I mean, they're
going to be able to argue what's called related conduct
at the sentencing related.

Speaker 1 (07:14):
Pommers none am I just thinking of something I saw
on YouTube of some ex bodyguard's girlfriend that said, I'm
trying to remember I thought there was some he threatened
their lives at some point, or.

Speaker 2 (07:23):
I mean I I remember with Cassie specifically, he testified,
she testified that he threatened her future in the music industry,
that she was over, she was going to be done
and less unless unless so that is a form of coercion.
But coercion, you know, in this context we're looking at prostitution. Now,
you can force someone into prostitution using threats of force

(07:45):
and threats of violence right as well, And that is
something that the judge will consider for the purposes of
sentencing for what's called an enhancement. An enhancement means a
bump up in the amount of time you get federal
court every crime as a point allotted to it. It
is a point system driven criminal system. So the worst

(08:06):
thing you do to higher the what's called offence level.
So in this case, prostitution carries with it the transportation
for prostitution carries with it a base offense level of fourteen.
Now that already strikes you as low. Just when you
say the number fourteen, that doesn't sound all that high.
It goes up into the thirties and forties. So when

(08:27):
you look at that, that's the baseline level, which they
can then bump up if violence, threats of violence, and
force were used. They can also bump up the sentencing
exposure based on how many victims they had. So here
you've got the US government, the US attorney excuse me,
going from saying this guy is guilty of rico, which
is twenty years to life to now we're going to

(08:49):
ask the judge for fifty three to sixty.

Speaker 1 (08:50):
One months time served included.

Speaker 2 (08:53):
Well, he's going to get credit for every day he
was in custody. So he's been in for roughly nine months.
Let's call it nine months ballpark. So if the defense
gets its way, he would serve something along the lines
of twenty three to thirty one months. If the DA,
if the prosecutor gets their way, it's fifty three to

(09:14):
sixty one months. Why the difference, it's those aggravating factors.

Speaker 1 (09:19):
So he's got a couple more years in their best
case scenario.

Speaker 3 (09:22):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (09:23):
I mean, it really depends on what the judge wants
to do, and the fact that the judge denied bail
pending sentencing or denied release pending sentencing kind of is
mixed bag. That could suggest that the judge thinks, you know,
I might give this guy closer to time served. I
might give him the base offense level for each victim consecutive,

(09:44):
which means you serve one term for one victim and
you serve the next term for the other victim and
concludes I think.

Speaker 1 (09:50):
Going along wile though, couldn't it if he did that?
You're saying that's the best case and worst case for
Shawn Combs those two examples.

Speaker 2 (09:57):
Well, no, I mean, if the worst case is sixty
one months, I think now that the judge could give him,
could give him up to the statutory maximum, okay, which
is ten he's not. I think that's pretty unlikely because
under the federal sentencing guidelines, there is a provision that
this the judge has to make sure that whatever sentence
he hands down is consistent among similarly situated defendants. So

(10:22):
this judge has to consider all of the both aggravating
and mitigating facts. One important mitigating fact is this man
has no criminal history whatsoever, let alone a prior felony.
And the judge is gonna hear, and the judge is
gonna know that he at no point was offered the
opportunity to take a plea to the man Act violation

(10:42):
to the transportation. It was always put your neck in
the guillotine and eat the rico count. And he didn't.
And so that's why, as you said, he had the
applause in the jailhouse, that he's the jail house hero,
because when the Feds get a hold of you, God
save you. Even if you have a defense, even if
you have something you can fight over, the system is

(11:03):
set up such that you pay a trial tax for
going forward. Like I'll give you an I'll break it
down to you, if you take a plea at an
early stage in federal court, you get a break on
your sentence automatically. Like I said, this is a point
system driven sentencing program, no matter what you've done, no
matter what it was okay. Some things there are mandatory minimums, right,

(11:24):
but then maybe you get the minimum instead of the aggravated.
But I'll give you an example. Let's say in this offense,
if he would have taken a plea to the man
Act violation the transportation for prostitution, he would have gotten
his sentencing levels reduced by three levels upfront. Three levels
when you're talking about a lower point level like this
could cut your sentence by forty percent. That's huge. But

(11:48):
he never had the opportunity to do that. So now
when he goes into sentencing, his attorneys are going to
make it clear and this judge already knows he never
had an opportunity to accept responsibility for what for what
he was actually guilty of. The man the Rico charges
crashed and burned and that was all he could.

Speaker 1 (12:08):
Ac It almost starts over again.

Speaker 2 (12:11):
It doesn't start over, but the judge considers the totality
of the case's history when it comes to sentencing. So
he has to impose a sentence which is enough to
impose punishment, to deter, to send a message, and to rehabilitate.
These are things that have to be balanced under the
sentencing guidelines. And so the judge is going to know
this guy couldn't take a plea without ending is without

(12:34):
essentially handing the US attorney the rest of his life
and hoping for the best. And if he would have
pled to the ricail count, he would have he would
have eaten substantial time. I would say a multiple of
what he faces now.

Speaker 1 (12:47):
My guess is Attorney Roger Banagtar, Thank you Roger for this.
In closing here, I got a question. Yeah, domestic abuser,
drug issues, the Swinger stuff and all of that, it
really swayed public opinion. And I'm saying I was swayed
all those press conferences and people coming forward underage and

(13:07):
when I heard all the way down to nine years old,
why did they do that? Is it attention getting or
does bad Boy and shun Combs have enough like mafia
shut down witnesses kind of influence and money here? Do
you think those the underage really existed? Did you believe
those press conferences or were you saying I'm going to
wait till the trial, let's see if they bring it forward,

(13:29):
because they didn't bring it.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
There was Yeah, to be very clear, there wasn't an
iota of evidence that children were involved in any of this.

Speaker 1 (13:36):
Can they be in trouble for that? Can he assume?
I mean, I mean there is that's a big accusation.
Nine years old involved in your sex parties.

Speaker 2 (13:46):
It's something that oftentimes you can never come back from.
An allegation of child abuse is something that you can't
that is permanent. I mean, that's something that you really
can't unring a bell from. He may have some remedies,
I don't really see them as being being viable because
ultimately he's going to have to go to trial.

Speaker 1 (14:03):
So that was all fake inside show stuff. Unless they
paid the witnesses off, I mean one or the other.

Speaker 2 (14:08):
You wouldn't You wouldn't need to pay witnesses off. Cassie
got paid twenty million bucks. You just testified the subpoena
power of the court, and contempt is real. If the
US attorney wants to drag you into court and make
you testify, believe me, they've got the tools to do it.

Speaker 1 (14:22):
But if it were your nine year old, any parent
would be in the courtroom demanding justice or paid off.
And you don't need the parent. You don't need the parent.
I mean, they look if they're saying that this guy
abused these children.

Speaker 2 (14:37):
At his homes. They're terabytes, hundreds of terabytes of data
that they seize from these homes. Same thing with the
Epstein files. There's DVD loads of videos.

Speaker 1 (14:49):
Right.

Speaker 2 (14:49):
If this in fact exists, then that's what you play
in your opening statement. You don't wait for later. It's
not the bowl around the box. It's the foundation that
the house is built on. Because you lead with strength,
you lead with the best piece of evidence that you
have always in forever. Why Because that's when you have
the jury's attention. That's when you're the broker of truth.

(15:12):
That's when you build your case.

Speaker 1 (15:13):
If I hadn't been on vacation and was more of
my game, I would have gone back and played your
audio from two months ago where you basically said the
same thing that you said today because you predicted a game. True,
they didn't have it, they didn't have it, they didn't
have it. Well you got it. Thank you, man, Roger Banagdar.
Always a pleasure, sir, Appreciate your time, sir. This is
the Trevor Kerry Show on the Valley's Power Talk. It's

(15:36):
going to South Carolina to talk to black voters. Yeah,
that's what's on the schedule. We'll see if the fire
over in the Santa Maria area is spreading on the
central coast in that area, if that'll keep Newsome in
state or not. I just had a real hoot. You
never heard me use that word, have you. It was
a real hoot when I read ABC thirty dot COM's

(15:57):
Monica Madden's little article here. Let me just teach you
the headline that caught my eye. California Governor Gavin Newsom's
approval rating surges after class with President Donald Trump. You
see Irvine poll finds Wow, surging because he stood up
to Trump. Let me go on two three, four, six

(16:17):
paragraphs down. This is what the guy let's see here.
He's from Irvine, the guy that did the polling. He said,
I think some of it is that they're pleased to
see someone stand up to Trump, and they like the
positions that the governor has taken. We need to wait
and see whether this says any lasting effect on the governor.

(16:38):
I would say, hey, Gold, list them, list the positions.
What are they?

Speaker 4 (16:42):
Then?

Speaker 1 (16:43):
The next paragraph says, the poll shows voters remain deeply
dissatisfied with broader issues facing California, with sixty percent of
all voters surveyed saying they believe the state's on the
wrong track. So we're down to like halfway through this article,
we learned the headline could be sixty percent of Californians say,

(17:07):
like John Candy, plane strains and automobiles. Remember they were driving,
You're going the wrong way. Remember the people yelling at
yah sixty percent of the state. He's yelling, you're going
the wrong way.

Speaker 5 (17:21):
No.

Speaker 1 (17:22):
Newsom's approval rating surges after clash with President Trump. He
goes on to say, this is the guy to the survey,
Californians are just not happy right now. Wait, the approval
ratings are surging. People are annoyed. They don't like the
direction of the state. Well, how do you put a

(17:42):
headline and then put the rest of that in that article?
I think it's called fake news. Let's see. Congressman Sam Lecardo,
Democrat here in California, said there is no doubt that
Newsom is going to run for president, and he's been
running for forty years. Yeah, he kind of has, hadn't he.

(18:03):
Look what Newsom is coming out up. Joe Pollock at
Breitbart had an article about how Newsom is copying Trump.
Why is he copying Trump? Because now he's coming out
and saying, we got to make America rake again. He
means the forest, the force. He said, California manages three
percent of the state land. The rest of it is

(18:26):
a federal government managed his fifty seven percent of the
forest here in California. So he said the President needs
to do more to back up his rhetoric with investments
and resources to roll back the cuts. Look at him now,
acting like he is. He's involved with the force, using
the words make America rake again. He wants forty billion

(18:51):
dollars in aid to deal with the LA fires from
the federal government, and he signed on with fifty million
dollars of our state taxes here to fight Trump administration. Guys,
that's deranged. We got a deranged governor Trump. What did
I say, Trump? Oh, we got Trump derangement syndrome and
Trump demonic syndrome. Yeah. Newsom's bordering up in the demonic Now,

(19:14):
it's like in his soul and spirit. Gavin, your state's
on fire. Sorry, I got to go test the waters
for a presidential run. They're saying he's gonna be in
South Carolina's supposed to be there tomorrow and Wednesday. He said,
Newsom's gonna meet with voters in the most economically challenged
and environmentally vulnerable counties. South Carolina is an early primary

(19:39):
state there as Well. Yeah, he's done, he's checked out.
So these issues and these not that he would solve
them at all. Well, hold on, let's are we having
some Let's go to the newsroom. Let's I knew some

(20:00):
speaking again. You remember this one, don't you. This is
an oldie, but a goodie, not that long ago. Let's
go to the governor. Is he ready? I don't know.

Speaker 4 (20:11):
Okay, we are working on the audio. I'm not sure
if that's on the governor's in, but we're working to
get that production up and running for you so you
can listen in. We certainly will have excerpts of what
the governor has said, but we're efforting to get thee
audio working so we can hear the government. Governor knew

(20:33):
some speech.

Speaker 2 (20:33):
We're not going to go back to normal.

Speaker 1 (20:35):
No, We've got the governor who's ready.

Speaker 3 (20:36):
Just as other failed dictators have done in the past. Look,
this isn't just about protests. Here in Los Angeles, when
Donald Trump sought blanket comedy made that order. He made
that order applied in this state.

Speaker 1 (20:52):
This is real, guys, this happened.

Speaker 3 (20:54):
This is about all of us is about. This is
any maybe first Californy.

Speaker 6 (20:59):
But clearly try building a tram.

Speaker 1 (21:10):
This is the Trevor Cherry show, on the Valley's Power Talk.
He abused, he rates underage girls, overage girls, had an
island where he would fly him to no clientless whatsoever.
So charges were brought. He was in prison. Zell Maxwell

(21:35):
is in prison for sex trafficking for underage kids. But
they were the only two involved. That's what our government's
telling us. That's what the new FBI director Cash be
Tell's telling us. Deputy Director Dan Bongino's telling us. Now,
US attorney Alina Haba she was part of the Trump

(21:56):
administration fighting all his charges when they're trying to bankrupt
in the campaign. Here's what she said back in February.

Speaker 5 (22:03):
Here in this case, in Epstein's case, it is incredibly disturbing.
We have flight logs, we have information, names that will
come out.

Speaker 1 (22:11):
Is it going to be shocking?

Speaker 5 (22:12):
I don't see how it's not shocking that there were
so many individuals that were hidden and kept secret and
not been held accountable. Let's talk about the reverse. I
believe in accountability, so you have to now go through
your process.

Speaker 1 (22:30):
All right, let's go through our process, shall we. Either
she's lying or the FBI is now lying. What somebody's
lying here?

Speaker 5 (22:41):
Now I won't say they're guilty until they go through
their time in court. But again, now it's time for accountability.
We have seen for so many years, Pierce in this country,
many investigations, subpoenas, testimonies in Congress, et cetera, et cetera.
But there's a general frustration with accountability. We take it halfway,
we don't take it home. And I really believe that
now with Cash and Pam, there will be accountability.

Speaker 1 (23:02):
All right, let's go to Pam referencing Pam Bondi, the
Attorney General again. Remember the DOJFBI said there's no client list,
and he committed suicide as well. It's done, shut, done,
let's stop talking about it. President Trump praising the FBI
for getting all the criminals. And that's good. I'm glad

(23:23):
you're getting criminals, but don't deflect from what this situation is.
We are talking about child rape. And I was under
the impression that the number one law person in this
country had a little file that had names of child
rapists in it, and they were going to go arrest

(23:43):
these child rapists. It was on her desk.

Speaker 7 (23:48):
It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's
been a directive by President Trump. I'm reviewing that. 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 3 (24:03):
So so have you seen anything that you said, Oh.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
My gosh, not yet. Not yet. It's a directive from
the president. Even President said go find this. Congress Wellman
and a Paulina Luno of Florida said, all caps, this
is not weird or what the American people asked for.
Get us the information that we asked for.

Speaker 7 (24:27):
The FBI, he handed over a couple hundred pages of documents.
But you know, Sean, I gave them a deadline of
Friday at eight am to get us everything. And a
source had told me where the documents were being kept,
Southern District of New York. Shock. So we got them
all by, hopefully all of them Friday at eight am.

Speaker 1 (24:46):
Yeah, why wouldn't it have been one piece of paper
that said Jeffrey Epstein acted alone. He sesss traffic, prostitutes
and underage girls. He was his own pimp. There's nobody else.
So why do you need all these documents? Why do
you need the FBI to back up a truck with

(25:07):
if it was just Epstein? And there's no it doesn't exist,
There's no such thing.

Speaker 7 (25:10):
Thousands of pages of documents. I have the FBI going
through them, and Cash is also now that we have
cash here, it's a game changer, of course, and Cash
is going to Director Patel is going to get us
a detailed report as to why the FBI withheld all
of those documents.

Speaker 1 (25:27):
Well, that detailed report came out last night. Doj FBI
released this document, child predator Epstein did not have a
client list, He was not murdered, he committed suicide. Nothing
to see here, continue on paym.

Speaker 7 (25:41):
Sorry, you're looking at these documents, going, these aren't all
the Epstein files. You know, there were flight logs, there
were names and victims' names, and we're going, where's the
rest of the stuff. And that's what the FBI had
turned over to us. And so a source said, oh,
all this evidence is sitting in the Southern District of
New York. So based on that, I gave them the deadline.
Friday at eight, a truckload of evidence arrived. It's now

(26:05):
in the possession of the FBI.

Speaker 1 (26:06):
Truckload of evidence. Again, you need one page, actually maybe
a couple of sentences. Nothing to see here. Epstein acted alone.
Case closed. That is what they just told us.

Speaker 7 (26:23):
Cash is going to get me and himself really a
detailed report as to why all these documents and evidence
had been withheld. And you know, we're going to go
through it, go through it as fast as we can,
but go through it very cautiously to protect all the
victims of Epstein, because there are a lot of.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
Victa okay, a lot of victims. But just one guy
pilot fly me and all these girls to my island.
Let's go. There's no list, there's no flight logs, there's
no thousands of pages of the FBI hasn't.

Speaker 7 (26:54):
Had obviously, they haven't looked at the thousands of atches
of documents that they've just received Friday. But Cash has
team going through them, and it's always about protecting the victim.
But you know what we believe in transparency and America
has the right to know.

Speaker 1 (27:08):
We do have the right to know. Well's sten here
talk about transparency in honesty.

Speaker 7 (27:14):
You know, sadly these people don't believe in transparency. But
I think more unfortunately, I think a lot of them
don't believe in honesty. And it's a new day, it's
a new administration, and everything's going to come out to
the public. The public has a right to know. Americans
have a right to know.

Speaker 1 (27:30):
Well, Ms BONDI, we know that so many in the
swamp media protected these sexual abusers. We know that there
were powerful businessmen or politicians, prime ministers, world leaders. I
don't know how deep it goes. I can tell you
right now on that list, on that paperwork that came in,

(27:52):
thousands of pages, truckloads coming in. It wasn't just one dude.
Come on, this is beyond something is not adding up,
way beyond it.

Speaker 7 (28:05):
Really. It's not sad. It's infuriating that these people thought
that they could sit on this information, but they can't.
It's a new day, and we believe in transparency, and
it's going to come out.

Speaker 1 (28:18):
It's going to come out. Well, it didn't. It was
back in February. She said, the files are on my desk.
Later on right at the end of February, she announces files,
flight logs, and names are going to be released. Then
they released phase one of the files, two un her
plus pages that were mostly public already, and you had

(28:41):
the influencers out there with their binders waving them in
front like a spectacle over child rape again, reminding you
child rape. Then she said, I demand the Epstein files
by eight am. That was on February twenty eighth. On
March second, she claims the FBI misled her, but she
now has thousands of pages. On March thirteen, she says

(29:05):
she received a truckload. On April twenty eighth, a hidden recording,
she was quoted as saying the FBI reviews tens of
thousands of Epstein videos with children. On May seventh, publicly
states the FBI is reviewing tens of thousands of videos.

(29:25):
She denies any of these files are missing, and she
cites victim protection on this is why they're not talking
about it. Guys, tens of thousands of videos Epstein videos
with kids and it's just him, no other adults in
the room. And why we deserve to know is that well,
they're still out there able to pray on kids. More

(29:51):
files are coming, No, do see at Fox News he's
asking Secretary Press Secretary Levitt about what's going on here.
This doesn't seem right.

Speaker 8 (30:03):
So the FBI looks at the circumstances surrounding the debt
of Jeffrey Epstein. According to the report, this systematic review
revealed no incriminating client list. So what happened to the
Epstein client list that the Attorney General said she had
on her desk?

Speaker 9 (30:21):
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 8 (30:27):
Ahead, and Roberts said, dooj maybe releasing the list of
Jeffrey Epstein's clients.

Speaker 3 (30:31):
Will that really happen?

Speaker 8 (30:33):
And she said, it's sitting on my desk right now
to review.

Speaker 9 (30:36):
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.

Speaker 1 (30:47):
Yes, first time I'm going to say she's spinning. She's spinning.

Speaker 7 (30:50):
It's sitting on my desk right now. Review. That's been
a directive by President Trump.

Speaker 1 (30:55):
Yeah, and then Levitt continued on here not talking about Epstein.
This is a real polished Jeane Pierre. I'm going to
take you off on another track here somewhere. Let's get
away from what Doocey at Fox just asked me, and
I'm going to talk about all the good things that
they're doing again.

Speaker 9 (31:15):
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 the United States.

Speaker 1 (31:30):
It's good to hear, but what about epstein.

Speaker 9 (31:32):
Crime in 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.

Speaker 1 (31:40):
It's good to hear, what about EPs.

Speaker 9 (31:42):
Rector are committed to putting bad people behind bars where
they belong. That they promised an exhaustive review. That's what
they did. For any further details, I would refer you
to the Department of Justice.

Speaker 1 (31:52):
Yeah, okay, good, You're putting bad people behind bars. But
what about the child rapist. That's what we're talking about,
people that rape kids. This administration said they would bring
them to justice, and they had the proof, and now
you're going doesn't exist, not here, Carolyn.

Speaker 10 (32:11):
The DOJNFI now concluded there was no Jeffrey Epstein client list. Wait,
you tell Maggot supporters who say they want anyone involved
in Jeffrey Epstein's alleged crimes to be held accountable.

Speaker 9 (32:21):
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 the Trump 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

(32:44):
Jeffrey 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.
That's what they did and they provided the results of that.

Speaker 8 (33:05):
The assistant Trevor Jerry Show Mondo Valley's Power Dog.

Speaker 11 (33:10):
And the other thing we should do is you should
challenge these students. We should challenge students in these schools.
They have advanced placement programs in these schools.

Speaker 3 (33:17):
We have this notion that.

Speaker 11 (33:18):
Somehow, if you're poor, you cannot do it. Poor kids
are just as bright and just as talent as white kids.

Speaker 4 (33:25):
Oh, wealthy kids.

Speaker 1 (33:27):
Change that, change that there are good kids really mean it.

Speaker 2 (33:30):
But think how we think about it.

Speaker 1 (33:31):
Yeah, think about what you think about right. Yeah, it's
a flashback to old Joe Biden. There I got incorporating.
Every now and then something needs to feel a little
bit important. A suspect has been arrested and it was
DNA that linked into a series of rapes in Fresno County.
Chief Bendy Castle said fifty five year old Caesar Flores
arrested Tuesday morning of last week at his home in

(33:53):
Fresno County. It's the first genealogy based serial rapist case
here in Fresno. On the chief said, what they do
is they go find somebody that's related to somebody and
they narrow it all the way down where they can
go arrest into five year old Caesar Flores. They said
the rate took place around southwest Fresno and I said
chee Castle said Flores had approached to women in public.

(34:15):
They say maybe even targeted kids. Sex crimes against miners. Yeah,
breakthrough this DNA technology. They called on genealogy experts and
they match it up. Fascinating stuff. YouTube's got them all
filled up. If you're into that kind of thing, or
if you're not, it's kind of interesting to go look at.
Amazing how they are now doing this. He was booked

(34:35):
into the Fresno County Jail several charges related to sex
crimes against adults and kids under the age of fourteen
and ten. Bail set at two million. He could face
up to two hundred and sixty four years in prison.

Speaker 8 (34:47):
They assisted Trevor Jerry show Mondo Valle's Power Dog