Breaking: MAGA Abandons Trump as he Posts Racist Images and Epstein Files Expose the Truth

Summary

The Parnas Perspective — Episode Summary

Episode Title: Breaking: MAGA Abandons Trump as he Posts Racist Images and Epstein Files Expose the Truth
Host: Aaron Parnas
Guest Interviewer: Katie Couric
Date: February 6, 2026

---

Overview

This episode dives into two major breaking stories:

1. Widespread outrage, even among MAGA Republicans, after Donald Trump posted a racist image depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as monkeys.
2. Explosive revelations from the latest release of Jeffrey Epstein court and investigative files, including the extent of Donald Trump’s mentions and the systemic failure of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to properly investigate and redact critical information.

Aaron Parnas and guest interviewer Katie Couric discuss the political, legal, and ethical implications of these developments, revealing the scale of Epstein’s abuse network, inadequacies in DOJ handling, and new details about the involvement of household names in the files.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Trump’s Racist Post and Political Fallout

• Trump posted a meme/video depicting the Obamas as gorillas, sparking condemnation "even from MAGA Republicans" ([01:00]).
• The White House, via spokesperson Caroline Levitt, dismissed the outrage as "fake" and an internet meme, telling media to "report on something that actually matters to the American people" ([02:14]).
• Aaron points out that, regardless of the deflection, both racism and the Epstein files matter significantly ([02:47]).

Quote:

"Go look at Tim Scott and the rest of the GOP, praying it was fake. ...It's still there on the president's site. And while the White House doesn't care...the president's racism needs to be called out." — Aaron Parnas, [02:16]

---

2. Deep Dive: Epstein Files, Scale of Abuse, and DOJ Failures

Scale of Disclosure

• DOJ released 3.5 million pages, 2,000+ videos, and 180,000 images on Friday ([03:24]).
• Aaron has personally reviewed 100,000 documents so far — a fraction of the total archive ([03:54]).

Key Takeaways from the Files

• The child abuse network was much larger than previously understood ([04:51]).
• High-profile individuals (business and politics) — including Trump — are implicated more often and with more detail than formerly known ([04:51]).
• Improper Redactions: DOJ failed to redact survivor names and child abuse images but did redact names of alleged co-conspirators never charged ([04:51]).

Quote:

"Literally had a horrific image of a naked child that was completely unredacted... The DOJ failed to redact the names of survivors... and at the same time redacted the names of co-conspirators that were never charged." — Aaron Parnas, [06:35]

The Epstein “Sweetheart Deal”

• In the 2000s, then-US Attorney Alex Acosta offered Epstein a plea deal—Epstein pled to a lesser state-level charge and served minimal time, mostly outside jail ([07:42]).
• The original 60-count federal indictment (never filed) included three co-conspirators, only one (Maxwell) ever charged; others’ names remain blacked out ([07:42]).

Trump’s Involvement as Seen in the Files

• Trump referenced by name 5,300 times and appears in 38,000+ mentions ([09:50]).
• Following backlash and attention to the files, DOJ briefly removed and then partially reposted documents after botched redactions ([10:27]).
• A new 2025 FBI summary outlines over a dozen allegations from survivors against Trump, with at least one affidavit describing witnessing Trump engage in sexual abuse of minors alongside Epstein ([11:05]).

Quote:

"There is an affidavit in there... from a survivor who says she personally witnessed the president engaging in sexual abuse of minors alongside Epstein." — Aaron Parnas, [11:17]

DOJ’s Failure to Investigate

• Evidence reportedly ignored or inadequately investigated, with agents moving on quickly if a survivor didn’t immediately respond ([11:29]).
• A survivor’s attorney requested all files be taken down to prevent harm to survivors after privacy breaches ([11:05]).

---

3. High-Profile Names in the Epstein Files

Katie Couric and Aaron Parnas review findings on public figures:

• Elon Musk: Multiple email threads about visiting Epstein’s island; no direct evidence of him visiting yet ([17:59]).
• Howard Lutnick: Continued interactions long after claimed cutoff; evidence of donations and island trip discussions as late as 2017 ([18:27]).
• Prince Andrew: Disturbing images and internal Maxwell statements seemingly confirming the authenticity of the photo with Virginia Giuffre ([19:06]).
• Bill Gates: Epstein emails claim Gates contracted an STD; Melinda Gates calls for answers ([20:12]).
• Other Notables: Numerous mentions or evidence of involvement — Steve Bannon, Richard Branson, Brett Ratner, Sergey Brin, Deepak Chopra, Larry Summers, Casey Wasserman, Peter Attia, Ehud Barak, and more ([17:44]–[25:47]).

Notable Moment:

• Email submitted as evidence:

"New Brazilian just arrived. Sexy and cute = nine year old." — Unidentified sender to Epstein, with the sender's name redacted by DOJ ([16:24])

• Aaron:

"That person's name has been redacted. My answer: why don't you have an indictment against them at this point?" ([16:54])

---

4. Political and Legal Ramifications

Ongoing Investigations

• Lithuania, Poland, and the UK initiate new probes based on the files.
• U.S. House Oversight has subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton; they’ve agreed to testify publicly, though Aaron notes the focus on the Clintons to the exclusion of Trump and others as hypocritical ([26:25]).

DOJ and Prosecution

• Aaron predicts no further criminal charges under current DOJ leadership, but notes sex trafficking has no statute of limitations.
• Repercussions will primarily be professional and “in the court of public opinion”—with jobs already lost (e.g., Peter Attia's severed media and professional roles) ([29:23]).

Quote:

"Actual accountability...this is something survivors have been demanding for five administrations, for 20 plus years. I don't think they're holding their breath." — Aaron Parnas, [30:46]

DOJ and Politicized Justice

• DOJ’s rationale for redacting co-conspirators (“not wanting prosecution in the court of public opinion”) is strongly criticized by Aaron ([16:50]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "This child abuse scheme was a lot larger than we could have ever imagined." — Aaron Parnas, [04:51]
• "They failed to redact child sexual abuse materials in violation of the law." — Aaron Parnas, [06:35]
• "Trump is referenced over 5,000 times; 38,000 mentions, and the President says he's not named except as a victim of a scheme by Michael Wolff and Epstein. That is false." — Aaron Parnas, [09:50]/[13:12]
• "At the same time Steve Bannon is advising Epstein on how to dodge these allegations, he's also serving as Trump's senior advisor." — Aaron Parnas, [13:26]
• "Bill Clinton never visited the island," Epstein wrote in internal PR emails, but numerous photos and contacts are present ([22:03]).
• "As a lawyer, I can't see actual accountability coming because this DOJ doesn't seem to want to make it happen." — Aaron Parnas, [30:46]

---

Critical Timestamps

• Trump’s Racist Image Fallout:
  [01:00]–[02:47]
• Scale/Failure of DOJ in Epstein File Release:
  [03:24]–[06:35], [10:27]–[11:05]
• Epstein’s Sweetheart Plea Deal:
  [07:09]–[08:48]
• Trump’s Involvement in the Files:
  [09:50]–[13:12], [15:09]–[16:08]
• Key High-Profile Names Discussion:
  [17:44]–[25:07]
• Congressional Investigation, Clinton Testimony:
  [26:25]–[28:26]
• Accountability & DOJ’s Future Actions:
  [29:23]–[31:59]

---

Tone & Closing

Aaron Parnas’s tone is urgent, provocative, and sometimes exasperated, pushing for accountability and transparency both in politics and justice. The episode is packed with insider details, legal insight, and hard-hitting criticism of institutional failures — all delivered with the energetic, rapid-fire delivery Parnas’s Gen Z audience expects.

Call to action:
Aaron encourages listeners to follow, share, subscribe, and support his work—and hints that further, deeper dives into the Epstein files are inevitable as more is uncovered.

Transcript

[A]

My name is Mackenzie and I started a GoFundMe for the adoptive mother of a nonverbal autistic child. The mother had lost her job because she wasn't able to find adequate care for this autistic child. So she really needed some help with living expenses, paying some back bills. So I launched a GoFundMe to help support them during this crisis. And, and we raised about $10,000 within just a couple of months. I think that the surprising thing was by telling a clear story and just like really being very clear about what we needed, we had some really generous donations from people who were really moved by the situation that this family was struggling with.

[B]

GoFundMe is the world's number one fundraising platform, trusted by over 200 million people. Start. Start your GoFundMe today at gofundme.com that's gofundme.com gofundme.com this podcast is supported by GoFundMe.

[C]

We have some major news right now. There is now even MAGA outrage. Republicans are blasting the President of the United States for what they say is the one of the most racist thing they have ever seen come out of the White House after Donald Trump posted a horrific racist image depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as monkeys. Meanwhile, the White House is defending it and saying that the American people should stop talking about this and should stop with the, quote, fake outrage and that the public and the media should talk about something that the American people actually care about. That's a direct quote from Caroline Levin. Okay, we're going to talk about the racism and then we're going to talk about something else that the American people care about because Americans care about both. Going to talk about the Epstein files today because Donald Trump has been mentioned in the files nearly 5,000 times. He has been referenced more than 30,000 times and we're going to talk about it. So make sure to, like, comment, share and subscribe because I think people need.

[D]

To see this episode.

[C]

The more you like, the more people will see. And please support my work by subscribing to my substack. Click the link below. Let me just quickly remind you what happened overnight. Donald Trump posted this horrific racist video. This is a screen grab from the video showing Michelle Obama on the left, Barack Obama on the right, depicted as gorillas, as apes.

[D]

Okay?

[C]

Republicans are furious, praying it was fake because it's the most racist thing I've seen out of this White House. The President should remove it. No, Tim Scott. No, Senator, it's not fake. It's still there on the president's site. And while the White House doesn't care, the White House is saying, quote, this is from an Internet meme depicting President Trump as the king of the jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King. Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American people. Well, even MAGA Republicans are upset that.

[D]

Donald Trump posted this.

[C]

But since Caroline Levitt doesn't think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, as a journalist, I think I can. And so we're gonna blast the White House for its racism. We're gonna talk about the President's racism, which I have all morning. We're also gonna talk about the Epstein files. And so that's why I sat down with Katie Couric, one of the most famed journalists out there, and I explained everything about the Epstein files, from who's involved to where we are in terms of the release and to what happens next and to the fact that Donald Trump has mentioned a hell of a lot more times than he wants you to know. So make sure, once again, like, comment, share and subscribe. Spread the word. Here's my interview with Katie Couric.

[B]

We're here to really wanted to talk to you, Aaron, about these Epstein. So you've been reviewing this latest tranche, as they've been called, of files. The DOJ released them on Friday. Over 3.5 million pages of documents were published, along with more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images. Erin. So first and foremost, how are you doing? How are you going through these files, and how much progress have you made?

[D]

Yeah, so not much progress. I think I'm through about a hundred thousand documents, which is a lot. But it's not like it's just a small dent in this three and a half million file tranche for me. I was a lawyer before doing this, and so I feel like I'm in my element doing doc review just like incessantly, just like going document by document. But I think what, like, a lot of people don't realize is that this really is like a big puzzle, and each of these documents are like a small piece in the puzzle. And so one I saw on Saturday wasn't relevant when I was looking at it, but today I saw another document, 10,000 documents later that kind of connected the dots to the two. So, I mean, it's just been. It's been a long few days to.

[B]

Put it, and we're going to kind of get granular because one of the reasons is I think people are getting this in Bits and pieces. And obviously we'd love to have you back, Erin, as you make your way through these documents. But so far, what are the main takeaways?

[D]

Yeah, so I think a couple things. Number one, this child abuse scheme was a lot larger than we could have ever imagined. I think that's the biggest takeaway. I think there have been a lot of wealthy and powerful people that had been in a way, outed as being closely connected with Epstein throughout the years. Obviously we've already seen some fallout, right? A human trafficking investigation in Lithuania, criminal investigation with Peter Mendelsohn in the United Kingdom, lots of wealthy and powerful people connected with Epstein. Now on a kind of more granular level, granular level here in the United States, President Trump mentioned about 5,300 times his name. He then has about 38,000 so called, like mentions of like we're like referencing the President. In some respects, there are many significant allegations against him. Obviously the allegations must be investigated. And what we're seeing is that they haven't fully been vetted and investigated. Like you'll get a tip to the FBI and then oftentimes the FBI will just not follow up on the tip. And that's what we've kind of seen in some of those respects. I think the biggest takeaway I have are kind of twofold. Number one, many of the files have been improperly redacted to the point where on Sunday I was clicking through the documents and I literally had a horrific image of a naked child that was completely unredacted. Right. So the Department of Justice failed to redact child sexual abuse materials in violation of the law. The Department of Justice failed to redact the names of survivors, the names, the identifying information of survivors, and then at the same time redacted the names and identifying information of co conspirators that were never charged. So one of the biggest documents that I think not many people talk about because it's not as salacious as like an allegation against a president. For example, is the 60 count draft indictment against Epstein that was drafted in the mid-2000s by the US Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida. 60 counts related to sex trafficking. Three co conspirators, one presumably is Maxwell, but two who have never been charged and never been identified. And in all of the files their names are redacted at the same time. Survivor names are not. So it's kind of been a real struggle kind of going through them and seeing all of the mistakes and mishaps by this doj.

[B]

I want to go back to that, because he really did plead to a lesser charge. Right. This was this initial criminal indictment which kind of washed over a lot of his activities and kind of charged him with a lesser count. And somebody who was involved in that, that was Alex Acosta. Acosta. And tell us a little bit about what happened. And it was really sort of the mid to late 2000s when this went down in Florida, right? Yeah.

[D]

Epstein essentially got the deal of a century. I mean, like he. So there was this draft indictment. They had been investigating him, allegations from numerous young girls, numerous survivors in Florida. They put together this lengthy indictment that would have put him away for the rest of his life if he was convicted. And then something happened. He was meeting with Alex Acosta, the then Southern District of Florida US Attorney and other US Attorneys there, and they cut this sweetheart deal where he pled guilty to a state level prostitution charge and was sentenced to 18 months in state prison. But even that was a bit of a fallacy because he was out, out of jail six out of seven days a week for 12 hours a day doing like, whatever work at his home or whatever. So he really got a deal of a century there.

[B]

And it was also, you know, at first glance, a much lesser. Like, it didn't even mention children or underage. It was just sort of this prostitution chart, wasn't it?

[D]

Yeah, it was a prostitution charge. It wasn't sex trafficking in any way. Now, had they released all of the evidence behind it, we would have known what the truth was. But that wasn't what was told to the public, at least then.

[B]

And then Alex Acosta went on to write, to be associated with Donald Trump.

[D]

And I think he was Trump's Labor Secretary, if I don't recall, in his first term, and then became the president of fiu, Florida International University Organization.

[B]

Okay. All right. Well, getting back to the here and now in these current documents, yesterday, President Trump said during a press conference that the US should move on from the Epstein files and get on to something else. He claimed that the only mention of him in the new release was about how reporter Michael Wolff and Epstein conspired against him in order to fight like hell to make sure I lose the election. That's the only thing that was mentioned about me, is what the President of the United States said. Obviously that isn't true. You've been going through these files. Why don't you repeat what you said early in our conversation about how many times Donald Trump's name is mentioned?

[D]

So Friday night, it was 5,300 times. That they then deleted a bunch of documents that they improperly redacted. Now it's down to 4800 times, but over 5000 specific mentions of Trump and then over 38,000 references to Trump.

[B]

Can you talk about sort of, you know, what kinds of references we're talking about? And before we do that, though, can I ask you, Aaron, because I was seeing on social media, people were taking screenshots prior to the DOJ taking down some of those documents. Have they posted them again? Have they released them again or. Because I'm confused about that.

[D]

Yeah, so they took down a bunch of them. I think they put some of them back up, but they haven't put all of them back up. They took down ones because they forgot to redact survivor names. So they're taking them down. I've been emailing with DOJ all week at this point, sending them files. Every time I find them, they take it down and then waiting for them to put it back up after proper.

[B]

Because that violates a law that was passed with the DOJ protecting the survivors, which was passed like a year or two ago. And, and, and yet they're redacting some of the co conspirators, as you said, but they're not redacting. They're not being very careful about survivor names.

[D]

Correct. And I think that's one of the biggest takeaways. And the survivors themselves kind of told the doj, what the hell are you doing? You got to the point where attorneys for the survivors this week filed a letter in court saying that they should take down all of the files because of the harm that has been caused to the survivors in this entire release. But you were talking about the way Trump is mentioned. So the biggest Trump document that is referenced is kind of in 2025 last year, the FBI put together, or was asked, I guess by DOJ to put together a high level summary of every allegation made against the President of the United States throughout the years. There are about 15 allegations from survivors whose names have been redacted. And I mean, the allegations are horrific. Right. I mean, I am not gonna go into detail into what exactly the allegations are, and people can look them up. They are very horrific allegations. They essentially say that the President participated in or knew about sexual abuse of minors. There's also, which to me, I think is probably the most important document as it relates to Trump. There is an affidavit in there sworn to and attested under the penalty of perjury from a survivor who says that she personally witnessed the president engaging in sexual abuse of minors alongside Epstein. Now the question is were these ever investigated? Did the FBI follow up, did the DOJ run down any leads? And the answer to that is not really. I mean, some, in some respects they say they did, but in other respects they kind of just said, oh, survivor didn't answer a phone call. We moved on. Right. So it's like you didn't actually really fully investigate these leads. And as a result, it's very hard for me to just kind of sit here and say it's all bs.

[B]

Right, but. And they're very serious allegations about sex with underage girls.

[D]

Correct.

[B]

And how many are, how many different victims are there described? I know you haven't made your way through the entire.

[D]

Yeah, I mean the issue is I don't know because theoretically one survivor can make the same claim 15 or different claims 15 times. So you don't know if it's 15.

[B]

Because the survivors names have been redacted.

[D]

Have been completely redacted. So they're about. There are over a dozen allegations.

[B]

Wow. And so this claim that the only mention of him is Michael Wolf trying to rape the election against him or in Cahus with Epstein is absolutely, positively false.

[D]

False. I mean, it's just, it's not even logical because at the same time where Donald Trump is talking about this Wolf Epstein connection, Epstein is thoroughly speaking with and ingrained with Steve Bannon, who is also serving as Donald Trump's senior advisor. At the exact same time Steve Bannon is advising Epstein on how to dodge these allegations publicly. So.

[B]

Yeah, got it. And Jill, who's one of my paid subscribers. Hi Jill. Wanted to mention that you share links in your post and it goes straight to the government website, right?

[D]

It does. And I also have the native copies of every single document they took down as well. So if they don't put them back up, I have them.

[B]

Good Lord. Erin, are you getting help with this? Because this is a huge job. I wish you could, I wish you could hire some assistance to help you comb through this material because it's so much.

[D]

It is. But I will say being that I did this type of review already as a lawyer, it's very. I know how to like do search terms. I know how to find certain docs that I'm. Because a lot of these 3 million plus documents are irrelevant. They are, they're just like duplicates, triplicates. And so I kind of have been able to narrow down kind of where to find McKeith docs at this point.

[B]

Well, you are doing God's work. Thank you, Erin. And now when this new batch of files was released, Todd Blanche, who's the Deputy Attorney General, said, quote, today's release marks the end of a very comprehensive document identification and review process to ensure transparency to the American people in compliance with the act. But there is still some confusion, I know, Erin, about whether all the files have in fact been released. What is your understanding of this?

[D]

They haven't been. So even Blanch acknowledges that there are some documents that he's allegedly waiting for a court order to be able to release. So there's a tranche, a smaller tranche that still haven't been released. He says that they reviewed six million. He says three and a half million are, quote, responsive. To me, what that means is either a, they're withholding two and a half million documents in the sense that they may actually be, for example, child sexual abuse material, which you're not allowed to release, or they're duplicates of current documents. I don't know what he means by the term non responsive. And what's going to be telling is within 15 days of the release, so within 15 days of last Friday, they have to submit a letter to the government, to Congress to explain redactions and explain withholdings of certain files. So we're going to get some more insight as to why they're withholding 3 million plus documents, on what basis they're redacting, they're making certain redactions. We're going to get some more information on that next week, probably right after Pam Bondi testifies.

[B]

There was one really upsetting thing that I saw you post on Threads, I believe it was this morning. And you were saying, why is this individual being redacted? Can you share what that mention in the file was? Because yeah, there is. So much of it is so upsetting, but this to me was just like sickening.

[D]

I mean, people can go look it up for themselves and I would encourage them to do that. But there is a document, the bait. The base number is EFT02102821 and essentially a unknown person emails Jeffrey Epstein and says new Brazilian just arrived. Sexy and cute equals nine year old. Best regards.

[B]

And that person's name has been redacted. Who sent that?

[D]

Correct.

[B]

Why?

[D]

Your guess is as good as mine. I don't know. I mean, what the DOJ is going to tell us is they're redacting these names because they don't want people to be prosecuted in the court of public opinion. Right. They're going to say, well, we don't have an indictment against them, so we're not going to have the public prosecute them. But my answer to that is, why don't you have an indictment against them at this point then like, what are you doing on your end? Because Blanche says they're not going to go after anyone else essentially right now.

[B]

And what is their explanation for doing nothing when they have access to an email that is basically saying I am involved, involved in child trafficking?

[D]

And for the record, that email's not the worst one. I mean there, there are worse emails out there. I don't know what their explanation is other than the fact that Blanche was asked, is it what should happen to these men who quote, partied with Epstein? And he said it's not illegal to party with Epstein. That was his response.

[B]

So yuck. Okay, let's talk about some of the high profile names that you can. I'm just kind of going to go through them and you can give us a quick overview if, if you've gotten to these. Elon Musk.

[D]

Lots of files regarding Elon Musk. Lots of emails and correspondence going back and forth about in the mid early 2010s about him discussing visiting Epstein's island. I don't no confirmation that he ever met the went to the island, but lots of emails about him talking about going to the island.

[B]

Okay. Howard Lutnick, who said he had not maintain contact with Epstein after a certain year. I can't remember, but you can eliminate us on that.

[D]

He said in 2005 that he cut off all contact with Epstein after him and his wife visited Epstein's home. They were neighbors on the Upper east side. They saw the massage room in Epstein's home. They were discussed it and they said they cut off all ties. But in 2012 they were discussing a trip to Epstein's island. And then as recently as 2017, Epstein made a $50,000 contribution per an email on behalf of Lutnick to a foundation.

[B]

Okay. And you say they were, you're saying Howard Lutnick and Jeffrey.

[D]

Yeah. Howard Lutnick and his family were presumably speaking with Epstein about visiting the island.

[B]

Okay. Prince Andrew must be all over this.

[D]

All over it. There are actually pretty horrific pictures of Prince Andrew on all fours over a survivor or what appears to be a survivor, a woman or a young girl. It's unfair what her age is. Her face is redacted. So pictures of Andrew on all fours. I actually just saw probably one of the biggest documents right before I came on here. I found was Ghislaine Maxwell, a draft statement she wrote to rebut the allegations made by Virginia Giuffre, which was one of the more prominent Epstein survivors. And she in there essentially confirms that the picture that everyone for years had been trying to discredit Virginia for Virginia Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell, that that image is actually real in this statement that she was drafting internally to try to rebut allegations. So that's a. That's a really big document that actually just.

[B]

I just found Bill Gates very disturbing. Melinda Gates has commented on this. Basically, he got an STD and was trying to give her antibiotics secretively to prevent her from. Is that right?

[D]

It's tough. I mean, so that's what Jeffrey Epstein wrote in an internal email to himself. That's what he said. Bill Gates. That's what happened with Bill Gates. That email was never actually sent to Bill Gates. Bill Gates denies it. But Melinda Gates came out last night and said that Bill Gates has to answer questions.

[B]

Kevin Warsh, who is Trump's new pick for chairman of the Federal Reserve, is a P here.

[D]

His name just pops up once. From what I can tell so far. There was like a list for some type of event or some type of party that Epstein was involved in, and that Warsh was on that list of potential invitees.

[B]

Sergey Brin, the founder of Google.

[D]

I haven't gotten there yet, but he's probably. If you're saying it, it's probably. He's probably there.

[B]

Brett Ratner.

[D]

The filmmaker behind Melania's new.

[B]

Documentary, the director of the documentary, who was accused by, I believe, six women of sexual har. Perhaps assault. I'm not sure. Reportedly during the MeToo movement.

[D]

He's all over these files. But the biggest file regarding Ratner is there's an image of him and Epstein and then two potential survivors, and their faces are blacked out.

[B]

Richard Branson.

[D]

That was an interesting one. I mean, they've been communicating. You could see the communications back and forth for a long time. They were obviously in close contact with one another. There was one email that I found where Branson kind of says something about partying with Jeffrey Epstein and I believe Woody Allen as well, and kind of was like, make sure to bring your harem. That was a direct quote from the email.

[B]

Bill Clinton.

[D]

Bill Clinton is in the files. There are plenty of pictures of Clinton and Epstein and Maxwell. But there is actually an interesting email in which Epstein himself says Bill Clinton never visited the island.

[B]

And who was that email to?

[D]

I have to go back and look. But it was like when Jeffrey Epstein, he did a lot of like internal communications with like PR people and he in that email said Clinton never visited the island.

[B]

Casey Wasserman, who's a well known figure here in Los Angeles, the head of the LA upcoming LA Olympics, some pretty disturbing communications between him and Ghislaine Maxwell, I understand.

[D]

Yeah, there were some disturbing communications between the two. I can go pull up the exact language that Wasserman used. But LA officials are now calling for him to resign from leading the Olympics. And honestly, I mean, at this point.

[B]

Speaking of that, I want to mention Peter Attia or Atiya, I guess, a wellness longevity expert sort of in and with the podcast, very successful bestselling book about longevity. Well, this has been covered a lot, but some really gross exchanges between him and Jeffrey Epstein. And he's in there quite a bit. Yes.

[D]

Yeah. And he's talking about female genitalia and I mean some really just graphic and gross emails back and forth between him and Epstein.

[B]

Ehud Barak.

[D]

Yes, about that, that was an interesting one. And I'm actually finding more and more about that. But the most recent one I found was that I believe Barack and his wife stayed at Epstein's home in New York well after Barack left office. But obviously this fuels a lot of talk about Epstein being part of Israeli intelligence, which has been a story that's kind of been in the news, but not front of mind for a long time. But it's not just Israeli intelligence. Also there's this whole angle of Epstein being part of Russian intelligence as well. So there's a lot there that I still need to dig into.

[B]

Yeah. Ehud Barak, former Prime Minister of Israel have you seen any evidence of this Russian connection, Aaron, yet, or not really.

[D]

So not. I mean, yes, there is a lot of connection about Jeffrey Epstein speaking with Russian officials, even about Donald Trump, for example, of like how to have the Russians. He spoke with a Russian official by the last name of Churkin in 2016 or 17 where they spoke about how to gain or like curry Trump's favor, like how to get on Trump's good side. And then Poland actually opened up an investigation today into connections of Jeffrey Epstein possibly leaking government data and information to the Russians. So there is a lot there. It's just, it's hard to kind of piece together at the moment.

[B]

Right. And you're still working on that. Larry Summers. Larry Summers, Secretary of the treasury and also former President of Harvard.

[D]

Yeah, that one's not surprising there. I mean, I think a thousand plus mentions of Larry Summers, he flew on Epstein's Jet. They regularly communicated with one another. That one's not new, per se.

[B]

Okay. Steve Bannon.

[D]

That's the story that not enough people are covering. The amount of communications between Bannon and Epstein are shocking to the point where Epstein had his final interview before his death with Bannon. And that interview is very revealing. It's about an hour long. Epstein kind of refers to him as the devil himself. But Bannon essentially was helping navigate the PR world for Epstein over the last couple years of his life, at the same time assisting Donald Trump and advising Trump on policy in the White House. It's very, very weird.

[B]

Also, Deepak Chopra is in there a lot.

[D]

I did see that. Yeah. I don't. I haven't dug into that one as much yet, but that's on the list. But, yes, he's in there a lot.

[B]

Okay, let's talk about sort of what's happening now. But let's talk about the House's ongoing probe into Jeffrey Epstein. So former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have agreed to appear for depositions later this month after months of back and forth with House Oversight and Committee Chair James Comer. Can you give us, can you bring us up to speed about sort of what's happening and the ins and outs? Because I know they wrote this big letter to Comer saying they wouldn't, and now they've agreed to be deposed. Can you clarify that for us?

[D]

Well, the House Oversight Committee. Nine, I think nine, eight or nine Democrats joined, all Republicans voted to hold the vote. Is a subpoena, essentially, Bill and Hillary Clinton a while back, and then they didn't respond to the subpoena or just kind of said, like, they were working it back and forth, and they said that they're not going to testify in front of the committee. And while then they voted earlier this year to hold them in to begin the contempt proceedings.

[B]

But I thought they wanted to do it publicly. Right. They just didn't want to do it behind closed doors.

[D]

So that was part of it. They'd been offering to testify for a long time, but, like, initially it was kind of like, why are. Like, what's the point of this if you're not subpoenaing Donald Trump and all these other people? Well, why are you only going after the Clintons? Which. True. And now it's like they're willing to offer testimony publicly. They're saying that they want cameras and they want to do this publicly. February 26th and 27th, it looks like Hillary and Bill are going to testify based on what I Understand, Bill Clinton is the one who's in these files who I would love to hear testify personally. Hillary, not so much. I've seen her name pop up once maybe thus far like, and in like passing. So to me it is a, it's very sad that they're being hauled in for depositions and Trump and other people aren't. That, to me is the issue.

[B]

Well, I guess the big question is now that these files have come out, now that Donald Trump and a number of other political figures and even private figures have been mentioned numerous, numerous times in these documents, in these files, will this committee now subpoena all these other individuals?

[D]

All these other individuals may be Donald Trump? No, they said Comer said he's not going to subpoena Trump, but there are plenty of other individuals for him to subpoena from. Any one of those names that you already listed in this life. But I think they subpoenaed also Lex Wexner and some of these other people associated with Epstein, like more of his associates. So hopefully we'll get some more information there when they have to respond to those subpoenas.

[B]

So. So Erin, in closing, you're a lawyer. You know, will there be any repercussions for obviously you said Lithuania, Poland and the UK They've all launched investigations. We've got this House committee that has subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton. They're going to be testifying. But what about all these people we are talking about? And by the way, we just scratched the surface. I just mentioned, I just mentioned some of the high profile names. There are many, many others. But what will happen to all these individuals? Obviously, I think there might be professional ramifications for some of these individuals as there was with Larry Summers, as there might be with Casey Wasserman. You know, I don't know about anyone else, but is anything going to come of this? I guess is my final question to you.

[D]

Well, a couple things. Number one, in the short term, criminally, no, just because this DOJ doesn't seem interested in prosecuting anyone or continuing this investigation. Now, I say that with the caveat. In the short term, probably not, because sex trafficking and charges related to sex trafficking have no statute of limitations. And so presumably if Democrats were to win in 2028, you could have a Democratic attorney general open up criminal investigations into all of this. Again, there is no statute of limitations for sex trafficking. So that's number one. Number two, they may not be prosecuted in an actual courthouse, but they will be prosecuted in the court of public opinion like you said Peter Attia lost his job at CBS already. You have.

[B]

Did he, did they announce that.

[D]

I saw a note that they. Yes, that they were pulling his contributorship.

[B]

Because I know they canceled a rerun on 60 Minutes, a big profile they had done on him, but I didn't realize that they had severed ties.

[D]

They also sever ties. He also lost his job at his like day job where he was a chief science officer at a company or something. So all of these people, I mean, are going to lose employment and like get ridiculed and justifiably so. As far as actual accountability goes, I mean, this is something these survivors have been demanding for five administrations for 20 plus years. I don't think they're holding their breath in terms of getting actual accountability. And as a lawyer, I can't see it coming because this DOJ doesn't seem to want to make it happen.

[B]

Okay, maybe this is a dumb question, but I do have to ask you, you know, during the Biden administration, right, they had these files. They did, Right. The DOJ had these files. Why didn't Merrick Garland or anyone in the Biden administration pursue this and investigate these individuals who are in these files, including the former president at the time?

[D]

Well, good question. I wish that they did. And they may very well have investigated. We just don't know. Right. Many of those files have not been released, the investigatory documents. But the one caveat the Biden administration prosecuted, Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine Maxwell's case did not end like all the legal avenues through the Supreme Court until earlier last year. You can't release any files related to Ghislaine Maxwell while her case is pending. You just can't do that. So that's why none of these files were actually released during Biden, is because the case was still pending, the appeals.

[B]

Process was still ongoing, Even, even the ones that didn't mention her by name. They couldn't release any of these files or they couldn't investigate any people mentioned in these files.

[D]

They could investigate and they should have investigated. As far as releasing it, it's a little touchier because you could argue that some of the Epstein files, even if they didn't mention Maxwell by name, were tangentially associated with an associate of Epstein's being Maxwell. So they should have investigated. I'm not saying they couldn't. They could and I don't know why they didn't. I don't have an answer for you. I mean, and I said from the beginning, this isn't just like A stain on the Trump administration. This is a stain on the Biden, Obama, Bush. I mean, everyone could have investigated this. No one did.

[B]

Well, we really appreciate you kind of going through this with us, Erin, and I'd love to have you back as you make your way through these documents. And I know most people who are watching know of you. Please follow Aaron. He is the force of nature. I'm so proud of what he's built and the work that he's put in bringing accurate journalism. Oh, we have till 2:40. I mean, I think, is Judd ready though? I think we can move on. I've kept Aaron long enough, you guys, and I think I can get Judd on the foreign route. We're going to be talking, Aaron, about this whole move to nationalize elections.

[D]

The unconstitutional move to nationalize elections. Can't be better.

[B]

Yes, yes. And you know, taking voter rolls from Fulton county, trying to get Minneapolis and Minnesota to give DOJ there, but, I mean, it's just absolutely insane. I don't know how you keep up with all of it on a daily basis, but we're really grateful. Everyone, please follow Aaron. He is just doing a kick ass job and let's do this again. Maybe we can do it when you've gotten through more files, but please take care of your health and get some sleep and take care of yourself and maybe get some people to come and help you, Erin, because it's, it's a huge job.

[D]

I'll do it if I have to. I will, I will just.

[B]

I know I'm sounding like your mother right now, but I could be your mother, Aaron.

[D]

Well, this was so awesome and yeah, let's do it again soon. Thank you so much for having me. And go subscribe to td.

[B]

Thanks a lot, Aaron. Okay, take care.

[D]

Hey folks, thanks so much for watching. Feel free to add this podcast on.

[C]

Apple Podcasts, Spotify or anywhere you watch for the latest breaking news and daily hits throughout the day.

[D]

Make sure to follow subscribe. See you soon for more.

[E]

There's nothing like being in the stands cheering on your favorite team. Game time is your hack to unlocking amazing tickets in just a few taps. Plus, their game time guarantee means you can Trust you'll get 100% authentic tickets at the best price. Fees are always included, so what you see is one what you pay. Get the best deals on sports Tickets. Download the GameTime app and create an account to start searching for tickets to upcoming games and events. Swipe, tap, ticket. Go. Game time.