Transcription
It's Sarah. Hi. How are you?
Hi, Katie. Good to see you.
Good to see you, too. Sorry to keep you waiting. We were a little um, we were a little behind schedule talking about Iran, but as I was mentioning, Sarah, you know, thank you for coming on because our team feels like it's really important to continuing to continue covering the Epstein story because there's so much speculation that that this war was an effort to distract from that really damaging story to President Trump. And uh, and so we wanted you to come on. So, thank you. Thank you very much.
Okay. So, I haven't done an interview about the Epstein files uh in a couple of weeks. So, last month I wanted to backtrack because I wanted to give this story more attention and then Iran happened. But this was the story that the MP that NPR broke, but actually an independent journalist, I should have his name here, Julian Roger Sullenberger. He's amazing.
Thank you. Roger. At first broke the story that the Justice Department, Sarah, had withheld some really incriminating files related to allegations that President Trump had sexually abused a minor. Then, surprisingly, I don't know why, but last week the DOJ released documents that are part of something called the 302 files. So before we kind of talk about the accountant coming in to testify and some of the other things, the New Mexico ranch being searched, tell us about these particular files and why they were so important.
Sarah, absolutely. So I think it's really important to recognize this is a significant development, but this is what has been reported by other journalists is just one set of files related to one accuser. My reporting actually has brought it much broader. I have nine sources familiar that have told me that and we've reported this in my piece a couple weeks ago that there are uh people had shared information with the FBI including me specific mentions of Trump and allegations that are nowhere to be found in the files. So that universe of missing files is actually much larger. Um, and I think that's important for the public to understand and the justice department has um, not really acknowledged that.
When you say nine sources, Sarah, are you talking about nine different survivors with allegations or nine sources within the Justice Department? And obviously, you can't reveal your sources, but are these people who are actually victims or people just who have knowledge of these additional files?
It's a combination of both. It's a combination of both, but I would say it's an extensive. There are many victims who have submitted information to the FBI, including through their lawyers, including addressed to senior members of the Justice Department that does not appear in this. So, it's a very concerning and troubling matter both outside of the Justice Department, but I think most importantly inside of the Justice Department. This is of great concern.
So Sarah, are these additional files are they do they incriminate the president of the United States or do you know that have not been released?
I need to be very careful about um getting into to things that haven't been reported yet, but I think that they are concerning allegations that were of concern and are not random. These are these are things related to allegations of misconduct.
Let's talk soon.
Let's talk about the the 302 files, the the more narrow files that have been released. And um can you tell us what was in or what the information that was in those files?
Mhm. So, a 302 is kind of one of the most important documents that the FBI produces. It's kind of the official record of an interview with um a victim or someone who had knowledge and it's it's among the most prized possessions. They're very very carefully worded. They're very important. They're like the primary source document. And so the documents that were missing that didn't originally make it in, although there were some mention of them in the files, for example, we could tell the reason that I and other journalists were able to figure this out is because there are missing page numbers. There are other references. Um, you know, this was just like a very very clear example, but a 302 something that had been redacted that had been redacted that had clearly not just redacted, not released.
Right?
Not released at all. Um, and I think this is a really important point because this is not a subpoena. This is a law and the law is incredibly broad and there are criminal penalties for not releasing information according to the law. Um, so that's why this is so significant. The 302s reflect interviews with a woman who
A girl 13-year-old.
Yes, she she was an adult at the time of the interview, but yes, a woman who actually did not, as far as we can tell, um, did not reach out to the FBI herself. Others who had, um, knew her, and trusted her had reported it to the FBI and then the FBI followed up. They had what appears to be at least four interviews with this individual um in 2019. They are lengthy interviews. There is clear documentation both in the files that have been released and in my own reporting which reflects that the FBI took this person seriously, believed that they were credible, found them to be a reliable source of information. Um, and there's the 302s. There's still some redactions in them, but from what we can tell of what has been released, there is an allegation. And she's describing her sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein that she at 13 years old went kind of got into his orbit believing that she was going to be babysitting um and was very quickly abused which is a absolute textbook pattern um from we know from thousands actually other victims in these 302s she makes mention of the fact that she also encountered allegedly Donald Trump that she was introduced to him by Epstein and that uh Donald Trump sexually um assaulted her at age 13. She actually, you can tell from the the narrative and the way that the interview was conducted. This is not something that she was trying to you know it it came about as part of the natural process. It was not her focus. Her focus was on Epstein. But it's it's very clear and very disturbing. Um, of course, we see that there were multiple follow-up interviews. And I think most crucially, at the time that this was investigated, it's not like this was investigated and then we see a clear the FBI has closed this case. That's not clear from here. But most critically, one of the most important documents in the Epstein files to date is there's a presentation that was prepared last summer by the Trump Justice Department briefing. It was a briefing, a kind of overview of the case, four senior justice department leaders prepared by the FBI. And the number one, it has a list of prominent names who have allegations, true misconduct allegations on a slide. Donald Trump, this mention is the first in that slide. So that means even as recently as last summer this was of importance that the government felt that they needed to um share it widely and share the underlying information. So that again gives this I point that out to show that this is not the FBI gets tons of tips. They do tons of interviews many of them and we can tell from the documentation that many of them come in the FBI looks into it. They make some calls. This clearly rose to a different level. Now, Trump has not been uh accused by law enforcement of a crime. However, Donald Trump has also, I have confirmed, never been questioned by law enforcement about this or any other allegations. So, it's a very very we don't have all the facts, but the fact pattern is incredibly disturbing.
The um according to PBS, the accuser details in very graphic terms Trump's sexual alleged sexual alleged sexual assault against her and how she fought back. She also said she had two additional interactions with Trump. But before she expanded on that any further, she asked if she could go on to another subject. During the last interview with the accuser, the FBI asked if she would be comfortable sharing more about her contacts with Trump. She said at the time that she didn't know what the point would be when there was a strong possibility nothing could be done about it and it's unclear if there was any additional followup after that last interview. I'm think I'm reading a transcript from uh from PBS.
So what about um what about ahead intel both from the publicly available documents and then I've confirmed with other reporting independent reporting is that the government actually sought to have her be a collaborator. So it wasn't just that this was a 302 that came in. They were interested in pursuing this further and having her be a primary potential witness who knows some kind of thing. So again, it speaks to the fact that this was taken seriously. We don't have all the facts, but we know that it was taken seriously and that law enforcement officers to this day believe that this was a credible accusation.
So you say that it was all ready to go last summer. Pam Bondi was the attorney general then, she's the attorney general now. Not to ask uh the captain obvious but what happened between last summer when they were ready to pursue this and now?
So or the release of the files.
So it's well they were ready to release the files. They were preparing for the potential to release the files. Um, we actually have no indication whatsoever and I think this is one of the key points for the audience. We have the Trump Justice Department came in and said this was a this was a campaign promise. Bondi said that she had the client that best ready to go. They do these big shows. I have found absolutely zero evidence, any indication that the Justice Department has taken any steps, any material law enforcement steps, even inquiries into the Epstein matter since Trump has come into office and since Bondi has come into office. So there's a real disconnect between the stated interest and any material law enforcement followup. And that's really critical, especially when you think about how accusations of crimes, specifically crimes that involve children, I have done extensive reporting on the FBI. When there isn't a hint of a crime against a child, they get into action right away. So again, it's stunning. It's just a stunning and really disturbing pattern. And quite frankly, we're dealing with a justice department that um chooses really not to engage or share information. And that has created, I think, so much public mistrust. Um, and it's really unfortunate.
You had talked about this these additional files that you know exist from your reporting. Do you have any idea if and when those will be released?
So officially the Justice Department has said that there are no more files that will be released that anything that is still uh remaining is either duplicative could be held under some sort of thing. We have lots of reason to believe that that's not true because they have been so either careless or negligent in the pro in the along the way of this process. Um, so I don't think there's no indication that they will be released except for the fact that the public takes this so seriously and that members of Congress take this so seriously. So I think that there is both political and public pressure to have this be done. But as of right now, there's no indication that that's ever going to happen.
Let's talk about some of the other things, uh, Sarah that have transpired. Richard Khan, who was Jeffrey Epstein's longtime accountant, testified before the House Oversight Committee for almost 6 hours yesterday. Um, we're going to talk about that in a moment, but tell us about the role Richard has played in this investigation up until this point.
So, this is the craziest thing or one of the many crazy things. He has played zero role in this investigation. Zero. Epstein's accountant, the person responsible for his finances, has never been questioned by law enforcement. He's never been questioned by the FBI. He's never been questioned by local law enforcement. He's never never.
It I have no explanation for it. I find it so alarming. And what I will tell you is that every single member of law enforcement that I know cannot explain this. It's it's it's so negl it's just there. This is the number one investigative step that you would take. And keep in mind, there were investigations, FBI investigations, SDNY investigations in multiple jurisdictions in recent years for which this would have been material, but never. Still bizarre.
It's really I don't I wish I had a stronger word than how alarming that is.
As not just as a journalist, but as an American citizen who trusts that the basics of investigations in law enforcement are being followed.
One of the biggest headlines out of this Khan hearing was from PBS's Alli Rogan. She reported that Khan confirmed that the Epstein estate paid a settlement out to the women the woman who accused both him and Donald Trump of abuse. Both Epstein and Donald Trump. He said Khan did not say how much or when the settlement was paid. Um, I I don't know if if you have any information about that, but it seems pretty significant that the accountant is reporting that a settlement uh was paid to the woman who made these accusations.
So I have spoken to many many people that were in that deposition and are familiar with it. There is a key point that there was this question was answered kind of relatively early in the day and then there was one followup later in the day which suggests that he may have not understood the context of the question or he may have I don't know there's just there's some differing things and this is the problem with closed door depositions. We hear this information that comes out but we have no way to put it in context or to know. Um, so I would say we still need to find that out. There are the fact pattern does suggest that that may be accurate. So I I think that that's you know it was absolutely a worthy question to have been asked. We're going to have to wait to see the transcript to really know for sure.
And Khan continues to maintain that he never saw or knew anything about Epstein's wrongdoings. Uh Democrats are saying Epstein's trafficking operation would not have been possible without Richard Khan. So, um, does it sound like Khan was conning the committee?
I look, I I don't want to speculate, but I can say that my knowledge of this case and my knowledge of other trafficking organizations, the accountant is among the most key people. And I think this is also important. Remember, accountants are licensed. They are licensed. They have responsibilities under the law in order to have their certification. And one of the things that I I don't know if it came up in the hearing is the obligation to know your client, to have understandings of why things were being done and where things were going. Uh, which is important for a variety of reasons. Tax reasons, uh, making sure that you're complying with other financial laws. Uh, Epstein had property in multiple countries that would be very important to have an understanding. It just doesn't pass the smell test. And I think one of the ways that I'm starting to think more recently as more information has come out about this is to look at the Epstein operation somewhat similar to a a mob operation in that there are individuals who often play a role in these cases. It's like if you've ever seen The Sopranos or The Wire, you have people in this in this sphere.
Organization.
Organization who play a very specific role and they deliberately try to not have things in writing, not know things, not ask certain questions, don't tell me that I don't want to know it if you have seen any of these shows. So, I think that's part of the context here, which is why didn't he want to know and why did he feel comfortable uh continuing to work for this man even after he is arrested, even after is he convicted sex offender? Like, there's there's really no great explanation except for perhaps he either did not want to know or was not telling the truth under oath. And I think that we'll have to find out.
Let's let's move on to New Mexico. And I'm sorry I keep blowing my nose, everyone. I've got this worst cold and keeping it classy. I ran out of Kleenex.
Girl, I have been sick and my children have been sick. It feels like for months. So.
Okay, good. So, you you you know where I'm coming from. But let's talk about New Mexico because I haven't been paying enough enough attention to this. On Monday, New Mexico state investigators began searching Epstein's 30,000 square foot mansion, which is called the Zor Zoro Ranch. Uh, I was like, why did he have property in New Mexico? So, he had a lot of property in various places. He also loved this kind of jet set lifestyle of going from one place to another, not being in any one particular place for a time, which in hindsight we can look at as prot like perhaps a pattern that is of concern and would be of concern to investigators. But he had this large ranch. He liked to entertain there. He would often bring guests there. Um, and it was a site of a lot of alleged abuse in including very violent and an absolutely criminal abuse. The reason that this is coming up somewhat now is because the included in the files uh that have been released the wide millions of files are some allegations unverified that um crimes may have taken place there including like bodies being buried. We have no like we don't know. Oh, this is just something that's in the file and there's a lot of unverified information in the file.
Right?
But that's what's prompting this right now. Again, this property could have been searched 25 years like this is this is it doesn't it's almost comical that this is the first time that law enforcement and keep in mind it's not the FBI, it's the state. It's the state.
And have they found have they found anything Sarah in the search or do you know what the status is of that?
Not to my knowledge. Um, I think that it's it's they've had some preliminary search and we'll have to wait and see. But, um, the other thing you have to remember is this is a search many years after his death. Many years after like.
Has it just been just sitting there empty?
I mean, there's been a lot of time. I think what I would tell you is there's been a lot of time for this is not an active crime scene. This is a place that has been changed immensely since uh, Ebene was last there. We also heard this week that a foreign hacker breached servers connected to the FBI's New York field office and may have access files related to Epstein. Honestly, this does sound like some kind of John Lere novel or something, doesn't it? But in a statement to the Guardian and Reuters, the FBI described the incident as an isolated cyber event. What have you heard about this?
So, there's actually been a couple different cyber events that have come into public knowledge in the last couple weeks, which is both a reflection of how critical what a target this is uh for foreign governments, for uh state kind of large criminal organizations and just ordinary hackers. Uh, however, we don't know for sure that Epstein files were accessed or at least I have not independently found that. But this is absolutely something that should be of concern because there is besides personal information um, you know, VC there's just so much that is incredibly sensitive and concern and I think again it comes down to is the federal government taking every possible precaution. Cyber intrusions unfortunately especially from foreign actors are incredibly common. But that's why in part like the fact that there is information that the public doesn't know but that our foreign other foreign governments might know is a really important question and a question that I'm running around Washington constantly asking.
Looking forward, what's next on the agenda? Sarah for the oversight committee. Leon Black was ordered to be deposed in a lawsuit brought by a woman who alleges that uh Bank of America facilitated and profited from Epstein's sex trafficking enterprise. So, what are we what are we looking at in the in the days and weeks to come?
There's a couple new depositions. There's a couple new things um that could be quite interesting and and could provide new information. The things that I'm really watching for are two things. One is that Howard Lutnik has um agreed to testify before the committee. That I think is incredibly important um for a variety of reasons. One, he he has this bizarre, you know, interview in which he said that he knew that Epstein was a creep and and he never vowed to never see him again. And then we find out only after the files are released that he in fact was bringing his children to Epstein's island in a foreign country after years after Gia mentioned sex offender and has spent time in prison which speaks to questions about judgment as well as all sorts of other things. Um, so I think that that that interview I'm going to be really really looking carefully on in part because one of the questions that I've been asking the White House and kind of every agency in town recently is were did Epstein's relationship people's relationships with Epste their financial relationships with Epstein the fact that this material was in existence um did that come up in vetting presidential transition vetting. Did that come up in FBI background checks, which most officials need to pass? And specifically for the highest level officials, including cabinet secretaries, their security clearances. And why is that important? It's important because a key part of of our national security is that we don't want our foreign adversaries to have information that could be embarrassing or problematic because it it provides an opportunity for blackmail. I have gotten no good answer about whether or not this did come up or was never addressed. Either way, it's a major problem. Um, and just speaks to all sorts of potential issues.
What about some of the other people we know are in these files, like Bill Gates, for example, Larry Summers? I mean, there are a lot of uh, you know, highranking officials and executives who are in these files. Will they be testifying before this oversight committee?
Look, unfortunately, this story, it's all about political will. You have to get a group of senator a group of congressmen on this committee to all agree to send the subpoena. They have to reach a certain threshold. So, it just depends on whether or not there can be enough agreement, bipartisan agreement, to to send these subpoenas and to actually enforce it, to actually have the political will to enforce it.
Well, things may change if if the Democrats win the midterms and and have the majority in the House, then they can compel these people to testify, right?
Absolutely. And that I think that as time goes on, this is actually have a piece that's going to be coming out about this sometime soon, which is the political and kind of cultural impact of the Epstein story and the Epstein files, which is that this is such an issue. This is one of the rare issues that has bipartisan support and that actually looks like it is motivating voters in a significant way. So, Democrats are aware of that, Republicans are aware of that and they're making plans um for how they would continue this investigation if Democrats took the House.
And final question, Sarah, someone's asking me what the clicking noise is. I think it might be your your key. Is it your keyboard? I wonder who's I wonder what clicking. It's a mystery, everyone. We don't know.
Noise. I don't hear.
Where that clicking noise is coming from.
It's sort of creepy and scary. But I wanted to ask you about.
I I wanted to just ask you about um uh Jeffrey Epstein's death. Um, some of the accusations that Epstein was murdered in prison are once again getting mainstream media attention. Julie K. Brown, whose reporting was so phenomenal at the Miami Herald, who really broke this story wide open, reported that an inmate housed at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York told the FBI he heard overheard guards talking about covering up Jeffrey Epstein's death on the morning he died. Of course, there are many theories. There are a lot of consp conspiracy, missing videotape, etc., etc. Someone just said Linda Trip joined the joined the chat. Very funny, Barb. But um I guess the question is, are you is any of your reporting dealing with that? And are you starting to hear a lot more people focus on how Jeffrey Epstein died?
I I think that's an absolutely valid line of inquiry. I think that there are there's so much I mean it is kind of incredible, right? In one of the he was at the time a very carefully watched inmate in a very secure prison. There was so much public attention and spectacle and yet even the basics the very basics of checks of documentation of video did not happen during this critical period. It is there are so many errors which could have been human error which could have been coincidence. We just don't know. But there's a lot of them and that is of concern. Unfortunately, as I'm sure you know because you have also covered a lot of prisons in your journalism, that's unfortunately not that unusual. It is a very um not very regulated and a lot can happen without really clear oversight, especially in prisons that have tremendous staffing shortages. I think what I can tell you from my reporting is that Jeffrey Epstein continued to use his money and his power even from jail. He was able to pay for certain food, certain things, have more time in the room with his uh his lawyers and his other advisers. So, and that is a well-known thing that does occur in prisons, unfortunately. So, I think there are great questions to be asked. I think it's really important journalistically though that we do not feed conspiracy theories when there is not, you know, clear probable cause or things. So, I'm always very cautious in how I talk about that because there is so much about this story that is outrageous. There is so much that is sometimes difficult to believe even for someone who has spent almost 10 years reporting on it. But I don't I do think that they it is very painful for the victims, for members of law enforcement, for people who live with this story every single day to have some of those conspiracy theories um be given the same attention as valid and true facts. And some people view those conspiracy theories as a way to cheapen or cast doubt on the Epstein story overall. And in part, that's why, you know, this was able to be under wraps and not given the intention it deserved for a very long time.
Well, I hope that the survivors know that so many people are continuing to cover the story. Sarah, I know that you are focused on it 24/7 and all your energies are going to covering the story and I'm sure they're grateful. We're grateful that you're doing that. And I just wanted to mention I I I just Googled it quickly that Julie K. Brown has expressed data.
Yes.
That Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide.
Yeah.
And that that he he died uh you know by hanging himself or whatever it was. Um, so I mean it's just another layer of this horrible uh, you know, story that that is that that really went uncovered for so long.
Yeah.
And it is now getting the attention it deserves and I think it's important we continue to focus on it uh, for the sake of the survivors so that um, you know, people will be held accountable.
Absolutely. And I think the other thing to remember it's, you know, there's so many crimes. There are crimes against children every single day. Uh, and statistically it's incredibly prevalent. So I think the public does benefit in some ways. I want them to always keep in mind that if all of these failures happen in a case that had so much public attention, had so much oversight, had so many opportunities. I think we should all be concerned about what happens when pe to those crimes where nobody's watching or there is.
And one victim, you know.
And one victim, you know, and I I that, you know, this is why as a journalist I feel such a tremendous responsibility to highlight this case even though it is sensational and even though you could argue it is old, but it does highlight some really glaring failures that need to be addressed. And we all depend on faith in the justice system in order for for our democracy to survive.
Well, I can't say it any better than that. Sarah, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Pardon my cold and my nose blowing. I hope you're feeling better and your children are feeling better. Please follow Sarah's reporting everyone in the Atlantic, which is such a fantastic publication full of really terrific articles. Sarah, thanks for your time today. I appreciate it.
Thank you for having me. And Katie, thank you for you and your team giving this story such care and and rigor. It really, I think, has been impactful in so many ways.
Well, thank you for saying that. I know they're listening and they appreciate that, too. Thanks, Sarah.