Legal Analyst (3:30)

Of the 2009 investigation and Epstein's lawyers synopsized and quoted Trump as saying that that Jeffrey Epstein was not a member of his club at Mar A Lago, but he was a guest at Mar A Lago and he had never been asked to leave. And that was redacted for some indeterminate, inscrutable reason. I know it seems to be at odds with some things that President Trump has been saying recently about how he had kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club or asked him to leave. And this was at least one report that appears to contradict it.

Political Commentator (4:12)

So what Raskin is describing is a document that was prepared by Epstein's lawyers and in this document is a synopsis of essentially what Donald Trump had to say. This document was prepared 2008, 2009. That was when Jeffrey Epstein was facing the first criminal allegations against him that were officially charged. Right. And apparently according to Raskin, one of the statements in that document essentially was quoting Donald Trump in which he said that Epstein wasn't a member of Mar A Lago, but he was a guest and he was never actually kicked out of the club. Now that is significant. Why? Because it contradicts Donald Trump's prior statements. We learned, according to the Wall Street Journal, that allegedly Jeffrey Epstein was banned from Donald Trump's spa in 2003 after an 18 year old employee complained to managers that the pedophile pressured her for sex so that in 2003 allegedly was banned. Trump previously said that he was not a fan of Jeffrey Epstein's. In 2009 he said he had not spoken to Jeffrey Epstein in 15 years. That would mean he had not spoken with Epstein since 2004. But what Raskin is saying is that not only did the first thing really not happen, Epstein was never banned or kicked out of Mar a Lago, based on what Epstein's lawyers wrote down. But also, it seems as though Trump's lawyers were communicating with Jeffrey Epstein as recently as 2009 when they were discussing the. Essentially the synopsis over the allegations against Jeffrey Epstein. That is significant. And while it's a lie, right on its own, to me, what's significant about that is that it was redacted. Why was that statement redacted? There was no reason for that statement to be redacted. And it raises the question, what else is redacted that we don't know about? Well, here is what else is redacted. After reviewing Epstein documents at the Department of Justice, Jamie Raskin said that there is evidence of victims as young as nine years old. As young as nine years old. I mean, that is horrific. Horrific to say the least. And, well, he also was asked about whether or not Bill Clinton's name was redacted. Take a listen to what Raskin had to say.

Interviewer (6:29)

What did you see specific to President Trump or President Clinton, and were there specific redactions to them?

Legal Analyst (6:35)

Well, I just gave an example of one redaction related to. To President Trump. I did not see any redactions related to President.

Political Commentator (6:47)

So you saw no redactions as related to President Clinton. Okay. All these redactions according to. About Trump, but not Clinton. I do want you to hear what he had to say about redactions regarding survivors. Take a listen.

Legal Analyst (7:02)

All of the information to come out. And the only redactions should be the names of the victims and the identifying information. Unfortunately, they violated that precept by releasing the names of a lot of victims, which is either spectacular incompetence and sloppiness on their part, or, as a lot of the survivors believe, a deliberate threat to other survivors who are thinking about coming forward, that they need to be careful because they can be exposed and have their personal information dragged through the mud as well.

Political Commentator (7:40)

A deliberate threat. And. Well, look, this is kind of the stuff that's redacted, right? I mean, we've seen all these redaction failures. This is a document that was found from interrogatories. Interrogatories are legal questions asked in a lawsuit. The lawsuit was a survivor suing Jeffrey Epstein. And one of the questions that was asked is, list out. And this is normal in all lawsuits. List out anyone who may be a witness to the allegations in the lawsuit. Okay. And. Well, this is the answer to that question. And on the right you see, quote, knowledge of finances and defendants sexual desire for minor girls. Donald Trump being one of the names. Mark Epstein, Jean Luc Brunel, David Copperfield, Maxwell. Okay, the third line is Lex Wex, Les Wexner. Not sure why they redacted just the first name and not the full name. Doesn't make any sense. The first line is redacted and the last line is redacted. Why? No one knows. So it's things like this that shouldn't be redacted and yet are. And well, Melanie Stansbury, a congresswoman on Capitol Hill after the Ghislaine Maxwell Short deposition today, really kind of put this all into perspective. Take a listen.

Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury (8:51)

That there are more than three dozen associates, family members and individuals directly associated with Donald Trump named in those files. Now there are now at least nine or 10 other countries across the world that have opened investigations or forced their leaders to step down because of their mere association with Jeffrey Epstein. And the United States government is engaged in an active cover up of the largest sex trafficking scandal and influence peddling scandal in the history of the United States. And Donald Trump is right at the center of it. And the person who is living to provide the evidence, who knows what is going on, is trying to invoke the fifth to buy her clemency.

Political Commentator (9:39)

I couldn't have said it better, better myself. I mean that's kind of the truth. And that's where we're at. And while more members of Congress are going to be digging into these, quote, unredacted files in the coming days, but remember, there are 3 million of them. One person can't review 3 million redacted documents or unredacted documents in a week, in a month. It's going to take a long time. So we'll keep pressing, we'll keep pushing. Make sure to like, comment, share and subscribe. More updates coming soon. Hey folks, thanks so much for watching. Feel free to add this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or anywhere you watch for the latest breaking news and daily hits throughout the day. Make sure to follow subscribe. See you soon for more.

Weight Watchers Advertiser (10:21)

The new Wegovy pill is now available through weight watchers. Powerful GLP1 results in a simple pill at the lowest price available. And with Weight Watchers you can get doctor support and personalized nutrition programs. See if you qualify@weightwatchers.com ad not reviewed or approved by Novo Nordisk.