Breaking: Trump Caught in Major Lie After Congress Reviewed Unredacted Epstein Files

Summary

---

The Parnas Perspective – Breaking: Trump Caught in Major Lie After Congress Reviewed Unredacted Epstein Files

Host: Aaron Parnas
Date: February 9, 2026

Episode Overview

This explosive episode dives into newly revealed, unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files now being reviewed by members of Congress. Host Aaron Parnas breaks down how evidence from these files contradicts Donald Trump’s longstanding claims about his relationship with Epstein. Featuring clips from Congressman Jamie Raskin and Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury, the episode exposes redaction failures, potential cover-ups, and the disturbing breadth of the scandal’s reach, with Trump situated firmly at its center.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Unredacted Epstein Files: Congressional Review Begins

[01:57–03:30]

• Members of Congress are now reviewing unredacted Epstein documents for the first time.
• Jamie Raskin, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, was the first to review them—which is significant, as he will soon question Attorney General Pam Bondi.
• These documents contradict Donald Trump’s previous public statements regarding his interactions with Jeffrey Epstein.

2. Trump’s Claimed Banishment of Epstein Debunked

[03:30–04:12]

• Jamie Raskin (voiced by Legal Analyst):
  “Epstein’s lawyers synopsized and quoted Trump as saying 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.”
  [03:34]
• Trump’s narrative that he “kicked Epstein out” or banned him from Mar-a-Lago is directly contradicted by legal documents from 2008–2009.
• Aaron Parnas summarizes the findings:
  • Trump told Epstein's lawyers in 2009 that Epstein was never banned from Mar-a-Lago.
  • There are records showing Trump’s lawyers were still in contact with Epstein and his legal team as late as 2009.
• Analysis: The redaction of this information raises questions about what else remains hidden.

3. Specific Redactions: Trump vs. Clinton

[06:29–06:47]

• Interviewer: “What did you see specific to President Trump or President Clinton, and were there specific redactions to them?”
• Legal Analyst (Jamie Raskin’s summary):
  “I just gave an example of one redaction related to President Trump. I did not see any redactions related to President [Clinton].”
  [06:35]
• Findings indicate more redactions around Trump than Clinton, raising further concerns about selective transparency.

4. Victim Privacy, Redactions, and Possible Threats

[07:02–07:40]

• Raskin stresses only victims’ names should have been redacted, but officials instead released several victims’ names, either due to “spectacular incompetence and sloppiness” or, as many survivors suspect, as a deliberate threat to keep others silent.
• Jamie Raskin:
  “...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.”
  [07:27]

5. Exposed Witnesses: Redacted and Unredacted Names

[07:40–08:51]

• Parnas describes legal documents (interrogatories) where witnesses are listed:
  • Donald Trump’s name appears under those with “knowledge of...defendant's sexual desire for minor girls.”
  • Other notable names are included (Mark Epstein, Jean Luc Brunel, David Copperfield, Ghislaine Maxwell, Les Wexner), with some full lines redacted for unclear reasons.
• Questions persist about inconsistency in redactions, e.g., partially redacting Les Wexner’s name: “Not sure why they redacted just the first name and not the full name. Doesn’t make any sense.” [07:57]

6. The Scale and Consequences of the Cover-Up

[08:51–09:39]

• Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury:
  “There are more than three dozen associates, family members and individuals directly associated with Donald Trump named in those files... 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.”
  [08:51]
• Stansbury points out that other countries have forced resignations and launched investigations over lesser associations with Epstein—implicating the US government in a massive cover-up.
• She further notes that Ghislaine Maxwell, key witness, is invoking the Fifth Amendment, seeking clemency.

7. Ongoing Investigation and Next Steps

[09:39–10:21]

• Parnas underscores the sheer volume of material: “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.”
• He promises continued reporting as more members of Congress dive into the files.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Jamie Raskin ([03:34]):
  “He had never been asked to leave. And that was redacted for some indeterminate, inscrutable reason.”
• Aaron Parnas ([04:12]):
  “It raises the question, what else is redacted that we don’t know about?”
• Jamie Raskin ([07:27]):
  “A deliberate threat to other survivors who are thinking about coming forward…”
• Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury ([08:51]):
  “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.”
• Aaron Parnas ([09:41]):
  “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.”

---

Important Timestamps

• 01:57 — Congressional review of unredacted Epstein files begins; Trump's credibility called into question.
• 03:30 — Evidence contradicts Trump's claim he banned Epstein; Raskin details the contents of the files.
• 04:12 — Discussion on redaction strategy and implications for transparency.
• 06:35 — No redactions found for Clinton; several for Trump.
• 07:02 — Raskin lambasts the exposure of victim information.
• 08:51 — Stansbury’s remarks on the cover-up and the international response.
• 09:39 — Scope of the investigation outlined; next steps for Congress and the public.

---

Episode Tone

Aaron Parnas approaches the episode with urgency, skepticism towards official narratives, and empathy for survivors. The conversations are direct, unsparing, and critical of government and institutional failures—with a tone that’s both investigative and activist.

---

Takeaway

This episode provides a revealing and unsettling picture of how redaction, obfuscation, and governmental hesitance are shielding key facts about the Epstein case, with Donald Trump now caught in a documented lie. The episode echoes a call for justice and continued scrutiny as congressional investigators dig deeper into the scandal’s untold depths.

Transcript

[Midi Health Host]

This podcast is supported by Midi Health. Are you in midlife feeling dismissed, unheard or just plain tired of the old health care system? You're not alone. For too long, women's serious midlife health issues have been trivialized, ignored and met with a just deal with it attitude. Many of us have been made to feel ashamed or forgotten. In fact, even today, 75% of women seeking care for menopause and perimenopause issues are are left entirely untreated. But here's the powerful truth. It's time for a change. It's time for miti. MITI is not just a health care provider. It's a women's telehealth clinic founded and supported by world class leaders in women's health. What sets MIDI apart? We are the only women's telehealth brand covered by major insurance companies, making high quality, expert care accessible and affordable. Our clinicians provide one on one face to face consultations where they truly listen to your unique needs. We offer a full range of holistic, data driven solutions from hormonal therapies and weight loss protocols to lifestyle coaching and preventative health guidance. This isn't one size fits all care. This is care uniquely tailored for you. At miti, you will join our patients who feel seen, heard and prioritized. You will find that our mission is clear to help all women thrive in midlife, giving them access to the health care they deserve. Because we believe midlife isn't the middle at all. It is the beginning of your second act. Ready to feel your best and write your second act script? Visit join MIDI.com today to book your personalized insurance covered virtual Visit. That's join MIDI.com Mitty the care women Deserve.

[Political Commentator]

We have some significant developments this afternoon. Donald Trump, the President of the United States, has a problem because now members of Congress are reviewing the unredacted versions of the Epstein files and we're already seeing that, well, Trump lied. Now, it's not surprising that the President would lie about his relationship about Jeffrey Epstein given the fact that the two of them were close at periods of times and he wouldn't want to be associated with this horrific, evil individual. But the fact that the President is lying and that his lies are covered up by these redactions, well, that speaks volumes. And well, today Jamie Raskin became the first member of Congress to go and review these files. He's the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. He's going to be leading the effort to question Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday. And what he found completely undercuts one of Donald Trump's critical claims as it relates to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and whether or not Trump actually kicked Epstein out of Mar A Lago. Everyone needs to see this. So make sure to like, comment, share and subscribe. The more you like, the more people see this. Subscribe Support my work on my substack. Click the link below. Today's the one year anniversary of doing journalism full time and your support really helps fuel this. I honestly am just so grateful to have your support because making that decision was one of the hardest and scariest of my life. So let's just jump right into it. I want you to listen to what Congressman Raskin had to say about Donald Trump allegedly kicking Jeffrey Epstein out of Mar A Lago because that's what he previously claimed. Take a listen to what Raskin had say after reviewing the files, the period.

[Legal Analyst]

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]

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]

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

[Legal Analyst]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 [e-mail] ad not reviewed or approved by Novo Nordisk.