Epstein Survivor Drops Bombshell! - The Parnas Perspective

Loading summary

Transcript26 lines

[00:00]
A
Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment
[00:22]
B
of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan. Required $15 per month. Equivalent taxes and feeds. Extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. Me slow when network is busy. See terms. I'm Kiana and I leveled up my business with Shopify.
[00:34]
A
Once I figured out that Shopify was a thing, I never turned back.
[00:39]
B
I can create a site with my eyes closed. Shopify thinks ahead of us, you know,
[00:44]
A
and it thinks about the customer more than anything. Every day I'm thinking about some other new business, but Shopify is doing it to me because it's so easy to use. It's like, I can't stop.
[00:54]
B
I'm addicted.
[00:56]
A
Start your free trial@shopify.com Trump administration looks like a monkey having intimate relations with a football. Those aren't my words. Those are the words of Scott Jennings after an embarrassing moment for the administration where it admitted that not only did Donald Trump lie, but that the Justice Department went after a man who was innocent, a man by the name of David Hearns, an Olympian, who they arrested because they said that he was vandalizing the reflecting pool. But there was no vandalism. We knew that. I reported it last night after the or after the Department of Justice moved to dismiss criminal charges against him. And it comes at a very precarious time for this administration because the embarrassment is mounting. Trump is throwing his own attorney general nominee under the bus right now. And, well, the war in Iran is rapidly escalating, not de escalating, as Iran is getting material support from Russia in the form of intelligence. China is sending rocket launchers and the United States is now saying, if you live in the region, get out. I spoke with Danny Bensky, an Epstein survivor, about all of this and about what Todd Blanch's confirmation vote on Tuesday means. What you should expect. Make sure to like, comment, share, get the word out and hit that subscribe button. As we're on the road to a million subscribers, we're going to keep the Epstein survivors front and center, always, today and every day. But I want to talk about the embarrassment first that the administration is facing right now. Scott Jennings, who is a key Trump ally, said, quote, yeah, of course, I mean, on this one, the administration looks like a monkey having intimate relations with the football. It looks terrible. And you know, after everything that was said, this guy, he is owed an apology. This guy is referring to David Hearns and I don't know what the procedures are for it, but he ought to sue anybody that he thinks can he can to get his name back. I have a strong reaction, to be honest with you, when people have their name dragged through the mud. And that's obviously what happened here. So I'm glad the charges got dropped. So that's good that they admitted it. They dragged this guy's name through the mud. And it comes as Donald Trump today says, you know what, if Senators Cornyn and Tillis, both upset because I wouldn't endorse them, aren't going to approve Todd Blanche, one of the most respected professionals, according to everybody in the country, to be the US Attorney General, then I will keep Todd Blanche's acting AG and push hard to get the anti weaponization bill which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the crooked Joe Biden and Obama administration. I get nothing, although I was treated horribly. Pass. Todd Blanche was a voice of reason. It will immediately be back on the table and it will get done. Thank you for your attention to this matter. So the weaponization fund is back on the table. Well, Republican senators say they're not going to vote for Todd Blanche, which means Todd Blanche's confirmation vote scheduled for now Tuesday in a few days, is in very much trouble right now. I spoke with Danny Bensky about this and so much more. Make sure to hit that subscribe button, get us to a million subscribers and I'll see you soon. My conversation with Danny Bensky right now. Danny Bensky, welcome to the Parnas Perspective. How are you?
[04:07]
B
Good. Yeah. A little tired from the week in D.C. but we're here kicking. Yeah.
[04:11]
A
So you were in Washington D.C. this week. You were lobbying senators to vote against Todd Blanche's confirmation. Now there is a vote now scheduled on Tuesday after it was pushed. What's your reaction to Chuck Grassley scheduling the vote on Tuesday?
[04:24]
B
Yeah, I mean, I, you know, I hope it's a no. We all hope that it's a no. I think that's sort of unlikely, but there is a little bit of hope still. I think with Cornyn and Tillis and especially with Senator John Cornyn, you know, I hope that he knows what he wants his legacy to be. And if he leaves on the note of voting a yes to Todd Blanche. I think it undermines the career that he has had with prosecuting sex offenders. So I'm really hoping that he sticks to his guns here. And even though he's been talking about the slush fund quite a bit, I have a feeling that there are more reservations than just the slush fund. But, of course, that's just me projecting, so hopefully he'll do the right thing.
[05:05]
A
Now, you spoke with Cornyn's office and Tillis's office while you were in Washington, D.C. did they give you any kind of insight as to how the senators were thinking?
[05:14]
B
Not really any insight. I do think, like, we had a great meeting with Cornyn's office. We did meet with his head Judiciary staffer, and that went very, very well. But it would have been better if we met with the senators, of course, directly. I get that they're busy, but Senator Tillis did say that he would meet with us. And then later that day, we went to. To his office, and we did wait for over half an hour. And I know that that day was really busy, so we were really hoping to meet with him the following day. We did reach out on two separate occasions to have that meeting, and we still haven't had the meeting, so it's a little bit disappointing. We really hope that there is an opportunity before the vote. I just don't know how that'll happen now because most of the survivors have left D.C. so even if it's on zoom, it's not ideal. But I think he really does need to hear. Hear what happened within the Blanche meeting.
[06:04]
A
So I want to talk about that meeting, specifically the branch meeting. Many Republicans say, well, Blanche checked off a box. He met with you guys after claiming he couldn't meet with you guys. That should be enough. What's your response?
[06:16]
B
Yeah, it's not enough. I mean, it was. The meeting was almost a waste of a meeting. It was a waste of time, to be honest, because all it was was a lot of condescending tone. But beyond the condescending and sort of just the. The vibe of the meeting, the substance of the meeting was not there. Right. So we kept trying to get down to the facts. Why? You know, for me, my information was released in all three batches. And then there was a document that literally was taken down to be redacted and put back up the same way that it was with my name still out there. So, like, we really wanted answers for that. We wanted answers to why perpetrators are still being protected. I just Saw an email recently or, you know, something in the files recently that said that Jeffrey Epstein's email was redact and Jeffrey's name was redacted. And yet, you know, victims information, there's still. There are still victims in there right now who are unredacted. And then also, you know, we asked about the Ghislaine Maxwell transfer. His response to that was, victims never knew, never know when their abuser is moved. Right. And that's not a satisfactory answer because she, you know, she's a convicted felon and she was moved to a lower security penitentiary. That doesn't make any sense for. For the American public. Right. And we've just seen him, you know, I called him walking perjury yesterday because it's true. He is walking perjury. He is 1,000%. We have seen him lie under oath more times than we can count. And it's like we. We keep catching him in it, and we feel crazy. And so in that meeting, it was just more of. He just argued language. He was very rude about. Get to the point. You know, he. He said a couple of times, what are you getting at? Like, I'm. I'm bl. I'm blindsided. You're blindsiding me by walking in here. And it's like, well, we've requested this meeting, you know, so many times. But even, like, at the start of the meeting, the setup of the meeting, he responded when he first got there with, you know, someone told me that you guys were here on the Hill. And it's like, this meeting wasn't a happenstance meeting. This is a meeting that came after eight or nine months of requests coming from, you know, multiple different angles with nonprofit organizations, survivors directly. And we still. We didn't hear anything until that day. And it was like, well, I rearranged my schedule for you. Here I am. And so, you know, when you walk in with that sort of ego and attitude, you're like, you're talking to survivors who have been dying to talk to you. So we didn't get anything out of the meeting. And, like, when I say get anything out of it, all we wanted was a good faith commitment. All we wanted was for him to say, you know what? I'll look into this. This is an investigative lead. You're right. Virginia's deposition, she names all these men. Maybe we'll take a look at Prince Andrew and his response to Prince Andrew or former Prince Andrew, which I love to say now, but his response to Prince Andrew was that he won't cooperate with us. It's like, of course he's not going to cooperate. He's being brought up on charges. You know, so it's like that attitude of like, well, they're not. They're just not going to work with us. Like, do you think any of these people are going to want to work with you? No, but we got to find justice here. That's the goal. So, yeah, it was. It was an exhausting meeting, for sure. But beyond all the feelings about it, there was just no, nothing that got accomplished in that meeting. And I think survivors and people in this country definitely deserve better from their acting ag.
[09:36]
A
I thought something interesting you just said was that survivors are never told when their perpetrator is moved facilities. That's not actually true. Prosecutors oftentimes communicate with survivors all the time when perpetrators being moved facilities, when a perpetrator is being released, providing updates about cases. Does he do that with you all?
[09:56]
B
No. No. And I've been a part of the victims notification system since 2008 when I was first subpoenaed by the FBI. The FBI kind of found me, actually in 2008. I was. I didn't know how they. How they found me. They subpoenaed me, and then I was enrolled in the system. So I've always gotten updates on Jeffrey's whereabouts. So if he was moved when he was first put in prison in that downtown facility. So, yes, I've always received updates, and I was receiving updates on the Maxwell trial, but then did not receive anything after that. So, yeah, doesn't make any sense to me.
[10:31]
A
That's fascinating. I got to ask you a question that I see continuously pop up, and I asked Jess Michaels, as I asked other survivors this, everyone is or not everyone, but a lot of people keep commenting. How come the survivors won't just come out publicly and start naming names?
[10:45]
B
Yeah.
[10:46]
A
Can you tell people why?
[10:48]
B
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I think there have been so many serious risks about defamation and about real physical safety. There are some people that, you know, had to sign NDAs at one point and now are trying to figure out ways around the NDAs. And so. And it's complicated. But I will tell you that, you know, the redacted reading room is an amazing resource because they have created these bound books where you can go and read the files. So it's created sort of a safeguard for us, and we have actually gone and read the files because that's not us necessarily sharing our own stories with our own personal details. That's literally public information and in the public domain now. So that we had a filibuster where we literally read through names like Glenn Dubin and Ava Dubin. I mean, Ava Dubin, we know, you know, she's on the side of Mount Sinai. Sinai. And we know that she at least violated her oath as a physician. Right. So. And we like Richard Kahn, Darren Indyk, we are saying all these names, we have been screaming these names like Les Wexner, you know, I mean, the list goes on and on and it's just, honestly, it's so many names to constantly keep saying out there. But the first place to start, we always call Virginia Gifri's deposition like ground zero. Like if you start there and you look for other survivors, you have corroborating stories, then you have a case. Right. So you could at least build there. But even starting small, starting from the enterprise itself, which is where, you know, I wasn't trafficked to anybody other than Jeffrey. But there, you know, sex trafficking doesn't happen in a vacuum. It's a ring. Right. And so we know that there are more co conspirators beyond Gillian Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. So like, you know, indicting Leslie Groff would be a great place to start. And so. Or Richard Kahn and Darren Indyck. Right. Who are the accountant and the lawyer. Like, that's like, I don't want to say like low hanging fruit, but that's like, that is literally the inner workings. So if you start there and branch out, but they're not even trying to open one active investigation on any of these people.
[12:43]
A
Another talking point I'm starting to see bubble up and Vice President Vance said this recently on Rogan was that, well, I can't really tell the difference between a co conspirator and a victim.
[12:52]
B
Yeah. Which is such a frustrating conversation. Right. Because that is sex trafficking. Like it feels like sort of a pyramid scheme, which sucks. But there are different layers, you know, there are different levels of co conspirators in this case. But what I'm hearing is like a lot of blame be placed on victims and a lot of like, well, the girls were just all bringing each other. And that's just it. That was all how, that's how it went. And it's like, that's actually so not true because you need demand for supply. Right. So you know that there were other men that, you know, in order to have this many girls that were involved, you needed other men to be involved as well. And so I do think that it's a, it's a tricky topic for sure. But I think that somebody that was 16 years old and brought a couple of friends is a very different. It's a very different category from somebody who was working for Jeffrey full time for, you know, nine years, 10 years, 11 years, whatever, and sitting outside of a school. I mean, Keland literally used to park a car and wait outside of schools and talk to girls to bring them to Jeffrey's. So I feel like that is such a different level. And I'm not. I'm not saying that one is, you know, okay. I'm just saying that this is what sex trafficking is, unfortunately. So there's a lot of education that needs to happen. And there is. I think there is a line where it becomes co conspiratorship and we need to kind of define what that is
[14:13]
A
before I let you go. It's been decades. It's been decades. And you also haven't got any justice or any accountability. How do you keep fighting? Because I saw you on Capitol Hill and you were just on top of it. Like, I mean, it was amazing to see the energy and just like the want to keep fighting.
[14:34]
B
I think it. It always, for me, it stems back to my students. Often it stems back to Virginia Giuffre. It stems back to knowing that this case has, you know, 30 years of material and seeing how, honestly, the deeper we go into this case, the more you see how truly unfair it is. And you're like, this is. How can this be legal? This is crazy. So you want other people, especially senators and government and, you know, people in the Senate to see what you see. Right. You feel like you're going insane. You're like, what am I looking at that they're not looking at here? And so I think there is a lot of that. But honestly, also, just knowing how many survivors there are in this country and knowing that we are a country made up of survivors, I mean, one in three women, that is. That's a huge number. And that's just women that we're not talking about, you know, unfortunately, like young men, young boys. Right. Like, so I just think that that statistic is high and we need to do something about it. We have a real problem in this country about that idea of demand and accountability. And we're placing the accountability always on the victim instead of on the abuser. And that is something that really needs to shift. And I think we are starting to see a shift. You know, we were with the Platner and Swalwell, two victims there this week, and it was incredible to see. See how fast their case moved and how they were able to come forward and without fear of retribution or shame. Or maybe they did have those fears, but they did it anyway. And so that bravery and seeing that from our younger people and seeing that even just the stories that I get in my inbox regularly, it really does fuel the fight and keep the fight alive. And so it's just been an amazing experience to hear from other people and know that we're changing things.
[16:20]
A
Danny Bensky, thanks so much for the time.
[16:21]
B
Thank you so much. Thanks, Aaron.

Summary5 min read

Podcast Summary: The Parnas Perspective — "Epstein Survivor Drops Bombshell!"
Host: Aaron Parnas
Guest: Danny Bensky (Epstein survivor and advocate)
Release Date: August 1, 2026

Episode Overview

This impactful episode of The Parnas Perspective brings to the forefront the voices of Epstein survivors and the ongoing struggle for justice and accountability in the aftermath of the scandal. Host Aaron Parnas interviews Danny Bensky, a survivor and lobbyist, directly after a week of lobbying on Capitol Hill against the confirmation of Todd Blanche as U.S. Attorney General. The conversation traverses government failures, redaction controversies, the lived reality for survivors, and the continued cover-ups that have protected perpetrators for decades. The episode is urgent, raw, and focused on action and transparency, highlighting the complexities and systemic obstacles still present within America's justice system when it comes to the case.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Current Political Climate and DOJ Scandals

Context: The Trump administration faces mounting embarrassment over mishandled prosecutions and the disarray around the Todd Blanche Attorney General confirmation (01:00–03:50).
Discussion: DOJ dropped false charges against Olympian David Hearns, with Trump's allies openly criticizing the administration's mistakes.

"On this one, the administration looks like a monkey having intimate relations with the football. It looks terrible. ... He is owed an apology."
— Scott Jennings, quoted by Aaron Parnas (01:00)
Blanche Confirmation Vote: Scheduled for Tuesday, is hanging by a thread with opposition from Senators Cornyn and Tillis, who have been the targets of lobbying by Danny and other survivors.

2. Lobbying Against Todd Blanche's Confirmation

Danny’s Capitol Hill Experience: Danny spent the past week in D.C., meeting with senators and staff to urge a NO vote on Blanche's confirmation (04:06–06:04).
Meetings: Productive staff-level discussions, but lack of direct senator engagement was disappointing, particularly as time runs out before the vote.

"We did meet with his head Judiciary staffer, and that went very, very well. But it would have been better if we met with the senators, of course, directly."
— Danny Bensky (05:14)

3. Failures in DOJ’s Handling of Survivors & Evidence

Lackluster Meeting With Blanche: Survivors’ months-long demands for dialogue resulted in a condescending, fruitless meeting.
- Redaction Failures: Victim information has remained unredacted, while perpetrators' details (like Epstein and high-profile associates) remain shielded. (06:15–09:35)
- Lack of Transparency: Blanche’s attitude dismissed survivors’ need for information and accountability.
"We wanted answers to why perpetrators are still being protected. ... I called him walking perjury yesterday because it's true. He is walking perjury. He is 1,000%. We have seen him lie under oath more times than we can count."
— Danny Bensky (07:35)
Victims Kept in the Dark: Survivors were not informed about Ghislaine Maxwell's transfer to a lower-security facility; standard victim-outreach policies were ignored.

"Victims never knew, never know when their abuser is moved. Right. And that's not a satisfactory answer ... She was moved to a lower security penitentiary. That doesn't make any sense."
— Danny Bensky (08:35)

4. Obstacles for Survivors Naming Names

Why Don't Survivors Name Names Publicly?
- Risks: Legal exposure (defamation), physical safety, NDAs, and social consequences (10:45–12:42).
- Safe Release Through Public Documents: Survivors use "redacted reading rooms" to point to published documents rather than repeating their own stories.
- Notable Associates Named: Glenn and Ava Dubin, Richard Kahn, Darren Indyck, Les Wexner, Leslie Groff. Emphasis is placed on the existence of mountains of corroborating documentation ignored by authorities.
"We have been screaming these names like Les Wexner ... The first place to start, we always call Virginia Giuffre’s deposition like ground zero. ... But they're not even trying to open one active investigation on any of these people."
— Danny Bensky (12:00)

5. Complex Dynamics: Co-Conspirators vs. Victims

Nuanced Roles: Vice President Vance’s recent public confusion over survivor vs. co-conspirator roles reflects a broader societal misunderstanding (12:42–14:13).
Pyramid Scheme Analogy: Danny explains the layered nature of trafficking operations, highlighting that blame is often misdirected toward victims, especially those who were minors or coerced.

"Somebody that was 16 years old and brought a couple of friends is a very different category from somebody who was working for Jeffrey full time, for, you know, nine years, 10 years ... There is a line where it becomes co-conspiratorship and we need to kind of define what that is."
— Danny Bensky (13:30)

6. Motivation and The Broader Crisis of Accountability

Endurance in Activism: Danny’s resolve is powered by solidarity with other survivors, students, and statistics that show the epidemic scale of sexual abuse (14:14–16:19).
Broader Message: There’s something systemically wrong; accountability remains misapplied; cultural change is starting, but is slow.

"This case has, you know, 30 years of material and seeing how, honestly, the deeper we go into this case, the more you see how truly unfair it is. And you're like, this is. How can this be legal? This is crazy ... We are a country made up of survivors, I mean, one in three women ... There is something that really needs to shift."
— Danny Bensky (14:33–15:20)

Memorable Quotes

On government failure:
"We didn't get anything out of the meeting. And ... all we wanted was a good faith commitment. ... I called him walking perjury yesterday because it's true."
(Danny Bensky, 07:27)
On survivors’ caution:
"There have been so many serious risks about defamation and about real physical safety. There are some people that had to sign NDAs ... and so it's complicated."
(Danny Bensky, 10:47)
On pyramid schemes and co-conspirators:
_"Sex trafficking doesn't happen in a vacuum. It's a ring. ... I think that somebody that was 16 years old and brought a couple of friends is a very different category from somebody who was working for Jeffrey full time for 10 years...and sitting outside of a school."*
(Danny Bensky, 13:00)
On the fight for accountability:
"We're placing the accountability always on the victim instead of on the abuser. And that is something that really needs to shift. And I think we are starting to see a shift."
(Danny Bensky, 15:20)

Key Timestamps

03:50 — Host previews the interview with Danny Bensky
04:10 — Danny recounts DC lobbying against AG nominee Blanche
05:14 — Details of meetings with Cornyn/Tillis staffers
06:15 — The failed meeting with Todd Blanche
08:35 — Maxwell transfer and lack of victim notification
10:45 — Why survivors can’t always “name names”
12:42 — Discussing co-conspirators vs. victims
14:33 — Where Danny finds the will to keep fighting

Final Thoughts

The episode provides a no-holds-barred look at bureaucratic inertia, government complicity, and the enduring power of survivor advocacy. Danny Bensky’s testimony is a clarion call for systemic reform, underlining the need to shift accountability, smash the status quo, and create safety for those willing to speak out. The fight continues—not just for justice in the Epstein case, but for cultural transformation nationwide.

Loading summary

Transcript26 lines

[00:00]
A
Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment
[00:22]
B
of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan. Required $15 per month. Equivalent taxes and feeds. Extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. Me slow when network is busy. See terms. I'm Kiana and I leveled up my business with Shopify.
[00:34]
A
Once I figured out that Shopify was a thing, I never turned back.
[00:39]
B
I can create a site with my eyes closed. Shopify thinks ahead of us, you know,
[00:44]
A
and it thinks about the customer more than anything. Every day I'm thinking about some other new business, but Shopify is doing it to me because it's so easy to use. It's like, I can't stop.
[00:54]
B
I'm addicted.
[00:56]
A
Start your free trial@shopify.com Trump administration looks like a monkey having intimate relations with a football. Those aren't my words. Those are the words of Scott Jennings after an embarrassing moment for the administration where it admitted that not only did Donald Trump lie, but that the Justice Department went after a man who was innocent, a man by the name of David Hearns, an Olympian, who they arrested because they said that he was vandalizing the reflecting pool. But there was no vandalism. We knew that. I reported it last night after the or after the Department of Justice moved to dismiss criminal charges against him. And it comes at a very precarious time for this administration because the embarrassment is mounting. Trump is throwing his own attorney general nominee under the bus right now. And, well, the war in Iran is rapidly escalating, not de escalating, as Iran is getting material support from Russia in the form of intelligence. China is sending rocket launchers and the United States is now saying, if you live in the region, get out. I spoke with Danny Bensky, an Epstein survivor, about all of this and about what Todd Blanch's confirmation vote on Tuesday means. What you should expect. Make sure to like, comment, share, get the word out and hit that subscribe button. As we're on the road to a million subscribers, we're going to keep the Epstein survivors front and center, always, today and every day. But I want to talk about the embarrassment first that the administration is facing right now. Scott Jennings, who is a key Trump ally, said, quote, yeah, of course, I mean, on this one, the administration looks like a monkey having intimate relations with the football. It looks terrible. And you know, after everything that was said, this guy, he is owed an apology. This guy is referring to David Hearns and I don't know what the procedures are for it, but he ought to sue anybody that he thinks can he can to get his name back. I have a strong reaction, to be honest with you, when people have their name dragged through the mud. And that's obviously what happened here. So I'm glad the charges got dropped. So that's good that they admitted it. They dragged this guy's name through the mud. And it comes as Donald Trump today says, you know what, if Senators Cornyn and Tillis, both upset because I wouldn't endorse them, aren't going to approve Todd Blanche, one of the most respected professionals, according to everybody in the country, to be the US Attorney General, then I will keep Todd Blanche's acting AG and push hard to get the anti weaponization bill which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the crooked Joe Biden and Obama administration. I get nothing, although I was treated horribly. Pass. Todd Blanche was a voice of reason. It will immediately be back on the table and it will get done. Thank you for your attention to this matter. So the weaponization fund is back on the table. Well, Republican senators say they're not going to vote for Todd Blanche, which means Todd Blanche's confirmation vote scheduled for now Tuesday in a few days, is in very much trouble right now. I spoke with Danny Bensky about this and so much more. Make sure to hit that subscribe button, get us to a million subscribers and I'll see you soon. My conversation with Danny Bensky right now. Danny Bensky, welcome to the Parnas Perspective. How are you?
[04:07]
B
Good. Yeah. A little tired from the week in D.C. but we're here kicking. Yeah.
[04:11]
A
So you were in Washington D.C. this week. You were lobbying senators to vote against Todd Blanche's confirmation. Now there is a vote now scheduled on Tuesday after it was pushed. What's your reaction to Chuck Grassley scheduling the vote on Tuesday?
[04:24]
B
Yeah, I mean, I, you know, I hope it's a no. We all hope that it's a no. I think that's sort of unlikely, but there is a little bit of hope still. I think with Cornyn and Tillis and especially with Senator John Cornyn, you know, I hope that he knows what he wants his legacy to be. And if he leaves on the note of voting a yes to Todd Blanche. I think it undermines the career that he has had with prosecuting sex offenders. So I'm really hoping that he sticks to his guns here. And even though he's been talking about the slush fund quite a bit, I have a feeling that there are more reservations than just the slush fund. But, of course, that's just me projecting, so hopefully he'll do the right thing.
[05:05]
A
Now, you spoke with Cornyn's office and Tillis's office while you were in Washington, D.C. did they give you any kind of insight as to how the senators were thinking?
[05:14]
B
Not really any insight. I do think, like, we had a great meeting with Cornyn's office. We did meet with his head Judiciary staffer, and that went very, very well. But it would have been better if we met with the senators, of course, directly. I get that they're busy, but Senator Tillis did say that he would meet with us. And then later that day, we went to. To his office, and we did wait for over half an hour. And I know that that day was really busy, so we were really hoping to meet with him the following day. We did reach out on two separate occasions to have that meeting, and we still haven't had the meeting, so it's a little bit disappointing. We really hope that there is an opportunity before the vote. I just don't know how that'll happen now because most of the survivors have left D.C. so even if it's on zoom, it's not ideal. But I think he really does need to hear. Hear what happened within the Blanche meeting.
[06:04]
A
So I want to talk about that meeting, specifically the branch meeting. Many Republicans say, well, Blanche checked off a box. He met with you guys after claiming he couldn't meet with you guys. That should be enough. What's your response?
[06:16]
B
Yeah, it's not enough. I mean, it was. The meeting was almost a waste of a meeting. It was a waste of time, to be honest, because all it was was a lot of condescending tone. But beyond the condescending and sort of just the. The vibe of the meeting, the substance of the meeting was not there. Right. So we kept trying to get down to the facts. Why? You know, for me, my information was released in all three batches. And then there was a document that literally was taken down to be redacted and put back up the same way that it was with my name still out there. So, like, we really wanted answers for that. We wanted answers to why perpetrators are still being protected. I just Saw an email recently or, you know, something in the files recently that said that Jeffrey Epstein's email was redact and Jeffrey's name was redacted. And yet, you know, victims information, there's still. There are still victims in there right now who are unredacted. And then also, you know, we asked about the Ghislaine Maxwell transfer. His response to that was, victims never knew, never know when their abuser is moved. Right. And that's not a satisfactory answer because she, you know, she's a convicted felon and she was moved to a lower security penitentiary. That doesn't make any sense for. For the American public. Right. And we've just seen him, you know, I called him walking perjury yesterday because it's true. He is walking perjury. He is 1,000%. We have seen him lie under oath more times than we can count. And it's like we. We keep catching him in it, and we feel crazy. And so in that meeting, it was just more of. He just argued language. He was very rude about. Get to the point. You know, he. He said a couple of times, what are you getting at? Like, I'm. I'm bl. I'm blindsided. You're blindsiding me by walking in here. And it's like, well, we've requested this meeting, you know, so many times. But even, like, at the start of the meeting, the setup of the meeting, he responded when he first got there with, you know, someone told me that you guys were here on the Hill. And it's like, this meeting wasn't a happenstance meeting. This is a meeting that came after eight or nine months of requests coming from, you know, multiple different angles with nonprofit organizations, survivors directly. And we still. We didn't hear anything until that day. And it was like, well, I rearranged my schedule for you. Here I am. And so, you know, when you walk in with that sort of ego and attitude, you're like, you're talking to survivors who have been dying to talk to you. So we didn't get anything out of the meeting. And, like, when I say get anything out of it, all we wanted was a good faith commitment. All we wanted was for him to say, you know what? I'll look into this. This is an investigative lead. You're right. Virginia's deposition, she names all these men. Maybe we'll take a look at Prince Andrew and his response to Prince Andrew or former Prince Andrew, which I love to say now, but his response to Prince Andrew was that he won't cooperate with us. It's like, of course he's not going to cooperate. He's being brought up on charges. You know, so it's like that attitude of like, well, they're not. They're just not going to work with us. Like, do you think any of these people are going to want to work with you? No, but we got to find justice here. That's the goal. So, yeah, it was. It was an exhausting meeting, for sure. But beyond all the feelings about it, there was just no, nothing that got accomplished in that meeting. And I think survivors and people in this country definitely deserve better from their acting ag.
[09:36]
A
I thought something interesting you just said was that survivors are never told when their perpetrator is moved facilities. That's not actually true. Prosecutors oftentimes communicate with survivors all the time when perpetrators being moved facilities, when a perpetrator is being released, providing updates about cases. Does he do that with you all?
[09:56]
B
No. No. And I've been a part of the victims notification system since 2008 when I was first subpoenaed by the FBI. The FBI kind of found me, actually in 2008. I was. I didn't know how they. How they found me. They subpoenaed me, and then I was enrolled in the system. So I've always gotten updates on Jeffrey's whereabouts. So if he was moved when he was first put in prison in that downtown facility. So, yes, I've always received updates, and I was receiving updates on the Maxwell trial, but then did not receive anything after that. So, yeah, doesn't make any sense to me.
[10:31]
A
That's fascinating. I got to ask you a question that I see continuously pop up, and I asked Jess Michaels, as I asked other survivors this, everyone is or not everyone, but a lot of people keep commenting. How come the survivors won't just come out publicly and start naming names?
[10:45]
B
Yeah.
[10:46]
A
Can you tell people why?
[10:48]
B
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I think there have been so many serious risks about defamation and about real physical safety. There are some people that, you know, had to sign NDAs at one point and now are trying to figure out ways around the NDAs. And so. And it's complicated. But I will tell you that, you know, the redacted reading room is an amazing resource because they have created these bound books where you can go and read the files. So it's created sort of a safeguard for us, and we have actually gone and read the files because that's not us necessarily sharing our own stories with our own personal details. That's literally public information and in the public domain now. So that we had a filibuster where we literally read through names like Glenn Dubin and Ava Dubin. I mean, Ava Dubin, we know, you know, she's on the side of Mount Sinai. Sinai. And we know that she at least violated her oath as a physician. Right. So. And we like Richard Kahn, Darren Indyk, we are saying all these names, we have been screaming these names like Les Wexner, you know, I mean, the list goes on and on and it's just, honestly, it's so many names to constantly keep saying out there. But the first place to start, we always call Virginia Gifri's deposition like ground zero. Like if you start there and you look for other survivors, you have corroborating stories, then you have a case. Right. So you could at least build there. But even starting small, starting from the enterprise itself, which is where, you know, I wasn't trafficked to anybody other than Jeffrey. But there, you know, sex trafficking doesn't happen in a vacuum. It's a ring. Right. And so we know that there are more co conspirators beyond Gillian Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. So like, you know, indicting Leslie Groff would be a great place to start. And so. Or Richard Kahn and Darren Indyck. Right. Who are the accountant and the lawyer. Like, that's like, I don't want to say like low hanging fruit, but that's like, that is literally the inner workings. So if you start there and branch out, but they're not even trying to open one active investigation on any of these people.
[12:43]
A
Another talking point I'm starting to see bubble up and Vice President Vance said this recently on Rogan was that, well, I can't really tell the difference between a co conspirator and a victim.
[12:52]
B
Yeah. Which is such a frustrating conversation. Right. Because that is sex trafficking. Like it feels like sort of a pyramid scheme, which sucks. But there are different layers, you know, there are different levels of co conspirators in this case. But what I'm hearing is like a lot of blame be placed on victims and a lot of like, well, the girls were just all bringing each other. And that's just it. That was all how, that's how it went. And it's like, that's actually so not true because you need demand for supply. Right. So you know that there were other men that, you know, in order to have this many girls that were involved, you needed other men to be involved as well. And so I do think that it's a, it's a tricky topic for sure. But I think that somebody that was 16 years old and brought a couple of friends is a very different. It's a very different category from somebody who was working for Jeffrey full time for, you know, nine years, 10 years, 11 years, whatever, and sitting outside of a school. I mean, Keland literally used to park a car and wait outside of schools and talk to girls to bring them to Jeffrey's. So I feel like that is such a different level. And I'm not. I'm not saying that one is, you know, okay. I'm just saying that this is what sex trafficking is, unfortunately. So there's a lot of education that needs to happen. And there is. I think there is a line where it becomes co conspiratorship and we need to kind of define what that is
[14:13]
A
before I let you go. It's been decades. It's been decades. And you also haven't got any justice or any accountability. How do you keep fighting? Because I saw you on Capitol Hill and you were just on top of it. Like, I mean, it was amazing to see the energy and just like the want to keep fighting.
[14:34]
B
I think it. It always, for me, it stems back to my students. Often it stems back to Virginia Giuffre. It stems back to knowing that this case has, you know, 30 years of material and seeing how, honestly, the deeper we go into this case, the more you see how truly unfair it is. And you're like, this is. How can this be legal? This is crazy. So you want other people, especially senators and government and, you know, people in the Senate to see what you see. Right. You feel like you're going insane. You're like, what am I looking at that they're not looking at here? And so I think there is a lot of that. But honestly, also, just knowing how many survivors there are in this country and knowing that we are a country made up of survivors, I mean, one in three women, that is. That's a huge number. And that's just women that we're not talking about, you know, unfortunately, like young men, young boys. Right. Like, so I just think that that statistic is high and we need to do something about it. We have a real problem in this country about that idea of demand and accountability. And we're placing the accountability always on the victim instead of on the abuser. And that is something that really needs to shift. And I think we are starting to see a shift. You know, we were with the Platner and Swalwell, two victims there this week, and it was incredible to see. See how fast their case moved and how they were able to come forward and without fear of retribution or shame. Or maybe they did have those fears, but they did it anyway. And so that bravery and seeing that from our younger people and seeing that even just the stories that I get in my inbox regularly, it really does fuel the fight and keep the fight alive. And so it's just been an amazing experience to hear from other people and know that we're changing things.
[16:20]
A
Danny Bensky, thanks so much for the time.
[16:21]
B
Thank you so much. Thanks, Aaron.