Ruthless Podcast: "The Truth About the Epstein Files"

Airdate: November 20, 2025
Hosts: Josh Holmes, Comfortably Smug, Michael Duncan, John Ashbrook
Special Guest: Rep. Brandon Gill

Episode Overview

This episode of Ruthless dives into the recent surge of media and political attention on the Jeffrey Epstein files. The hosts analyze why Epstein’s crimes were underreported for years, scrutinize both Democratic and Republican handling of the fallout, and expose what they see as the partisan exploitation of the case against Donald Trump. The show also points out contradictions in media coverage, questions surrounding justice for victims, and the dangers of making investigatory files public. Later, they welcome Rep. Brandon Gill, discussing his approach to governance and current legislative efforts.

Main Discussion Themes

1. Media and Political Cynicism Around the Epstein Files

• Delayed Attention: The mainstream media only started reporting on Epstein when it served a political purpose.
  • Holmes: "You wonder why it is that for 20 long years Jeffrey Epstein has never been a national topic of conversation... but never really broken through the national media" [01:48]
• Partisanship Over Justice: The hosts argue that partisan maneuvering, not victim advocacy, drives the current push for disclosure.
  • Ashbrook: "It’s not even about justice for these poor women who were abused by Jeffrey Epstein." [00:14, 09:30]
• ‘Shirts and Skins’ Mentality: The debate around Epstein has transformed into a political team sport, with facts and victims sidelined.
  • Ashbrook: "This has become a shirts and skins exercise, a political partisanship thing." [00:14, 09:30]
• Selective Outrage: Democrats allegedly only care about the files when they can be used as ammo against Trump.
  • Holmes: "It wasn’t until Democrats collectively thought, well, he was a neighbor of Donald Trump... Maybe we should pursue this kind of thing." [03:00]

2. The Risks of Releasing Investigatory Documents

• Witness Safety and Legal Recklessness: The Trump administration’s reluctance to release all files stemmed from concerns about exposing witnesses to public scrutiny and possible danger.
  • Holmes: "From a justice standpoint is unbelievably reckless. The idea that you have investigatory documents that people assemble with anonymous witnesses... you either bring those in the court of law or you don’t." [04:54]
• Political Fuel, Not Justice: Calls to release files morph into partisan witch hunts, not a quest for justice.
  • Holmes: "If you’re looking for justice for victims, they’re now like 45 years old. The justice for them would have been under Barack Obama..." [18:47]
• Collateral Damage: Ordinary people could be smeared if their names appear in released documents without context.
  • Holmes: "What happens when there’s just an average Joe Blow who fixes Epstein’s tires and overhears a conversation?... Now he’s a part of the Epstein file. Is he a pedophile?" [23:36]

3. Congressional (and Democrat) Involvement With Epstein

• The Plaskett Connection: Delegate Stacey Plaskett’s communications with Epstein during congressional proceedings are highlighted.
  • Plaskett: "I got a text from Jeffrey Epstein, who at the time was my constituent..." [11:18]
  • Holmes: "She had him in her contact book, no question about that." [11:08]
• Defensive Maneuvers: Plaskett and her defenders claim it was routine constituent service, which the hosts mock.
  • Plaskett: "Having a friendship with him is not something I would deem to have... I’m moving forward." [14:58]
  • Holmes: "That doesn’t seem like a worthwhile source to try to..." [13:50]
• Attempt to Weaponize Info Against Trump: Evidence suggests Plaskett asked Epstein for dirt on Trump to use during congressional impeachment hearings.
  • Holmes: "She’s texting with Epstein to try to figure out if there’s something fresh... something that they didn’t otherwise know." [17:19]
• Democratic Leadership Also Implicated: Hakeem Jeffries received fundraising solicitations from Epstein after his conviction.
  • Smug: "He said after the date. It’s after 2008. He knew – he’d already been convicted." [38:19]

4. Media Bias and Narrative Control

• Selective Coverage: The story’s coverage is presented as dependent on whether Democrats or Republicans stand to benefit.
  • Holmes: "All of a sudden, Jeffrey Epstein is a topic of interest for the mainstream media. Right." [09:39]
  • Ashbrook: "Weird how that works." [28:11]
• Redactions and Deceptive Leaks: Democrats, after finally releasing documents, redact key exculpatory details and use leaks to imply Trump’s guilt.
  • Smug: "They did it to weaponize it in such a cynical way of essentially using a victim’s suffering as a political weapon..." [45:46]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "Nothing is reported unless it is in service of another Democrat."
  — John Ashbrook [03:16]
• "Democrats working with Jeffrey Epstein to try to go after Donald Trump."
  — Smug [18:38]
• "The New York Times had a live counter of the vote, the House vote, on releasing the Epstein files. The New York Times did. Think about how insane that is."
  — John Ashbrook [27:50]
• "If Clinton's name is in here, so what? That's one less barrier for AOC to get the nomination... The younger Dems are motivated to get the older ones out."
  — Michael Duncan [21:57]
• "We are in a scary era right now with a united Democratic Party over anything that's like a meme, anything that's an Internet narrative where the public demands it..."
  — Josh Holmes [50:00]
• "I'm not sure it ends with more justice. In fact, no less justice. It may end up with less justice in the future..."
  — John Ashbrook [51:31]
• "This isn't a defense of Jeffrey Epstein. Fucking fuck that guy. I'm glad he's in hell forever."
  — John Ashbrook [52:19]

Key Segment Timestamps

• 00:14 - Origins of political partisanship around the Epstein case
• 01:48 - Overview of why the media ignored Epstein until it was politically relevant
• 03:16 - The "only report if it helps Democrats" media criticism
• 04:54 - Risks and responsibilities in releasing investigation files
• 11:18 - Stacey Plaskett admits to texting Epstein as "constituent service"
• 14:58 - Plaskett's deflection and claim of "moving forward" from the scandal
• 18:38 - Evidence of Democrats actively seeking Epstein’s help against Trump
• 21:57 - Theory: Younger Dems using Epstein scandal to push out party elders
• 23:36 - Collateral damage of publicizing sensitive investigatory files
• 27:50 - Media double-standards in covering the Epstein files
• 38:19 - Evidence of Hakeem Jeffries’ ties to Epstein post-conviction
• 45:46 - Democrats’ weaponization of redacted documents to target Trump
• 51:31 - John Ashbrook's argument that releasing all files won’t mean more justice

Interview: Congressman Brandon Gill

[From 68:00 onward]

Background & Style

• West Texas native, former financier, and conservative media entrepreneur
• Known for viral congressional hearing moments where he directly confronts progressive witnesses
  • Gill: "You have them under oath. They can't lie to you. So you can just ask them very directly..." [68:34]
• Sees teamwork within the party as essential: "You’ve got to figure out how to work as a team and get to that end goal." [74:35]
• Takes pride in representing a true conservative district authentically and focusing on policy delivery

Legislative Focus

• Expedited Removal for Criminal Illegal Aliens: Expands crimes (especially sexual and violent crimes) that allow for easier, faster deportation.
  • Gill: "If you're involved in any kind of sexual crime and you're an illegal alien, like, you need to go." [76:36]
• The "Bow Wow Act": Bill to deport illegal immigrants who abuse animals (beagle Freddie attends the hearing).
  • Gill: "If you’re a Democrat and you can’t vote to deport illegals who are literally kicking beagles..." [78:23]

On Party Dynamics & Policy

• Emphasizes the need to reach disaffected, working-class voters while exposing left-wing excesses.
• On media: "Why would we use tax dollars to basically pay for earned media for left wing ads? That’s basically what NPR is." [83:57]

Three Big Questions

• Last Meal: New York strip steak, bourbon, cigar, potatoes, and spinach [87:28]
• Other Career: Would enjoy founding a cigar company [88:52]
• Motivation: Hates losing—more driven by the agony of defeat than the thrill of victory [89:56]

Closing Thoughts

• The hosts challenge listeners to consider: "Is the Epstein thing the new Russia hoax?" [53:49]
• The episode ends with a commitment to reading and responding to listener feedback and a spirited “King of the Hill” segment lampooning partisan hot takes and social media warriors.

Tone & Style

• Sarcastic, irreverent, and often profane
• Combines sharp, skeptical political analysis with humor and insider anecdotes
• Frequently breaks into jokes, analogies, and asides
• Highly critical of mainstream media, Democratic politicians, and occasionally their own party’s shortsighted moves

Bottom Line

This episode frames the renewed focus on Epstein not as a reckoning with elite abuse, but as a cynical political “weaponization” designed to damage Trump while protecting or disposing of older Democratic leaders. The hosts are dubious that justice for victims will result. They warn of dangerous precedents in transparency and privacy, and skewer the media and Democrats for hypocrisy and opportunism. The episode also highlights rising GOP voices like Rep. Brandon Gill, emphasizing direct, unapologetic conservatism and humor as tools for both winning votes and fighting the ongoing culture wars.