← The Daily Beans
The Daily Beans
Epstein Survivor Reveals More Docs Hidden by Trump DOJ | The Breakdown
00:30:20
Allison talks with Epstein Survivor Annie Farmer who reveals there's another Jane Doe accusing the DOJ of withholding her documents, and the upcoming shadow hearing with survivors in Palm Beach Tuesday, May 12th.
Loading summary
Transcript36 lines
- [00:02]
A
It's no surprise that newsmakers try to manipulate the audience. They want you to believe that they are the one holding the line, and they'll use any trick they can to get you there. But don't let them fool you. Get Unspun. I'm Amanda Sturgel. I've been a reporter, and today I teach future reporters to cut the spin and think critically about what newsmakers say. My podcast, Unspun, shows you how to know when you're being manipulated by the news, learn to spot the tricks, and how to make up your own mind about what's true. So if you're tired of being fooled by the news, subscribe to Unspun today. Unspun because you deserve the truth.
- [00:41]
B
Hey, everybody, it's Allison Gill. And welcome to the Breakdown. If you've been watching the Breakdown here on the Midas Touch Network for the last six, eight weeks, even going back further than that, we've really been focusing on, on the Epstein files. About five weeks ago, I think I covered Melania Trump's weird press conference, apropos of nothing, where she thrust the Epstein files back in the news in the middle of the Iran war. And during that press conference, she was complaining about people tying her to Epstein and how she insisted that Epstein didn't introduce her to Donald. We just happened to be at a lot of the same parties and she met her husband by chance at a party in New York City. And we talked about how I think Ghislaine Maxwell, who's holding the only cards, by the way, because she's the only living person in prison for the Epstein sex trafficking ring, and that she was using that to push Todd Blanche, Trump's personal attorney, by the way, who also happens to be acting attorney general right now, pushing him for a pardon after successfully getting a sex offender waiver last year to be moved to a low security facility in, in Bryan, Texas. And we also here talked about how the most damning, some of the most damning stuff about Trump was being discussed via email within the Department of Justice that same month, July of last year, when Ghislaine was moved and met with Todd Blanch. And how when it did come to light this year for, you know, for example, the 13 year old who had accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting and raping her, that Jane Doe, the, the Jane Doe I spoke to, who had one of those anonymous t to the FBI who did later did like four interviews with the FBI. None of the those forms and interviews, by the way, came out during the release of the Epstein files. And we talked about that document dump and how all of those documents had batestamps from Ghislaine Maxwell's case on them and how probably in that same month of July, all those leaks to the Wall Street Journal, the ones that Trump sued them for $10 billion for, also could have come from Ghislaine. We also discussed the odd mention of no blackmail in Pam Bondi and Kash Patel's declination notice, also released last July, when Ghislaine was moved to a low security camp, saying, there's no client. You know, they put out that thing. And like on a holiday weekend, July 4, weekend, in the middle of the night, there's no client list. We're closing all the investigations. We've shut down the, you know, we've shut it all down. And there's no blackmail, by the way, just putting that out there and that, you know, after having shut down the last remaining actual probe of Epstein co conspirators in the Southern District of New York and firing those prosecutors and then stealing all the files. So we learned this year that one of the Maxwell documents was an FBI interview form that showed that Trump had discussed blackmail with Epstein and that again had a Ghislaine Maxwell Bates number on it. So then Melania called on Congress to allow survivors to testify on the Hill, putting the burden on them instead of law enforcement, which I guess has been the way for the last three or four decades, and to get the truth out there. And then after that, we learned that anonymous Republicans suddenly, two weeks later, were supporting a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell in exchange for her testimony before Congress to give her clemency, by the way, which she doesn't need. The President doesn't have to pardon a person to give them clemency to testify on the Hill. The House Oversight Committee can actually give limited use immunity to somebody to testify so that they can't be charged for anything that they say unless they perjure themselves. Which could be very tough for Ghislaine Maxwell given that she already was about to be charged with two counts of perjury for lying about her involvement with Jeffrey Epstein in that investigation. But you don't have to pardon her to give her clemency. You can do limited use immunity. Ask Oliver North. So anyway, last week Katie Fang joined me here. She's also, you know, Katie Fang from the Midas Touch Network joined me here on the Breakdown to discuss her new lawsuit, very novel lawsuit with novel legal theories against the Justice Department for failing to release the Epstein files pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency act, saying that she is irreparably harmed because as a journalist, she's unable to do her job because they withheld documents, inappropriately redacted documents, and she's asking for a special master. So we've had all that, and now this week, we've learned that House Democrats will actually be holding a hearing in Palm beach, presumably because Republicans in Congress won't allow it on the Hill. And this hearing will be to interview Epstein survivors. And we're going to give you details on that hearing and talk to one of the participants, in a way, on today's episode of the Breakdown. Hey, everybody. Welcome to the Breakdown. I'm Alison Gill, host of the Daily Beans Podcast. Thanks to Midas for hosting this show. Joining me today, psychologist, author, prominent survivor of sexual abuse by convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. She's recognized for publicly identifying herself, testifying against Ghislaine Maxwell in 2021 and advocating for the release of documents related to the Epstein case. Please welcome Annie Farmer. Hi, Annie.
- [06:29]
C
Hi. It's good to see you.
- [06:31]
B
It's good to see you again. The last time you were on here, I think it was a few months ago. We talked about it was the release of your sister's FBI 302, which is the form that memorializes a formal interview with the FBI. And we talked about how, gosh, it's weird that there's only one. And all of the other interviews that had to do with Trump, there weren't any 302s for. But that release of that 302 was like this massive vindication for the fact that people have been calling her a liar for three decades. It had been buried by the FBI. FBI. Nobody could get a hold of it. And then, bam, it comes out in the release. And that was the last time we spoke. So it's been a while.
- [07:16]
C
Yes. That feels like quite a long time ago now with everything that's happened in this case.
- [07:21]
B
Yeah, yeah, for sure. A lot has happened since then. And I want to start because this. In the interim, we had that weird Melania press conference from the White House and how anonymous Republicans then two weeks later started supporting a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell. What. What did you. What did you make? I know you're in contact with other survivors. What did y' all think when you saw that bizarre Melania Trump press conference?
- [07:49]
C
We were all pretty shocked. Nobody's. Nobody saw that coming. And honestly, I think we had conflicted feelings about it because, you Know, there were people that had wondered about whether she might, might be a survivor of this group. And in that case, of course, having, you know, some, some empathy for that experience. You know, she obviously said that that was not the case, but that she was in favor of having public hearings. And that's something that a lot of us have wanted for some time. You know, my sister, Maria Farmer has been very outspoken about, you know, wanting to be able to testify under oath and have the type of hearings to really explain all the missteps of the government in this case, because that part of the story, I think often still is not fully understood. So we were in support of that idea, but I think that also it felt with it being so abrupt and some people were concerned it was putting the onus, as you said, back on survivors because names have been given to the doj investigations should be done without having. There are people that are Jane does that don't want to be public, don't want to come forward and testify. They shouldn't have to in order to have their claims investigated, of course. So, yeah, so I think it was a bit of a mixed bag with that statement, and it was pretty confusing. And then, as you said, with some Republicans, us learning more recently about Republicans being in favor of a pardon for Elon Maxwell, you know, that was, of course, extremely troubling. Yeah.
- [09:34]
B
And I couldn't help but tie the two things together in my head. First of all, I, I have a real hard time believing that anything that Melania Trump does is in the interest of anyone other than Melania and Donald Trump. And so when she said that, I was like, is she trying to piggyback on getting a Ghisaine Maxwell testimony and in doing so somehow requiring a pardon in order for her to testify, since she pled the fifth before? And as I've said, a pardon is not required. You can do limited use immunity, making it nearly impossible to be prosecuted for anything that you talk about, unless, of course, you perjure yourself, which is where we kind of sort of run into a problem. But we don't because Todd Blanche is in charge of charging that perjury. And he's all. They're all in this together, whatever it is they're trying to do. So I kept thinking, is there some sort of a pursuit of a support for a pardon? And like you said, when we found out that there were Republicans, Anonymous Republicans, Comer wouldn't name them. Comer was like, I don't support a pardon, but there are many people who do. My very first thought was it seems like this Melania press conference tied up with this support for a pardon from Republicans seems like a way to give Donald Trump political cover to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell so she won't release a bunch of stuff about him. That's just where my mind first automatically goes. And so I can't imagine, I mean, you must have been sitting there like, yeah, I appreciate that Melania wants us to be able to testify publicly, but what is her motive here?
- [11:15]
C
Yeah, I think that definitely there's a lot of speculating about what that motive can be. And really no one else knows.
- [11:24]
B
Right.
- [11:24]
C
So it's just speculation. But I will say I was relieved that at least Comer said that that was not something he was in support of, the pardon. I held onto that. That felt important to me. But I did find it really troubling that there could be Republicans that would be in support of that. We have met with a lot of Republican lawmakers, you know, myself, other survivors, other advocates, to kind of really help them understand the details of this case and to understand the ramifications for other survivors of sexual abuse and sexual assault. Like what a, what a symbol it is for people in this country and why it's so important that we send a strong message of accountability. And so this is the one person, Right. That has been actually held accountable. And to think that that they could send such a destructive message by allowing her to get away with her crimes was just very upsetting. And what I found is that in these individual meetings, a lot of people have been, you know, Republicans and Democrats have expressed support and have, you know, said that they understood those, the dynamics and why it was so important. And I do, and I believe that that's the case. But then, you know, I don't know if it's misguided thinking that there's going to be some, you know, some really important information that she provides somehow would, you know, allow, you know, allow further prosecutions. But as you said, she can't be trusted. No information she's ever provided has been accurate. There's no reason to believe her. And it would. It's. I've never spoken to any survivor that thinks that would be a worthwhile gamble.
- [13:01]
B
Right, right. And, you know, I got to think that there's going to be some sort of a sacrificial lamb, whether it's Leon Black or maybe they fire Lutnick, who had a really embarrassing showing behind closed doors in a deposition this week. He wouldn't even say he went to Epstein island after testifying earlier that he would, you know, would never be within 10ft of that man in the same room ever. And then, you know, he's on the island with his kids and his nannies and his family. So there seems like there's going to be some sort of sacrificial lamb and maybe it's served up by Ghislaine Maxwell and maybe that gets her some sort of clemency, but it doesn't, you know, it. I think what it's going to come down to is that she wants a pardon and I'm sure she's willing to do all sorts of things to get it. And her lawyer, who didn't sign on to her habeas petition, by the way, which is interesting, her lawyer, David Marcus, has said he believes that she will get the pardon. And it's really something probably Donald Trump does not want to do. And they have to see if it's, you know, there's gotta be some sort of deal going on behind the scenes. And I don't know what it is yet, but I think we'll probably learn sooner rather than later.
- [14:20]
C
Yeah, I mean, there's been such a troubling precedent with some of the pardons that have come out of this presidency. Right. And people that are responsible for lots of heinous crimes, including child sexual abuse. Right. And sex trafficking. So, you know, that I think if you've been paying attention to what's been happening in that world, it is extremely concerning on its own and then also for how that sets a precedent for more problematic pardons. But clearly this particular case has gotten so much attention that I have hoped that would make it much more challenging for Trump to do something like that. I think there will be a tremendous public backlash if he was to pursue that. So, yeah, who knows what that calculation is. But I'm just, I'm just hoping that we can stay loud and stay, you know, in, in people's minds enough that they do not allow that to happen without a fight.
- [15:22]
B
Yeah, agreed. Last week I had Katie Fang on. She's filed a lawsuit. Tell me what you think of, of that lawsuit. Because a lot of it has to do with Katie knowing that there are documents that are being withheld. We already know that the ones that were released about blackmail and about the 13 year old Jane Doe that were bait stamped with Ghislaine Maxwell batestamps numbers are duplicates. They aren't even the originals that the FBI released. We know from you and talking to you and about your sister that there have to be other FBI 302s for what? When she spoke to the FBI, and those weren't released. And we also know that, you know, I spoke to another Jane Doe who was caught up in the modeling agency part of it and was a Trump working with the Trump Modeling Agency, had a friend who was working with the Trump Modeling Agency. We know that there were multiple FBI interviews there because we have the screenshots of the voicemails from the FBI agents and all sorts of other things. But those 302s were not released because they discussed Donald Trump. In fact, the only one of your sisters that was released was the one about Epstein and those photos. So, you know, I think this is a great law. It's a novel legal theory to be able to say I'm a journalist who's harmed because I can't do my job because of the failure to release under the Epstein files Transparency Act. But those kinds of known missing documents that have to do with Donald Trump are kind of at the crux of that lawsuit. I was wondering what you thought of her lawsuit and her and Ballou, her lawyer coming out to sue to have a special master look through these documents to make sure that they haven't been inappropriately redacted.
- [17:11]
C
I think it's fantastic that there's, you know, that people are looking at different ways to hold the Justice Department accountable for their failures here. There has certainly been some conversations around what are the best ways for us to pursue the problems with this process. Right. Because as you've talked about so much, there were the issues with redactions on both sides over redactions under redactions, exposure of people who had up to this time, you know, never been public. And that's, that's really life altering. And, you know, they can go back and black that name out, but it's. Their life is forever changed. Right. And, and I think we probably spoke about this last time I was here, or maybe that came out in a future release, I can't remember. But the issue with the nude photos being released, which is just, to me, like, so, so horrific, and I just don't feel like there has been nearly enough explanation around how that failure could have occurred. So. Yeah, but certainly not releasing all the files as part of what I know my sister Maria wants to talk about in this hearing coming up in Florida is I want my whole file. And I think the document that came out for her was actually an FD71 because it was a report. It was a report that she was calling to file. And there was some document that we thought, well, Maybe this is part of her 302 from 2006. Sorting through, it's very hard to find because things are so disorganized the way that the materials are put together. It's hard to know. But still, she has not just ever been given access to her whole file, despite numbers and numbers of FOIA requests. And she's not the only one. I've talked to another survivor at Jane Doe who has been back and forth numerous times and been given the run around even since the release of the files. She knows there's things that conversations she had that have not been released and she's not seeing that documentation and she's still being told, no, it will not be released to you. And so I love that Katie Feng is highlighting this. It may be that they're, I'll be curious to see how that unfolds. But I think it's, I think it is really important.
- [19:34]
B
So there's another Jane Doe that you spoke to that knows that there's stuff that, that wasn't released. Has this, has this Jane Doe, has this been publicly reported before or is this an additional?
- [19:45]
C
I don't know if she has. I'm not sure. I think she's been in touch with some journalists, but I'm not sure how much that has been reported.
- [19:52]
A
So.
- [19:53]
C
But, you know, I just, to me, it adds to my confidence about the fact that, you know, there are more
- [19:58]
B
documents, piles and piles of documents that haven't been released. If that person, you know, wants to speak with me or with Kate, just let me know. We could be put in touch. But that's, you know, we keep learning just about all of these documents that we know exist somewhere. All we're getting are the ones from Ghislaine Maxwell's, duplicates from Ghislaine Maxwell's thing, probably because she's waving him around trying to get a pardon. But again, that's just speculation. So you mentioned that's what Maria, your sister, is going to be talking about at this hearing. You, you both are participating in this hearing virtually, right? Remotely. Talk about, talk about that.
- [20:42]
C
Yeah. Yeah. So this is, I guess it's called the shadow hearing that's happening that the House Oversight Committee Democrats, that ranking member Garcia and the other HSC Democrats have put together, think that it has been planned in order to provide a public venue for some really crucial survivor and witness testimony. And they are doing it in Florida. And I think that is really symbolic because we know that this is the area, Palm beach county, where this sweetheart deal unfolded. You know, 20 years ago. That really is such an important piece of all of this, understanding why that was allowed to happen and what, you know, what went wrong there. And so I think that there are going to be a few survivors that give testimony there and maybe do a Q and A with congresspeople. And then because of my sister's health issue, she wasn't able to travel to be there in person. And so she has provided some video testimony that they will be playing as well. And then there's a few of us that have submitted some written testimony because we're not able to be there. So I will be really curious to see, you know, to see how that unfolds. I think it's just important, you know, I know that there, that again, there are, there are members of the House, Republican members that have been very supported and are wanting, you know, wanting to continue this investigation, including Chairman Comer. And I think that I hope that after Melania's statement, he said that he was in support of hearings in D.C. i hope Pete follows through with that. I believe that that would still be important. We'll see.
- [22:33]
D
Right?
- [22:33]
C
Maybe this will help build momentum for that to occur.
- [22:37]
B
Yeah, that's the hope. At least one of, one of many. So I, you know, I just want to reiterate to everybody that this hearing is going to be Tuesday, May 12th. I am told it will be streaming live here on the Midas touch network at 10:00am Eastern, 7 Pacific Time. We're going to have a link, if we have a link by the, you know, we'll pop it in the show notes. But I'm sure Midas will share it as soon as they have it. But that's where you can watch it is here on the Midas Touch Network, among other things. But they're going to be streaming it live. And you know, I just want to say again, thanks for, you know, participating in this. I know it's like as, as a lot of folks felt after the Melania statement and having survivors testify that the onus seems to continue to be on y', all, on the survivors in order to get justice for yourselves, because no agency, law enforcement or otherwise have, have, have done their part as they were supposed to under, under law. And so, you know, we thank you for that. And I just want to let you know, you know, with the Katie Fang lawsuit, that's a novel thing to have a journalist say, I'm, I'm not able to do my job. And because when you and I talked about this last time about somebody suing to get A special master for the Epstein files. We figured that, you know, the survivors would definitely be able to show a harm and a need and no other way to get it. And so, again, that might, you know, my offer is still on the table, but, you know, hating to put the onus on survivors, but if any of you are interested in that, I'm happy to be behind the scenes supporting that. I can help support that lawsuit financially. If you all decide to do that, Just, you know, keep in touch with me. I'm here because I think that somebody needs to at least be held accountable for breaking the law. Now, what. How many months are we out? Six months out of the. Breaking the law for not releasing the Epstein files under the Epstein files Transparency Act. So I just want to let you know I'll help you in any way I can for. For that, if you decide to go that route.
- [24:50]
C
Well, thank you. That's appreciated. Yeah, there's definitely been some conversations among survivors around how to, you know, how to best pursue that from a legal standpoint. And I think it's. You know, there's been a lot of moving parts, as you know. You know, my sister has filed, or she filed now, years ago. Right. This lawsuit against the federal government for the mishandling and neglect in this case. And that's. It just highlights how what a slow process it can be, right. To, you know, even file claims and then be able to actually, you know, pursue, pursue, pursue something like that. So we're. I'm curious how what happens in Florida, you know, my. May relate to that. You know, I'm hoping that that will win because she really was banging that drum when no one else was talking about it.
- [25:43]
B
Right.
- [25:44]
C
Especially the government piece. I think, like, recognizing that, you know, what happened was horrible, but also that really the role the government played needed more exposure and needed more attention. Unfortunately, these crimes, you know, are not uncommon. Right. We know a lot of these things happen, and in all our communities. And I think, really looking at how do we respond, how does. How does law enforcement respond? How do people in power respond is so important. And because these are people that have the most power, you know, it especially needs scrutiny.
- [26:18]
B
Yeah. And was Maria's a lawsuit or a Freedom of Information act request? A lawsuit pursuant to a Freedom of Information act request.
- [26:25]
C
Yeah, I know she filed, like, she, I think, requested the Office of Inspector General do an inquiry. Right. And then there was no real resolution to that or response to that. And then she filed claim, you know, administrative. Like an administrative claim thing. And then I think six months later, was able to file an actual lawsuit. So she kind of goes into that some in her testimony in more detail because it is complicated. Right. And I think, again, with all of the many details of how this has unfolded, it's easy to lose sight of some of those things.
- [27:03]
B
It is. And now the Office of Inspector General at Department of Justice, a guy named Blier, I believe, who's been there since 2007, is conducting an investigation of the release of the Epstein files, as well as the Legislative Government Accountability Office, which is totally bipartisan thing. They're looking at it. And so I think the more eyes, the better. I don't really trust anything that was part of this administration to do the right thing. But, you know, I'm really glad that the Democrats are having this shadow hearing again. It's Tuesday, 10am Eastern. It'll be streamed here live on the Midas Touch Network. And I appreciate all that you're. You're doing. I mean, this just, it's, it's, you know, on a very, very small, much smaller scale, trying to stand up for my own investigations into sexual assault and, and everything that happened to me is. It's very, it's. It's tough on your mental health, and it takes a lot of work. And so I just want to say that I see that and I, I recognize that, and I appreciate everything that y' all are doing.
- [28:15]
C
Well, no, I, I mean, honestly, I really, I appreciate, you know, what you did. And, and I think that's why, you know, I felt confident I wanted to talk, to have these conversations because I know, you know, the, the fact that you were whistleblower and that, that did take such a toll. Right. Like, you really understand in a way that I think a lot of people don't, you know, what my sister was up against. Right. Inflowing the whistle on this. And, and it has taken a big toll, you know, and I. She will talk about in her testimony. But this month has been really tough. Right. She's been in the hospital much more than she's been out of it with different health issues. And we know that a trigger for so many of them is stress. Right. And so I think that, you know, our bodies are complex, right. And our emotional and, you know, mental health, of course, it affects us in so many, so many ways. And so I think for a lot of us, it's trying to balance, wanting to be advocates and push forward and highlight this, but also take care of ourselves and stay healthy, which can be challenging in this context.
- [29:22]
B
Right. And I think that's why community is so important for survivors because being betrayed by a person who assaults you is one thing, but then being betrayed by the institutions that are supposed to protect you. You and I talked about this the last time we spoke as a whole other ball of wax that just adds on exponentially to all of this stress and cause health issues. So I really appreciate you coming on taking the time to talk to me today. I look forward to hearing your statement and watching your sister's video testimony again Tuesday 10am and I'll stream live here on the Midas Touch network. So thanks for your time today.
- [29:58]
C
Well, thank you for having me. Take care.
- [30:00]
B
All right everybody, thank you so much for joining us today. We really appreciate it. Thanks to Annie and thanks thanks to Midas Touch for giving us this platform. We'll see you next week on the Breakdown.
- [30:43]
E
Love this video. Support independent media and unlock exclusive content, ad free videos and custom emojis by becoming a paid member of our YouTube channel today. You can also gift memberships to others. Let's keep growing together.
- [31:01]
D
History is messy. It's weird, wild and anything but boring. Rainy Day Rabbit Holes is a history podcast about unhinged stories that make you stop and ask, wait, is this real life? From crazy disasters and tasty scandals to enlightening and surprising heartwarming tales, we explore the moments where people behave badly and sometimes beautifully. We've got naughty politicians, cultural chaos and a deep love for the Pacific Northwest, including Bigfoot. It's thoughtful, irreverent, occasionally serious, and always entertaining. Let's fall down the Rabbit Hole MSW.