After facing immense backlash stemming from claims the DOJ was purposely trying to withhold some of the Epstein files to protect Donald Trump. The DOJ has now released the interview with the woman accusing Trump of sexually assaulting her when she was a child. [00:00:16] Jenke will get into the details in a second, but first, your $0.02. I'm a little puzzled by this, guys, because, these are terrible allegations, but we covered them before. I guess there's more details now. We'll share the horrific details with you in a second. [00:00:31] But why did this come out now? That's super weird. We'll talk about that too. - First, Jordan, give us the facts. - Sure. To bring you up to speed a bit. The allegation was public knowledge. Thanks to internal FBI documents and a slideshow that was made public in the initial Epstein file dump that showed prominent names [00:00:49] listed in the Epstein files. You could see here stated Blanc stated Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump, who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis, which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out. [00:01:07] This incident was said to have happened in the 1980s when she. When the accuser was between 13 and 15 years old. The agents interviewed the alleged victim four times in 2019 and had written summaries of each conversation. However, NPR's report says only the FBI's first interview with the Trump accuser, [00:01:25] in which she makes no allegations of wrongdoing against the president, was part of the DOJ's massive records release made public last month. According to The New York Times. Initially, officials said the missing files were, quote, duplicates that had been released elsewhere, but that wasn't true. [00:01:42] So now let's get into what the additional three interviews, which took place in August and October of 2019, revealed. In the second interview, the woman described additional abuse by Epstein and several of his male associates. She said that Epstein drove her and or flew her to either New York [00:01:59] or New Jersey sometime when she was between 13 and 15 years old, and she was taken to a very tall building. It was there that she said Epstein introduced her to Trump. Trump asked everyone to leave the room where they met and mentioned something to the effect of, let me teach you how little girls are supposed to be. [00:02:16] According to the description of the woman's comments in the interview, he then unzipped his pants and put her head down to his penis. The woman told agents that she bit Trump, who then struck her and said words to the effect of get this little blank the hell out of here. [00:02:32] In the woman's third FBI interview about three weeks later, agents wrote that she described receiving threatening telephone calls that she said she believed had to do with Epstein or Trump, as well as several incidents where she was almost run off the road by other cars. [00:02:48] Up until this point, her attorney had been present during the interviews. However, during the fourth and final one, she was uncomfortable with being recorded and questioned the point of coming forward with these allegations. It's unclear what became of the FBI's investigation into the woman's claims. [00:03:04] An email sent between FBI agents last summer and included in the DOJ file notes that one identified victim claimed abuse by Trump but ultimately refused to cooperate. Although it doesn't specify if it's the same person as the accuser. The claims this woman made matched those of Jane Doe four, [00:03:23] who had sued the Epstein estate but dropped her lawsuit in December of 2021 after receiving a financial settlement. She did not name Trump in the lawsuit, only stating Epstein brought her to gatherings in New York with prominent wealthy men. [00:03:38] Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. In a statement Thursday, white House press Secretary Caroline Leavitt described the claims from the FBI interviews as, quote, completely baseless accusations backed by credible evidence. She also questioned the credibility of the accuser, whose name is redacted in the [00:03:55] files, pointing to her criminal record. According to the Miami Herald, she was arrested for theft in the past, but the charges were dropped. There's more to this. We'll get into some of the timing and other details, but, Keith, I want to bring you in here. What do you make of this, this new document dump and how how do [00:04:15] you think people should see this? - Well, it's very clear that there's. - Something going on here. Our government is covering something up at the moment, and I would like to know why the Department of Justice isn't further investigating this. [00:04:34] I know that Caroline Leavitt wants to say that these are baseless, baseless accusations. But I'm telling you right now, the FBI does not interview someone for separate times if they feel like there's no there there now. I don't know whether or not Donald Trump did what this accuser said. [00:04:52] Now, there's a lot of smoke. We don't know if there's any fire, but a competent DOJ, a competent FBI would investigate this regardless of who the president is. And I want to say one final thing is that it's really interesting to me that Hillary [00:05:12] Clinton is being interviewed by Congress. Bill Clinton is being interviewed by Congress. Howard Lutnick is going to be interviewed by Congress. But Donald Trump, who's mentioned, I think 30,000 times, 70,000 times, [00:05:29] a lot more times than Hillary Clinton has not had one interview with Congress. Yeah. So, guys, when the files first came out, I said, there's like order of credibility, right? So when you have emails of Epstein and his friends, [00:05:46] those are the most credible because those are clearly emails, things they wrote. So if they admitted to things in the emails, that has a ton of credibility, right? So the second was known accusers. So if they wrote something contemporary contemporaneously at the time we go, [00:06:03] okay, well that has a good amount of credibility. That's the person we know was a victim. And that's what they wrote at the time about how they got victimized. And there's some haunting stories in there. So then there's a third bucket, which is what this one was in, which is some rando called into the FBI and said this happened. [00:06:23] Okay, that's less credible, right? So it hasn't been vetted, etc.. That's the category we thought this one was in. That's why it actually, when we first heard about it, without as many details, we had it in the camp of I wouldn't, I'm [00:06:39] not sure we ever said this one on the air. I don't think we did. Because we thought it was incredible enough. But now in this new release. Wait, they interviewed her four times. If it's a crank calling in, like, oh, yeah, dude, I knew Trump and he did this. [00:06:54] They're not going to go through four interviews, right? So that's interesting. And then Jane Doe number four got a settlement. You don't usually give a settlement to someone who wasn't a victim. So. And she matches Jane Doe number four. Wait a minute. [00:07:11] This is getting more and more credible as we go, right? I significantly more credible. So now a lot more people are talking about it. But I do wonder why did the DOJ of all things and of all times release this? [00:07:27] Now did they check with the white House before releasing this? I can't imagine that they did because there's no way Trump would have said, oh yeah, go ahead. Put that out about me. How a 13 or 14 year old and this and that and all the things that Jordan just told you. So wait, did somebody at the DOJ release like incredibly damning things about Trump [00:07:47] as Trump is trying to make a decision on some things, like maybe ground troops or no ground troops in Iran? I don't know, I don't know, it's just like I know that it sounds like too conspiratorial to connect it to anything else, but it is an incredibly strange time to release this damning information [00:08:04] about Donald Trump. What do you think, Jordan? I think the other angle here is Pam Bondi and the files that were released yesterday is progress, but all the files should have been released. And according to Thomas Massey, there's still work to be done. [00:08:22] Not getting the answers we need from Pam Bondi. And she might be happy to offload this to somebody else as well. Because, you know, I just spent three hours at the DOJ this week looking on the computers at the unredacted files, and I'm finding evidence of files [00:08:38] that they haven't released yet. And I'm going to be over there and keep digging on that. But, you know, we got them to release 3 million files. There's still a lot more they need to get out. So shocking when they keep telling us they're all out. Todd Blanch came out. Pam Bondi came and they're not just like, don't lie to me. [00:08:56] Like I don't like being lied to. That's why Republicans are probably going to lose the House. Pam Bondi will still have to answer for her missteps, it seems. On Wednesday, the House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Bondi for testimony [00:09:11] on the DOJ's handling of the Epstein files 24 to 19. Five Republicans broke with their party and voted with Democrats including Nancy Mace, Tim Burchett, Lauren Boebert, Michael Cloud and Scott Perry. In a statement to Ex, mace wrote we are moving to subpoena [00:09:28] US Attorney General Pam Bondi. A.G. Bondi claims the DOJ has released all of the Epstein files. The record is clear they have not. The Epstein case is one of the greatest cover ups in American history. His global sex trafficking network is larger than what is being revealed. 3 million documents have been released and we still don't have the full truth. [00:09:46] Videos are missing. Audio is missing, logs are missing. There are millions more documents out there. We want to know why the DOJ is more focused on shielding the powerful than delivering justice. The American people deserve answers. Victims deserve justice. Hold the line. [00:10:04] According to mace, the subpoena will be for a closed door testimony with video being released to the public afterwards. There is no date set for when the testimony will occur, but personally, Jack, to your question, I think that's why they did it. They released these on the heels of that subpoena. [00:10:21] Yeah. So I hear you. I'm curious what Keith thinks too. And, and others have like one of our members on Titcombe. Mr.. In between, they released these because even the Republicans in Congress were supporting using a subpoena to get them. So guys, I totally get that. [00:10:36] But at the same time, there's like a million files in there. So they found the most damaging to Trump and released it now. Maybe, by the way, the other explanation could be it'll get lost in the sauce. We're in the middle of a war with Iran. We might invade Cuba this weekend. [00:10:53] Sneak that out there in the middle of a Friday, you know, and hope that it gets buried. So, what do you think, Keith? I mean, most of these have been on Friday dump. So I do think that's part of it, I think. I mean, these are not these are not very savvy people, but they're smart. [00:11:09] They're doing the smart thing. They're releasing this crazy crap on a Friday. We're still talking about it. But you're right. Like there are a lot of different crises happening in our country that I think they're trying to just say, right, sweep it under the rug. I do think that the subpoena is powerful. [00:11:26] And I think that's one of the reasons why Pam Bondi has decided that she's going to at least try to follow the law. And I think Kristi Noem kind of getting the ax too, is a little bit of a wake up call to this administration and to the people in it that they're not all powerful, that there is accountability. [00:11:43] And one way or another, the law is going to catch up to them. And I think Pam Bondi is maybe seeing a little bit of the light on that. They never see the light. So I again, that can't be it. It has to be. It has to be the law. The law. So look, another one of our members and we like doing the show [00:12:00] with you guys tyt.com/join to be part of the young Turks. Be a member and be part of the show. And, and so let me read one more from t.com members police. The white House says, I remember when we first found out about Epstein being a massive child sex trafficker, we were told that there were a ton of video evidence. [00:12:20] Why don't we ever hear about the videos anymore? So that's such a great point. And we covered the videos, last week too, and asking the same question as you. And we showed you a ton of evidence of why they exist. The New York Times has pictures of the video cameras in the hallways in the rooms. [00:12:37] We know that there's emails that Epstein wrote. Hey, I'm going to buy more video cameras. Put them in the Kleenex tissue boxes. There was video cameras found in the clocks. And yet our government says, oh no, we could not find any of the videos. [00:12:55] So where are the videos? So if you think this stuff is damning, you know, whether they wanted to bury it or highlight it today. Wait till you get a load of the videos and look guys. So in terms of blackmail, you know, I made kind of an allusion to it before and [00:13:11] people get really touchy about that topic. Like, oh my God, blackmail sounds so conspiratorial, guys, intelligence agencies use the tactic of blackmail all the time. Not some of the time. Not rarely. Not like, oh my God, it's a new novel. Crazy conspiracy. [00:13:28] In fact, Israel told Clinton back in 1998, as reported by the Israeli press, we have the tapes of you with Monica Lewinsky. So release Jonathan Pollard. Okay, so that happened, and that was in the middle of the negotiations, [00:13:47] by the way, with the Palestinians. So I don't know what else the Israelis got. So they knew about Monica Lewinsky before we did, before anyone did. And they already used it to blackmail one of our presidents. So where's the videos and who has them and who's going to release them at convenient [00:14:05] times or hold them for leverage? Are these fair questions? Obviously, there's definitely videos and the videos were there for a purpose. There's only one purpose for taping powerful men having illegal sex. It's not complicated. So there's a lot more to find out here. [00:14:24] But so far, what we already know for a lot of these guys and for Donald Trump is disastrous. On the other hand, there's been absolutely no consequences. Can I just add one thing before we go to break? So we talk about like, why the timing, right? Of course, it's in the middle of not just a new war in the Middle East, but also [00:14:44] on the verge of what is likely to be another regime change operation in Cuba. So you have two massive foreign policy distractions. And yes, there is some reporting and coverage of these document dumps, but they're hoping you won't notice those because let's be real, most people don't read print. [00:15:01] Some people will tune into cable news or network news, which is largely focused on these foreign policy conflicts right now. But also this all goes back to the monopoly the right is creating within our media and social media. We're seeing a wave of suppression on TikTok this week as the Ellisons [00:15:21] purportedly are reconfiguring the algorithm to specifically suppress Epstein related videos. I've seen multiple trusted accounts of people like millions of followers, suddenly have their view counts reduced to a couple dozen, and some were even suspended. [00:15:38] So the suppression is very real. It happens across social media. So it's not just that they, they, they dump it out there and then they're worried about people finding it. It's that there are other parts of this with their hands on the levers of power, making sure you can't even spread it. [00:15:55] And I just want to add real quick, the, the government that is, that is insisting on suppressing the Epstein files is the Kenyan government and the government of Tajikistan. Oh, no. Right. It's weird. Israeli supporters are insisting that the Epstein files be suppressed. [00:16:15] I wonder why every time you ring the bell below, an angel gets his wings. Totally not true. But it does keep you updated on our live shows.