Transcription
We have seen some pathetic stunts at a Pam Bondi's DOJ to cover for this administration's Epstein connections, but none as shameless as this. The DOJ just sent Congress a six-page letter explaining their redactions to the Epstein files. And buried in that letter is a list of all government officials and politically exposed persons who appear in the release materials.
But what they decided to do was combine those who are implicated with Jeffrey Epstein's crimes with those who are just in the files because of a passing mention or because of their efforts to actually expose Epstein's crimes. The DOJ explicitly states that people appear on this list if their name shows up at least once in the files.
But what that could mean is they had extensive direct email contact with Jeffrey Epstein himself. Or, and this is important, it can mean they were mentioned only in a portion of a document, including press reporting, that on his face is unrelated to the Epstein and Maxwell matters. Which is to say, if a newspaper article that mentioned Epstein also happens to mention, say, Barack Obama in a completely unrelated context, Obama's name goes on the list. That's it. That's the bar.
Your name could appear in a flight manifest metadata. You could be referenced in a customs document. You could be mentioned in passing in an email about something else entirely. And congratulations, you're now on this big bombshell Epstein list distributed by Pam Bondi's Department of Justice. In other words, it was a deliberate effort by the DOJ to muddy the waters under the guise of transparency. Yet another red herring thanks to Trump and the rest of these pedophile protectors in his administration.
So, let me be crystal clear about something. This list is not a list of co-conspirators. It is not a list of people who did anything wrong. It is simply a list of every name that appears in the thousands of pages of documents. And the DOJ is using that ambiguity, that lack of context as a shield to protect, well, I think you figured out that part by now.
But here's what the DOJ isn't telling you in this letter. They are not telling you which people had actual contact with Epstein and which ones were just mentioned in passing. They're not providing any context whatsoever. They are throwing hundreds of names at Congress and the American people and saying, "Here you go. We complied with the law while knowing full well that this will devolve into a partisan food fight where everyone just tries to weaponize the names on the other side while defending the names on their side." And that's exactly what's happening.
Instead of having a serious and much needed conversation about what the DOJ redacted and why, we're arguing about whether Bill Clinton or Donald Trump is worse in the files. Meanwhile, the DOJ gets to pat themselves on the back for transparency while hiding behind privilege claims. And by the way, if you don't believe me, you should because Pam Bondi just proved it days ago.
I also found an email that I have right here from Jeffrey Epste to Gain Maxwell that was unredacted and it included notes of statements that Donald Trump made about his prior relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Now, there is no reason for this to be hidden from the American people. There is no privilege. There is no attorney client privilege. And I see you're checking with your staff. And I can assure you staff, this is not under attorney client privilege because it was sent from Jeffrey Epstein to Gileain Maxwell. Will you commit to publicly providing the unredacted version of this so that the American people can understand the extent of Donald Trump's lies about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein?
>> You're about as good of a lawyer today as you were when you tried to impeach President Trump in 2016. Have you apologized for that in 2019?
>> So are will you will you unredact this? Will you unact on that?
>> Privileged.
>> I'm asking you. Will you unredact this?
>> Privileged.
>> Privileged. Of course, I look forward to discussing this more.
>> Could the DOJ release it? Yes. Will they? Clearly not. And the same goes with this list. Could they break it down into actual co-conspirators and those who have a fleeting mention in the files? Of course. Will they? Well, they didn't. So, I guess that's our answer.
Also, as far as Pam Bondi erroneously claiming privilege is concerned, what this is is simple. The concept of privileged information is being weaponized to hide information that the American people have a right to see. The deliberative process privilege that's supposed to protect internal government discussions so that officials can speak freely, but it's been expanded to cover basically any internal communication, even if it's about whether to prosecute powerful people connected to Jeffrey Epstein. Work product privilege, same deal. Supposed to protect attorney strategy, but it's being used to shield information about immunity deals and nonprosecution agreements. A process that is supposed to protect the sanctity of the law is instead being used to flout the law. Surprise, surprise.
And then, of course, the DOJ explicitly states that no materials were redacted or withheld based on embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government officials, public figures, or foreign dignitaries. Great. So, they're not protecting anyone's reputation. Except, oh, wait. They are protecting information under privilege that just so happens to involve communications about decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epste or his associates. So, while they're technically not redacting things to protect reputations, they are redacting the very information that would reveal whether powerful people got preferential treatment. You see the game that's being played here?
The DOJ releases this list to create the appearance of transparency. Look, we're not hiding any names while simultaneously hiding all the information that would actually tell us what those names mean. And meanwhile, they want all of us fighting about Trump or Clinton being in the list, hoping that this devolves into the usual D versus R fight, and therefore completely missing the point that the real scandal is what the DOJ is hiding about co-conspirators, immunity deals, nonprosecution agreements, and preferential treatment for the rich and powerful men who are contained within this scandal. The exact thing that all of these people ran on doing during the campaign, in case you'd forgotten.
>> everybody has everybody in politics has a vice that's much worse than alcoholism is is the way that I put it. Um, but we we um
>> release the list.
>> Seriously, we need to release the Epstein list. That that is an important thing.
>> You say that the FBI has Epstein's list. They're sitting on it. That doesn't seem like something you should do. You're protecting the world's foremost predator. That seems like an evil thing to do regardless of who may be embarrassed in the release of that list. Why is the FBI protecting the greatest pedest um the the largest scale pedtoist in human history?
>> Simple. because of who's on that list.
>> Who has Jeffrey Epstein's
>> black book?
>> Blackbook.
>> FBI.
>> But who that is that that I mean there's
>> Oh, that's under direct control of the director of the FBI.
>> What the hell are the House Republicans doing? They have the majority. You can't get the list. Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are.
>> You wondering why we're not hearing more about this Epstein case? I mean, the guy was only connected to just about every major player in the swamp internationally, and yet you don't hear much about it. And what the hell are they hiding with Jeffrey Epstein?
So, here's my message. Do not fall for the red herring. This list means nothing without context, and the DOJ knows that. They are counting on partisan tribalism to distract us from asking the real questions. Do not let them get away with it.
Before you go, if you enjoyed this content and you want to see more and support independent media, please subscribe to this channel. The subscribe button will be right here on the screen. But second, the reality is that we are now in a political environment where this administration can lean on any of the social media platforms to suppress certain voices if they don't like critical coverage. That means my longevity here is in the hands of a few tech billionaires who are already making it clear that they are willing to cater to this administration. To that end, signing up for my newsletter is a way for me to reach you directly if that ever becomes necessary. I'll put the link right here on the screen as well. So, please sign up. It's free, but there's also an option to do a paid subscription if you'd like to support me and my team. I really appreciate it. Thanks so much for watching.