reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker notes that there is fear people want Trump to have done something gross with women, but 'I really don't believe wanna be clear. I do not believe that. Yeah. Not covering for Trump. I just don't think that's true.' They insist there is no indication, saying they've spoken to people 'close to Epstein, very close to Epstein, who've told me off camera, in private, no, it's not. Trump never did that shit.' The speaker adds, 'So I don't think it's about that.' They question why 'no one talking to Les Wexner?' and end with 'And' (truncated). The focus remains unclear.

I did not like Jeffrey Epstein and never wanted anything to do with him. While others associated with him, went to his island and other places, I never did. I have good taste. James Patterson, a member of Mar-a-Lago, confirmed that I threw Epstein out many years ago. I am not a fan of him. Also, those who came into the country illegally must be deported.

Speaker 0 says that more than a decade ago, President Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago and was one of the few prominent people reportedly willing to help law enforcement go after Epstein, who is described as a disgusting child abuser and sex trafficker. They say this is common knowledge.

Speaker addresses rumors that 'Trump did something gross with women' and says, 'I I really don't believe wanna be clear. I do not believe that. Yeah. Not covering for Trump. I just don't think that's true.' They assert they've seen no indication of it and have spoken to people, 'to be totally honest with you, close to Epstein, very close to Epstein, who've told me off camera, in private, no, it's not. Trump never did that shit.' The remarks emphasize that the issue isn't about that alleged conduct. The speaker then questions, 'But why is no one talking to Les Wexner?'

Speaker 1 says that the real information about the Epstein files has not come out and that “there were only four Republicans, four of us that’s really fought to get them released,” who “signed the discharge petition, went against the White House,” and were “threatened,” with Donald Trump calling him a traitor and saying his friends would be hurt. He questions why anyone would vote for Republicans if the administration doesn’t release all the information, framing it as a line in the sand for many people. Speaker 0 asks why they think the Epstein files are being hidden. Speaker 1 responds that it’s because the hidden information would protect “some of the most rich, powerful people,” arguing that Epstein was “definitely some sort of part of the intelligence state” who was “working with Israel” and with the “former prime minister of Israel.” He asserts that these are “the dirty parts of government and the powers that be that they don’t want the American people to know about.” He concludes that, sadly, he doesn’t think the files will come out. Speaker 0 presses on whether Trump is in the Epstein files. Speaker 1 speculates that if someone is “living under blackmail” or “living under threat” and told not to release information, that fear could influence actions. He suggests that someone might be warned by threats to prevent disclosure, giving a hypothetical example: after standing on a rally stage, you could be shot in the ear and warned that “next time we won’t miss,” or that the bullet might be for someone you care about. He says he is “speculating,” but notes he has “a strong enough reason to speculate like that.”

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss whether arrests will occur under Trump and how they might be framed. - Speaker 0 asks if arrests will happen under Trump and if figures like Bill Clinton or Obama will be arrested, suggesting that any arrests might be part of “dark handing the keys off to the light” and that the deep state would sacrifice some players. - Speaker 1 responds by outlining alleged close connections: Trump was one of Epstein’s closest friends; Howard Letnick was Epstein’s neighbor; the first lady was Epstein’s girlfriend. He argues that Epstein’s relationship to Israel and the Mossad, and the president’s loyalty to Israel, are significant, and contends that many would say this loyalty goes beyond the United States. He adds a dismissive remark that the other speaker is “smoking dope.” - Speaker 0 contends there will be arrests but believes they will be for optics to bolster support for Trump, implying the releases would be to energize followers and that “deep state players” will be sacrificed. - Speaker 1 refers to certain individuals as “chew toys,” naming Fauci and Gates, suggesting they are used as targets or distractions. He reiterates skepticism that any arrests have occurred so far, noting that Trump has been in power for a year and there hasn’t been an arrest. - The conversation touches on the speed of data-center-related actions and mentions “Stargate” as part of what Trump did, implying rapid actions or moves on day one.

The speaker defends himself against allegations and claims to have nothing to hide. He offers to release all evidence to prove his innocence. The interviewer brings up the association with Jeffrey Epstein, to which the speaker explains that he and his wife had massages at Epstein's house but denies any wrongdoing. He mentions that many prominent individuals also had massages there and that his friendship with Epstein was purely academic. The speaker argues that having a massage does not make him guilty and that the person making the allegations has admitted to possible mistaken identification. He concludes by stating that he and his wife are innocent.

Speaker 0: "I don't understand why it's a hostile act. I talked to president Clinton... I'm sorry, president, Trump back in 2009 and several times after that. He didn't think that it was a hoax then. In fact, he helped me. He got on the phone. He told me things that were helping our investigation." Speaker 1: "The only thing... Trump is the only person who, in 02/2009, picked up the phone and said, let's just talk. I'll give you as much time as you want. I'll tell you what you need to know and was very helpful in the information that he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever, but had good information that checked out and that helped us. And then we didn't have to take a deposition of him." "So Do you know if there's any truth to James Patterson's claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar A Lago?" Speaker 0: "I've definitely heard that." Speaker 2: "Epstein was inappropriate with the member's daughter. I went to mister Trump and he threw him right out." Speaker 3: "So it's your understanding then that president Trump didn't know what Jeffrey Epstein was up to?" Speaker 0: "That is correct." Speaker 2: "Epstein liked stars... He loaned Clinton his plane at least on four occasions and it was, it had to do with the foundation." Speaker 4: "The pilot said Trump was on the plane; it was actually a trip from Mar A Lago to New York, not to the island." Speaker 0: "And our investigation wasn't looking into him, but he was helping us then. He didn't treat this as a hoax. I want transparency." Speaker 3: "Did anybody see or hear of the president himself doing anything inappropriate as it related to Jeffrey Epstein? No."

Epstein was banned from Mar-a-Lago by Trump after he flirted with someone's underage daughter. Trump made it clear that such behavior was not tolerated at his club. Epstein, a wealthy Palm Beach resident known for throwing parties, was a member at the time. However, once people discovered his true nature, they distanced themselves from him, including President Trump. Trump emphasized that he never associated with Epstein and took action to remove him from the club. This incident provides clear evidence that Trump was not involved in any illegal activities.

The FBI and the Department of Justice released a two-page memo stating there is no evidence of a client list associated with Jeffrey Epstein, no evidence that anyone was blackmailed on account of such a list, and no evidence that Epstein was murdered in his Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. The memo supports the medical examiner’s judgment that Epstein committed suicide by hanging himself “effectively while sitting down on the floor of his cell with something tied around his neck,” a feat described as a one-of-a-kind phenomenon in suicide-watch prisoners. The FBI and DOJ also released eleven hours of videotape they say proves no one entered the cell or the area around it overnight before Epstein was found dead. The term “unresponsive” is referenced prior to a medical examiner declaring them dead. The speaker recalls that, earlier this year, when Attorney General Pam Bondi was asked about releasing the Epstein client list promised by the incoming Trump administration, she replied, “it's sitting on my desk right now for review.” The memo’s contents are portrayed as a gauntlet from those who wield power, insisting there is no list, no evidence of blackmail, and no evidence of murder, presented as conclusions rather than outcomes of evidence review. The speaker argues the point is less about truth and more about opposing disbelief of the powerful, framing it as demonstrations of naked power. The discussion references a post by Cash Patel and Dan Bongino about the Epstein client list and blackmail, noting their transition to high-profile roles and subsequent stance: no list, no blackmail, no murder. There is also mention of a public exchange between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, wherein Musk suggested real Epstein files were the reason they had not been made public; Musk later deleted the tweet, and Trump said he had cut ties with Epstein two decades ago and that Epstein’s lawyer cleared him of wrongdoing. The speaker invokes George Orwell, noting the party’s command to reject the evidence of eyes and ears, and suggests we are moving toward a post-truth world where truth is whatever the self-declared powerful say it is. The text emphasizes that, despite Epstein’s trafficking convictions and Maxwell’s conviction for trafficking underage girls, the memo asserts no guilty party existed among those connected. The speaker questions the consistency of Maxwell’s charge given the claimed absence of victims and participants. Toward the end, the speaker laments a hoped-for White House regime crumbling and questions whether recent developments are a deliberate test of loyalty to authority, implying a broader move toward a new regime’s post-truth reality, where memory and inconvenient knowledge are manipulated and “double speak” reframes war as peace and freedom as slavery. The overall arc suggests a dispiriting trend of sameness amid signals of change.

The speaker mentions that there have been accusations against President Trump regarding his involvement in certain activities, but Trump supporters tend to dismiss such claims. The speaker, who is a lawyer, states that they have no information or opinion on the validity of these claims. However, they do mention that in 2009, when they served subpoenas to various individuals, President Trump was the only person who cooperated and provided helpful information. The speaker is not aware of the truth behind James Patterson's claims about Trump kicking Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago.

The speaker defends himself against allegations and claims to have nothing to hide. He offers to release all evidence to prove his innocence. The interviewer brings up the association with Jeffrey Epstein, to which the speaker explains that he and his wife had massages at Epstein's house, but denies any wrongdoing. He mentions that many prominent individuals also had massages there and that his friendship with Epstein was purely academic. The speaker argues that having a massage does not make him guilty and that the person accusing him has admitted to possible mistaken identification. He asserts his innocence and states that neither he nor his wife are guilty.

I woke up yesterday and saw that Bruce Reinhart signed off on the warrant to search Trump's Mar-a-Lago. I host two podcasts on Jeffrey Epstein and remembered Reinhart was one of Epstein's lawyers. He previously worked for the Southern District of Florida, which prosecuted Epstein for the sex crime case in 2008. The victims felt like a huge injustice occurred with Epstein's sweetheart deal. They named Reinhart in their suit because they felt it was unfair that Epstein hired civil servants to represent him. There's no proof that Reinhart used inside Justice Department information, but he did switch to the other team. I am not saying there is a connection between Epstein and the raid, but Reinhart does have a history with Epstein.

Speaker 0 pressed: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?' Speaker 1 responded: 'I have never spoken to president Trump about the Epstein files.' Speaker 1: 'The attorney general and I have had numerous discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team.' Speaker 1: 'And we have released where president Trump's name is the files.' Speaker 1: 'During many conversations that the attorney general and I have had on the matter of Epstein, we have reviewed' Speaker 0: 'Question is simple.' Speaker 0: 'Who' Speaker 0: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'Why don't you try spelling it out' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no? Use' Speaker 0: 'the alphabet.' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'No. A b c.' Speaker 0: 'Question has been asked and answered.' Speaker 0: 'You've not answered it, and we will take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt.'

Speaker 0 stopped representing Epstein after the deal was made and hasn't seen him in years. Introduced to Epstein by Lady Rothschild, Speaker 0 had an academic relationship with him, attending conferences and seminars. Once they learned about Epstein's other life, all social relationships ended. Speaker 0 became Epstein's lawyer and defended him, proud of representing controversial people. Some criticize the deal, but Speaker 0 defends trying to get the best deal possible. Speaker 0 denies ever meeting the woman who made allegations against Epstein, calling it a complete lie. Speaker 1 appreciates Speaker 0 joining to discuss the explosive story and the horrific allegations against Epstein.

Speaker 0 explains that Epstein’s legal problems began with police investigations into allegations that underage women were coming to Epstein’s house. Epstein allegedly believed that Trump was the first to inform the police about what was happening at Epstein’s house, and from that point they became bitter enemies. Speaker 1 asks if this is what Epstein is telling him. Speaker 0 confirms that this is the version he is relaying, as presented by “Oh, the hoax yesterday.” Speaker 2 clarifies that “the hoax” refers to Democrats using a narrative to attack him. He says Epstein has never said or suggested or implied that the hoax is real; he has talked to Epstein many times. He states that the whole thing comes across as a hoax, not that Epstein’s actions are a hoax. He explains that Epstein believes himself innocent, and that when he first heard the rumor, he kicked him out of Maribago. He adds that Epstein was an FBI informant trying to take this matter down. The president knows and has great sympathy for the women who have suffered harms; it’s detestable to him. He and the speaker have spoken as recently as twenty-four hours ago. What he is talking about, according to Speaker 2, are the Democrats who are pursuing this with impure motives. If they truly cared, he asks, why didn’t they act during the four years of the Biden administration when the Biden DOJ had all the records? They didn’t say a word about it, and now they pursue it for political purposes. Speaker 3 notes that our current president has had relationships with Epstein in the past, and mentions Katie Johnson and possibly other victims who have accused Trump of involvement in similar matters. In the speaker’s experience, Trump supporters will not listen to such claims. He admits the court of law isn’t present here. He asks if there is anything that can be said about the validity of those claims or whether more is known. Speaker 1 responds that he can say nothing at all. He states that the only thing he can say about President Trump is that in 2009, when he served subpoenas and gave notice to connected people that he wanted to talk to them, Trump was the only person who picked up the phone and said, “let’s just talk.” Trump offered as much time as needed, provided information that checked out, and helped him so they didn’t have to depose him. He adds that this occurred in 2009. Speaker 3 asks if there is any truth to James Patterson’s claims that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago. Speaker 1 confirms that he definitely heard that.

Bradley Edwards, attorney for Jeffrey Epstein's victims, was asked about allegations against Donald Trump. Edwards stated that in his experience, Trump supporters are unwilling to consider claims of Trump's involvement with Epstein. When asked about the validity of claims against Trump, Edwards said he can only say that Trump was the only person who, upon receiving notice of a subpoena in 2009, offered to talk and provide information. Edwards stated that Trump was helpful, provided good information, gave no indication of involvement in anything untoward, and a deposition was not needed. Regarding James Patterson's claim that Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago, Edwards has heard that rumor, possibly involving a manager at Trump's club. The rumor alleges Epstein was attempting to pick up someone's daughter, but Edwards was unable to confirm it.

They if what people are saying they're afraid of is that Trump did something gross with women I I really don't believe wanna be clear. I do not believe that. Yeah. Not covering for Trump. I just don't think that's true. I've seen any indication of it, and I've talked to people, to be totally honest with you, close to Epstein, very close to Epstein, who've told me off camera, in private, no, it's not. Trump never did that shit. So I don't think it's about that. But why is no one talking to Les Wexner? And

The transcript captures a short, informal discussion about Donald Trump’s handling of the Epstein files and the broader question of whether presidents protect rich and powerful people at the expense of victims in sex-crime cases. The dialogue unfolds between Speaker 0 and Speaker 1, with a recent history/politics flavor and an on-the-record moment later in the exchange. Speaker 0 begins by asking Speaker 1 how Trump fought to avoid releasing the Epstein files, noting that Trump initially indicated a release but then reversed course. Speaker 1 responds noncommittally, suggesting that Trump “probably” had friends who were involved and that Trump “saved them” from trouble. The question is framed as whether this constitutes presidential conduct—protecting powerful people rather than victims. Speaker 0 presses further, asking if protecting rich and powerful people over sex-crime victims is appropriate for a president, and whether such behavior is common in presidential history. Speaker 1 counters by pointing to historical examples, stating that many presidents have favored their friends and families, adding that while JFK’s affairs were noted, he claims Kennedy “got caught,” implying possible crimes. Speaker 0 acknowledges Kennedy’s infidelity but questions whether there were crimes, while Speaker 1 reiterates the point that Kennedy “got caught,” and asserts that such behavior is not becoming of a United States president. The conversation shifts toward evaluating current leadership: Speaker 0 asks whether Speaker 1 agrees with Trump’s protection of powerful individuals at the expense of crime victims. Speaker 1 answers, “All depends on who the powerful people are,” suggesting a conditional view rather than a blanket condemnation or approval. The discussion then veers to the expectation that a president should serve all Americans, not just the wealthy, and Speaker 0 reiterates the moral question. Speaker 1, initially evasive about personal details, asserts that they are a state representative and holds a badge, claiming to work for their country. The exchange ends with a sense of irony in the narrator’s commentary: the “moral of the story” being that it’s acceptable for Donald Trump to protect rich and powerful men because he himself is rich and powerful, effectively equating protection of the powerful with personal parity. Overall, the transcript presents a back-and-forth debate about why presidents might shield powerful individuals, how historical precedents factor into current judgments, and whether leadership should be equally accountable to all segments of society, ending with a skeptical, wrap-up sentiment about the perceived fairness of such protections.

A limo driver who met Donald Trump in the 1990s alleges that Trump groped a young girl along with Jeffrey Epstein. The victim was encouraged to go to the police, but she replied, "I can't because they will kill me." She eventually reported it to the police, but was found later with her, "head blown off," and the police officers on the scene stated that there was no way it was a suicide even though the coroner ruled it as such. The speaker questions what is going on and why nothing is being done about it. K: We gotta let these guys know that this does not end until people, these gross disgusting people, all go to jail.

Transcript centers on truth and why Epstein files should be public. They note both parties avoid real reasons. Speaker 1 says the president views it as “all a trap” and that it “reminds him of Russiagate”—an attempt by Democrats to ensnare him in a fake scandal; “he's not... never did anything creepy,” the speaker says. The speaker argues transparency would have helped “the country” and “the administration,” giving it credibility. They speculate why disclosure is feared: “could it be that Trump was there and he just doesn't wanna jeopardize his presidency even putting it out there?” Epstein is described as “the center of New York society for... decades.” The claim: “I don't think having dinner at his house or even necessarily going to his island is proof of a crime.” Finally, they note “Epstein had contact with Israeli intelligence” and “British intelligence”—“probably scarier than Mossad and CIA.”

Attorney Bradley Edwards, who represented victims of Jeffrey Epstein, mentioned that in 2009, President Trump was the only person who willingly cooperated when served subpoenas. Trump provided helpful information that indicated no involvement in any wrongdoing. There are claims that Trump expelled Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, as stated by James Patterson in his book. Complaints were made about Epstein's inappropriate behavior towards young women at Mar-a-Lago, leading Trump to remove him from the club. It is believed that Trump was unaware of Epstein's activities. Epstein had connections with various influential individuals, including lending his plane to Bill Clinton on multiple occasions. Edwards noted that Trump's involvement with Epstein was related to their foundation.