Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Remember when the now-former AG went into the Congress and informed Representatives that DOJ had traced the search/keystroke histories each Member had used, while they reviewed the unredacted versions of pending Epstein releases earlier this year? Now today, AG nominee and former Bondi Deputy states “there are no closed...

TheQNewsPatriot's profile picture

SGAnon

123,642 subscribers

15,588 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

After reviewing some of the UN-REDACTED Epstein files at the DOJ today, Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna say at least six men are implicated in the files, with one of them being a "prominent person" and another being "pretty high up" in a foreign government. Khanna pointed out that they found the six names by just reviewing files for two hours. Massie says he will discuss the names on the floor of the House of Representatives where he has legal protections. DOJ set up a room where members of Congress can review the Epstein files without redactions; however, members have already complained today that there are only four computers and that some of the files remain redacted. Khanna and Massie also noted that some of the files arrived at the DOJ from the FBI with redactions already applied, and that their legislation requires the FBI to remove those redactions; the FBI operates under the Department of Justice. Massie also said that the "algorithm" the DOJ used to process redactions over-redacted the names of women.
1:18

After reviewing some of the UN-REDACTED Epstein files at the DOJ today, Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna say at least six men are implicated in the files, with one of them being a "prominent person" and another being "pretty high up" in a foreign government. Khanna pointed out that they found the six names by just reviewing files for two hours. Massie says he will discuss the names on the floor of the House of Representatives where he has legal protections. DOJ set up a room where members of Congress can review the Epstein files without redactions; however, members have already complained today that there are only four computers and that some of the files remain redacted. Khanna and Massie also noted that some of the files arrived at the DOJ from the FBI with redactions already applied, and that their legislation requires the FBI to remove those redactions; the FBI operates under the Department of Justice. Massie also said that the "algorithm" the DOJ used to process redactions over-redacted the names of women.

Yashar Ali 🐘

139,509 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Epstein victims will compile and release their own version of the Epstein client list, free of outside, foreign, and government influence. Epstein victim, Lisa Phillips, gave her testimony today and revealed that the Epstein victims/survivors will get together and compile all Jeffery Epstein associates and abusers to create and release a list to the public. The list will be free from outside influence and contain who was seen and not seen or involved in nefarious activities including trafficking and the sexual abuse of women and children in regards to Jeffery Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. This is a monumental move outside of U.S. and foreign influence and what needs to be done and will be one of the most important pieces of information regarding the Epstein case to out all of his associates and abusers who were involved in the largest trafficking, abuse, and blackmail operations in the world. These women must be protected at all costs and every single person mentioned must be investigated and held accountable if guilty of crimes involving the trafficking and sexual abuse of women and children. This all needs to come out and end now. Nothing will ever change, get better, and trust will never be had again until all is exposed with severe consequences for the ones accountable and everyone knows it.
2:13

Epstein victims will compile and release their own version of the Epstein client list, free of outside, foreign, and government influence. Epstein victim, Lisa Phillips, gave her testimony today and revealed that the Epstein victims/survivors will get together and compile all Jeffery Epstein associates and abusers to create and release a list to the public. The list will be free from outside influence and contain who was seen and not seen or involved in nefarious activities including trafficking and the sexual abuse of women and children in regards to Jeffery Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. This is a monumental move outside of U.S. and foreign influence and what needs to be done and will be one of the most important pieces of information regarding the Epstein case to out all of his associates and abusers who were involved in the largest trafficking, abuse, and blackmail operations in the world. These women must be protected at all costs and every single person mentioned must be investigated and held accountable if guilty of crimes involving the trafficking and sexual abuse of women and children. This all needs to come out and end now. Nothing will ever change, get better, and trust will never be had again until all is exposed with severe consequences for the ones accountable and everyone knows it.

The SCIF

263,380 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

If I could question Pam Bondi in Congress, this is what I’d ask her: Last February, when you handed conservative commentators (including me) who were visiting the White House for meetings with cabinet members the infamous white Epstein binders, did any Trump admin members besides your team know you were going to distribute those binders? If so, who? You made the Epstein binder cover sheet on that binder, correct? The one that bragged about the Trump administration being the most transparent administration in history? Yes or no? When you handed out those binders to those conservatives, had you even viewed the contents of those binders? Had you looked at those pages? Had you read the documents? Had you reviewed any of the supposed SDNY materials that the supposed whistleblower told you that the SDNY was hiding from you? Truckloads and truckloads, you told the conservative commentators, including me, at the White House, the juicy stuff, the dirty stuff. Had you looked at any of it yourself? Had any member of your team looked at it? Had you looked at the client list that you claimed, while on Fox News, was sitting on your desk? Who told you that the FBI was going through thousands of videos of child sexual abuse material? This was in late spring and early summer 2025. Why in July of 2025 did you say there were no more files coming? Period. Did anyone up to it, including President Trump, direct you on how to speak about the Epstein files, or whether or not to be transparent about the contents, or whether or not to release them? Do you agree with FBI Director Kash Patel and now former Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino, the statements that they made to Maria Bartiromo on Fox News last summer when they stated unequivocally that Epstein killed himself? Do you agree with that assessment? Have you viewed the video the flash of orange that appeared to enter Jeffrey Epstein's prison tier at the Metropolitan Correctional Center at 10:39 p.m. on the night before Epstein was found dead? This prison activity log was just released to the public, yet DOJ has been in possession of it for years. The FBI’s own report says that flash of orange was possibly an inmate. Was any further investigation done about the identity of this person? Was there any investigation into an agent of the FBI changing the camera at the Metropolitan Correctional Center following Epstein's death in a way that erased the recorded footage? Has your team at the DOJ done any further investigation into Jeffrey Epstein or into the circumstances surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's death, or have you relied on data, information, and investigative findings that had already been conducted by your predecessors? This is one of the most critical questions of all. And of course, when will the remaining 3 million documents be released? This 3 million that was released last week is only half of what we expect to see. Will there be any further investigations or prosecutions? These are the questions that should have been asked of Attorney General Pam Bondi. These are the questions that we need answers to.
4:24

If I could question Pam Bondi in Congress, this is what I’d ask her: Last February, when you handed conservative commentators (including me) who were visiting the White House for meetings with cabinet members the infamous white Epstein binders, did any Trump admin members besides your team know you were going to distribute those binders? If so, who? You made the Epstein binder cover sheet on that binder, correct? The one that bragged about the Trump administration being the most transparent administration in history? Yes or no? When you handed out those binders to those conservatives, had you even viewed the contents of those binders? Had you looked at those pages? Had you read the documents? Had you reviewed any of the supposed SDNY materials that the supposed whistleblower told you that the SDNY was hiding from you? Truckloads and truckloads, you told the conservative commentators, including me, at the White House, the juicy stuff, the dirty stuff. Had you looked at any of it yourself? Had any member of your team looked at it? Had you looked at the client list that you claimed, while on Fox News, was sitting on your desk? Who told you that the FBI was going through thousands of videos of child sexual abuse material? This was in late spring and early summer 2025. Why in July of 2025 did you say there were no more files coming? Period. Did anyone up to it, including President Trump, direct you on how to speak about the Epstein files, or whether or not to be transparent about the contents, or whether or not to release them? Do you agree with FBI Director Kash Patel and now former Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino, the statements that they made to Maria Bartiromo on Fox News last summer when they stated unequivocally that Epstein killed himself? Do you agree with that assessment? Have you viewed the video the flash of orange that appeared to enter Jeffrey Epstein's prison tier at the Metropolitan Correctional Center at 10:39 p.m. on the night before Epstein was found dead? This prison activity log was just released to the public, yet DOJ has been in possession of it for years. The FBI’s own report says that flash of orange was possibly an inmate. Was any further investigation done about the identity of this person? Was there any investigation into an agent of the FBI changing the camera at the Metropolitan Correctional Center following Epstein's death in a way that erased the recorded footage? Has your team at the DOJ done any further investigation into Jeffrey Epstein or into the circumstances surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's death, or have you relied on data, information, and investigative findings that had already been conducted by your predecessors? This is one of the most critical questions of all. And of course, when will the remaining 3 million documents be released? This 3 million that was released last week is only half of what we expect to see. Will there be any further investigations or prosecutions? These are the questions that should have been asked of Attorney General Pam Bondi. These are the questions that we need answers to.

Liz Wheeler

84,849 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

SENATE DEMOCRATS just OBJECTED to approve the release of ALL EPSTEIN FILES. What are they trying to hide? This should tell you everything you need to know. Senate Republicans with a new resolution demanded state and federal courts immediately unseal all Epstein documents. AG Pam Bondi and President Trump both already called on all judges to release all the files. This can no longer be blamed on either of them. Ask yourself why Democrats are OBJECTING and BLOCKING the release of the Epstein files, again? First it was the judges, now this. This action alone should tell you everything you ever needed to know about the Democrats about the Epstein files and in general. Now you know why Trump always points at the Democrats when he says "human traffickers" in Congress when he's speaking.
1:53

SENATE DEMOCRATS just OBJECTED to approve the release of ALL EPSTEIN FILES. What are they trying to hide? This should tell you everything you need to know. Senate Republicans with a new resolution demanded state and federal courts immediately unseal all Epstein documents. AG Pam Bondi and President Trump both already called on all judges to release all the files. This can no longer be blamed on either of them. Ask yourself why Democrats are OBJECTING and BLOCKING the release of the Epstein files, again? First it was the judges, now this. This action alone should tell you everything you ever needed to know about the Democrats about the Epstein files and in general. Now you know why Trump always points at the Democrats when he says "human traffickers" in Congress when he's speaking.

The SCIF

67,770 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Wolff: Now Epstein’s explanation for why this friendship ended is as follows. In 2004, Epstein believed himself to be the high bidder on a piece of real estate in Palm Beach—a house. His bid was $36 million. He took his friend Trump around to see the house, to advise him on how to move the swimming pool. Trump thereupon went around Epstein’s back and bid $40 million for the house—and got the property. Epstein, who was well acquainted and in fact deeply involved with Trump’s scattered finances, understood that he didn’t have $40 million to pay for this house. Now, if that was the case, it was someone else’s $40 million. At the time, Epstein believed this to be the $40 million of a Russian oligarch by the name of Rybolovlev. Less than two years later, this same house that Trump had bought for $40 million was sold for $95 million—and it was in fact sold to Mr. Rybolovlev. This is all a red flag of money laundering. And what Epstein did—and he was furious about losing this house—I mean, there’s something about these guys, these men, that nothing rouses them so much as a real estate betrayal. Epstein, after this—the sale of this house, after Trump went around his back, got this house—Epstein began to threaten with lawsuits, with going to the press and saying that Trump was a frontman for a money laundering deal. Trump panics at this point, and Epstein believed—that it was Trump who went to the police and, as Epstein said, dropped the dime on him. That is to say, informed the police of what was going on. And an investigation began, and all of Epstein’s legal problems for the next 15 years began to unfold. This story about this piece of real estate and their falling out was first published in June 2019. It’s published actually in my book Siege, the second book I had written about the Trump White House. Epstein had recounted this story to me. I put it in this book. Epstein, at that moment, was in Paris. He read the book. He called me with some alarm, and he said he was afraid that he might have said too much. Three weeks later, he returned to the United States from Paris and was promptly arrested on the tarmac of Teterboro Airport in New Jersey when his plane landed.
4:12

Wolff: Now Epstein’s explanation for why this friendship ended is as follows. In 2004, Epstein believed himself to be the high bidder on a piece of real estate in Palm Beach—a house. His bid was $36 million. He took his friend Trump around to see the house, to advise him on how to move the swimming pool. Trump thereupon went around Epstein’s back and bid $40 million for the house—and got the property. Epstein, who was well acquainted and in fact deeply involved with Trump’s scattered finances, understood that he didn’t have $40 million to pay for this house. Now, if that was the case, it was someone else’s $40 million. At the time, Epstein believed this to be the $40 million of a Russian oligarch by the name of Rybolovlev. Less than two years later, this same house that Trump had bought for $40 million was sold for $95 million—and it was in fact sold to Mr. Rybolovlev. This is all a red flag of money laundering. And what Epstein did—and he was furious about losing this house—I mean, there’s something about these guys, these men, that nothing rouses them so much as a real estate betrayal. Epstein, after this—the sale of this house, after Trump went around his back, got this house—Epstein began to threaten with lawsuits, with going to the press and saying that Trump was a frontman for a money laundering deal. Trump panics at this point, and Epstein believed—that it was Trump who went to the police and, as Epstein said, dropped the dime on him. That is to say, informed the police of what was going on. And an investigation began, and all of Epstein’s legal problems for the next 15 years began to unfold. This story about this piece of real estate and their falling out was first published in June 2019. It’s published actually in my book Siege, the second book I had written about the Trump White House. Epstein had recounted this story to me. I put it in this book. Epstein, at that moment, was in Paris. He read the book. He called me with some alarm, and he said he was afraid that he might have said too much. Three weeks later, he returned to the United States from Paris and was promptly arrested on the tarmac of Teterboro Airport in New Jersey when his plane landed.

Acyn

1,617,781 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Brown: Blanche says the DOJ is essentially done with the Epstein investigation and that they're moving on. Swalwell: The victims aren't done. Democratic, and some Republican members of congress aren't done. It's all going to come out. We can do it now in a bipartisan way, or we can do it in about nine months when we are in the majority.
2:08

Brown: Blanche says the DOJ is essentially done with the Epstein investigation and that they're moving on. Swalwell: The victims aren't done. Democratic, and some Republican members of congress aren't done. It's all going to come out. We can do it now in a bipartisan way, or we can do it in about nine months when we are in the majority.

Acyn

42,531 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

BREAKING: FBI REVIEWING THOUSANDS OF VIDEOS OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN WITH CHILDREN & CHILD PORN! Attorney General Pam Bondi said today the FBI is diligently going through thousands of Jeffrey Epstein tapes that contain him with children and child porn and that there’s hundreds of victims. "There are tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn and hundreds of victims,” Bondi said. “The FBI is diligently going through that." People who are bitching about the delay of the files need to take a seat. If you want to see justice, this needs to be done right and the identity of these victims must be protected! Not only does it take time to go through thousands of videos, the agents tasked at reviewing the tapes have the worst job in the world as viewing the rape and torture of kids is soul crushing and will no doubt leave these agents with PTSD. Pray for the investigators, the victims and for justice!
0:33

Sensitive content

BREAKING: FBI REVIEWING THOUSANDS OF VIDEOS OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN WITH CHILDREN & CHILD PORN! Attorney General Pam Bondi said today the FBI is diligently going through thousands of Jeffrey Epstein tapes that contain him with children and child porn and that there’s hundreds of victims. "There are tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn and hundreds of victims,” Bondi said. “The FBI is diligently going through that." People who are bitching about the delay of the files need to take a seat. If you want to see justice, this needs to be done right and the identity of these victims must be protected! Not only does it take time to go through thousands of videos, the agents tasked at reviewing the tapes have the worst job in the world as viewing the rape and torture of kids is soul crushing and will no doubt leave these agents with PTSD. Pray for the investigators, the victims and for justice!

LIZ CROKIN

396,917 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Rep Nancy Mace is exposes it was “LEADERSHIP in BOTH PARTIES that worked to kill the vote to make the Congress sexual harassment slush fund public She says up to $5 million tax dollars per year is being used to pay out these sexual harassment hush money “How much of a problem is this in Congress of sexual assault, sexual harassment claims from sitting members of Congress against their staffers? Is this a huge issue?” Nancy Mace “Well, clearly it's enough for LEADERSHIP in BOTH parties to hide it from the American people — I had to fight yesterday, even to get the slush fund subpoena done on an over, and that money only goes to 2018. But up until 2018, we're talking about tens of millions of dollars from $1 to $5 million a year paid out on sexual harassment claims.” “$10 tens of millions of dollars is paid out to settle these claims and nobody will allow them” “The same members of Congress that have been screaming nonstop for the full release of the Epstein files, the ones that didn't do anything about it while they were in Congress, of course those same people just voted in mass to kill a bill, forcing the house ethics panel to release all sexual harassment allegations that have been made against themselves.”
5:52

Rep Nancy Mace is exposes it was “LEADERSHIP in BOTH PARTIES that worked to kill the vote to make the Congress sexual harassment slush fund public She says up to $5 million tax dollars per year is being used to pay out these sexual harassment hush money “How much of a problem is this in Congress of sexual assault, sexual harassment claims from sitting members of Congress against their staffers? Is this a huge issue?” Nancy Mace “Well, clearly it's enough for LEADERSHIP in BOTH parties to hide it from the American people — I had to fight yesterday, even to get the slush fund subpoena done on an over, and that money only goes to 2018. But up until 2018, we're talking about tens of millions of dollars from $1 to $5 million a year paid out on sexual harassment claims.” “$10 tens of millions of dollars is paid out to settle these claims and nobody will allow them” “The same members of Congress that have been screaming nonstop for the full release of the Epstein files, the ones that didn't do anything about it while they were in Congress, of course those same people just voted in mass to kill a bill, forcing the house ethics panel to release all sexual harassment allegations that have been made against themselves.”

Wall Street Apes

45,357 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Todd Blanche Said DOJ Excluded CSAM, Physical Abuse & Content Depicting Death (Snuff Films?) From Epstein Release; Names of Politicians & Government Officials In Files Will Go To The House & Senate! Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced today that the DOJ released more than 3 million pages from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation under the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed by President Trump. He said that a lot of the pornographic content on Epstein’s devices were not all taken by him and there were certain exclusions and redactions to this release. - He said that any depiction of CSAM or child pornography were excluded. - He also said that anything that would jeopardize an active investigation was excluded. This implies there are active investigations. When Blanche was later asked if there are active investigations, he did not confirm or deny this. - He also said anything that depicts death, physical abuse or injury was also not produced. This implies that Epstein not only had CSAM, he also had photos and/or videos of torture and possibly murder aka snuff films in his possession. - Blanche also said under the Epstein Files Transparency Act the DOJ has to submit to House and Senate committees a list of all government officials and politically exposed persons. The world is finding out how dark and evil this rabbit-hole is. No one can say good people did not try to warn them for years. TICK TOCK!
2:30

Todd Blanche Said DOJ Excluded CSAM, Physical Abuse & Content Depicting Death (Snuff Films?) From Epstein Release; Names of Politicians & Government Officials In Files Will Go To The House & Senate! Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced today that the DOJ released more than 3 million pages from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation under the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed by President Trump. He said that a lot of the pornographic content on Epstein’s devices were not all taken by him and there were certain exclusions and redactions to this release. - He said that any depiction of CSAM or child pornography were excluded. - He also said that anything that would jeopardize an active investigation was excluded. This implies there are active investigations. When Blanche was later asked if there are active investigations, he did not confirm or deny this. - He also said anything that depicts death, physical abuse or injury was also not produced. This implies that Epstein not only had CSAM, he also had photos and/or videos of torture and possibly murder aka snuff films in his possession. - Blanche also said under the Epstein Files Transparency Act the DOJ has to submit to House and Senate committees a list of all government officials and politically exposed persons. The world is finding out how dark and evil this rabbit-hole is. No one can say good people did not try to warn them for years. TICK TOCK!

LIZ CROKIN

182,199 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

To all those who did a 180 on the Epstein files, who viciously lambasted and excoriated Thomas Massie for his efforts to compel the release of those documents and give a voice to the victims… Understand that each and every insult you hurled against Massie for those efforts, you have now implicitly and effectively hurled against the First Lady. All because you had no courage and integrity to stand by your principles, and instead went with your new marching orders. You should all be ashamed of yourselves - in the unlikely event that you have that degree of introspection in the first place.
1:13

To all those who did a 180 on the Epstein files, who viciously lambasted and excoriated Thomas Massie for his efforts to compel the release of those documents and give a voice to the victims… Understand that each and every insult you hurled against Massie for those efforts, you have now implicitly and effectively hurled against the First Lady. All because you had no courage and integrity to stand by your principles, and instead went with your new marching orders. You should all be ashamed of yourselves - in the unlikely event that you have that degree of introspection in the first place.

Viva Frei

116,670 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Lydia Moynihan on the latest Epstein files drop: “I thought there was a very interesting email between Epstein and Michael Wolff. And Michael Wolff says to Epstein, if you have anything juicy about Trump to change the narrative, this was back, I believe, in the first term, now would be the time to do it because Epstein was coming under fire.” “If Epstein had something juicy, he would have loved to change the narrative and reveal it. And I would note that all of the claims that you made in the intro, were, as you mentioned, from unverified sources. They were looked into and those complainants were deemed not credible. And there were multiple incidents with those folks involving police and psychiatric evaluations.” “So look, I think if anything, this shows that Epstein didn't have anything that d*mning where he would have released it. And again, if Biden, who his DOJ did everything they could to put him in jail for four years, if they'd had any inkling or any tidbit that was damning, I think we would know that by now.”
0:50

Lydia Moynihan on the latest Epstein files drop: “I thought there was a very interesting email between Epstein and Michael Wolff. And Michael Wolff says to Epstein, if you have anything juicy about Trump to change the narrative, this was back, I believe, in the first term, now would be the time to do it because Epstein was coming under fire.” “If Epstein had something juicy, he would have loved to change the narrative and reveal it. And I would note that all of the claims that you made in the intro, were, as you mentioned, from unverified sources. They were looked into and those complainants were deemed not credible. And there were multiple incidents with those folks involving police and psychiatric evaluations.” “So look, I think if anything, this shows that Epstein didn't have anything that d*mning where he would have released it. And again, if Biden, who his DOJ did everything they could to put him in jail for four years, if they'd had any inkling or any tidbit that was damning, I think we would know that by now.”

RedWave Press

702,192 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Failure To Release Epstein Files “Could Cost Us The Majority,” Worry Republicans “The people telling the president he could stop this [legislation] gave him awful advice,” says member of Congress Many in the MAGA movement responded with outrage and upset last July, following President Trump’s declaration in a cabinet meeting, and in subsequent social media posts, that there was nothing of importance in the large number of Jeffrey Epstein files that the FBI and Department of Justice are still holding. Those files allegedly include the names of individuals who participated in or were trapped in a sex blackmail operation tied to the US Intelligence Community, the CIA, and Israeli intelligence. Now, Rep. Thomas Massie’s (R-Ky.) is close to gathering a final needed 218th signature on a “discharge petition,” which would require a vote on the H.R.4405 - Epstein Files Transparency Act. That Act would mandate the FBI and Justice Department release the Epstein files as early as next month. The legislation explicitly states that personal embarrassment is not a reason for the FBI or DOJ to withhold documents from the public. “This vote is coming,” a Republican member of Congress told Public, “and it will pass the House with flying colors. This is inevitable. The people telling the president he could stop this gave him awful advice.” All of the individuals who spoke to Public were Republicans, and several suggested they feared the impact of the White House’s strategy on their party. “This is sucking the air out of the room and taking attention away from the other great things the administration is doing,” one member of the Republican conference said. Said another, “This is the behavior that could cost us the majority.” These comments were made to Public before the release of an interview with a former Justice Department investigator who claimed, to an undercover reporter working with James O’Keefe, that former President Bill Clinton was on Epstein’s plane when girls were being raped, and that Epstein worked for both the CIA and the Israeli government. In response to a query from Public, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said, “Democrats and the media knew about Epstein and his victims for years and did nothing to help them while President Trump was calling for transparency, and is now delivering on it with thousands of pages of documents as part of the ongoing Oversight investigation.” It is possible that the Files do not contain any significant new information. FBI Director Kash Patel last week told the Senate that he had no evidence that Epstein was trafficking women for anyone other than himself. And some journalists have pointed out inconsistencies in claims made by alleged Epstein victims. But if there is nothing of significance in the Epstein Files, then it is not clear why the Trump administration has sought to prevent their release. The explanation from the Trump administration for why the files can’t be released has shifted. Patel told Congress that the Epstein files were constrained by limited search warrants from 2006 to 2007, and that non-prosecution agreements hindered future investigations. However, those constraints only apply to the Southern District of Florida, not to the Southern District of New York. Epstein had homes in both states. In the hearing, Rep. Massie said he had evidence that the FBI had documents naming at least 20 men, including Jess Staley, CEO of Barclay’s Bank, and a “Hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars, one royal prince, one high profile individual in the music industry, one very prominent banker, one high profile government official, one high profile former politician, one owner of a car company in Italy, one rock star, one magician, at least six billionaires.” In August, the New York Times published photographs showing two hidden surveillance cameras in Epstein’s New York apartment. One of them pointed at a bed in a bedroom. Republicans and Democrats alike panned FBI Director Kash Patel’s testimony relating to Epstein last week. “Patel either doesn’t have operational control over this or he does and is using terms of art like ‘credible evidence’ to get around it,” said a House member. Earlier this month, Republicans on the House Rules Committee rejected an effort to put the Epstein Files Transparency Act to a floor vote. And, notes Axios, House Speaker Mike Johnson has, in the past, “tucked language in party-line procedural measures to kill” past petitions, and could try to do so again. But Johnson “faced blowback when he employed the tactic” last spring, said Axios, and the House Rules Committee Chair told reporters that her panel would not block a floor vote on the petition. According to another Republican member of Congress, “The members who voted against [allowing a vote on the Epstein Files bill] got hammered back home and were pissed. They don’t want to take a ‘no’ vote again.” In response, “West Wing staffers” at the White House have been aggressively demanding and threatening the handful of Republican Congressmembers who have joined Massie in signing the discharge opinion.... Please subscribe now to support Public's independent investigative journalism, read the rest of the article, and watch the full video!
6:48

Failure To Release Epstein Files “Could Cost Us The Majority,” Worry Republicans “The people telling the president he could stop this [legislation] gave him awful advice,” says member of Congress Many in the MAGA movement responded with outrage and upset last July, following President Trump’s declaration in a cabinet meeting, and in subsequent social media posts, that there was nothing of importance in the large number of Jeffrey Epstein files that the FBI and Department of Justice are still holding. Those files allegedly include the names of individuals who participated in or were trapped in a sex blackmail operation tied to the US Intelligence Community, the CIA, and Israeli intelligence. Now, Rep. Thomas Massie’s (R-Ky.) is close to gathering a final needed 218th signature on a “discharge petition,” which would require a vote on the H.R.4405 - Epstein Files Transparency Act. That Act would mandate the FBI and Justice Department release the Epstein files as early as next month. The legislation explicitly states that personal embarrassment is not a reason for the FBI or DOJ to withhold documents from the public. “This vote is coming,” a Republican member of Congress told Public, “and it will pass the House with flying colors. This is inevitable. The people telling the president he could stop this gave him awful advice.” All of the individuals who spoke to Public were Republicans, and several suggested they feared the impact of the White House’s strategy on their party. “This is sucking the air out of the room and taking attention away from the other great things the administration is doing,” one member of the Republican conference said. Said another, “This is the behavior that could cost us the majority.” These comments were made to Public before the release of an interview with a former Justice Department investigator who claimed, to an undercover reporter working with James O’Keefe, that former President Bill Clinton was on Epstein’s plane when girls were being raped, and that Epstein worked for both the CIA and the Israeli government. In response to a query from Public, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said, “Democrats and the media knew about Epstein and his victims for years and did nothing to help them while President Trump was calling for transparency, and is now delivering on it with thousands of pages of documents as part of the ongoing Oversight investigation.” It is possible that the Files do not contain any significant new information. FBI Director Kash Patel last week told the Senate that he had no evidence that Epstein was trafficking women for anyone other than himself. And some journalists have pointed out inconsistencies in claims made by alleged Epstein victims. But if there is nothing of significance in the Epstein Files, then it is not clear why the Trump administration has sought to prevent their release. The explanation from the Trump administration for why the files can’t be released has shifted. Patel told Congress that the Epstein files were constrained by limited search warrants from 2006 to 2007, and that non-prosecution agreements hindered future investigations. However, those constraints only apply to the Southern District of Florida, not to the Southern District of New York. Epstein had homes in both states. In the hearing, Rep. Massie said he had evidence that the FBI had documents naming at least 20 men, including Jess Staley, CEO of Barclay’s Bank, and a “Hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars, one royal prince, one high profile individual in the music industry, one very prominent banker, one high profile government official, one high profile former politician, one owner of a car company in Italy, one rock star, one magician, at least six billionaires.” In August, the New York Times published photographs showing two hidden surveillance cameras in Epstein’s New York apartment. One of them pointed at a bed in a bedroom. Republicans and Democrats alike panned FBI Director Kash Patel’s testimony relating to Epstein last week. “Patel either doesn’t have operational control over this or he does and is using terms of art like ‘credible evidence’ to get around it,” said a House member. Earlier this month, Republicans on the House Rules Committee rejected an effort to put the Epstein Files Transparency Act to a floor vote. And, notes Axios, House Speaker Mike Johnson has, in the past, “tucked language in party-line procedural measures to kill” past petitions, and could try to do so again. But Johnson “faced blowback when he employed the tactic” last spring, said Axios, and the House Rules Committee Chair told reporters that her panel would not block a floor vote on the petition. According to another Republican member of Congress, “The members who voted against [allowing a vote on the Epstein Files bill] got hammered back home and were pissed. They don’t want to take a ‘no’ vote again.” In response, “West Wing staffers” at the White House have been aggressively demanding and threatening the handful of Republican Congressmembers who have joined Massie in signing the discharge opinion.... Please subscribe now to support Public's independent investigative journalism, read the rest of the article, and watch the full video!

Michael Shellenberger

47,898 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Rep James Comer holds up the infamous photo of Bill Clinton in a dress found in Epstein’s home and explains that Bill nor his wife did not (today) and will now show up for the Epstein related Subpoena’s. “Epstein visited the White House 17 times while Bill Clinton was President” Just had to be 17 again… weird how that number keeps popping up, right?
2:01

Rep James Comer holds up the infamous photo of Bill Clinton in a dress found in Epstein’s home and explains that Bill nor his wife did not (today) and will now show up for the Epstein related Subpoena’s. “Epstein visited the White House 17 times while Bill Clinton was President” Just had to be 17 again… weird how that number keeps popping up, right?

MJTruthUltra

33,644 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Rep. Nancy Mace Exposes Taxpayer-Funded Slush Fund That May Have Enabled Eric Swalwell's Sexual Depravity Starting in 1997, Congress quietly used a secret fund to pay off victims of sexual harassment and misconduct with over $18 million of our tax dollars — while keeping the names of the accused members hidden from the public. Mace is trying to force the release of the records so Americans can see who used it — but her resolution was voted down 357-65. "Up until 2018, there was a slush fund that taxpayers paid for that could settle disputes and sexual harassment by members of Congress and their employees or other Hill staffers, for example." We need to know exactly which members used this secret fund that we financed. Mace says there are definitely more Swalwells hiding in Congress. Expose them all. Expel every predator.
4:38

Rep. Nancy Mace Exposes Taxpayer-Funded Slush Fund That May Have Enabled Eric Swalwell's Sexual Depravity Starting in 1997, Congress quietly used a secret fund to pay off victims of sexual harassment and misconduct with over $18 million of our tax dollars — while keeping the names of the accused members hidden from the public. Mace is trying to force the release of the records so Americans can see who used it — but her resolution was voted down 357-65. "Up until 2018, there was a slush fund that taxpayers paid for that could settle disputes and sexual harassment by members of Congress and their employees or other Hill staffers, for example." We need to know exactly which members used this secret fund that we financed. Mace says there are definitely more Swalwells hiding in Congress. Expose them all. Expel every predator.

Benny Johnson

115,305 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨 JUST IN: DC Draino respectfully pressures the White House on where the remaining EPSTEIN FILES are and if she has any timeline on their release - AND "when we might start seeing some arrests." This is in the new media press briefing. DC_Draino: "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 be returned the day after, and 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 release." "Do you have any updates from the DOJ or the FBI on when those files are expected to be released, and also when we might start seeing some arrests of the client list?" LEAVITT: "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, I'd have to check in with them. And we can certainly do that for you, Rogan, in the effort of transparency." "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 done. 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. I don't have a specific timeline on you for that, but I do, know that they're working on it over there. This is the 2nd solid question from DC Draino at the White House today, leagues above the significance of other Legacy Media questions.
1:20

🚨 JUST IN: DC Draino respectfully pressures the White House on where the remaining EPSTEIN FILES are and if she has any timeline on their release - AND "when we might start seeing some arrests." This is in the new media press briefing. DC_Draino: "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 be returned the day after, and 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 release." "Do you have any updates from the DOJ or the FBI on when those files are expected to be released, and also when we might start seeing some arrests of the client list?" LEAVITT: "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, I'd have to check in with them. And we can certainly do that for you, Rogan, in the effort of transparency." "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 done. 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. I don't have a specific timeline on you for that, but I do, know that they're working on it over there. This is the 2nd solid question from DC Draino at the White House today, leagues above the significance of other Legacy Media questions.

Eric Daugherty

959,144 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: The judge who presided over Jeffrey Epstein's case denied Trump's DOJ's request to unseal grand jury transcripts, highlighting Pam Bondi's bullshit cover-up. Judge Richard Berman writes that "the grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government's possession." The judge went on to say that Trump’s DOJ is the "logical party” to make the EPSTEIN FILES public since "the government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70-odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials." The judge also noted that the DOJ had already undertaken a comprehensive investigation into the Epstein case and "has assembled a 'trove' of Epstein documents and interviews." And unlike the grand jury materials, the files that the DOJ has are not subject to the rule of criminal procedure and can be released whenever. Citing AG Bondi's press release the day after her BS stunt with right-wing influencers in the White House, the judge writes, "In February 2025, the government, as noted, was prepared to release their 'Epstein Files' to the public. See DOJ Press Release. But then, on July 6, 2025, the government announced it would not make the files available to the public." The judge described the ENTIRE grand jury testimony as "a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein’s conduct" attributed to ONE "FBI agent who had no direct knowledge of the case." Over the last month, judges have also denied the DOJ's requests to make grand jury records public in two other cases: one involving the Epstein case in Florida and the other involving Ghislaine Maxwell.
2:32

🚨MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: The judge who presided over Jeffrey Epstein's case denied Trump's DOJ's request to unseal grand jury transcripts, highlighting Pam Bondi's bullshit cover-up. Judge Richard Berman writes that "the grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government's possession." The judge went on to say that Trump’s DOJ is the "logical party” to make the EPSTEIN FILES public since "the government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70-odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials." The judge also noted that the DOJ had already undertaken a comprehensive investigation into the Epstein case and "has assembled a 'trove' of Epstein documents and interviews." And unlike the grand jury materials, the files that the DOJ has are not subject to the rule of criminal procedure and can be released whenever. Citing AG Bondi's press release the day after her BS stunt with right-wing influencers in the White House, the judge writes, "In February 2025, the government, as noted, was prepared to release their 'Epstein Files' to the public. See DOJ Press Release. But then, on July 6, 2025, the government announced it would not make the files available to the public." The judge described the ENTIRE grand jury testimony as "a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein’s conduct" attributed to ONE "FBI agent who had no direct knowledge of the case." Over the last month, judges have also denied the DOJ's requests to make grand jury records public in two other cases: one involving the Epstein case in Florida and the other involving Ghislaine Maxwell.

CALL TO ACTIVISM

415,709 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

DOJ will release another 47,000 pages of Epstein files. So far about 3% of the mega terabytes of data they have. Videos of victims, snuff videos. Blackmail. Much cannot be released. So far zero accountability. But Congress voted to send THEIR INDISCRETIONS to die in the Ethics Committee! About $18M in payments. Congressmen Tim Burchett and Lauren Boebert explain. Members of Congress get away with sexual harassment of their staffs and U.S. taxpayers pay settlements to victims of this harassment and the members of Congress continue to get away with something that all the rest of us would be crucified over. This two tier justice has to end.
1:44

DOJ will release another 47,000 pages of Epstein files. So far about 3% of the mega terabytes of data they have. Videos of victims, snuff videos. Blackmail. Much cannot be released. So far zero accountability. But Congress voted to send THEIR INDISCRETIONS to die in the Ethics Committee! About $18M in payments. Congressmen Tim Burchett and Lauren Boebert explain. Members of Congress get away with sexual harassment of their staffs and U.S. taxpayers pay settlements to victims of this harassment and the members of Congress continue to get away with something that all the rest of us would be crucified over. This two tier justice has to end.

TRUTH NOW ⭐️⭐️⭐️🗽 🎺

53,440 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

House Oversight Committee asks Bill Clinton about Mark Middleton—special assistant to Clinton who "killed himself" via hanging AND a shotgun wound to the chest—and Middleton's letting Jeffrey Epstein into the White House: Clinton: "There was a period of time when he was in a position to wave people into the White House, because that was one of his jobs." HOC: "He has been identified by multiple resources to be the individual that most of the time was... signing in Jeffrey Epstein into the White House." Clinton: "He was working on logistical things in the White House...[but] I don't know if Mark had the authority—" HOC: "Do you have any knowledge of the content of their meetings or the topics of the meetings that Mr. Epstein would be coming for?" Clinton: "No......" HOC: "Do you have any information that... he did something other than commit suicide?" Clinton: "No." HOC: "Do you have any concerns that this was in relation to... his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein... have you ever had any conversations with people about whether there's any relationship between the two?" Clinton: "No. No one's ever suggested it to me."
4:07

House Oversight Committee asks Bill Clinton about Mark Middleton—special assistant to Clinton who "killed himself" via hanging AND a shotgun wound to the chest—and Middleton's letting Jeffrey Epstein into the White House: Clinton: "There was a period of time when he was in a position to wave people into the White House, because that was one of his jobs." HOC: "He has been identified by multiple resources to be the individual that most of the time was... signing in Jeffrey Epstein into the White House." Clinton: "He was working on logistical things in the White House...[but] I don't know if Mark had the authority—" HOC: "Do you have any knowledge of the content of their meetings or the topics of the meetings that Mr. Epstein would be coming for?" Clinton: "No......" HOC: "Do you have any information that... he did something other than commit suicide?" Clinton: "No." HOC: "Do you have any concerns that this was in relation to... his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein... have you ever had any conversations with people about whether there's any relationship between the two?" Clinton: "No. No one's ever suggested it to me."

Sense Receptor

136,772 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten