SHOCKER! Trump's latest would-be ASSASSIN has Ukraine connections, Real ID backlash | Redacted

Summary

Redacted News: SHOCKER! Trump's Latest Would-Be ASSASSIN Has Ukraine Connections, Real ID Backlash

Release Date: April 15, 2025
Hosts: Natali and Clayton Morris
Guests: Harrison Berger (Independent Journalist), Lionel (Lionel Nation), Tom Fitton (Judicial Watch)

---

Overview

In this riveting episode of Redacted News, hosts Natali and Clayton Morris delve into a series of explosive topics that challenge mainstream narratives. From a disturbing assassination plot against former President Donald Trump with alleged Ukraine connections to the contentious rollout of Real ID, the episode promises a thorough examination of issues often overlooked by mainstream media. Additionally, the hosts scrutinize the authenticity of a high-profile female space mission and explore the fairness of Harvey Weinstein's retrial, culminating in a discussion on the pursuit of transparency regarding Jeffrey Epstein's files.

---

The Would-Be Assassin Plot Against Trump

Timestamp: [00:00] – [13:56]

Clayton Morris leads the discussion on a chilling case involving Nikita Kassip, a 17-year-old who allegedly plotted to assassinate Donald Trump with foreign assistance. He criticizes the mainstream media's lack of coverage, emphasizing the purported Ukraine connections.

• Clayton Morris states, “[...] Nikita Kassip was actively carrying this out. [...] to carry out the murder of Donald Trump” ([04:30]).

• The hosts highlight that Kassip had foreign contacts in Ukraine who allegedly helped him “figure out how to build a bomb-dropping drone” ([05:10]).

• Clayton questions the media's silence: “Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media?” ([05:25]).

• They draw parallels to previous assassination attempts, such as Ryan Routh, suggesting a pattern of Ukrainian involvement ([09:11]).

• Natalie Morris adds, “We keep hearing, just wait. The plan is coming together” ([10:08]).

The segment underscores concerns about foreign interference and the possible underreporting of serious threats against political figures.

---

Real ID Backlash

Timestamp: [24:23] – [33:05]

The discussion shifts to the implementation of Real ID, a government initiative perceived as an extension of the Patriot Act, raising alarms about increased surveillance and privacy violations.

• Kristi Noem, Homeland Security Secretary, delivers a public service announcement promoting Real ID ([24:45]).

• Tinida Gates (likely a fictional guest) argues, “It's essentially trying to do the same thing, more government surveillance and control over Americans” ([27:10]).

• The hosts and guest debate the implications of Real ID on privacy, likening it to steps toward a controlled digital identity and potential central bank digital currency ([28:19]).

• Melinda Gates contends, “This is a holdover from the Patriot Act” and criticizes the erosion of Fourth Amendment protections ([27:10]).

• The conversation explores the conflict between state rights and federal mandates, questioning the necessity and consequences of such identification systems ([29:39]).

This segment reflects deep skepticism about government overreach and the potential loss of personal freedoms through mandated identification systems.

---

Female Space Crew Authenticity

Timestamp: [13:56] – [22:45]

Natali and Clayton scrutinize the recent Blue Origin mission featuring an all-female crew, raising doubts about its authenticity and underlying motives.

• Natali Morris questions the mission's legitimacy, noting inconsistencies in footage and behavior of the crew ([14:24]).

• They analyze the sequence where crew members open the capsule door, only to have Jeff Bezos intervene with a wrench, suggesting it may have been staged for PR purposes ([15:51]).

• Natalie Morris criticizes the portrayal of female astronauts, expressing concerns about the messages being sent to young girls regarding feminism and motherhood ([18:23]).

• The hosts mock the authenticity of interactions during the mission, highlighting moments that appear scripted or unnatural ([17:33]).

• Lionel humorously remarks, “What happens when she goes on a roller coaster? She's like, I really want to become an engineer and a physicist” ([21:16]).

The discussion conveys a skeptical view of corporate-sponsored space missions, suggesting they may prioritize image over genuine scientific advancement.

---

Harvey Weinstein's Retrial

Timestamp: [33:08] – [43:48]

The episode delves into the controversial retrial of Harvey Weinstein, questioning the fairness of the legal proceedings and the influence of the MeToo movement.

• Lionel, a constitutional expert from Lionel Nation, explains the basis for overturning Weinstein's conviction, focusing on the misuse of similar fact evidence ([35:44]).

• Kristi Noem outlines legal standards, arguing that prior misconduct should not prejudice the current trial ([35:37]).

• Lionel emphasizes the importance of a fair trial, stating, “You have to identify the body, you have to identify the deceased” and criticizes the potential bias jurors may hold ([39:23]).

• Natali Morris raises concerns about the manipulation of public opinion through the MeToo movement, questioning who benefits from such high-profile cases ([39:44]).

• Clayton Morris highlights the media's role in shaping perceptions, noting the lack of unbiased coverage ([43:07]).

This segment raises critical questions about judicial impartiality, the potential for media influence on legal outcomes, and the broader implications for social justice movements.

---

Jeffrey Epstein Files and Judicial Watch Lawsuit

Timestamp: [43:49] – [56:44]

Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch discusses the organization's lawsuit against the Department of Justice to obtain the elusive Jeffrey Epstein files, advocating for transparency and accountability.

• Tom Fitton explains the motive behind the lawsuit, emphasizing the need for public reassurance through FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests ([44:50]).

• He highlights potential government obstruction, stating, “The deep state is secrecy, so everyone doesn't want it to come out” ([48:01]).

• Clayton Morris probes the possible contents of the files, referencing terabytes of video evidence from Epstein's properties ([52:38]).

• Tom Fitton underscores the significance of Epstein's connections, questioning what the released documents might reveal about influential individuals’ involvement ([49:24]).

• The hosts express concern over Epstein's mysterious death and the handling of his case, suggesting deeper governmental complicity ([53:34]).

• Lionel adds intrigue by expressing interest in potential prosecutorial misconduct related to Epstein's case ([56:04]).

This portion of the episode underscores the ongoing quest for truth surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, the challenges of accessing pivotal information, and the broader implications for political and social elites.

---

Conclusion

The Redacted News episode effectively unpacks a series of high-stakes issues, blending investigative discussions with pointed critiques of mainstream media and governmental actions. By incorporating expert opinions and direct quotes, the hosts provide a comprehensive analysis aimed at uncovering hidden truths and prompting listeners to question widely accepted narratives.

---

Notable Quotes

• Clayton Morris: “Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media?” ([05:25])

• Kristi Noem: “Get a real ID. Starting May 7, you will need a real ID to travel by air or to visit federal buildings in the United States.” ([24:45])

• Melinda Gates: “This is written by the same authors, which makes sense because it's essentially trying to do the same thing, more government surveillance and control over Americans.” ([27:10])

• Tom Fitton: “The deep state is secrecy, so everyone doesn't want it to come out.” ([48:01])

• Lionel: “What happens when she goes on a roller coaster? She's like, I really want to become an engineer and a physicist.” ([21:16])

---

This detailed summary encapsulates the essence of the episode, highlighting the critical discussions and providing context for each major topic covered by Redacted News. Whether scrutinizing political assassination plots, government surveillance measures, or high-profile legal cases, the hosts strive to present a narrative that challenges listeners to seek deeper understanding beyond mainstream portrayals.

Transcript

[Clayton Morris]

Mainstream media has already memory hold this entire story because they don't want to ask tough questions. But we're going to dive into that today.

[Natalie Morris]

Plus is real ID yet another way to track us a violation from the Patriot act left over from oh you know how they used 911 to continue to track and violate our civil rights? Yeah, right. We're also going to talk about Harvey Weinstein because he's being retried. Now he was the poster child for the MeToo movement but maybe he didn't get a fair trial. What are they hiding from us? Why do they want us united against Harvey Weinstein? Now we are not here to advocate for anybody except equal justice under the law. So we're going to have Lionel Nation joining us about that Also.

[Clayton Morris]

Where are the Epstein files? See there's even an E missing in front of eps in on the the in our rundown here where it's purposeful because they're hiding it. Are we ever going to see the Epstein files? Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch is going to be joining us because they just filed a massive lawsuit to get to the bottom of these Epstein files. And I' excited to talk to Tom about that because they've been leading the charge on this. So that's coming up here a little bit later in the show. So. All right, we've got a lot of news to get to. Let us know where you're joining us from around the world. Thank you guys for patience here as we're building our new studio out.

[Natalie Morris]

And you see I started off camera I'm like hey everybody. Yeah, what's going on? We're still getting it worked out.

[Clayton Morris]

Don't you move, don't you move.

[Natalie Morris]

I won't move.

[Clayton Morris]

The team move also.

[Natalie Morris]

I'm getting used to that. I'm finding you guys. Yeah. So we're, we're still getting settled in here. So I apologize. Thanks for sticking with us through all the bugs before we get to. No, okay, no, we're not gonna do the sponsor first.

[Clayton Morris]

No, we're not.

[Natalie Morris]

We usually do.

[Clayton Morris]

Sorry. We're gonna get to it. Okay. All right, well let's get to it then shall we? We. Let's get to the news. So we are learning some stunning new details about the latest would be Trump assassin that the mainstream media has totally ignored. First let's set the stage here. A 17 year old kid murders his parents, lives with their bodies for two weeks. Records a video of his stepdad's corpse, surround candles. And that's not even the most disturbing part of the story. If you can believe that. If you can believe that part of it, which is actually creepy enough as it is. No, this young assassin in training had foreign contacts, one of them based in Ukraine. At least one. There could be more, and there likely is more in Ukraine. The same place, of course, that the United States has been sending endless billions without a single receipt. The Democrats, of course, their favorite money laundering machine is, you know, is the war in Ukraine. And Ukraine was his exit plan, using Ukraine to carry out the assassination and then exit afterwards and get back safely to Ukraine, where he would then be, I guess, I don't know, taken care of. This teenager, Nikita Kassip, wasn't just fantasizing about violence. He was actively carrying this out. And he allegedly killed his own mother and stepfather to free himself financially and logistically to carry out an assassination plot on President Trump like these. In other words, his parents were holding him back from carrying out his plan. They were just getting in the way of all of this. And he was being, you know, he was being held back by this. Well, now we have the new FBI affidavit today from the FBI agent working this case. I want to kind of go through this here because the DOJ and the FBI say his motive was crystal clear, quote, to obtain the financial means and autonomy necessary to carry out the murder of Donald Trump. And you can read the affidavit for yourself. It's long, it's a stunning, stunning read. But it gets worse. Kassip wasn't just working alone. So you can throw out the, the lone gunman story if you want. And we now know that Thomas Crooks also wasn't working alone in Butler, Pennsylvania. None of these guys were working alone. Why isn't this the biggest story in mainstream media? Like, just take a, take a pause here. If this was Barack Obama or Joe Biden for that matter, and you found out that there was a criminal conspiracy that involved a foreign government and the intelligence community to kill a sitting president, it would be wall to wall coverage on cnn, on msnbc. Turning on MSNBC today, no mention of it. Zero. Cnn, the same thing. Zero. It's unbelievable. So according to the federal agents, Cassip was texting someone with a Ukrainian phone number and another person inside of Russia, Ukrainian sympathizer, both of whom were allegedly helping him figure out how to build a bomb dropping drone because they've been really good at this. Dropping, dropping bombs with drones on him, right? Hitting apartment complexes in the Belgorod region of Russia, flying them right into windows and killing civilians. So he literally asked them how to weaponize a drone, and his Ukrainian connections were helping him to commit presidential assassination on US soil. And maybe there's nothing here, I'm sure. Maybe there's just nothing to look at at all. I don't believe that for a second. Of course. So were these people on the other end of that encrypted chat, who were they and why was one of them in Ukraine? I hope we learn who these people are from the doj. According to the affidavit, Kassip had fully immersed himself in the darkest corners of the Internet. He was hanging out in a satanic cult forum. He loved neo Nazis and was a big fan of Ukraine's Azov Battalion, the Nazis that the Biden administration aligned themselves with. And he was a big fan of the group called nswp, National Socialism slash white Power. So think of this guy kind of like as a mix. I, I, I was thinking of this guy kind of like as a mix between, like, Charles Manson, the Azoff Battalion, and a discord server from hell. And that's literally your guy trying to kill President Trump. Also, it's kind of interesting that Democrats love to call Trump a Nazi, and a literal Nazi was crying, trying to kill him for not being Nazi enough. People conflate the two all the time, right? Nazis were socialists. Trump is the opposite of a socialist. So they hate him for that. They hate that he won't, you know, marginalize black people. They hate that he got a huge amount of vote in the Hispanic community during this election, last election.

[Natalie Morris]

They hate that he loves capitalism.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, exactly. They hate that he loves business. This is really, really, you know, detrimental to socialists and Nazis who really don't want that at all. So this assassin, this would be assassin. Cassip even wrote a manifesto calling for Trump's death, then talked about fleeing to Ukraine after the job was done. So let me ask this question. What kind of a teenager kills his parents, builds a bomb plot, and thinks that Ukraine is a safe zone for him after he carries out an assassination? Unless, of course, someone told him it would be a safe zone. So someone tells him Ukraine will take care of him. So then he allegedly kills his parents, then stays in the house with the parents corpses for two full weeks. And he didn't just ignore the corpses, he actually filmed them with candles and made a video of his stepfather's body with candles surrounding it like some sort of satanic cult ritual. And again, according to the FBI, this guy was in no rush at all. He had a plan. He was being methodical about it. He was Calculating according to the affidavit. And after the murders, the next move in his mind was, I'm going to Ukraine where I'll have a safe house. He even messaged one of his contacts, quote, I'm quoting him now. So while in Ukraine, I'll be able to live a normal life, even when it's found out what I did. Like, he's asking, like, yeah, you've already assured me, like, this would be the case. So, like, I'll be able to live a normal life there. Like, they'll be. I'll be sort of, like, praised over there. I mean, you don't ask a question like that unless you've been sort of led to believe the answer is yes. Am I wrong? I mean, that's the way that I read it. This isn't speculation. This is straight from the DOJ's affidavit. And why does the US media cover it from one day? And then they just suddenly. Memory hold the damn thing. Ukraine's numbers keep showing up on caller ID for these would be assassins, like he did with Ryan Routh, the guy who tried to kill Trump at Mar a Lago on the golf course. The CIA knew exactly who Ralph was, of course they did, and that he was in. He was in Ukraine, of course, playing mercenary with his mercenary friends. So today we can switch gears a little bit today, because now we've got. We've got this hearing today. So.

[Natalie Morris]

So let me just play devil's advocate a little bit.

[Clayton Morris]

Well, you would be a devil and you would be advocate. Yeah.

[Natalie Morris]

Okay.

[Clayton Morris]

It's appropriate.

[Natalie Morris]

Is it possible. I mean, you can get a Google voice, Ukrainian number. Right. And so is it possible then, that there's another group trying to make it look like this is Ukrainian? That. That clearly is possible. But why. Right, and so why is no one asking these questions? So sort of like, why somebody. Yes. Right.

[Clayton Morris]

Maybe. Yeah, because we don't know.

[Lionel]

Because, like, I, I would. I would. I would question that. Like a government getting involved in this simply for the fact that, let's say they were successful. What has changed? Like, if Ukraine is trying to change their own, like, you know, political landscape, then now JD Vance is there, and has he given any indication that he's going to be pro Ukraine and turn the money back on for the war effort? I mean, how far down the chain would they have to go before they find a sympathetic person? It just. That just doesn't. It doesn't make sense to me.

[Natalie Morris]

Well, these assassination attempts were. While Trump was a candidate, though. And so for Ryan but, but, well.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, no, no, he was president elect at this point.

[Natalie Morris]

Okay.

[Clayton Morris]

Right.

[Tom Fitton]

So Ryan Ralph was president elect.

[Clayton Morris]

Yes.

[Natalie Morris]

You get J.D. vance and, and J.D. vance has the same platform about ending the war in Ukraine. But for Ryan Ralph, at least, they wanted to prevent a Trump presidency. And they probably were banking on the fact that J.D. vance couldn't get elected on his own or the Republicans could not replace him with another person of this ideology.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah. I mean, and now this one, of course, just happened. So now. But here's my question is like, how many more have we not even learned about? Right. How many more of these have been kept quiet from us right now? And how many more of this? Or do we have, like, Ukrainian connections with. So let's just talk about Ryan Roth, because today, big news in the Ryan Routh story. The man accused of trying to assassinate President Trump was back in court today. And we're getting more confirmation of everything we already warned you about here on this show. And you know, people, oh, you guys are conspiracy theorists. And then you go in court and they actually talk about it in front of a judge. So glad to be called a conspiracy theorist. Um, so let's be clear. This is the same guy we told you about weeks ago who allegedly tried to buy a rocket launcher from someone in Ukraine using encrypted telegram messages. That's not new. Of course, you heard it here. When we first reported that a few weeks ago here on the show, we reported on the encrypted messages. We reported the RPG request. We were, we reported the, quote about Trump being, quote, bad for Ukraine that they got from his telegram messages with Ukrainian weapons dealers, all of it. But today's hearing in Florida federal court just cemented what prosecutors are building here, that this, in fact, was a conspiracy. So prosecutors laying out before the judge that this is a conspiracy. This guy wasn't a lone wolf. He was not a lone gunman. He had help. Prosecutors say this wasn't some unstable guy with a grudge. This was a politically motivated assassination plot with Ukrainian entanglements. So once again, the word Ukraine is sitting front and center today in court in Florida. Prosecutors are going all in on the Ukrainian connection. They reiterated that Ralph went to encrypted apps, tried to procure military grade weapons, not from Craigslist, not from some gun, gun show, but from Ukraine. And as we played you soundbite from Tucker a few weeks ago here on the show, over 50% of all of these weapons have been sold on the black market. They're getting them, receiving them, and selling them off to terrorists, known terrorists and drug cartels. So that's two assaft, you know, two attempted assassins, two Ukrainian connections and we don't know to what lengths, you know, Thomas Crooks may have been connected using encrypted applications on forums and so forth with Ukraine. We don't know that. Of course his body was burned almost immediately and cremated so that no one could, could analyze that. Like, I really hope that we get some answers from Pam Bondi now and Cash Patel, because that was the FBI under Biden that just took his body and just cremated it like right away. His apartment was like totally wiped clean. No silverware, no nothing. Like who was this ghost in Butler, Pennsylvania? So what the hell is going on here? Of course the corporate media won't touch that question, ignoring their money laundering operation in Ukraine. Ralph's trial, by the way, is set to begin on September 8th. So let's see if he. Here's my. Let's see if he actually survives to see that trial. And we hear public evidence in trial because this guy, you know, he's on a path to like Epstein island, you know, Epsteining himself because maybe a lot of information might actually come out during this trial that the deep state doesn't absolutely want in front of the American people. So let us know your thoughts on that.

[Natalie Morris]

All right, before we move on to talk about more serious matters, I want to let you know that I am feeling super inspired by these all female blue origin space crew to do more math and science. I really am excited about that. I'm just so happy that women are now better represented by these ladies who were passengers on a three minute space tour. But wait a minute, was it real? Now that's what's trending around the Internet today.

[Clayton Morris]

Wait a minute, it's all fake?

[Natalie Morris]

Well, there's a lot of fake stuff you see on your screen when I put that picture up. Absolutely. Can we just put it, put it back up again?

[Clayton Morris]

There's a lot of plastic surgery.

[Natalie Morris]

Probably none of them have that real hair color. Yeah, there's a lot of Botox fillers. Yes, absolutely. There's a lot that's fake that I can confirm is fake. But let's look at what the evidence is that maybe the entire mission was fake. Now we could see the whole stream from soup to nuts, but once it passed the atmosphere, we couldn't see the outside of the capsule. So. Okay. Some people are saying though that the fact that the ladies open the door to the pod themselves only to be told to close it so that Jeff bezos could come over with his muscle shirt and use a wrench to get it open and rescue them. Yeehaw. Cowboy style proves that it's fake. Now, the New shepherd is the vessel that they traveled in. It does have a release mechanism. We're going to watch it here. See, they open it and then this lady says, no, no, not yet. Don't open it. Can we rewind that? Restack it a second so you can see that it does open for a second. And then they're like, no, girls. No, no, stay put. And so this is the part that people are saying was totally faked. So see, here they go up, the girls open it, and then they have to wait. And Jeff Bezos is holding this wrench that apparently opens.

[Clayton Morris]

Doesn't really need it because the girls on the inside already opened this thing.

[Natalie Morris]

Right. And so was that a camera op or is it supposed to open now? Again, the New shepherd does have a release mechanism from the inside in case, for whatever reason, the wind blew them way off course and they were put somewhere that the rescue vehicles couldn't open, and they were stuck in there, starving. No water, no bathroom, right? Then they could open it from the inside. So they had already opened it. But then why is he standing there with that wrench? Is that just a photo opportunity? Uh, oddly enough, I did ask ChatGPT about there because I love to see what the mainstream narrative is, and usually AI gives it to me. Uh, and so AI said, yes, this is suspicious, But Blue Origin is basically a fancy roller coaster to space and back. Take a look. It says, well, other missions had more complicated doors and release mechanisms, so they couldn't open it up and blow themselves to smithereens in space. But New shepherd, no big deal, because it's basically a fancy roller coaster to space and back. Now, another major issue I have is this heavily edited, edited footage of them fooling around with toys and flowers. Now think about this as I show you this 1 minute and 3 second video. They had 4 minutes total in space, that's 240 seconds. But they used at least a quarter to a third of it, taking selfies and playing with toys. So you have to think to yourself, If I have 4 minutes total in space, am I going to f around with a camera in these toys and this, like, girl shot? Watch. Got it. One, two, three.

[Clayton Morris]

Take up space.

[Natalie Morris]

Tamir.

[Kristi Noem]

Tamara's in space. My dear, look right behind you.

[Natalie Morris]

It's okay.

[Kristi Noem]

Leave Flynn up there.

[Clayton Morris]

I would just be staring out the window the whole time.

[Natalie Morris]

Here's Katie. She's Staring at herself with her.

[Lionel]

They're looking at each other like, what the hell?

[Natalie Morris]

Yes, at each other. Which they've been doing for months in preparation for this.

[Clayton Morris]

Look at me.

[Harrison Berger]

Oh, the moon.

[Natalie Morris]

You guys, I have to tell you, look at the moon.

[Melinda Gates]

That's amazing.

[Clayton Morris]

Wow.

[Natalie Morris]

Look at the blue line.

[Kristi Noem]

Oh, my gosh.

[Clayton Morris]

Oh, my God.

[Natalie Morris]

Oh, my God. That's our pink moon. Okay. They're not even looking out the window. 240 seconds. This is all you have in space.

[Clayton Morris]

And then you're coming back.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah. And you're playing with your shit.

[Clayton Morris]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. That's amazing. Like, let's play a whole game of checkers. Let's bring up a whole bunch of pieces and.

[Natalie Morris]

Oh, it's time to go down now. Oh, shoot. I'm so sorry that I messed around with these ladies that I'm not even close personal friends with, but our other influencers. It's outrageous.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah. The listener in our chat says, wow, what the hell? This is Cringe Beyond.

[Natalie Morris]

And I am so shocked that they've left all their social media comments open because it is a PR disaster. Most people are just thinking that this is such a sham. It's such an influencer campaign. It's inspiring nobody. Here's another problem I have with this because I was listening to the live stream while I drove my daughter to school. And one of the hosts of the livestream on Blue Origin was a woman named Kristen Ann Fisher. She is the daughter of NASA astronaut Dr. Annalee Fisher. So in the prep for the launch on Monday, Fisher talked about being a woman and an astronaut. And she said that her mother went to space when she was only 15 months old and was chosen for that mission while she was still eight months pregnant. And she explained it saying her mom really felt that she had something to prove as a woman, which I found incredibly offensive because no woman has anything to prove while they're pregnant. You're literally doing magic while you're pregnant. It is. This is not feminism. Saying that being pregnant is not enough.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, you also need to go to.

[Natalie Morris]

Space, so I need to prove myself. Like, while you're pregnant, you have. You have shit all to prove while you're pregnant to anyone. So to frame this as I have to show something to the world is crap. And I made sure to tell my daughter, do you hear how offensive that is? That you have to be an astronaut to prove something and being a mom is not enough. That is not feminism. I reject it wholeheartedly. Even the New York Times, which I always disagree with, does not like this. They say that this only proves that several women have amassed the social capital to be friends with Lauren Sanchez, who had the social capital to land Jeff Bezos as a fiance. They also says that. Say that this is a great point. Hadn't thought of. This is done for male fantasy, not for female empowerment. Buff, bald, rich, midlife crisis boyfriend uses his expensive toys to send Barbie fiance to. With her friends to space. So I don't like anything about it. I'm not feeling inspired. I don't think this is a good lesson for my daughters of what feminism should look like. But I'm loving the memes about it because there is almost nobody to say anything positive about it. Here's a fun meme that. And there's so many of these. And if you see more, please tag me in them because I've had a rough week and I need to see more like this. Go through your whole life not knowing.

[Clayton Morris]

How much love you have inside of.

[Harrison Berger]

You until the day you launch.

[Natalie Morris]

It was music. I'm sorry about that. We're not supposed to play music on YouTube. But anyway, when Katy Perry came back, she said she was feeling so much love, so connected to love. Lauren Sanchez said, we're all in it together. By looking at the earth from a different vantage point. She really felt like we're all in it together. Katy Perry said she really wanted to learn more about STEM and science. They had a two day training, so I don't know if she. I mean, maybe she learned a lot. And if you want to get on a rocket she builds next, be my guest. So let me know your thoughts.

[Lionel]

What happens when she goes on a roller coaster? She's like, I really want to become an engineer and a physicist.

[Natalie Morris]

Like, yeah, more women need to be represented in transportation. So I'm gonna go ride the bus after this for a while.

[Clayton Morris]

Okay.

[Natalie Morris]

And there you go.

[Clayton Morris]

One person says, oh, man, you are really jealous of them. Yeah, clearly. You really want to go to space.

[Natalie Morris]

Well, here's another thing. This woman who left her 15 month old to go to space, like, that's also a choice that I can't, I can't abide as a mother. That's very dangerous. What if your daughter becomes motherless because you had something to prove? Because having her was not enough in your life? I don't, I don't reckon. I. I don't. I don't connect with this as a woman at all. But if you want to see it as jealousy, that's cool. Yeah, I don't care.

[Clayton Morris]

All right, we got A lot more news to get to here. We're going to speak with Lionel coming up in just a moment about the Harvey Epstein story. Is he getting a new affair trial?

[Natalie Morris]

You have your perverts mixed up.

[Clayton Morris]

Did I call him Harvey Epstein? Yeah, Harvey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein. He's still alive. And is he going to have a new trial here? We're going to talk about that. Plus real id get ready for real id. Kristi Gnome, you know, wants you to get ready because, you know, Patriot act is still in effect and this is the new reality for all of us with American IDs and, and, and, and the biometric database and everything else that the United States is planning on rolling out. We're going to talk about that in a second.

[Natalie Morris]

But first, first we want to tell you about our sponsors over at Shopify because Shopify is not only a sponsor of our show, but we use it for the redacted store as well. So we are Shopify customers. Shopify has everything you need to grow your business and to launch your business. So if you have a great idea to launch anything, whether it be clothes or a service or what have you, Shopify is where you start and end because they can help you get started. In fact, that's the redacted store that runs on Shopify. So anytime we have an idea for something new that we think that you might like as a listener of Redacted, then we can launch it quite easily. Not only do they handle the graphics and, but they also handle the back end plus the payment system. So it really, they have great customer service. If you get confused, you don't have to know design, you don't have to know E Commerce. They do it all for you. So right now you can sign up for a one month trial period today by going to shopify.com redacted one more time. That's shopify.com redacted. It's everything you need to grow your business.

[Clayton Morris]

All right, well, real ID get ready. Are you guys ready for real id? The way that the government will track you, of course, will track and do track you and do everything to make sure that they know where you, where you are at all times of the day. This, of course, is a holdover from the Patriot Act. Well, here is your Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noam to give you a warning. She dropped this public service announcement on X Watch.

[Harrison Berger]

Hi, I'm Kristine Ulm, the United States Secretary of Homeland Security. If you plan on traveling, we need your help to prevent delays and to prove your identity. Get a real ID. Starting May 7, you will need a real ID to travel by air or to visit federal buildings in the United States. These IDs keep our country safe because they help prevent fraud and they enhance security. Please do your part to protect our country. Go today and don't delay. To learn more, go to dhs.govreal-id thank you.

[Clayton Morris]

Now, we've been warning about the Real ID for a long time here, and now it's finally coming. A lot of Americans have already gotten it, and they don't see any trouble with it. Harrison Berger is an independent journalist. He's been on this story for a long time and is here to talk about this. Harrison, welcome to the show. Great to see you from Brazil today, from Buenos Aires.

[Melinda Gates]

Great to see you From Rio de Janeiro. Yeah, thank you so much for Rio de Janeiro.

[Natalie Morris]

I was going to say Buenos Aires, Argentina.

[Clayton Morris]

My brain. Sorry, I apologize. Welcome from Brazil. And so let's talk about this. You know, Americans are sort of like, blindly kind of going along with this, but this is a holdover, of course, from the Patriot act, is it not? And why should Americans be concerned about real id?

[Melinda Gates]

It is. And in fact, it's written by the same authors, which makes sense because it's essentially trying to do the same thing, more government surveillance and control over Americans. And let me just remind people what our Fourth Amendment says, because I think we so often forget. It says that there will not be any unlawful or unreasonable searches and seizures, and it protects you against that from the federal government. But since I've been alive, pretty much because I was born in 2001, I'm 23 years old, we've had this erosion of our privacy rights and Fourth Men protection, starting with the Patriot act, now with this real id. And so it's not surprising that that's happening right now, because the Trump administration is embracing many of the same tactics as the war on terror. We have this rendition program now where we're sending people to El Salvador. And Kristi Noem from the DHS has announced that she's going to be screening visa applicants for anti Semitism. And so it makes sense that they're doing this, pulling this tool out of the old war on terror bag and trying to revive this old legislation. Now, at this moment, can you explain.

[Natalie Morris]

More about the purpose of real ID from a government standpoint? Not what they're telling us, but what the actual purpose is? Because Representative Thomas Massie said that this is proof that your physical person matches their entry in a database. So can you expand on that? Please. Yeah.

[Melinda Gates]

I mean, basically the data that's printed on these IDs would all be standardized and shared with a single network. That's not what we have right now. Each state controls how they want to ID each of their citizens. That's under the 10th Amendment that we have that. This is a total reversal of that. And it's really a radical change. They want to standardize it and make it national, which makes it easier for the government to track and monitor you again. It makes sense why they're doing this, because this is the game that they've been playing for so long.

[Clayton Morris]

I mean, is real ID just really that first step towards, you know, government controlled digital ID and putting us all on, you know, digital currency, central bank digital currency, you know, all the talks about what we're going to see at the border, of course, biometric scanning coming in, like all of us will be tracked forever. There's no way really to get away from it.

[Melinda Gates]

I mean, what's really amazing about this is that I thought it was conservatives who were warning about this. I remember in 2022 when it was Jim Jordan and Thomas Massie who were warning against the dhs, who at the time had the disinformation governance board, led by Nina Jankowicz, censoring Americans. They were monitoring Americans monitoring school board meetings, monitoring their church attendance, all of this. And it was really Mike Johnson and Jim Jordan in Congress who made a big stink about this. But now that Trump is in charge and they have free reign to go after their political enemies, they've completely abandoned their principles and now they're wielding the same framework against their own political enemies. It makes you wonder if we're just in this cycle where every four years, each political faction, each partisan faction will wield these newly weaponized tools against their enemies. And America is all the worse for it in the end.

[Natalie Morris]

Right? Because now we see Democrats speaking out against ID laws, you know, which is something. I mean, they have been for voting for a long time. But so any incumbent party will be for it and then their challenger will be against it, and then that will just flip flop. And so it's us that needs to stay consistent. And so is this the same kind of tracking ability, though, that the government already has, if you have a passport? Because a passport can be a stand in for a real id.

[Melinda Gates]

I mean, you make a good point. The fact is that the government already has all sorts of tools to monitor you and know everything that you do, everything that you search on the Internet, who you talk to. They have all these Ways to break encryption. So even your signal chats and your telegram chats, they can see who you're talking to. You raise a great question, what else more do they need? But apparently they do need more. They do need to know where we are at all times and basically coerce every American to register with the federal government under this new ID program, which is really novel and revolutionary.

[Clayton Morris]

I mean, what happens to, you know, individuals who refuse to comply? I mean, there's a lot of people in our audience that are saying, no, I'm not getting real id, I'm not going to do it. Do they lose their rights to travel freely within the United States? And you know, like. And would you. I mean, I know I'm asking you kind of huge question here, but can states step in and say, no, we are sort of a free of real ID state. You know, in Nevada or Arizona, you don't need it here and therefore come here as like a safe haven?

[Melinda Gates]

Well, it has been a states rights issue for a long time. Going back to 2012, 2011, there were groups like the Cato Institute and the ACLU. You had this kind of convergence of left right interests against this, based on what you're saying now that it's the state's right to decide how they identify each of their residents and citizens. So you know what the repercussions could be for people who don't register? I mean, I think we could look to what happened with COVID I think we can anticipate that people who don't comply with these orders will face some sorts of punishments. What that will be to be determined, but that's what I would anticipate.

[Natalie Morris]

Right. And what do you think? What if you refuse, but you want to drive across the border and then, I mean, that's. We should have the right to do that.

[Clayton Morris]

Maybe you don't crime.

[Natalie Morris]

Right.

[Melinda Gates]

I mean, all of this is in question now. The fact is that they passed this law a long time ago with the Patriot act, as you mentioned, but they failed to enforce it for this exact reason. Because each state, like New York and Connecticut, they have different rules about this that, you know, Connecticut has this real id. They've had it for a while, but New York has not. And so it creates a lot of confusion. And just like really everything that the DHS has done since 9, 11, including the ramping up, the security at TSA where we all have to undress, there's no real point to it. It doesn't seem like it makes us safer. There's no evidence that it stopped any terror attacks because, in fact, we've still had these terror attacks on our soil, like in Boston, that DHS or the FBI or any of these groups failed to stop. It just seems like a way to hassle us. You know, Gore Vidal wrote about this a long time ago. He called it the shredding of the Bill of Rights. And I think that's exactly what's happening now. It was very prescient.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, you're absolutely right about that. Yeah. So we all have to take off our shoes because some, by the way, a British citizen, Richard Reed, you know, decided to put, you know, like some little sticky gum explosives in his shoe that, you know, now we all have to take off our damn shoes. I feel so much safer because of that. This is ridiculous. This is just another way that the Patriot act continues to rear its ugly head. Harrison, great to see you. Thank you so much for your perspective on this. And it seems like this is going to be the law of the land here really soon unless we have more Thomas Massey standing up to fight against it. Harrison, great to see you. Thank you so much for your perspective.

[Melinda Gates]

Thanks for having me on.

[Natalie Morris]

Well, coming up, we're going to talk about did Harvey Weinstein get a fair trial because he was used for a female empowerment movement, the MeToo movement. But is there more there behind? He's going to be retried this week. What is there to see? Lionel has been tracking this from The Lionel Nation YouTube channel. So he will tell us where to look. Not the mainstream media. But before we get there, Clayton will tell you about.

[Clayton Morris]

I'll tell you about our friends over at Bunker because, you know, Bunker has been a great sponsor for redacted. They are having tremendous growth and they're doing it slowly and intentionally and methodically instead of these other apps that are exploding like, you know, Telegram and Signal. So let me tell you about Bunker, okay? It's a way for you to protect your lives from surveillance, cyber criminals and other threats. And what you do is Bunker is an uncompromised private messenger together with a password manager, a secure vault and notes that work seamlessly together. Private messaging and sharing. Send messages and leverage Bunker sharing capabilities for passwords, documents, notes, photos and videos. You can create to do lists, travel business, private reflections, recipes, workouts, all of that taken care of inside of bunker over 130 countries, bunker customers enjoy peace of mind. You can travel with greater ease, have more energy to focus on what matters. So right now you can get 25% off. Download Bunker today from the App Store. That's B U N K R dot life and use the code redacted to get 25% off. Live Life to the fullest. Protect what matters most. Download bunker today.

[Natalie Morris]

All right, well, Harvey Weinstein is being retried this week in New York. Being against him seemed like an open and shut case. It basically launched us into the MeToo era. But something that was not obvious to everyone is that he may not have had a fair trial. And we're not advocating for Harvey Weinstein. We're advocating for equal justice under the law. What is there that the mainstream media won't tell us about? Well, Lionel is. Lionel from Lionel Nation is a litigator and constitutional expert. His Lionel Nation YouTube channel breaks all this down. He's been following Weinstein. He's been following Diddy. He's been following Epstein. So, Lionel, thank you for joining us. What is there to retry in the Weinstein case? Nope, I don't hear you. Do you hear him?

[Clayton Morris]

Oh, he's muted.

[Kristi Noem]

There we go. How's that?

[Natalie Morris]

All right.

[Kristi Noem]

Yeah. Yes, in the case of Harvey Epstein, which I think is a perfect truncation.

[Melinda Gates]

Of both of them. Here.

[Kristi Noem]

Here's the bottom line. There is a. The reason why this was overturned, and I'm 100% for it, is that there is something in law called prior or similar fact evidence. And in New York, there was a case in 1901 called the Molineau case. And what it means is this. If you as a prosecutor have to prove something like intent or plan or lack of mistake, I can use your prior instances of wrongdoing that you have not been charged with to make a case. Let's say, for example, Natalie, you're charged with arson. And in prior arsons, you used a particular way of taking baby dolls and soaking them gasoline. This is actually kind of an example that's used. And you had this unique M.O. this thing that you did every time you left playing cards and you. And the note. And we don't know who it is this time, but this arsonist did exactly what you did in a prior case. Under the cases of similar fact evidence, I can bring that before a jury to say, see, this is Natalie, because this behavior is similar to other behavior that she might not have been charged with. That makes sense. If there's confusion, if there's a reason, in the case of Harvey Weinstein, why do we have evidence or cases of other women claiming he attempted to abuse them? What's the purpose of this? There was no question as to who it was. It was Harvey Weinstein. He didn't have a unique M.O. he didn't say anything. There was no evidence, There was no benefit other than to tell the jury, where there's smoke, there's fire. And if you don't find them guilty of this one, well, this no good SOB did this in the past, and that is precisely what the appellate court said. Now other people are saying, no, no, no, this is, this is attempt to address the MeToo movement. And I'm all for that. But the problem is when relevant evidence, so called relevant evidence, is so prejudicial that a jury says, well, you didn't tell me about these other cases. Well, he must be guilty then. And that's where we're headed. So I don't like him. And between you and me, he probably did everything they said he did. 80 women, we've heard about this creep, but this is the courtroom. Whether it's Donald Trump or Harvey Weinstein or anybody, you have to ask yourself, why aren't we talking about this case with these victims, this evidence? Now, who cares what he did before? If I could give one more example, that happens all the time in the case where there's a terrible case, let's say, of a child who's murdered. This happens more often than not. You have to identify the body, you have to identify the deceased. In the old days, prosecutor would show the worst picture, the most horrible picture of the child, let's say, in the morgue to, let's say, a mother. The mother would scream, that's my baby. And courts would say, wait a minute, that's relevant, of course, the identity of the deceased. But this outweighs any prejudice towards the defendant. We have to balance this. I don't care if you're a Son of Sam or Harvey Weinstein or Harvey Epstein or anybody for that matter. You don't need this. Why don't we just take the words of this, these woman alone, Tell me what happened. Where were you?

[Natalie Morris]

How can they do that, though? Because every juror is going to know the reputation of Harvey Weinstein. So you can't say, forget that he ejaculated into a plant or was mean to Salma Hayek and abused her on set or anything. And let's just see, did he do this thing to this one victim and was it raped?

[Kristi Noem]

They, they may not know that, I'm sure. Listen, this idea of everybody is, do you think Diddy can get a fair trial? Do you, do you think, you know the last time we ever had a change of venue? Remember that, that relic from Time Gone by. I think the best case ever was. This is before your time, Murph. The serf. This guy was so they. Son of Sam Shepard was another case where the. The. The, you know, the evidence. Do you think O.J. simpson. Do you think today, in this world of social media that we live in, anybody can go anywhere? Of course not. But it's one thing, Natalie, to say, oh, I remember the thing about the planter, or about this, or maybe I don't. But when I have women in a courtroom who said, well, let me tell you something. You're on trial for parking tickets, and somebody brings up the fact that you were charged with shoplifting at a Costco was like, wait a minute. What does that have to do with anything? It shows a criminal propensity. Well, that is verboten. Now, I know this guy is a creep, but here's the question. What defense does he have? You don't need to do this. Put a woman on the stand and say, here's what happened. This is what he did. This is where I was. This is what he told me, and that's it. Harvey's not gonna take the stand to refute it. You don't need this overkill. And plus, let me ask you this. What about having women outside the courtroom chanting his name, chanting, you know, basically hang him. It's like a lynch mob outside. Do you think anybody deserves that? Now, it's hard to tell people outside whether you could protest or not. But when it seeps through the windows, I mean, listen, you're going to find the guy guilty. Give him at least a chance. And I'm not suggesting he has any kind of a defense. There is. But this similar fact, evidence. Prosecutors are too lazy with it. There has to be a reason, especially if there's a case. It has come in handy before, where you have somebody who is, let's say, kidnapped. They can't ID the defense or the defendant. He wore a mask. Well, in this other case, he wore the identical mask, people, so that makes sense. But even he deserves this. And let me tell you something. He and Diddy and others, once you're charged, let's face it, you're through. You are done. You're finished. And I'm gonna say the worst thing, friends. That Harvey Weinstein has so little jury appeal. He's hideous. He's disgusting. There's nothing about him where you even. He's no Luigi Mangione. There's nobody out there collect, you know.

[Clayton Morris]

In love with him.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Kristi Noem]

Well, maybe she would. So, you know, the criminal justice defines and requires that we give people a fair trial. Not a perfect trial, but a fair trial. Give the guy a break. You don't need three witnesses.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, yeah, well, we got to leave it there, Lionel. We are such a jam packed show for you. But I, I think you're. I think you're right, and I think you're absolutely right that he is a hideous. He's a hideous human being. He's a hideous looking human being. A lot of people in the chat are like, wow, that guy is just repugnant on every level. He is.

[Kristi Noem]

I hope you're not talking about fair trial.

[Natalie Morris]

I guess the question, though, that still remains is though, if they. If they did not give him a fair trial, if they sold us this, you know, worse than he already was story, to what end? What were they manipulating us to rally around the MeToo movement? What did we get from it? And what weren't we told? So those are questions we'll continue to explore. Again, we're not advocating for Harvey Weinstein. We're asking what were we collectively invited to champion and to what end? And who gained power from it? So those are the outstanding questions.

[Clayton Morris]

Lionel, great to see you. Thank you so much on a busy news day on this Tuesday. We appreciate it, as always. Great to see you.

[Kristi Noem]

Thank you, friends.

[Clayton Morris]

Thanks, Lionel. All right, let's talk now about the. You know, we've been talking Harvey Weinstein, and then I conflated the two and call him Harvey Epstein, but now we're talking about the. The. The Jeffrey Epstein files. And Judicial Watch has just announced it filed a Freedom of Information act lawsuit against the U.S. department of justice for records regarding Jeffrey Epstein. And a man who I have the greatest respect for is Tom Fenton and from Judicial Watch, who's really leading this charge to get answers for the American people. We keep hearing, just wait. The plan is coming together. Don't worry. You know, don't worry about it. The plan is coming together. Americans just need to sit back. But Tom is not waiting on that, and God bless him for that. Tom joins us now from Judicial Watch. Great to see you. Real pleasure to have you here.

[Tom Fitton]

Thanks for. Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.

[Clayton Morris]

So why did you. Why now? Why did you decide to sue the Department of Justice for these Epstein files now?

[Tom Fitton]

Well, we saw kind of the mess that happened early in February or in February and asked for records about the Epstein records. We saw the public interest there. So use FOIA to get some reassurances to the people that the records are being reviewed under law and we get a record of what they have and what they don't have and what they don't want to give us, et cetera. And so we filed relatively simple requests to give us records about Epstein. We also wanted records from the attorney General and the FBI director about the efforts to produce the records that seemingly were obstructed, according to their public statements, by some FBI folks. It's unclear what happened there. And my concern is that we get these, and I'm all in favor of transparency, but when you get these public leaks, you're not sure what you're getting. Are they withholding documents? I don't know what else is out there. Who knows? Maybe they don't even know. But the FOIA process gives you some more reassurance in that regard. And. And I would encourage the FBI and the Justice Department to take advantage of this lawsuit, really, to release everything they can under law.

[Clayton Morris]

Right. I mean, it's just sort of gives them a little bit of COVID here. I think that's a great point. I hadn't thought about that. You know, hey, we have these FOIA requests, these Freedom of Information act requests. There might have been a, you know, maybe federal agencies that were working with Jeffrey Epstein, confidential informant information that we couldn't release because it could implicate other people in the agencies. But now our hands are kind of tied because of this lawsuit, and through the discovery process or otherwise, we have to release this information.

[Tom Fitton]

It's a straightforward process if there's a commitment to transparency. And I generally think that they do want to release the records, but they're kind of stuck either by the volume or some of the issues related to withholdings that they recognize they may have to make, that they weren't anticipating making. And the best way to deal with that is let the public know what the issues are. We had the JFK records released. We don't know what those were about either, what's been withheld, and it's, to me, transparency 101, which is what's the federal law that applies to the release of government records, typically the Freedom of Information act, rely on that to get the records out. And that reassures the public generally that there's a process in place that we can go to court if there's an issue. Right. At least there's that check. These leaks today haven't provided that check to the American people, which is why they've been. To me, it's one reason why the releases have been received so negatively.

[Natalie Morris]

And so who do you think are the Parties that would push against this. What are the government's tools to not comply with your request? That you would think, what are the brick walls?

[Tom Fitton]

I mean, my experience is the resting state of the deep state is secrecy, so everyone doesn't want it to come out. There's always a reason not to release something. And this is why the leadership of the agencies, both the FBI and Justice Department, really have to err on the side of transparency, overrule the exemptions that are typically asserted for documents such as this. I mean, there's going to be a lot of fights about privacy. Whose names are going to be released, people who haven't been charged with crimes, but whose names show up. Well, how is it you release that information? Is there national security information in a serious way here? At issue? I doubt it. But much of what we're asking for can be released, and the decision to withhold it is typically purely discretionary. I mean, if someone's Social Security number is there, that might be an issue. If they released it, pretty much anything else they can release at their own discretion.

[Clayton Morris]

I mean, when you've pulled the thread on this, are there things that jumped out to you that you want to keep pulling that thread? You find that it's going to lead you down a dark corridor. In all of your work on the Epstein story.

[Tom Fitton]

I think this is going to be more a straightforward case than people presume. The questions that people have are because of the lack of transparency. And when you have lack of transparency, people presume the worst. And who's to argue with them, since the government's in this case now outside the law in terms of refusing to provide information? So the Epstein case is about a politically connected individual who engaged in the worst sort of criminal activity. The feds had him dead to rights. They let him off. He was friendly with a lot of people in power. So there should be questions about what those people knew and when and what was their involvement with his illicit activities. And some of those answers might be exonerate individuals. You know, there are many people who say, don't. Just because I knew him doesn't mean I'm a bad guy. But there are others who probably have reasons to hide. But the concern Americans have is that they don't know everyone who's been involved with him. And there's a concern is that the government knows more than they're giving up. And the way to alleviate that concern is just to release the information.

[Natalie Morris]

From what you've seen, Melinda Gates has a new book out saying that. I mean, she's completely distancing herself from it. Like, I knew something was off when Bill had this relationship, he turned my stomach. And so we see all these public figures distancing themselves for that. So that heightens our spidey sense. So we suspect. Suspect that something is a foul. So you're right. The narrative makes us innately distrustful.

[Clayton Morris]

I was going to play off that a little bit, Tom, which is what Natalie was just saying. Are there people you talked about, people who might be exonerated, but are there people who you've seen that maybe we haven't, that really should be scared about this, that probably should seek cover right now?

[Natalie Morris]

You can rhyme them if you don't want to say their names.

[Tom Fitton]

Yeah, I literally have no idea what's in the documents. I don't know what's in the documents. And anyone who tells you they know what's out there and what hasn't been released, who knows? I mean, when you hear them talk about a truckload of documents and a handful of those records are released in the first big tranche in February, who knows what's in there? And all we can do is just ask for the records under law and get what we're able to get. So at least more questions are answered. Now are all the questions going to be answered? No. I mean, I've been doing this too long to recognize that even if the government releases records, you know, the. The records themselves are proof of more government cover ups and such. So who knows? Yeah, but the key step is to be transparent.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah. Well, one of the big pieces people keep talking about, the documents, the documents, the documents. But I mean, we know from our reporting that there's, I mean, terabytes of video evidence from the residents. Where does the video evidence from his house in Upper east side and also Epstein island come into play in your Freedom of Information act lawsuit?

[Tom Fitton]

Well, that's a good question. Typically, if there's video that's responsive, then they should be turning it over to us.

[Clayton Morris]

Wow.

[Tom Fitton]

I'm also interested in how he died. I mean, we're supposed to pretend that was normal. There was nothing normal about it. At the time he died, he was the most. He was the most famous prisoner in the entire federal prison system and they let him die. Now, by his own it's alleged, others suggest it was something and not just, you know, some guy on the street suggesting it. But if I recall, was it Cyril Recht Wecht who suggests that there was something? Well, Michael.

[Clayton Morris]

Michael Bodden. Michael Bodden as well.

[Tom Fitton]

I was thinking of Michael Bot One. Yeah. Serial rec wizard.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah. Michael Bodden, one of the famous. Famous, you know. Famous. Well, I guess. What's the word I'm looking for? Not corn.

[Natalie Morris]

Autopsies. I just made that up.

[Clayton Morris]

I can't think of the name of it.

[Tom Fitton]

You know, Medical examiner.

[Clayton Morris]

Medical examiner, yes. Well, I mean, I've interviewed him countless times back when I used to work on Fox. And I mean, he would, you know, he, he said absolutely. There was. This was not suicide. 100%. This was not.

[Tom Fitton]

What are the records about that whole issue? What's that? We haven't gotten any records about that. If there are records about the circumstances of his death that have been released under foia, I'd be curious to find them. But we're asking for them through this request.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah.

[Clayton Morris]

Tom, I'll get you out of here on this. I know you're, you're slammed busy because of this, this lawsuit, what you're dealing with right now. How do you think Pam Bondi has handled this so far, handing out these binders to these social media influencers and the whole thing? How do you think it's been handled so far under the Trump administration?

[Tom Fitton]

I don't know what was going on there. My impression was there was a lot of pressure and concern that material wasn't coming out, and the Justice Department just pushed out whatever they had sitting around to kind of give themselves some breathing room, and it didn't turn out work out the way they anticipated. You know, my view is you should act with due speed, but correctly, to get information out to reassure the American people that this is being taken seriously. More public commentary, even on the status of the release of this information would be good as well.

[Clayton Morris]

Right? Well, Tom, I'm a big fan. I've admired your work for a long time, so it's a real treat to have you here. And when I saw that you guys filed this lawsuit, I said, absolutely. Let's get Tom on the show. So keep us updated. We'd love to have you back on as this unfolds.

[Tom Fitton]

We'll see what we get.

[Clayton Morris]

Good luck. Tom, great to see you. Thank you so much.

[Tom Fitton]

Thank you.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah, check out Judicial Watch. Go over to their website. You can read through the lawsuit and the, the press release there for. It's what I'd be interested in.

[Lionel]

Sorry, I'd really, I'd really be interested to see what, what records are in, in these files of Alex Acosta, the original, like, prosecutor that, that gave him that sweetheart deal that he got off the first time and then went, actually went to work in Trump's doj. And so I would be curious to know, like, what, what, like, if any of that prosecute prosecutorial information or, like, files would be in any of that. Because I'd like to. I'd like to know. I'd like to know the thought process behind that sweetheart deal to begin with.

[Clayton Morris]

Right, right. Why did he. Why this guy? And then, then I'll be interesting to see then the people that after that deal was made, they continued, like, to do business with the guy.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah.

[Clayton Morris]

Or develop new relationships with the guy in the case of, like, Bill Gates and so forth.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah.

[Clayton Morris]

But I do like what Tom said.

[Natalie Morris]

RFK Jr had a friendship with him.

[Clayton Morris]

Yeah. He flew. And he flew on his plane multiple times.

[Natalie Morris]

Yeah.

[Clayton Morris]

I like what Tom said there, which is like, no one knows. So people that think they know, they don't until we see these documents. And by the way, I mean, to see the, the terabytes of video footage that could. That Judicial Watch might be able to get their hands on with this lawsuit is. I mean, good luck trying to sort through all that.

[Lionel]

But telling. Telling. But I wouldn't want to watch it. I wouldn't want to watch it. There are not enough showers left in my life.

[Clayton Morris]

Oh, Bill Clinton's landing here once again. Didn't we just see him a few, like, a few tapes ago on the hard drive here? Oh, he's back. He's back to Epstein Island. Oh, my gosh.

[Natalie Morris]

All right, well, that's gonna do it for us today. But before we go, we want to remind you that Redacted is brought to you by Tax Network USA. Today is tax day, you guys. Today's the 15th, and if you've fallen behind on filing taxes or you owe back taxes, then delaying will only make things worse. But if you have a powerful advocate on your side, you could make a good deal with the IRS. And that's what Tax Network USA does, with over 5,000 new tax liens filed every day. And the IRS has powerful enforcement tools. Now, then, we just don't know what the IRS is going to do if you have back taxes. So don't make the mistake of facing them alone. Let Tax Network USA help you take control, whether your issue is 10,000 or $10 million. Their team of skilled attorneys and seasoned negotiators have solved over $1 billion in tax debt using proven strategies. So call them today at 800-958-1000. You get a free consultation, absolutely free. They can just tell you what services they offer. And. And if they can help you uh, or you can visit tnusa.com redacted. It's free and it's confidential. So again, don't wait until after April 15th today to make a move. Beat the IRS to it. Be proactive. Call them 800-958-1000 or get a free private consultation by going to tnusa.com redacted all right, well, that's going to do it for us today. Again, we will be back tomorrow. We're live 4pm Eastern, 1pm Pacific every day. Hey, don't forget we have a newsletter you can head on over to Redacted. Do put in your email address and you'll get the newsletter every single day. It is free. There's nothing behind a paywall. No upsell, no cross sell. It's just something that we like to provide you. Writing the newsletter not only helps you sort of study up for what the show is going to be and read original source material helps us prepare as well. Because we are a family business. It's Clayton and I, we're a married couple. So we compile the newsletter. We compile the show. We have a small team and we just really like interacting with you and having our free voices in an independent media. So thank you so much for being a subscriber to Redacted and to the redacted newsletter. And we'll see you tomorrow, everybody.