reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Participants claim “thousands and thousands of page 55” exist and “they'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files.” They note Ghislain Maxwell was visited and “I got transferred to a minimum security person too recently, which is against b o p policy because she's she's, like, convicted sex offender.” “Minimum security prisons are designed for nonviolent offenders with short sentences.” “Acting deputy chief of the office of enforcement operations, Joseph Schnitt,” is said to have been “telling a stranger about the FBI and DOJ's handling of the Epstein files” and is described as “very credible by virtue of where he works inside the Department of Justice.” The FBI and DOJ are criticized for promising transparency then “refusing to release footage and unredacted documents.” Pam Bondi: “this department of justice is following through on president Trump's commitment to transparency and lifting the veil on the disgusting actions of Jeffrey Epstein and his co conspirators,” and Cash Patel: “there will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned.” If any material is released, it will be “heavily redacted” and “the name won't be here.” The transcript also asks for tips: “tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395.”

OMG reports exclusive audio: FBI analyst Mitchell Rosas says the bureau and the administration is covering up the Epstein files, and "there is definitely something being held back" with "a lot of powerful Democrats on that list." The speakers argue "it's clear they're covering something and protecting someone or some people," and question promises to release information on JFK and MLK while Epstein details remain withheld. They insist the American people deserve "the full, unvarnished, unredacted truth regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case." They cite DOJ "redacted every single word of the probable cause used to obtain the search warrant, the raid of my newsroom." They urge contact with OMG at signal (914) 491-9395 or tips at okeith media group dot com, and promote the podcast "Price is my life" with "The Price is My Reelection, I would say." They reference a conversation with congressman Thomas Massey about Epstein.

Speaker 0 says “it's clear that they're covering something and protecting someone or some people” and notes “there are a lot of powerful Democrats that are also on that list,” adding “there's definitely something being held back” and that it won't come out until this administration's progress. Speaker 1 references an OMG exclusive: FBI analyst Mitchell Rosas admitting that “the bureau and the administration is covering up the Epstein files,” and Rosas adds that “a lot of powerful Democrats are on that list.” They recall, “we're gonna release everything on JFK. We're gonna release everything on MLK. We're gonna release everything on Epstein” but, “Oh, never mind. We found some or it's like, oh, no. It turns out there is no list.” The piece says “the Department of Justice redacted every single word of the probable cause used to obtain the search warrant, the raid of my newsroom” and “The truth only comes out because brave people on the inside choose courage over silence.” They invite tips to OMG and promote the podcast “What's the name of your podcast? Price is my life. The Price is My Reelection, I would say.”

The video was posted by the founder of Project Veritas. That is a contra far. The video was released Wednesday by the O'Keefe Media Group founded by James O'Keefe. It's important to note, O'Keefe is the same person behind the group Project Veritas and has a history of publishing deceptively edited videos. The Department of Justice is now directly responding to a video posted on social media of the deputy chief of the DOJ appearing to admit to potential redactions to the Epstein list. The In video posted by journalist James H. Keith. Not only do those files exist, but all Republican names will be scrubbed, leaving a link. Democrats. Ghislain Maxwell, Epstein's associate, was transferred to a easier prison in exchange for her cooperation and silence. There had been real hopes in the White House that this story would go away.

Yeah. Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files. And then they visited that Maxwell person. I got transferred to a minimum security person too recently, which is against b o p policy because she's, like, convicted sex offender. Schnit, acting deputy chief of the office of enforcement operations, telling a stranger about the FBI and DOJ's handling of the Epstein files. Schnid, who works at a high level inside the Department of Justice, goes on to comment on the inconsistent statements, special treatment of Ghislain Maxwell, and the blatant backtracking on promises of transparency. Pam Bondi stated, "this department of justice is following through on president Trump's commitment to transparency and lifting the veil on the disgusting actions of Jeffrey Epstein and his co conspirators," and also claimed they were shedding light on Epstein's extensive network only to later claim that Epstein was acting alone and that the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection. "There will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." Only to later claim on Joe Rogan's podcast that releasing any videos would revictimize those impacted. "We're not gonna revictimize women. We're not gonna put that shit back out there. It's not happening because then he wins." "The FBI really wants it. Second in command at FBI has been, like, causing problems because he's like, no. These have to be released." If it does, it'll be heavily redacted, and his name won't be here. Difference between a low security prison and a minimum security prison is that minimum security prisons are designed for nonviolent offenders with short sentences. They often have no perimeter fencing, and inmates are housed in dormitory style rooms. Convicted sex offenders are historically ineligible for minimum security facilities. This raises significant questions about why Ghislain Maxwell was provided such special treatment at a time where the DOJ and the FBI are under heavy scrutiny for their handling of the Epstein files. If you know more about this, please email tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395, and we will tell your story without fear and without favor.

The unredacted Epstein files have been shown on Capitol Hill, with Ro Khanna and Thomas Massey beginning to view them. The discussion centers on why large portions of the documents were redacted by the DOJ and why Pam Bondi may not have complied with the Epstein Transparency Act. An ad aired during the Super Bowl urging transparency and truth about the victims and the case is referenced. Ghislain Maxwell, Epstein’s associate, appeared before Congress and pleaded the fifth when asked direct questions. Ro Khanna summarized his view of Maxwell’s deposition: after listening to her refusal to answer questions about the men who raped underage girls, she should be sent back to maximum security rather than stay in a country club setting. The conversation then returns to why the DOJ did not release the names of clients and coconspirators, with Massey highlighting the failure to release those names as a core issue. Former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene appeared on Redacted to speak about the Epstein files. She emphasized the victims’ desire for transparency and the public’s right to know the truth, noting the files illustrate violence and possible murder, far beyond what initial perceptions suggested. Greene stated that the release of the files has shown the American people more than many can handle, and she argued that the DOJ is breaking the law by redacting certain names and deleting or redacting information in ways that protect the powerful. She also asserted that the files reveal a vast cover-up involving rich and powerful elites, and she tied the issue to a broader theory of an international deep state. Greene claimed that the problem is not just with individuals like Pam Bondi, but that “the man at the top is Donald Trump,” who she said initially opposed releasing the files and labeled the release a “democrat hoax.” She argued that Bondi works for Trump and that the FBI and other agencies operate under the president’s authority, making independent action difficult. She asserted that the president’s stance has influenced the pace and scope of disclosures, and that those who press for release face political backlash. She also described her confrontation with the two-party system as a “political industrial complex” that punishes dissidents, detailing how Massey and others have faced political and professional retaliation. Greene reflected on the personal cost of pushing for disclosure, recounting the pressure and the “knife in the back” she has felt from colleagues across the aisle. She described the political environment as a “blood sport” in which those pushing for transparency are isolated, while the system rewards conformity. She criticized neocon Republicans and asserted that governance is driven by fear and fundraising rather than principled action. She indicated that, for her, the Epstein issue underscores broader frustrations with Washington and the perceived inability of independent actors to enact change within a two-party framework. Regarding potential remedies, the discussion touched on the possibility of an independent counsel. Greene suggested that the American people themselves are the independent counsel, explaining that trust in politicians to appoint such counsel is limited. She expressed skepticism that the Epstein files will yield accountability, noting that the president warned that “his friends would get hurt.” She stated she does not expect significant resignations or indictments of major figures, including those connected to Israel, but underscored the desire for full transparency and justice for the victims. When asked about listing the names seen in the documents, Greene clarified that the list is held by the women involved and that reading it publicly could expose them to costly lawsuits; she did not have the list herself.

Well, there's 33,000 pages that have been released. they've basically released everything except for the victim information, which, obviously, we don't release that. One thing to note that today when we're actually talking to some of the victims, one of the women stated that at 14 when Epstein started to victimize her, that she has no recollection of some of the stuff that was done to her. She's hoping to find that out so that she can actually bring to her therapist and continue the healing process in regards to the damage and the trauma that was caused to her. there's a lot of very wealthy bad people. It's actually scary to hear some of the stuff that was brought forward. the only way to collectively attack this is as a group and as a whole, meaning that Democrats and Republicans have to work work together and back up on more subpoenas because I think this is gonna be pretty hairy. Is there more information beyond these 33,000 pages? Well, there's gonna be names. The attorneys kept emphasizing we need to follow-up on the names. These girls are not just making this up. These are some of the wealthiest people probably in the world, and we'll start They told us not to because they don't want those people to start basically burning files. So I think this is going criminal investigation for sure. I know that some of the delay was due to redacting victim information, and so we'll see where it goes.

John and Mario discuss the breadth and implications of the Epstein files, asserting that Epstein was an access agent connected to Mossad and deeply embedded with various intelligence actors. - Epstein as Mossad access agent and broader intelligence ties: - John asserts that Epstein’s status as a Mossad access agent is correct and that Epstein sought contact with the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Council, MI5, MI6, and even Russia’s Putin. He notes emails from Epstein’s side asking for private meetings with Putin, which were granted in a restricted form, while Epstein’s attorneys reportedly filed FOIA requests with the CIA and NSC about any association with them. - The conversation expands to consider broader pressure on the DOJ and the Trump administration to redact or withhold documents, with Congresswoman May mentioned as observing DOJ monitoring of her and colleagues. - The two discuss the idea that the “movers and shakers” in American culture and the billionaire/political class are driving the cover-up, with the implication that releases mandated by law have not been fully honored. - Death of Epstein and questions about the death/mortality: - Both speakers repeatedly state “Epstein did not kill himself,” noting the belief that he was murdered and cremated, preventing body examination. - They list several anomalies surrounding Epstein’s death: attempted suicide on July 23 with deleted footage, six days of suicide watch followed by removal from watch contrary to protocol, guards’ missed rounds, an empty cell with a removed cellmate who had been violent, an unmonitored call the day before death, and camera malfunctions on the day of death. - They discuss a decoy body used in the autopsy process and discrepancies in the autopsy report (ear shape, nose, and penis appearance) and a DOJ report dated a day earlier than publicized. The discussion includes the possibility of a decoy body to mislead reporters. - A forensic expert is cited, noting that the autopsy description described a normal penis, conflicting with accounts from a victim about a deformed penis. - Redactions, sources, and the release of documents: - They argue the released files overwhelm audiences and muddy facts, with millions of documents, of which only a fraction has been released; the rest remain redacted. - John explains FOIA processes and redaction rules (sources/methods, unindicted co-conspirators, victims’ privacy), emphasizing that there is little justification to redact content about Epstein himself since he is deceased. - They compare the redaction situation to the torture report, where redacted material obscures critical findings, and point out inconsistencies in what names are redacted (e.g., Les Wexner redacted as “Les” but not his full surname). - Libyan assets, Ukraine, and other financial angles: - A memo shows Epstein plotting to loot Libya’s frozen assets, with Greg Brown (former MI6 and Mossad connections mentioned) proposing to identify recovered assets and take 5–10% as compensation, with Libya’s reconstruction spending potentially exceeding $100 billion. - The discussion notes that the U.S. Treasury rewards those who facilitate repatriation of unfrozen assets, creating incentives for private actors with intelligence ties to pursue such recoveries. - A separate thread cites a 2014 Ukraine-related discussion where Epstein allegedly said the upheaval could provide opportunities; the Rothschilds are reported to have emailed Epstein about Ukraine and asset management strategies, implying Epstein represented the Rothschilds in asset opportunities. - They discuss the possibility that events like regime changes could be exploited for personal gain, with Epstein’s reputation management and potential money-motivated exploitation of geopolitical upheavals. - Honeypots, blackmail, and sex as an intelligence instrument: - The discussion covers claims of victims receiving death threats in Hebrew, and whether this indicates Mossad involvement or a private group using Hebrew phrasing to threaten. They argue Mossad has historically used threats and spying, and Epstein’s network could include others who leveraged sexual exploits for leverage. - They examine emails describing sexual activity in a transactional manner, with grainy surveillance footage capturing some redacted sexual content, suggesting a blackmail operation rather than simple perversion alone. - They consider whether Epstein’s sex life served as a bargaining chip for intelligence services, with Epstein’s protection and coercion potentially enabling illicit activity to be used for intelligence purposes. - Notable connections and individuals: - Fergie (Sarah, Duchess of York) is discussed as having close ties to Epstein, including emails referencing “marry me” and a period after his conviction; Prince Andrew is noted as heavily implicated in the broader Epstein network. - Howard Lutnick’s name appears in the documents; his denial of involvement with Epstein is highlighted as a potential discrepancy given the surrounding evidence. - The possibility that redacted materials could still reveal high-level connections or be weaponized against political figures is considered, with the overarching view that information could resurface or be released later to influence politics. - Final stance and ongoing investigation: - John maintains that Epstein’s role as an intelligence asset is supported by the files released to date and that more documents remain to be disclosed. He emphasizes that the situation involves intersecting intelligence communities, financial opportunism, and political exposure, with ongoing questions about the true extent of who knew what and who protected whom. The conversation closes with an acknowledgment that more files will likely be released, more information will emerge, and expert analysis will continue to evolve.

Remember when I promised to release the Epstein, JFK, and 9/11 files? It's been a while, and still nothing. I put Anna Paulina and Pam Bondi on it, even created a committee, which seemed unnecessary just to release files. They handed over binders to DC Draino and company, but the information was heavily redacted, supposedly to protect victims' names and due to the FBI's concerns, even though we oversee the FBI. Then national security became the excuse for more redactions, and the whole thing just stalled. Now, we're moving onto releasing the JFK files, while the Epstein files remain hidden. And now Pam Bondi is investigating antisemitism on college campuses. So, I just have one question: Where are those files?

There are thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files. A DOJ analyst, Joseph Schnitt, discusses the Epstein files, noting "the inconsistent statements, special treatment of Ghislain Maxwell, and the blatant backtracking on promises of transparency." He describes his role at DOJ and interactions with the FBI and US attorney's offices. The conversation notes a Maxwell transfer to a minimum security facility—"I got transferred to a minimum security person too recently, which is against b o p policy because she's she's a convicted sex offender." It cites policy that "Convicted sex offenders are historically ineligible for minimum security facilities." It references "the tens of thousands of video" that "turned out to be child porn" and that "the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection." Pam Bondi says, "this department of justice is following through on president Trump's commitment to transparency and lifting the veil on the disgusting actions of Jeffrey Epstein and his co conspirators," and Cash Patel adds, "there will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." Maxwell's transfer raises questions about why she received special treatment while Epstein's victims wait. Tips: tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text (914) 491-9395.

Millions are waiting for transparency in the Jeffrey Epstein saga. The Attorney General has stated there is an active cover-up. Select media influencers were given the first batch of Epstein files, but Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna hasn't received the documents, and Pam Bondi says the FBI is withholding files from her office until tomorrow. There are questions as to why the Southern District of New York and the NYC FBI office didn't comply with releasing documents, especially with James Comey's daughter being the lead prosecutor in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. Attorney General Pam Bondi released what she had for transparency, and Mike Cernovich confirmed there are bad actors at the SDNY and the FBI New York City field office withholding documents. I hope Kash Patel follows through with releasing the files, and I've called for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to go to the FBI offices in New York City and find out who didn't comply with this larger disclosure.

There is no client list detailing people Jeffrey Epstein trafficked. Instead, there is a redacted FBI affidavit from accusers accusing various people of improper sex. The speaker, as the former lawyer involved in investigations, knows the identities of those redacted, but claims none are public figures currently in office. Some were previously in office, and some are dead. The redactions are the result of court orders from two judges in Manhattan protecting alleged victims. Pam Bondi, the Justice Department, and Donald Trump are not responsible for these redactions, and the speaker is unaware of any undisclosed information they could release. The speaker claims the vast majority of names in the files are already public knowledge, appearing in articles and books. The speaker believes the media has not done enough to find the people already disclosed in the public record.

"Yeah. Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "There's thousands and thousands of pages of file." "the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection." "there will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." "I'm not going to withhold information from the American public ever." "Only to later claim on Joe Rogan's podcast that releasing any videos would revictimize those impacted." "There's thousands and thousands of pages of file." "Convicted sex offenders are historically ineligible for minimum security facilities." "please email us at tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395, and we will tell your story without fear and without favor."

The Jeffrey Epstein files are about to be released. Attorney General Pam Bondi says the scale is far worse than anyone realized, with potentially 250 victims. The release is imminent, possibly today. I just saw Pam and Cash in the White House. I haven't seen the files yet, but they are coming out in portions, so patience is key. This case was vetted, tried, and prosecuted correctly. The information in these files, including flight logs and names, will be shocking because so many individuals were hidden and not held accountable. Accountability is crucial. We've seen many investigations that fall short. With Cash and Pam, I believe there will finally be accountability. Ghislaine Maxwell is the only person imprisoned so far. Releasing these files will likely lead to further criminal actions. We must hold rapists accountable and try them in court. Hiding lists to protect political friends is unacceptable.

Speaker 0 and 1 discuss "there's definitely something being held back" and that "a lot of powerful Democrats are on that list" in relation to Epstein files. An insider, FBI analyst Mitchell Rosas, claims the bureau and the administration are covering up the Epstein files. He references a plan to "release everything on JFK. We're gonna release everything on MLK. We're gonna release everything on Epstein," later noting, "oh, never mind. ... there is no list." Rosas says "a lot of powerful Democrats are on that list," and mentions Bill Clinton as an example. The speakers argue the American people deserve "the full, unvarnished, unfiltered, unredacted truth regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case" and criticize DOJ for "redacted every single word of the probable cause used to obtain the search warrant." They urge courage over silence. OMG asks viewers to contact via signal or email; promotes "The Price is My Life" and "The Price is My Reelection, I would say"; contact (914) 491-9395, okeith media group dot com, and check Massey conversation.

We've just reviewed the Epstein client release, a 20-plus page dump made public by the DOJ or FBI, but it's a huge disappointment. It's mostly procedural jargon, heavily redacted, with no significant new information. I spoke with Liz Wheeler, and she reports that Pam Bondi and the President expected the release to contain everything Kash Patel had previously seen. However, the Southern District of New York FBI and Department of Justice may be withholding tapes and other information from the White House. If this is true, it signifies an internal civil war, with departments rebelling against the president. I still trust that President Trump, Cash Patel and Pam Bondi are committed to exposing this evil. If these agencies are in rebellion, President Trump should personally go to New York, fire everyone involved, and padlock the doors.

I released about 120 pages of documents that I requested upon entering office. We carefully redacted them to protect the personal information of the young female victims of sex crimes and sex trafficking. I was assured that there were no more documents, but I recently learned that the Southern District of New York is sitting on thousands of pages regarding Epstein. We will obtain everything, and redact it to protect grand jury information and confidential witnesses. The American people have a right to know, and as the most transparent president in our nation's history, I will ensure America gets the full Epstein files, as well as those pertaining to JFK and Martin Luther King.

Speaker 1 questions why House Republicans haven't released Jeffrey Epstein's Black Book, which is under the FBI director's control, to expose alleged pedophiles. When asked if he would declassify the Epstein files, Speaker 1 says he would, but expresses concern about potentially affecting people's lives if the information is phony. Speaker 0 says the issue is bigger than Epstein, 9/11, JFK, or RFK, and asks who is on the Epstein tapes and in the black books, questioning why this information has been hidden. Speaker 3 mentions Donald Trump has discussed the DOJ potentially releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients. Speaker 2 claims that the release is under review, following a directive by President Trump, stating that everything will come out to the public because Americans have a right to know.

Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files. I got transferred to a minimum security person too recently, which is against b o p policy because she's, she's, like, convicted sex offender. Difference between a low security prison and a minimum security prison is that minimum security prisons are designed for nonviolent offenders with short sentences. They often have no perimeter fencing, and inmates are housed in dormitory style rooms. There’s files; thousands and thousands of pages. There will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned. Pam Bondi: "this department of justice is following through on president Trump's commitment to transparency and lifting the veil on the disgusting actions of Jeffrey Epstein and his co conspirators." Cash Patel: "there will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." If it does release, it'll be heavily redacted, and his name won't be here. Maxwell was transferred to minimum security amid scrutiny of Epstein files, raising questions about special treatment.

"Thousands and thousands of page 55. They'll redact every republican or conservative person in those files. Leave all the liberal democratic people in those files." "There will be no cover ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned." "Epstein was acting alone and that the only video evidence they had was of Epstein's personal child porn collection." "We're not gonna revictimize women. We're not gonna put that shit back out there." "If it does, it'll be heavily redacted, and his name won't be here." "What we're looking for is people on the inside of the government to step forward for your private actions to match your public actions." "tips@o'keefemediagroup.com or text us at (914) 491-9395, and we will tell your story without fear and without favor."

Bezos owning the Washington Post is described as an arm of the CIA, a claim raised by Speaker 0. He suggests that the newspaper is part of a broader pattern where media power is consolidated in the hands of a few billionaires, accusing the outlet of being used to push a particular agenda. Speaker 1 responds dismissively to that assertion and mentions Ellison taking over of [text incomplete in the transcript], signaling ongoing concerns about who controls major media and institutions. The conversation continues with Speaker 0 asserting that Barry Weiss is trying to squash real news and hide it, and that reporters who are doing real journalism are being targeted, framed as investigations or actions run by a few billionaires who control much of the media landscape. A related critique follows, declaring Bill Clinton a “slimeball” for deregulating the Federal Communications Act of 1996. The speakers reference the consequence that there were thousands of independent radio stations, television stations, and newspapers before deregulation, and now six companies control 92% of the media as a result of that action, calling Clinton a “lousy little slime ball.” The discussion moves into personal remarks about Monica Lewinsky, with a claim that “I didn’t have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky,” followed by derisive language directed at Bill Clinton, describing him as “that little clown.” The conversation then shifts to the Epstein files, with frustration expressed about why those files are not being released. The speakers criticize the redaction of the Epstein files and question, “Where the hell are these Epstein files?” They argue that the redactions are to protect individuals, using charged language to describe the situation as disgusting, and they call for the files to be made public. The topic then turns to the DOJ’s handling of redactions related to Congressman Thomas Massey. The DOJ reportedly missed deadlines to provide reasons for the redactions to Massey and “walked right past his deadline.” The speakers say they interviewed Massey on the show, reiterating that the DOJ violated the deadline and ignored the will of the people, with the DOJ referred to as the “DOJ, Department of Jerkoffs.” Finally, Massey is praised as one of the top lawmakers, described as one of the few in Congress who is truly respected, and “one of a kind,” with Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 expressing strong admiration for his work and integrity.

In the discussion, Congressmen Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie were shown viewing the unredacted Epstein files on Capitol Hill, including material that had been previously redacted by the DOJ. The hosts question why large portions of the files were redacted and accuse Pam Bondi’s team of noncompliance with the Epstein Transparency Act. They suggest the move to foreground Bondi is a signal of political maneuvering to manage the release of the documents. Speaker 1 presents a Super Bowl ad urging the DOJ to release what the law requires, followed by a note that Epstein’s associate and alleged child sex trafficking figure Ghislain (Ghislaine) Maxwell appeared before Congress and invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about the men who allegedly abused underage girls. Ro Khanna’s reaction is shared: Maxwell should not be in a cushy setting and should be sent back to maximum security. Speaker 2 emphasizes that, of the files released, the names of clients and coconspirators in the sex trafficking ring have not been disclosed, while victims’ names have been released. This is framed as either over-redaction or omission, with a claim that government names should not be redacted under the Transparency Act. Speaker 0 introduces Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who explains her perspective. She notes the urgency of transparency and states that victims deserve the truth, accusing the DOJ of failing to comply with the Epstein Transparency Act and calling out a persistent “battle” over the release of files even after the 2025 law. Speaker 3 (Greene) describes the impact of the disclosures, noting that the files reveal “violence, possibly murder,” and that survivors’ testimonies are harrowing. She recounts facing personal and political backlash for pushing disclosure, arguing that the administration and many Republicans have shifted their positions since the revelations. She asserts that the released files show that “the DOJ breaking the law” through redactions of names of former presidents, secretaries of state, and government officials, while leaving victim information exposed. Speaker 4 asks Greene about the possibility that the information might point to a broader, deeper network. Greene responds by stating that the files include FBI forms about Epstein, implying a level of official involvement, and asserts that the Trump administration has not released the information; she claims President Trump referred to the Epstein issue as a “Democrat hoax” and that Pam Bondi, who works for Trump, controls the release. Greene suggests the “independent counsel” would be the American people themselves, explaining distrust toward political figures and the two-party system. She shares that she would not vote to support foreign aid or a central bank digital currency, and notes the chilling effect of the retaliation she and Massey have faced from party structures, including loss of campaign staff and suggestions of political blacklisting. Speaker 0 asks about potential accountability or a special counsel and whether there might be more significant revelations. Greene predicts limited accountability, arguing that the president has influence over DOJ and other agencies, and that the people are the true independent counsel. She laments the “uni-party” dynamic and predicts continued resistance to releasing the full Epstein files. Towards the end, Greene reiterates that she does not plan to run for higher office and reflects on the broader political environment, emphasizing that the public’s demand for transparency could drive change. The dialogue closes with Greene expressing willingness to return and discuss further.

John and Mario discuss the EpsteinFiles with a focus on who is behind the cover-up, the involvement of intelligence services, and the implications for justice and power. - Epstein as Mossad asset and broader intelligence links: - John reiterates his original conclusion that Epstein was a Mossad access agent and adds that he was actively seeking contact with the CIA, the FBI, the NSC, MI5/MI6, Germany, and even Vladimir Putin, aiming to burnish his credentials with intelligence communities. Epstein allegedly requested private meetings with Putin, which were arranged with others present, and there were FOIA requests by Epstein’s attorneys to confirm associations with the CIA and NSC, which reportedly went unanswered. - Mario notes Epstein’s access to the Skiff (a highly restricted, sealed room for classified discussions) and argues Epstein’s entry suggests closer ties to American intelligence, since only Five Eyes would have access to such a space. He contrasts this with a broader view that the “movers and shakers” in American culture and the billionaire/political classes drive the cover-up, as evidenced by congressional mandates to release documents and the DOJ’s involvement. - The discussion flags that the released files show Epstein’s attempts to connect with major intelligence actors, and hints at a possible broader Israeli involvement (Mossad) and questions about whether Israelis were spying on the CIA/NSC. - The scope of the release and accountability: - John emphasizes that Congress passed a law mandating release of these documents; the executive branch has not released all materials, with millions unreleased and only a fraction of available data being disclosed (debate around 2% of data released in some outlets). He criticizes the DOJ for surveillance-like behavior of congressional briefings (e.g., a DOJ official observing members while they review materials). He also notes the CIA/FBI/FIVE EYES redactions that obscure sources and methods, and argues that there should be little redaction since Epstein is deceased. - Mario adds that the files reveal extensive redactions and questions about what remains unreleased, comparing it to the torture report’s redactions, and suggests the redactions may be politically or strategically motivated. - Notable file threads and alleged illicit activities: - A Libyan assets subplot: An associate, Greg Brown, discusses identifying and recovering frozen Libyan assets (potentially 80+ billion dollars). The plan purportedly offered Epstein a percentage (10-25%) for recovery, with Libya’s reconstruction as a potential cost. Brown claimed connections with MI6 and Mossad to identify stolen assets, illustrating a pattern of opportunities for private actors to profit from geopolitical upheavals. - Ukraine 2014 dispatches: A tweet claimed that Epstein, in 2014, discussed opportunities arising from Ukraine upheaval, with the Rothschilds emailing Epstein to discuss asset management and Ukraine, implying Epstein represented the Rothschilds in exploring opportunities amid regime changes. - The role of wealth and elite involvement: Mario and John describe how Epstein’s financial power enabled him to operate at the intersection of intelligence and global finance; the “go-to” for large asset claims is a reality that would require serious governmental or intelligence ties. - Death of Epstein and questions surrounding it: - The panel discusses the widely accepted view that Epstein did not kill himself, citing multiple irregularities: the July 23 attempt, the deletion of relevant footage, Epstein’s removal from suicide watch against protocol, a mass-murderer cellmate, unmonitored calls, camera malfunctions, and a decoy body claim. They discuss the autopsy differences (ear shape, penis description) and an DOJ note dated a day earlier than the death as a potential anomaly. - John explains that in the federal system prison guards’ qualifications and camera reliability are problematic, and argues that the death raises serious questions about the suicide narrative, while acknowledging a lack of inside information to confirm any particular theory. They discuss a decoy body and the possibility that Epstein was secretly killed, with ongoing debates about whether he’s alive or dead. - They reference a note about an escape plan and a will being signed days before death, suggesting Epstein anticipated danger and attempted to plan escape, though this is balanced against the argument that prisoners often contemplate escape. - Victims, threats, and blackmail: - They recount death threats to Epstein’s victims, including threats in Hebrew and references to Mossad-like intimidation. John explains that Western intelligence rarely issues direct threats to civilians, whereas Mossad has historically used such tactics; Epstein’s circle included individuals who reportedly faced threats and harassment. - They discuss Epstein’s private security cameras and alleged blackmail operations, citing emails in which victims describe transactional sexual experiences and Epstein’s networks. They consider whether intelligence agencies exploited Epstein’s perversion to further strategic aims and whether those networks used blackmail to recruit or control powerful individuals (e.g., Prince Andrew, Les Wexner, etc.). - High-profile associations and potential redactions: - Fergie (Sarah Ferguson) is mentioned as having close ties with Epstein, including emails after his conviction and marriage-like language; Prince Andrew is highlighted as heavily implicated. They discuss whether these relationships were used for blackmail or influence, and whether such information remains usable as leverage. - The breadth of individuals implicated ranges from Trump to Clinton to business titans; John notes there is no direct evidence of crimes by Trump or Clinton in released materials, but the extent of connections complicates public perception. - Conclusion and ongoing questions: - The conversation closes with an agreement that Epstein’s death and the surrounding files reveal a web of intelligence connections, high-level influence, and potential blackmail, with substantial redactions and a continuing need for full disclosure to understand the full extent of involvement, high-level figures, and the truth behind Epstein’s death. They anticipate further file releases and ongoing analysis.