An Epstein Love Letter Or A 10 Billion Dollar Lie?
Send Some Love and Buy Me A Cup Of Joe:
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermasShow more ETH - 0x90b9288AF0E40F8C90604460973743dBC91dA680
Watch My Documentaries:
https://rokfin.com/stack/1339/Documentaries--Jason-Bermas
Subscribe on Rokfin
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
Subscribe on Rumble
https://rumble.com/c/TheInfoWarrior
Subscribe on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
Follow me on X
https://x.com/JasonBermas
PayPal: [email protected]
Patriot TV - https://patriot.tv/bermas/
#BermasBrigade #TruthOverTreason #BreakingNews #InfoWarrior Show less
Hey everybody, Jason Burmes here, and this is going to be the full latest debate with Mario Nafal's channel.
And this one is talking Trump, Epstein, the Wall Street Journal, arms dealing, and beyond.
You're not going to want to miss it.
Buckle up and get ready to make sense of the madness.
Hello, everybody.
Good morning, good afternoon, good evening from wherever you're listening around the world.
And shockingly, we have another Jeffrey Epstein live panel.
This is a continuation of the space we had yesterday and the continuation of the other live streams we had.
And this is just a, we're going to continue to provide live updates now in a video format where we can discuss the news that have been happening.
I mean, obviously yesterday, last night, we had the report from the Wall Street Journal that maybe, maybe, you know, implicated Trump might have had a more personal relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
Donald Trump has come out heavily saying that this is fake, this is fake news, that that letter is fake.
But, you know, the Wall Street Journal is standing by the reporting and kind of some of the things I'm hearing around in the beltway, seeing reporters and people that kind of talk about it.
There might be more stories coming.
This is just the first.
It's not the last.
I think it's important to highlight that that letter does not criminally implicate Trump in anything in any way, shape, or form.
But I think it goes to the heart of that maybe President Trump had a more deep personal relationship and maybe was involved not necessarily in the criminal aspect of what Jeffrey Epstein was doing with minors, but in some of the parties and more salacious kind of nature and aspect of the relationship.
But I know there's going to be a lot of disagreement with that, maybe some agreement, but it might indicate why Donald Trump doesn't want the Jeffrey Epstein's files released.
He did indicate to Pam Bondi, his attorney general, to get the grand jury statements unsealed.
There's a lot of people who are saying, wait a minute, this is going to take a long time.
And the grand jury testimony that was kind of presented to them might not include all the non, you know, the co-conspirators that have not been indicted.
And so there might be a lot of information missing.
And I think that's kind of the thing.
And again, it might be more of a delay tactic.
It's important to note that as the rules committee yesterday in the House, the bipartisan bill did pass the rules committee.
That was much more forceful than what they want released.
And we'll see if that goes through.
But, you know, it would have to take a lot of senators to vote for it to make it veto proof.
And we don't know if Donald Trump is going to sign off on it.
I think he wants control in what he can and can't release.
And again, it doesn't look like they want any special prosecutors appointed to this.
And he's still relying on AG Pambondi to kind of take the lead on this.
But the crisis is still there.
The controversy is still there.
There's a lot to talk about.
So I'm going to go, as always, get initial reactions from all my guests.
And just because you're the first one on the top left for me, Dave, I'll go to you and then we'll go to Jason.
Yeah, well, I think this is indication that Trump has heard it from his base.
And we've seen it over the last few days.
He dug in and called this a Democratic hoax in that message where he said that he wants to unseal pertinent grand jury testimony.
He's also continuing that ruse, that absurd notion that this is a Democratic hoax.
And hey, I'm glad that they're responding to this.
It seems like the pressure that the public is applying is working to some extent.
And that's a good thing.
But this is not what the people called for.
We called for the files.
We want to hear the results of the warrant searches that were served.
You know, Jason brought this other factor up a few days ago.
We want to know what he told the FBI and the federal government under the arrangement that they signed that plea bargain over.
It says in those documents that he's going to be essentially an informant of some kind.
We want to have that.
And that's what the White House has, and they're not going to give it to us.
Biden was no different, but Trump isn't either.
So I think this is going to result in a nothing burger, even if the court decides to unseal it.
We want everything, and especially we want them to say, hey, you know, we did or did not interview Les Wexner or Leon Black at any time.
That would be pertinent too.
That's what really would be pertinent.
I'll go to Jason and then I'll go to Josiah.
Go ahead, Jason.
Yeah, I think this is going nowhere.
I think that the media is going to focus on a lot of stories that have been in the peripheral in the past.
For instance, let's just start here.
Trump did wish Ghelaine Maxwell well and then doubled down on that.
There is no doubt about that relationship.
Now, in some of these spaces, in these videos, a lot of people have talked about Katie Johnson.
I just want to say that that lawsuit was dropped twice.
But if you would like to see her testimony, you can watch her 29-minute video.
All these things are out there.
And I would also point out that even in the Palm Beach case, there are a lot of testimonies on video of these women.
Now, during the Ghelaine Maxwell trial specifically, okay, you did have one of the Jane Does come out.
Again, not saying anything sexual with Trump, but that relationship was there.
And he was introduced at 14.
We have to be adults.
Okay.
These guys had a relationship.
However, I do believe if there was anything to do with underage sexual activity, the Democrats would have pulled that out, no doubt, over the last three election cycles.
Okay.
I'm a grown-up.
I understand this.
However, there are certain allegations that are still not going to make this guy look great.
For instance, if anybody out there doesn't think that he was having sex with porn stars, okay, people that have sex on video for a living, and it was not somewhat transactional, I mean, you believe in fairy tales, leprechauns, and unicorns.
It's just not a real thing.
Okay.
These people do that.
Trump has proven himself to be part of that.
He doesn't really want those type of things going on.
You know, Stefano, it kind of goes back to, again, I voted for this guy three times.
But if you didn't go into it knowing three things, very easy.
Yes, the man liked women.
He was a misogynist, married three times, all models.
One of the other things they're going to focus on is the stories out there.
I think it was Ari Ben Minash that said essentially that, and I'm not endorsing these, by the way, okay?
That he was introduced to Melania through Epstein at a party where he was looking for wife number three.
Now, again, I didn't write those stories.
They're out in the peripheral.
Expect them to come out through the media.
But number two, if you don't realize this guy is at some level a gangster, they don't let you build Atlantic City unless you have the contracting deals.
You've had former Chicago mob bosses talking about not only dealing with Trump, but how he would flip a coin as to whether he was going to pay you or litigate against you.
Again, I don't think those are too far off.
And number three, he's an actor.
Okay.
Reality shows aren't real.
And even when I was a kid before that, you would have thought that Trump was the richest guy in the world the way Oprah and the media portrayed him.
So I don't think that especially the Ghana Maxwell trial documents are going to do them any favors.
For instance, another one of the winners in that was somebody called Annie Farmer.
Okay.
Now, Annie Farmer was underage.
Maria Farmer, her older sister, got involved with Epstein overage.
Now, I interviewed Maria Farmer many, many years ago.
She eventually developed brain cancer.
And I'll just say some of her behavior after that was pretty suspect.
But she made allegations that, you know, Trump and Epstein would go driving together.
Ivanka and Ghelane had a relationship.
And she also made allegations within the New York mansion that not only did they have cameras everywhere, but there was a room specifically where those cameras were being watched and taped by staff.
Now, once again, I'm putting out what's out there.
You notice Jason Burmes didn't say, hey, these are the things that happened.
Expect a lot of the things that were negative against Trump to come out in the media, but at the same time, expect Trump to push back with a lot of the Democrat things that have already been out there via Bill Clinton, via Bill Richardson, and others.
And I'll leave it there so other people can comment.
Let me go to Josiah.
You know, I know you're going to, you know, there's this take and all that.
I think the, Jason, let me, let me address your opinion.
Like, oh, the Democrats were let go.
I mean, that was the whole reason they weren't letting anything go.
And that's why people were saying there's a cover-up.
And maybe you can look at it as a uniparty thing.
Maybe you can look at it from, hey, this is sealed.
Maybe they ran a tighter ship.
They didn't want things to be leaked.
Because I think from the Wall Street Journal reporting, this came, a leak came from the, it looks like the Justice Department.
This wasn't from Disney Maxwell.
This was somebody that had access to the evidence.
So Josiah, my question to you, you know, do you want, I think you're going to say that this is fake and that the Wall Street Journal is fake.
But do you then believe that what Trump is arguing that he's calling just now the Jeffrey Epstein hoax that was created by the Democratic Party?
Do you believe that it goes to that level?
Or do you think that, hey, this is us a nothing burger and people are going to try to pull damning information for political points?
Yeah, it's the latter part, definitely.
You know, do you guys remember the P-Tape in 2016?
Like this was supposed to be this huge, you know, shocking revelation of Donald Trump peeing on prostitutes in Moscow, an agent of Putin.
And it all turns out to be completely fake, completely made up.
They never produced the P-tape.
They didn't produce these documents, the dossier, the dossier.
It's all bullshit.
And we continue to go through this over and over and over again.
The idea that we're going to drop a bunch of new information about Donald Trump's salacious personal life is completely ridiculous to me.
It has never been made clear that any of this kind of thing exists.
I think Trump is very careful.
You know, oh, he might have slept with women in the 90s or 2000s.
I don't care.
That doesn't have anything to do with anything now.
And claims of, oh, we have this letter, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Fake, fake.
It's just, it's apolitical.
It's like, this is like entertainment.
It's like, it's just like an online thing.
It doesn't go anywhere.
Most of this is audience capture driven.
There are influencers who feel like they need to lock in on Epstein because it's their whole, it's like this money-making adventure for a lot of people.
And that doesn't mean Epstein was a good guy.
I don't believe that at all.
I think he was, I could totally see him working for the Israelis.
But my point is this.
The worst things in America happen in the open.
No one doubts.
I'm looking at Reuters right here.
Between 2018 and 2024, there were 5,000 instances of puberty blockers and gender affirming surgeries given to minors in the United States.
If you care about children, if you care about the grooming of children, then let's concentrate on what we know is happening in American life right now.
Like I can go Google that and find it.
If you're worried about Israeli influence in the American government, then look at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Look at Mark Levin.
Look at Mark Dubovitz.
Look at what's happening in Congress.
This is all open.
No one is doubting any of this, but there's something salacious about Epstein.
Like, oh, you know, we're going to find all this secret stuff when the worst things in the country are being done right here.
So I think we need to lock in on what's politically relevant right now.
It's pointless to get distracted.
A lot of this has turned into a circus.
I don't think it's going to go anywhere.
I don't think anything, I don't think we're going to have the smoking gun evidence that's been implicitly promised by a lot of these influencers.
And I think what we're really learning in all of this is the people who promised, like Bongino and Patel, and then also Pam Bondi, like we're going to get in there and review all the stuff.
And they find out for whatever reason, they don't have as much as they thought.
They don't know what's available to them.
They're not meeting the expectation.
They overpromise, they under deliver.
That's a real problem, but it's a PR problem fundamentally.
So are there lessons to be learned here?
Absolutely.
Is Jeffrey Epstein a good person?
No.
Are we going to find out that Trump is like an evil guy?
Nope.
That's not going to happen either.
People, again, on the pro releasing whatever it is they want released are overpromising and they're going to under deliver.
It's going to disappoint a lot of people, but we'll all forget about it because the news cycle is going to move on.
Okay, Mike, let me go to you.
I still, you know, I may be within the base in some aspect, the people who've been pressuring most the Epstein file release, they're the ones that have been pressuring this story much more than anybody else, right?
Let's, I mean, I don't, I keep, you know, let's be real.
Um, I haven't seen liberal influencers really taking the mantra of Epstein.
I mean, that literally the argument that I'm hearing just high was kind of what a lot of Democratic supporters and liberal inferencos were saying during the previous election cycle.
And that's something that kind of got a lot of MAGA influencers as Josiah's pointing.
I also know it seems something because the Democrats are hiding it.
And now maybe Trump is office, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, who ran on this and were put in positions of power because of it.
You know, who knows why?
There's obviously tensions inside.
But Mike, I do believe that the Wall Street Journal maybe got some of the MAGA influencers to follow kind of the talking point, if I might say, of Donald Trump, that this is a hoax.
So is this as a possibility that now Donald Trump is able to switch this and say, see, told you all along this is a Democratic hoax, the Jeff C. Epstein hoax as the Democratic Park created by, I guess, Obama somehow.
Or is it still enough people, even within the base, are going to pressure this and the political memento is continuing to force the administration to do more releases?
Well, just like I said yesterday, that Trump has a basic formula.
You know, he blames the media.
If that doesn't work, he blames Democrats.
If that doesn't work, he blames Joe Biden.
And if he gets really desperate, he blames Barack Obama.
I think yesterday with this entire birthday card issue, he was given a proverbial gift from the ghost of scandals past because now we're not just purely talking about the Epstein files.
Trump's Birthday Card Gambit00:14:55
It's kind of like the Epstein files 2.0.
We're deflecting against the anemic drop of files.
And And now we're talking about the validity of this card, which may or may not be true.
If it's it, it's more believable post all of this other BS.
It would be more believable that it was fake.
If you would notice, most Democrats worth their soul, they didn't feed into a lot of the Epstein stuff.
We knew he was a terrible person.
We know he did horrible things against children, and we knew he should have been locked up and never saw the light of day again.
But the people that were calling for these Epstein files unceasingly to be released were people like Pam Bondi, who's currently in the administration, Cash Fate, the FBI director, Dan Bongino, the deputy director, Laura Loomer, who is, I guess, the person that you want to have secret conversations with if you want everybody to really hear it.
Don Jr., JD Vance, Steve Banning, who right now is pushing a third term conspiracy, Mike Flynn, Alex Jones.
These are the people that have been spoon feeding MAGA, this conspiracy that there are all of this salacious new stuff that's just going to undo this Democratic pedophilia cabal that's out there and it's just going to blow the whistle off of everything.
No Democrat, no prominent Democrat.
And I haven't done a little bit of digging.
I think in 2024, John Ofsoft says something about releasing the Epstein files.
It was just a little blip in one press conference, but it's not enough.
So to say that this is a Democratic thing or a Democratic hoax or something that the Democrats have been trying to purpose, that's a real false flag movement.
And just to give you an example, when we first started talking about this a few days ago, I, and I will admit when I'm wrong, I looked in this camera and I said, I believe that Jeffrey Epstein, because I don't do conspiracy theories.
I go off the evidence.
The evidence said, the government said, the tape said that Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide.
That's what I went with.
So much BS has been peddled by this administration, so much addition and so much subtraction, which makes absolutely no sense.
Now I'm on the side of I don't know if he committed suicide or not.
I have some serious doubts.
There's a lot more information that I need.
So trying to say that Democrats are the one that is thinking and dreaming all this stuff up is preposterous.
It's actually the opposite.
MAGA is getting so far and tripping over MAGA so much that it is turning on Democrats' minds and heads and making us think, hey, maybe there actually is some there there.
You're muted, Stefano.
Sorry.
I'm sorry.
Had a had a little glitch there trying to get this up.
My apologies.
Mike, I heard everything you said.
I was trying to get in.
So, but excellent question.
Let me go to Scott, kind of continue down the line.
So, Scott, I think that the thing that I'm kind of interested in is that, you know, I don't know.
And maybe this is an X mainstream big media, right?
Because in X, there's kind of like this predominant theory that this is fake.
In other areas, there's kind of concurrence that it's, no, it's real.
And it kind of explains why Donald Trump, like, I think that if the re, like we were asking ourselves why Donald Trump doesn't want to release this, the intelligence aspect or whatever, this is, I think, to me is a very clear example.
Why?
Maybe there's much more and there's a grand conspiracy and everything.
And the reason why, to me, I was saying, hey, why doesn't Donald Trump want to release it?
Because if it's an intelligence operation, it feeds into the aspect of a deep state.
But I think that one of the reasons is because he is concerned about the information about him in there and much more so than just taking the planes and maybe, look, this isn't criminal.
Nothing in the letter is credibly liable.
No prosecutor can use that.
And any conviction, and that's probably why it was never released, because if they can't use it for a criminal conviction, it doesn't serve them in their minds.
It's not in the public interest, right?
And we're not going to release material that's just damning for damning's sake, because that, you know, maybe they could do it, but that's why they didn't do it.
But I think this letter is one of the main reasons why Trump has been very concerned about releasing the files because there might be more information there that maybe not criminally implicit, but shows, hey, Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were the best friends they alluded to.
And one thing is to say Jeffrey Epstein on the record, oh, he's been my best friend for 10, 15 years.
Another things are letters between both of them that shows that they had a much more intimate relationship.
And it wasn't just them sharing dreams at a party.
Yeah, Jeffrey Epstein had lots of powerful friends.
So it's not surprising that Trump would have been one of them at all.
It's not surprising.
And I think that MAGA World really needs to prepare for this letter being completely verified.
And I'm not saying it's not fake.
Maybe it is.
Maybe it is.
But it's probably real.
And it's probably something that he wrote in a way to a friend.
But Trump also had a falling out with that friend because he was coming on the underage people at Mar-a-Lago, right?
So the same guy that was supposedly saying it was okay to molest kids if they're right about Trump kicked Epstein out for even going in that direction.
So I think, like you said, this letter, there's nothing incriminating in it.
So at the time, he didn't know that.
At the time, he was a Playboy.
Trump was a Playboy.
Lots of those guys were Playboys traveling to the island or whatever.
So I don't think that if Trump plays it right, it shouldn't really hurt him that much.
But I think the real question to all this is, what happened?
So, you know, going back to COVID, all right, Fauci, February 2020, Fauci said, you don't need a mask.
You don't need it.
Right.
And then one month later, Fauci's like, masks are going to save us from the pandemic.
Crucial.
And at the time, in February, his logic was correct.
So something happened from February to March of 2020.
Well, what happened in the Epstein case between the grand reveal of phase one with those influencers?
What happened from there to there's nothing else to see here because there was phase one.
Where's phase two?
Why didn't phase two get released?
So what is it just something that is about Trump?
I don't necessarily believe that because if Trump was worried about this, he would have been downplaying it the whole time.
And if they could have used it against him, they would have used it against him a long time ago.
So like you guys said, I don't think anybody has anything on Trump.
So what happened?
I don't know.
But the whole thing about Epstein being when Acosta said he was owned by intelligence or of intelligence, I think it has something to do with what they don't want people to know about when it comes to Epstein's relationship with certain covert agencies for certain countries.
I just feel like people always say, oh, they had to access this and released it.
But like, you know, I hear that.
But again, this leak had to come from the DOJ.
And let's be real.
Let's look.
And let me take this question to Tony for a second.
Like, let's look at the first Trump administration.
A lot of the scandals, say it's true, false, fake, real, whatever the mindset you might take.
The reason why that was released, it was because of people within his administration.
And all the writing on the wall for this story is it came from people in his administration.
And it highlights a difference maybe in how things were operating.
Now, again, in the Biden administration, I don't think they cared that much about Jeffrey Epstein.
It was not a priority for Democrats and they just never cared about it and they just moved on.
It was the MAGA base that really propelled this and the social media influencers.
But to me, by all means, Tony, like.
Give me your initial takes.
I mean, I'll tell you first off, it was actually the Southern District of New York, the James Comey's daughter that they fired who is a lead prosecutor who actually prosecuted Maxwell and prosecuted that evidence.
So the idea that Democrats didn't do something is ridiculous because you think this came from which leak?
The Wall Street Journal one, the Wall Street Journal one yesterday.
Well, I mean, it's possible that this came from Maxwell.
This could be a sign that, hey, I'm not going to play ball.
I mean, who else would have access or who would know about this birthday card or who could verify this birthday card or letter or whatever the fuck it is?
It's really not.
I don't think that this letter or this card is so important.
I think what is important that Donald Trump is willing to sue over a birthday card.
Okay, that's what we're talking about here.
And he's not suing over defamation.
Okay.
I mean, yeah, he's saying, oh, it's fake.
It's fake.
It's fake.
But I mean, it's going to be found out in discovery one way or the other if they actually sue.
Now, I think what is being underestimated here is how conspiracy theories work and how the business of conspiracy theories work.
We know that on the right wing, there is huge cash.
I mean, mountains of cash in conspiracy theory.
Now, Donald Trump's up against a huge mountain of cash here.
And the reason why is because every time he moves around Epstein, every time he says the word Epstein, every time anyone else says the word Epstein, he's in a world of hurt because it's just going to create more content and more content and more content.
And I got to say that if anyone who believes that the Trump administration is going to release the Epstein files, I mean the real ones, not some testimony somewhere, not some evidence that's already been out in the public, like phase one.
I'm talking about real evidence, like a client list.
And there is a client list.
It may not be one that Jeffrey Epstein wrote down, but they know who they are.
They know who they are.
And there is a list, okay, of people who they know who were participated in the vile rapes in this child sex trafficking ring, which there are many elite pedophiles out there that are being protected by MAGA now.
And the reason why they're being protected by MAGA, because they're protecting Donald Trump's reputation from the conspiracy theory cash mountain.
Okay.
And if you are in a situation where you believe that this administration is going to release the Epstein client list, then you'll believe that tariffs aren't taxes on Americans.
Okay.
You'll believe that lie.
You'll believe all sorts of lies.
You'll believe that he's going to do an audit at Fort Knox.
You'll believe that it's so much better to have sugar cane and Coca-Cola.
Like this is so, this is so ridiculous that anyone thinks that this is some sort of Democratic hoax because Democrats aren't the ones who invented this entire idea that everything and every conspiracy theory, including the Jews, is going to topple because the list is going to be released.
Let me be very clear.
If the Jeffrey Epstein client list is ever released, it's not going to fix all your problems.
It's not.
Prices aren't going to go down because you release the list.
Billionaires aren't going to pay less taxes because you released the list.
What we, the great American working class, are still going to be screwed.
Even though you release the list, this is not going to solve your problems.
But since the administration has decided to stake their entire claim on this one conspiracy theory, I'm all for it.
I think we should say Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, Epstein list until they direct ICE to come and round us up.
Johnny, let me ask you a question.
Because Tony and Josiah, in different ways, but kind of in similar end state, their messaging is kind of the same in a way, just from different angles, which is, and kind of what Donald Trump is maybe alluding to is, hey, and I think even Nancy Bluesy said it's like the policies is what matters.
The achievements is what matters.
The bringing food prices or securing the border or ending wars or new wars, Iran, Russia, Ukraine, inflation, taxes, like a lot of like the policy is what matters.
The Jeffrey Epstein is something that has grown in proportion, that shouldn't have an impact, and it's not going to change the American people.
So, Johnny, I want to give you the opportunity to head that point head on, because I'm pretty sure you heavily disagree.
So, why is this case of public importance and maybe one of the most important political crises in American currently in domestic American political history?
Well, my computer is going wild right now, so I hope you can hear me at least.
I'm not sure if I can do it.
Let me tell you that what you just heard there was not true.
Good, good.
All right.
Well, listen to me here.
Jeffrey Epstein wasn't just a child sex trafficker.
That is the conspiracy theory there.
That's the main conspiracy theory.
What the real reality of him was, he was a banker.
He was running guns and arms for many years before, well before his links to Israel were apparent.
His links to the CIA were very apparent.
There is a conspiracy here.
It's not a theory anymore.
We've discovered so much information.
It's insane.
And I tell you, the Democratic Party was using Jeffrey Epstein from the moment he got brought in and went to the White House under Bill Clinton from 1993, 17 times, along with Mark Middleton.
Of course, we know his fate.
From that moment on, he was helping choose the Democratic leaders and fund the Democratic leaders.
So he was funding everybody there.
John Kerry, potential leader.
We've seen how that played out.
Joe Lieberman, potential leader.
He ends up being vice president pick under Gore.
Gore himself, he's meeting with him.
We know that.
There's so many more.
There's Bill Richardson.
There's others.
He's grooming the next leadership.
RFK Jr., those guys were all there.
Grooming The Next Leadership00:05:52
This isn't conspiracy theory.
That's madness.
That is the conspiracy theory.
And that's what the CIA wants to put in your head.
So, Troy, I'm sorry to hear you say that, but I think Jeffrey Epstein was fundamental to the Democratic leadership picks for years, for years and years.
And what is now happening is distancing with a lot of people who moved from the Democrat Party over to the Republicans, and they become Republicans to distance themselves from exactly this crisis that is happening right now.
And it can't, they can't run from it.
You can't run from what you've done.
Can I respond to this?
Because we're not running.
We're saying release the files.
I could care less if there's Democrats in these files.
I could care less what old guard is in these files.
I don't care what new guard is in these files, honestly.
I don't care what lives it destroys.
Honestly, we need to ruin some billionaires' lives and some of these people that control our government.
If anyone believes that government is bad, but you only think that democratic government is bad, you're not aware of how tyranny works.
That's the gods and honest truth.
That's the conspiracy theory.
It is a conspiracy theory.
And again, you're just perpetuating the mountain of cash on the other side of the conspiracy theory to sell and market it.
That's all you're doing.
And you're selling it to one group of people who want to pay all clear with bad income.
I'd let you finish.
Let me finish and then you could jump in.
You could jump in when I'm done.
Okay.
If you believe that the conspiracy theory of the big bad government is in our two-party system, that there's only one party that was participating in power plays all around the world, in CIA operations, in blackmail operations, in money laundering schemes.
You are outside your mind and do not know how power works.
And you're a horrible conspiracy theorist.
Go ahead.
Okay.
Can I just respond?
Yeah, I said you could go ahead.
Go ahead.
Johnny, I'll let you respond.
Then I'll go to Bryce.
But go ahead, Johnny.
Then I'm going to go to Bryce.
Okay.
I just want to say quickly that he's never, I just want to say quickly, he's never read any of my work because I actually talk about all parties being exactly the same.
You need to actually learn who you're talking to.
So go.
Why did you say those history?
I didn't say that.
You made a logical fallacy out of what I said to supervise.
No, you said it said it was Democrats.
Jeffrey Epstein was in business with everyone.
And I can tell you just this one last thing.
He was especially in business between the time of 1993 on to about 2005, 2004, 2005.
He was in business with the Democratic Party.
That is history.
You cannot rewrite that.
That would be rewriting history, my friend.
I mean, you're going to be in power with any party that's in power.
Ironically, George W. Bush is not on the list, I guess.
I don't know.
Neither is Barack Obama.
That was a joke.
God, that was a joke.
Let me just run with it, please.
Jesus.
Bryce, go ahead.
I'm sorry.
Go ahead with what?
Do we want to continue the circle jargon and DNC bullshit here?
No, actually, no, that's an excellent point.
So, from your perspective, though, I mean, this is something we've talked about in the past.
I mean, this is a, you know, if Trump is not releasing it, people believe this is a key example of the uniparty, right?
That there's not two parties.
It's a uniparty.
They're all the same.
Does this, the way the Trump administration has handled this and the way they've addressed it, does it provide ammunition to highlight, hey, there's a uniparty here, and maybe people need to look elsewhere to restore faith in the government because of how this was handled.
There's always been a uniparty.
I mean, this is nothing new.
First of all, you had Kash Patel.
One of the big first interviews came out.
He said, there's obviously there's a bunch of people on this that are elites.
He said it straight out that there are elites on this list.
Now we got Pam Bondi.
Now we've got Dan Bonagina.
Now we got Kash Patel, all changing their attitude.
And I don't honestly think that Donald Trump is on this list.
I doubt that he actually did anything wrong.
But what he did is he told Bill O'Reilly that there are a lot of people on this list, a lot of powerful people that would have their lives ruined.
And it's the key of the unit party to hold water for powerful elites because this country is run by elitists.
The GOP, DNC, they're all the fucking same.
You know, you got the crumpet guy here and the progressive liberal.
They're both the same people.
They're just douchebags.
One's from the right, one's from the left, both saying the same stupid shit.
And they're just covering water for their side.
They're like, hey, don't, you know, don't pay attention to what's really going on.
Let me tell you this bullshit about the Democrats being the problem, and then I'll tell you about the Republicans being the problem.
And here's the thing, they're the same fucking people.
They're all on the list.
They're all part of the problem.
And it's time to change course.
Argentina finally changed course.
We got Javier Malaya and he's doing a wonderful job.
It's time to change course from these douchebags.
Stefano, can I just jump in on the hate?
Can I take a poll?
Is anyone here on the Epstein list?
Is anyone here on the Epstein list?
Can I just address that there is no list, please?
Because I keep hearing about lists.
Go for it.
Holy shit.
Thank you.
Now, first of all, yeah, I'm not here to make hostilities to anybody, but the idea, you know, as I've pointed out, that Jeffrey Epstein and Glene Maxwell were running some type of underage brothel where they were charging quote-unquote clients to come to these places and have sex with kids.
That's imagination land.
Okay.
Why Epstein Built a Harem00:03:20
The evidence clearly shows that this guy was a serial pedophile that built a harem.
And then in these areas, as to all of these women who have testified in civil suits in the grand jury, they talk about basically parties and then they would go have sex with these people, whether or not they knew they were underage or not.
So if you want the list of people that abused young girls, that's a different thing.
Now, why would Epstein do this?
He was obviously working not only with banking, but as Johnny just said, in the arms trade with the Republicans, by the way, which Johnny has gotten into because they were in power at the time.
I don't think this is a right-left issue, never has been.
Now, if you want to talk about business dealings, okay, outside of the government, there's a guy named Adnan Khashoggi.
Now, Khashoggi was heavily implicated, but never charged in any way, in the Iran-Contra scandal.
One of those, you know, real connections to Trump is that Khashoggi sold Trump his yacht for $29 million.
Now, I would, again, establish that Khashoggi was one of those guys that built a harem as well, and Epstein was financially representing him through the 80s.
You know, Stefano, I really hope that you check out that little section of Invisible Empire I sent you because it shows you how BCCI banking at the time, they had four guys that were arrested and they tried to clip it there because it was the Bank of Criminals and Cartels International.
It is literally, hold on, let me let me continue.
It's literally no surprise.
Hold on, that Lehman Brothers.
There's returning echoes.
Sorry, go ahead, Jason.
So Lehman Brothers paid out $75 million, okay, and JP Morgan paid out $290 million to different compensation funds for the victims.
They end up signing NDAs, so a lot of this stuff, quote unquote, cannot come out.
However, you start opening these cases, you get their testimony.
So on one end, you do have a relationship probably in real estate as well with Epstein and Trump, but it is undeniable what Johnny just said that, and by the way, Clinton, when we talk about Iran-Contra, a Democrat, very involved, Mina, Arkansas was one of the shipment points for that cocaine.
There was testimony from sheriffs and local law enforcement that Clinton himself was out on runways taking suitcases of money.
Everybody knows his brother was picked up for dealing cocaine on tape says, got to get some for my brother.
He's got a nose like a vacuum cleaner.
Jennifer Flowers will tell you the same.
Okay, so this doesn't make anybody look good.
And you know, Mike Benz alluded to it on your space last night.
When you find out that American taxpaying dollars has been a huge part of all of this, and it's not just the United States, what?
It's Israel.
Again, Iran-Contra.
Israel bought the weapons from Yugoslavia and Czechoslovak Slovakia for a plausible deniability circle.
So it's not one thing.
Okay.
And I'm not a right-wing grifter.
I've been doing this 20 years, kicking and screaming.
Right, but I mean, I guess, Jason, though, like, I mean, we like, like, yeah, like, we know U.S., like, I know Iran-Contra.
Bad Messaging Plays00:03:21
I mean, we don't have like, but do you know it?
But do you know what actually happened?
People talk about that Iran-Contra, but we've done these types of operations in the past called, you know, the Mukayuddin in Afghanistan between 1980 and 1988.
Stefano, let me ask you something.
You're talking about that era?
Hold on.
Do you think because I didn't want to go a little bit because I understand your point.
But again, that happens.
Yeah, that's how intelligence agencies and the foreign policy and the plausible deniability.
And you don't want tensions to rise.
So you try to do it.
The Russians do it against us.
The U.S. does it against them.
Everybody plays this game in spyworld intelligence, weapons trafficking for one group or another for geopolitical, whatever interests that exist.
But I think one of the things that I want to go to just to kind of focus on, because again, I kind of want to make this a little bit more about what's kind of going on immediately when this is kind of just the media story is let me go to Josiah for this question because I still like, okay, Josiah, there's nothing there.
So maybe the messaging was bad.
They played it and all that.
But why would Donald Trump then call this a Democratic hoax, which then invites people to believe he's implicated rather than say, hey, either, you know what, we thought there was more, there isn't, or maybe just keep his mouth shut and, you know, like they did with the binders and everybody made foot.
But people forgot about that.
And in a way, like it was kind of forgotten.
People laughed at the influential.
Ha, see, you got played again.
And then they moved out.
Like, there were so many different ways that the Trump administration can handle this.
Maybe release something.
Maybe to Jason's point, throw it Bill Richardson, who's dead under the bus.
Why didn't they do that?
And they're running with there's nothing there.
Oh, but there is.
But if it is, it's a Democratic hoax.
Like, like, why that?
And you can't say it's Pam Bandi because Donald Trump and his truth social said that directly.
That's why I think they're losing the credibility in this in this political crisis and people are putting the, you know, the fire under them to address it.
I mean, my read was that Trump was saying that the Democratic hoax is, you know, there's a whole bunch of people saying that Trump is a pedophile enabler or that Trump himself raped kids on Epstein Island.
You know, Trump obviously thinks that's a hoax and doesn't think that happened because it didn't.
And there's no evidence that that happened.
And so from that standpoint, you know, I understand where Trump is coming from because he's not in the same media environment where people are just locked in on this issue.
Like Trump is focused on, you know, stuff happening in the Middle East.
He's focused on Ukraine.
He's focused on weapons shipments.
He's focused on immigration.
He's like, I've delivered the big, beautiful bill.
I'm making progress.
And people are yelling about this thing that I wasn't really involved in, but I know it was bad.
And also, it's all the Democrats.
Like, Trump will just come out and say stuff.
You know, it's like, and there's a beautiful list and I'm not on it.
And the people on there are all criminals.
Put them in jail.
Like, I expect him to come out like, and just, I mean, to me, I think Trump just thinks this is ridiculous in some way.
And I keep getting a sense that I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop.
You know, I keep being promised.
Adnan Khashoggi, cartels, Iran-Contra.
There's emails.
It's all going to come together any day now.
Trump's Focus Shifts00:03:28
Any day now.
I can't wait for all the billionaires to go down.
They're going to perp Wakam.
I never said anyone's going down.
I said they're going to bifurcate the whole thing.
Any day.
This is obviously going to be a really good use of our time.
It's going to reveal all the great sins of our regime.
Or probably we could focus on what's actually happening.
Like Bryce is saying that MAGA is just like the liberal progressives.
And my response is: I want to do something about immigration and I want to deport illegal immigrants.
That's a huge difference.
We can do that right now.
I'm mad about fentanyl trafficking in America that kills Americans.
We can do something about that.
And we're doing it right now.
So when then we're talking about this other stuff, and I'm like, what is it that I'm going to get out of the time and energy and resources invested in what's going on here?
Right now, I'm saying there could be stuff there, but I don't think so.
It's just the juice isn't worth the squeeze on this.
It just let me tie into kind of what Josiah is saying and kind of like disagree with what Jason, like, you know, because Jason, you alluded to there is no kind of client list.
That's not what this is a weapons trafficking and maybe, you know, intelligence.
And so like, if like, let's say, let, for argument's sake, that's what happened.
That's the crisis.
Like, I would kind of agree.
Like, no, there should be a client list.
Well, like, like, Jason, like, like, what I'm saying is if the reason why there's a cover-up, it's because Jeffrey Epstein played a pivotal role in weapons trafficking and intelligence.
All right, Jason, you're shaking your head.
Because, bro, I love the queen, can't get enough of the queen.
Are we going to out Prince Andrew of continuing that long tradition of arms dealing and corruption?
Because that's what he was doing with Epstein.
I mean, the world, people will be pissed if they find out how the world really works.
That's why.
And it's not just the United States.
It's literally, listen, we have had an alliance now post-World War II.
You have this apparatus will stab each other in the back, but it is the global U.S., okay, Euro-Israeli-Saudi alliance.
All right.
You can talk about five eyes as well, but we've had so many treaties and business dealings.
That's why on 9-11, they'll burn the Saudis but not do anything.
They're one compartment of that.
But during the 50s and 60s, same network with BCCI, they build up an allegiance with Pakistan.
Okay.
And where do they find Bin Laden?
In Pakistan.
Where's he receiving treatment on the night of 9-11?
Pakistan.
Who gave Adam?
I mean, I mean, people don't know that.
Folks, we're going to take a quick break.
Please consider supporting the broadcast, checking out all the documentary films for free that really explain a lot of what I am talking about, especially Invisible Empire, a new world order defined.
They are in the playlist down below.
And so are the links, such as the buy me a coffee that you see right there and others that you can financially support the broadcast.
As there are no paychecks, folks, we're doing it with your support.
Back to the debate.
So again, like, let me, this is why I'm going to go to Dave.
And like, I'm going to like, like, I served Jordan, OIR.
Yeah, yeah, of course, not everything that happens gets reported.
No shit.
Yeah, duh.
Trump's Political Molestation00:15:54
But it's like, if, if the reason for, it's like to Josiah's point, like, let's say the cover-up is because of intelligence operations and weapons trafficking.
To be honest, it's like, oh, okay, you were doing this for doing weapons trafficking and smuggling.
And then I could just see somebody coming.
It's like, yeah, this is why we did it because these guys needed money.
We didn't want, let's say, the Russians to be pissed or the Iranians to be pissed or whoever.
And then, okay, so here's the connection.
This is why we do it.
It's the CIA guys.
It's part of the game.
Everybody plays it.
Like, I don't, I don't see maybe because I'm not saying I was never CIA and I'm not saying that, but it's like, I just don't see why that's the crisis.
Like, if anything, that to me doesn't seem like it's going to resonate with the American public.
What resonates with the American public is the clattle list child sex trafficking.
Like that's that's the like that to me is the crisis.
But maybe there's one part or the other and they merge, but like the intelligence aspect to Josiah's point, it's kind of one of those where you're just like, okay, countries do this.
We have a long history.
We don't have to go that like Syria under the Obama administration.
Yeah.
No doubt the salacious aspects are the sexual exploitation that he was committing with Ghelane Maxwell at the very least and possibly a cabal.
I know, you know, there's been lots of disputes among that.
But I think stuff like the birthday card is actually a big red herring.
And actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump's people put that out there to get us to not talk about the arms trafficking and the relationships with Israel because he was in bed with Douglas Leese and Adnan Khashoggi and people like Stephen Hoffenberg, who he helped conduct the biggest pyramid scheme in U.S. history outside of Social Security, of course.
And Josiah is right.
No, Trump is focused on other things like Ukraine, like arming Ukraine.
He is focused on arming Ukraine.
So yeah, he does want to get away from this and he wants that to be the top item.
But I think Trump's the red herring is trying to implicate Trump in these crimes.
There's no evidence to consider that.
They have the famous rift in 2004 over vying for the same oceanfront property.
And there's no evidence to me they even really had a relationship beyond that.
I'm open to all possibilities, by the way, and I would change my mind on that if there was evidence presented.
But I think that Trump would be behaving the same way if there were people close to him implicated in these things as the way he is acting now.
It doesn't necessarily mean that he's implicated.
I just think it's the uniparty.
It's all sides.
It's a big party.
We're not part of it.
That's what George Carlin said, right?
It's a big club and we're not part of it.
So I do think undermining the potential ties to Israel is something that would awaken a lot of people, especially now when you have some of the biggest voices on the right actually talking about this openly, how our relationship with Israel isn't a good idea.
Tucker Carlson's effing doing this.
Even Matt Walsh is questioning this.
Matt Walsh, he works at the Daily Wire and he's doing this.
So that's what I think.
Can I say one more thing?
And I've got to go and I hate to go because this is great because we can all agree to disagree here.
But I think the main thing is that we keep disagreeing because as long as we keep disagreeing, Epstein stays in the news.
And as long as Epstein stays in the news, then it's bad for the Trump administration.
So thank you, fellas, for keeping this.
Yeah.
No, and Ty, there you go.
But to me, you know, it's kind of, before you go, just ask this, it's like, and maybe at some point where, I mean, I've been doing this for, I mean, how long now I've been covering this?
A week, two weeks?
Space since live stream?
I've been posting about Epstein for a while.
I know, but for me, posting this, I'm just kind of embarrassed.
Like, what?
Like, why this?
Why?
And to me, the irony is...
Why what?
Why, why is Trump acting the way he's acting?
It's the Streisand effect.
And that's if he would have never mentioned Epstein, because Trump is really good at ignoring things.
I mean, when's the last time you heard about the kid who shot at him, right?
Or supposedly shot at him.
I guess if you believe that, you'll believe he's going to release the Epstein files.
But here's the thing is that if you guys are laughing, I mean, there's some truth in it, then I guess.
Here's the thing is that why now?
Why now?
Because he keeps talking about it and he won't shut up about it.
And the reason why he won't shut up about it is because he's scared that we're two half steps away from a big part of MAGA calling him a pedophile.
That's what he's scared of.
So I'll leave on that note.
How about that?
Can I just talk to the Streisan effect quick?
He's right in the fact that literally the Epstein searches.
Hold on, the Epstein searches went up 1,200% since yesterday, okay?
Since the release of the Wall Street Journal.
Can I ask you a question, Jason, really quick?
Can I ask you a question on that point?
Yeah.
Do you think that that search is because of Democrats searching it, Democrats, as everyone's talking about?
Or do you think it's just average people who watch kind of like Brocast and they're hearing in the broadcast, like, oh, he's turning.
So now I'm interested in why he's turning.
So now I'm going to go find out why he's turning it.
And the reason why they're showing up here, they're showing up on X.
And if you're watching on X, it is an information battleground on Epstein right now.
And do you think it's, do you think it's, I think it's no, I think it's amplified.
I think it's amplified by the president's response.
Like you said, a lot of people, listen, I'm not red or blue.
I'm not left or right.
There's been a lot of hopium.
And to Stefano's point, why is this so important?
I've alluded to it.
There is a fantasy branch of MAGA.
Listen, as far as policy goes, as far as the transgender stuff goes, I've been talking about that stuff for well over a decade, Josiah.
I don't like what's happening there either.
But at the same time, I have to acknowledge that these aren't Democrat documents.
You know, he talked about the FBI documents.
So again, no matter whether you think Epstein was intelligence in that sense, he was an FBI informant in that deal.
Well, what, you know, what did he provide and what officer of the FBI signed off?
Because that's still censored.
I think right now, again, he is in a situation.
I'm just being a pragmatist.
Like Josiah said, I don't think we're unraveling the deep sea.
I think I'll be talking about a lot of this stuff till I'm dead, unfortunately.
And I'm trying to put pressure just on the political system.
Unfortunately, you do have the fantasists that think that, you know, Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and Tom Hanks are in Democratic satanic rituals with everybody.
At the same time, do I think SRA exists?
It's documented.
Do I think that every Democrat is a Satanist or every Republican Democrat or a pedophile?
No, I stick to what I can prove, but a lot of people don't.
They're not reading the documents.
They don't sit there for half an hour or four hours and watch somebody's testimony and then try to cross-reference it with documentation like Johnny and myself try to do.
They read the headlines.
They listen to the talking heads.
And then, I mean, the message boards and social media throw it off the rails, bro.
I want somewhere in the middle.
You know, it was the Democrats back in the day when I was talking about 9-11 when I was anti-Iraq war in Afghanistan.
I would march with.
Well, now they're the censorship party out of nowhere.
But then the Republicans, they want to censor on behalf of Israel and call me an anti-Semite because I'm calling out an administration and their policy.
You know, it's a crazy world.
Let me jump into because I do want to get to some of the other speakers I've been spoken, but I'm going to have to go.
Thanks for having me, Johnny.
So keep the conspiracies rolling.
Keep it going.
So, Johnny, I think there's this, and I need people to explain to me because, again, we like the Iran-Contra, the Israel component, there was a player, like, again, the Mukhayedin, we know, through Charlie's wars, like, you know, Israel played a role and they bought Egyptian weapons and they sent it to the Taliban.
And the reason why they did it, because they didn't want in the beginning to send American weapons because they didn't want the Soviets.
And then we said, screw it.
Let's get the Mukaydin stingers to make the watches paint.
Like, yes, this, and a lot of these types of relationships that exist, and as you alluded to, Jason, I would highlight the Five Eye is a much more important relationship for the United States than this relationship with Israel, right?
The Five Eye Alliance is a critical component of intelligence here, but a lot of this is known.
So I'm trying to understand, maybe is it because the American people are not so in tune to it, but a lot of this information has been released already.
I would make the argument that Israel has suffered more, at least from a public relations perspective, because of the situation in Gaza, not because of some weapons dealing between Mossad, CIA, sending weapons to other countries to, because that's, I just think that's the, the, the, you know, just the nature of the game.
So Johnny, and then I'm going to stop.
Go ahead, Johnny.
Okay, I just want to say one thing first.
I, you know, as an outsider, I feel like an outsider because I've been accused of being on whatever political party, but I am really not a political guy.
I've researched a lot of this stuff and what you're talking about there as well, it comes into this.
This is really important to understand.
In a sense, we're being politically molested when we've got an objective view because it's being forced upon us.
I like to look at this as something else.
We're heading towards globalism, technocratic globalism.
The people behind the scenes, the people who are writing up society, the people in not only in think tanks, but in universities and academic institutes.
They're designing a future for us, which looks like a technocratic panopticon, which is globalist.
And that includes the world has to be, you know, the problems that we got now have to be kind of sorted.
And from a globalist scale, they just use political parties.
So I understand how why people at the moment think that they don't understand why Trump is doing what he's doing or why he's acting the way he's acting.
And it's because they're turning on him.
This is political expedience with Trump.
So I just want to say this first.
Political expedience is that they've got Trump into power.
These people are also partially in power.
The people who are part of the technocratic globalist panopticon who want to build that world, but are currently stuck in this system.
And they know that in three years' time, there's going to be more is the election starts again and Donald Trump is going to be out.
So they now position themselves in opposition to Donald Trump.
A lot of what we're watching now is political maneuvering.
It's maneuvering around.
And at the end of the day, Donald Trump can do a load of things like support Israel and things like that.
And Israel can get away with loads.
Israel will go and hang out with whoever will support them.
They've always done this.
And they are very good at campaigning, you know, down at a community level as well.
And that comes up to the Epstein case as well.
Because when I was researching for One Nation under Blackmail, I was asked to go and look at Les Wexner and how he built some of his infrastructure at the start.
And there's two sides of Les Wexner.
There's the businessman, Les Wexner, but there's also this community worker working within the Jewish community, making the, you know, these type of people were trying to push forward an idea of a greater Israel.
And this is what they're heading towards.
So Israel will do whatever's good for them.
And they will use the intelligence infrastructure for that as well.
They will use politicians.
They will use your favorite politicians.
And once they're disposable, they will attack them.
They will look like the opposition and they will form Hegelian dialectics.
So basically now Trump is one side of Hegelian dialectic and they're moving to the other side to become the antithesis of him within that party so that they can next election get their guy in and head towards more towards the technocratic globalist panopticon.
But the problem is Trump would not have gotten into office without those people involved and without accepting some form of allegiance to Israel.
That's it.
That's what I'd say.
Scott?
Yeah, so I agree completely with what everything Johnny said.
There's really, if Trump is not a pedophile himself and he's not, I don't think, I don't think any of us think that, then there's really only one logical reason for him to have behaved the way he's behaving and for them to completely about face.
And that's, of course, because of the relationship to intelligence, particularly Israel, which is a very, very, very hot topic, not just because of the idea of, Or again, he would have known this in 2019.
He used this as a political ploy, him and his followers.
He was president in 2019, like when this all happened in the beginning.
Like, if that were true, he would have known.
He actually, if anything, was not so fond of doing more.
It was more of the people he brought into his second administration, people who ran on it.
And so, there's, to me, the most logical explanation is two aspects.
One, he just overpromised and underdelivered, and people got played within the crowd.
Or two, there's damning information there that maybe is not criminally complicit, but shows like, yo, he had a very good relationship with somebody who is now notorious with child sex trafficking.
And that's not a good look for anybody politically.
Like, let's switch, let's pretend for a second that that letter was not Trump and it was Barack Obama.
Or Joe Biden.
Are we like, if it was Joe Biden, nobody in this panel, nobody in this panel would have said, oh, I don't think he's a pedophile.
I don't know about that.
I don't know about that.
I wouldn't have just accused him to be a, again, I commented on that yesterday.
It was very vague, right?
But even if it's vague, let's say Biden, it was Biden.
Are we really going to make the same argument that we're making now?
Well, let me just quickly say, Stefano, we did have.
Sorry, because I interrupted Scott.
But that's my argument.
Like, why is it this idea of something so nefarious that even when I really think about it, like it's, it exists, it's known.
We've had history and examples of American intelligence.
I would argue done worse things since the church community, specifically operating inside the United States, because of that.
But why not look at and analyze it from a perspective that Donald Trump doesn't want negative press and negative association with somebody so notorious in American politics?
Like, why is that so hard to believe?
It's like this uncle's answer.
Why not?
Is that the way we would look at it?
It feels like that they would have done that a long time ago if that was, if there was something there.
It feels like they would have used that against him the past decade at some point.
But if you've got intelligence agencies, including the CIA, Mossad, MI6, whatever, using a pedophile who they created, a billionaire, as a giant honeypot operation to own politicians across the world, that's not a good look.
Like nobody blames Mossad for working on Israel's behalf and doing things behind the scenes in certain countries.
That's fine.
But when you're doing, when you're blackmailing politicians in the United States to do your bidding, that's a bad look.
And you have a huge percentage of the people in this country who are Christian Zionists because that's the, I mean, I was raised a Christian Zionist.
I know that whole mentality.
And so Israel is almost a religion to them right beside Jesus.
Like, you know, bless those that bless you, children of Abraham, all that stuff.
Like, it's very superstitious to a huge percentage of the NAGA base.
And they don't want to hear anything, you know, against or even looking the slightest bit against Israel.
And, you know, so I, but okay, let me, let me just, because I hear this all the time, and I had to look it up because I couldn't remember the guy's name.
Seal Of Grand Jury Testimony00:09:47
Abu Muhammad Al-Masri.
I don't know.
Raise of hand.
Does anybody know who that is?
Abu Muhammad Al-Masri.
Probably not.
Okay.
Abu Muhammad Al-Masri was a key al-Qaeda operative that lived in Iran, right?
He lived in Iran, key al-Qaeda operative.
Al-Qaeda operates there in Iran.
Breaking news.
That actually is true.
The Iranians give them protection and gives them leverage.
Okay.
In 2020, he was assassinated in Tehran and by Space.
I'm reporting from the New York Times.
You know who conducted that assassination?
It was Israel.
Why did Israel kill him?
Because the United States asked them to.
Let's be real.
Like, that's what happened.
Like, this idea that in the difference here, Stefano, one line.
If America finds out that the real James Bond or Jason Bourne is Jeffrey Epstein, the serial pedophile, that's the thing.
Yeah, I mean, but I just feel like that, like, it's like, and maybe I just feel like there's people are trying to reach into something where there's a more direct link.
And I think, let me, let me go to Robert for a second because I know he just joined us.
But I think to me, is that this idea, like nobody wants to address what I think, because we know this has how Trump operates in many ways.
He is concerned about how people perceive him.
He is concerned about people.
And this idea that, oh, well, it would have been leaks before.
Well, not if it's under a grand seal, not if a judge, if they seal it, right?
That's how it operates.
That's how this works.
Like those information, and people respect that because they understand the concerns.
And so I just think that the Trump and President Trump, just like anything else that has dealt with him, and he's survived politically, but I think the reason why with Jeffrey Epstein, he's more concerned is, is because it's from his own base.
And so he's trying to flip this into something where he can convince his base that Jeffrey Epstein's hopes is a Democratic plant.
And that's why he's trying to go that way, because he's concerned of how this would affect him.
Because again, maybe criminally he's not involved.
He's not implicated.
But a more direct association between both causes concerns.
I don't just, this whole reaching into intelligence and da-da-da-da-da-da, it's just like, why not look at the most direct thing that makes the most sense?
And the reason why this wasn't talked about before is because under seal.
I don't know.
Robert?
As a whole, the seal, grand jury seal stuff is a red herring.
And the reason why I say that is because the only thing that's really sealed is grand jury testimony that only occurred there.
And even there, it's more what the grand jurors did and the lawyers in the room did.
The witness who testifies is not bound by that.
The witness can always testify outside the grand jury subpoena.
So if let's say the grand jury subpoena is financial records, that doesn't make those records sealed or secret.
So the only thing that's truly sealed is what the grand jurors themselves, they can't go out and say what they saw or witnessed.
And what the lawyers in the grand jury room that for work for the government, they're the only ones governed and bound by it.
And they're not, and you can't bring it into the grand jury room and thereby magically make it sealed and confidential.
So, I mean, I give the Trump administration credit for running that red herring because it sounds credible.
It sounds believable.
It's just a complete lie.
Now, it is partially reflective of the Justice Department in general.
They lie.
They try to intimidate people all the time this way.
They say, oh, this is going to go to the grand jury.
You better not talk about it anymore.
It's complete hogwash.
It's meant to, for them, the government to control and manipulate the narrative.
So that's the one thing on that part.
The second part, in terms of if, if Trump was trying to hide the files because he's in it in some adverse negative way, honestly, there's an easy way to do that.
You just release a bunch of the files and exclude the stuff that has him in it, right?
I mean, there's ways to do it.
I mean, what I find baffling by this is as if the cover-up is the motivation, it's the most incompetent cover-up in the history of man.
I mean, he's brober strike, the streisand effect is, this is the ultimate example of it.
I mean, every time he talks about it, he makes it bigger.
He makes it worse for himself.
So that what leads back to me is the only reason you would not want to disclose anything is if you don't know where anything leads.
And the only reason why you would not know where anything leads is if you're not concerned about a particular individual or set of individuals, you're concerned about it reflecting on institutions that you don't know.
Oh, if we put this information out, let's say it's just a financial transaction between Epstein and so-and-so.
And it was something that was investigated, just put out there for the world to see.
Well, why be concerned with that unless you don't know whether that leads back to the CIA, that leads back to MI6, that leads back to Mossad, that leads back to the CD.
I'd be all over that.
I'd love it.
Yeah, and I, and so that's always been the most logical explanation to me.
But when people say, Robert, let me just jump in.
So, when they say the Epstein file, though, but I think like that, like, but that's where this would be, I don't think that would necessarily have been in the public record, not the public record, but a lot of that information would not have made it to a DOJ prosecution against Jeffrey Epstein.
Like, those, like, if you're looking for that, that doesn't exist within the DOJ.
So, yeah, you would have to make an argument then we need to declassify because that information I would agree to you, if it has anything connected to intelligence, that would be classic.
The DNJ prosecutors wouldn't have seen that.
The maybe, maybe not, but that's what my point is.
And what Mike Benz has been highlighting: the cover-up letter was such a ridiculous letter for many reasons.
But one is, okay, if you're going to say you reviewed everything and you've come to clear, factual conclusions, tell me what you reviewed.
What was your methodology?
And one part of that would be: did you ask CIA Director Ratcliffe what the CIA had on Jeffrey Epstein?
That I think the voters on Epstein files was not limited to the Epstein prosecution.
It was about tell us what the government has on this guy concerning this guy.
Go to Scott Besant at the Director of Treasury, who has access to his tax records, who has access to his financial records, and tell us: is there anything in there that is pertinent or material that the public should know about?
So they have his financial.
I mean, he was how he was not flagged by FinCEN 2,000 times is beyond anyone's imagination.
I mean, he was doing the most suspicious transactions known to man for about 40 years.
It was, I mean, he was connected to Ponzi schemers where he stole 100 million bucks and pocketed it.
I mean, he was moving money all around the world all the time, beginning in the early 1980s.
He's connected every nefarious actor in the world, every gray space, Elroy-style grifter middleman that you can mention.
And that's where when they they didn't, they didn't even say, did they look at those files?
They didn't even tell us which files they looked at.
That's what, as soon as I saw the letter, I was like, this letter is a joke.
This is a half-ass cover-up.
These are, this is amateur hour cover-up time.
And they're expecting people to be just because I think Trump got in.
I think somebody's misled Trump, is my general view, just because he seems to think there's things in there that don't quite make sense that would be in there.
Two different administrations, though.
Yeah, yes, correct.
Well, at that point, I mean, at that point, you got to come in and be like, dude, like, what are you doing?
Are you president or are you a puppet?
Like, you're really like, I mean, that's the point where it's like, and then it's underlying, but then it's, then it's two completely different administrations.
You can't make the argument that's happening in the first administration and the second administration are anywhere ideologically similar.
Mike Pompeo was the CIA director back in the first Trump administration, and now it's Dan Ratcliffe, like polar offices, right?
Like how they think and how they operate.
So, but let me let me go to Bryce and then I'm going to go to Mike for a question.
But Bryce, like, you know, because there's something Robert mentioned about like, oh, FinCEN and blah, blah, blah.
And it's like kind of this, this, this, this billionaire class and all that.
I get, I guess that, like, if like, again, if it highlights two-tier justice system and it highlights or an intelligence cover-up or whatever it may be, how can anybody literally, because of this, at least in the people who focus on this on the most, I just think from their perspective, Trump was the only way they can regain trust.
And I think that has been shattered.
So is this a point where for that group of people, it's impossible for them to regain trust in the government unless it's come from somebody completely different coming in, maybe outside of the political spectrum of the you guys could call it uniparty Republican Democrat?
Or is there something at least that would show even in the Trump administration, hey, we made a mistake, but here's how we're rectifying and correcting it to regain the trust of the people who feel like their trust was betrayed.
No, I don't think there's any way to put trust back into the Trump administration or in any Democratic Republican administration.
I think that we have seen year after year cover-ups in some sort of form that the American people just do not trust the government.
And that goes back to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Since that time, trust in the government has eroded.
And here's the problem.
You know, Jason and Johnny, I mean, they have their points, right?
There's so many different ways that you can go in the Epstein, in this Epstein problem.
Like you can go to Israel, you can go to Iran.
There's just so many variables in which you can, you know, whichever conspiracy theory you want to go, there's too many doors to go through.
And my thing is, is you're never going to get the story.
You're never going to get the real story.
Nobody's ever going to release what actually happened.
Entities in Control00:02:28
If there is a client list and, you know, Jason says there isn't, there might not be.
But, you know, definitely there's a list of probably high profile people that pediddled some kids out there that they're protecting.
And we've known for a long time that let's be real, the president doesn't have a lot of power.
And how do we know this?
Let's go back to the early 1900s, the collapse of the stock market.
Who was able to save the stock market by influxing $700 million into the stock market?
It wasn't the government.
It wasn't the president.
It wasn't any regulatory system.
It was JP Morgan.
JP Morgan had the power to save the financial collapse of the United States.
We have the president, all of that, like they're puppets on a string to these people.
And people like Morgan, people like Rockefeller, people that are in significant points of power where their hands touch every industry possible.
BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street.
They don't give a shit who's in power.
So long as you play their tune.
And I think what you're going to end up finding, and as you go deeper and deeper into the Epstein list, or excuse me, into this Epstein scandal, what you're going to find is BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street's hands in there.
And I think this is where it all comes to, is that we don't have a country run by we the people anymore.
We have a country run by BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street and whatever the hell they want.
And their hands are literally touching on everything, whether it's Israel, whether it's arms dealing to both sides, whether it's the war machine.
I mean, here's the fucked up thing.
Since World War II, we could have suspended the military industrial complex and said, you know what, we don't need it.
don't need you guys anymore we're good but we kept going and we kept funneling more and more money into these entities Well, now who controls these entities?
If you look on the Yahoo Finance and you go to see who is the number one stockholder in Monsanto, who's the number one stocks on all of the Boeing, all of like the war machine people, you're going to find BlackRock, you're going to find State Street, and you're going to find Vanguard.
This is the problem.
Like this is the problem that we don't discuss.
We don't call out these three individuals.
Trillion Dollar Empire Threat00:02:14
We start going in all kinds of different directions because we're never going to attack the real problem.
And this is the trillion dollar empire that is BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street.
How is it that these two, these three entities have $36 trillion worth of wealth altogether?
That's something that concerns me.
We are negative $37 trillion in debt.
Yet here it is, these three companies have our debt in their coffers.
My question is, when is we going to see some real individuals coming in and saying, here's what's here's the problem.
You've got these group of individuals with money and they're influencing everything.
Rice, as a libertarian, though, what you're arguing in my perspective is something very similar to like a Bernie Sanders argument that would require a more intense government to address that without free fucking market.
Stop this crony capitalist bullshit.
Stop picking which companies that you want to succeed.
Shut up for a second.
Stop picking whatever companies that you want to succeed and allow a free market, allow competition, allow the small guys, stop regulating so that the small guys can't compete with the big guys.
This is what we have.
We have a government, a Congress, a Senate that puts out regulations so that small companies can't compete with big companies.
That's bullshit.
We should allow the free market to thrive.
We should allow small energy companies to compete with big energy companies.
That's not some kind of berny bullshit.
No, open up the free market.
It's populism.
It's populism.
And you're right.
He's right.
I just, I hear that.
And like, I mean, then that was literally the argument of Biden's FTC and why they did a lot of anti-monopoly laws and policies that actually went after them.
But I'm not trying to make this into that per se, but I just find it like there has to be, you see, okay, reduce regulation, but you know, when you're dealing with a multi-trillion dollar company that has the money and reach to influence a lot of policies, even without the government intervention, just the market in and of itself, there's a reason why governments have had to expand regulatory positions to try to prevent such a thing.
And maybe it's failed and needs to be addressed.
Full Disclosure Required00:12:30
But Mike, let me go to you because I think what Bryce's hand is highlighting, I think, is I think the Jeffrey Executive is an encapsulation of a significant problem of lack in trust.
I think maybe Congress might have a vehicle to force the administration's hand.
The question is, are they going to get enough, Mike, from the Senate to make it veto-proof?
And if they don't, and let's say it just passes with a simple majority, or maybe even, you know, not a veto proof, put over 60 where, you know, it can't be filibustered.
If Trump vetoes it, what's the next option?
Because if not, we're just beholden to the Trump administration.
Well, I'm going to say what most Democrats want.
I am an independent that caucuses with the Democrats.
So you can sort of say that I'm a Democrat.
There's nothing the Democrats can do until after midterms, until after this election.
We've been pretty much neutered.
I took a couple of notes on some of the things that you were saying.
Why doesn't Trump handle this thing in a different way?
Why didn't he just come out and say, you know, I knew the guy, we hung out a couple of times, but I cut him off after some of this nefarious stuff.
If you look at the first Trump administration, they stopped holding briefings, I think, for about six or seven months because they wanted to do a better job of controlling the narrative.
Trump himself says he's his best spokesman.
Nobody can speak for Trump like Trump.
So Trump is getting in all of this trouble because Trump wants to keep speaking for Trump.
Trump has a lot of very competent comms people around him that are probably giving him pretty sound advice, but he doesn't do that.
He goes with his gut.
He thinks he's the smartest person in the room, for good or for worse.
How did we get here?
I think one of the other panelists alluded to: we haven't really had trust in the government since the JFK assassination, which I believe was in November of 1963.
This is not going to be something we're going to get ourselves out of anytime soon.
It's not going to be in this legislative session as long as it took for us to dig ourselves into this hole, as we have to dig ourselves out of this hole.
But this election, this last election in 2024, is the gold standard of why we need to start doing our research as a constituency.
Look at who we elected as president.
Now, you may be for the thing.
Everything that you're doing, somebody's probably for it.
A lot of people on this panel love some of the things he's doing.
There's some things he's doing that I have issues with.
But look who we elected.
He's been married three times.
He has a lot of children by a lot of different people.
You know, one person alluded to: how do you get buildings built in New York and New Jersey?
You almost have to be a mob boss.
You know, when you elect that type of person, what type of honesty are you going to get out of that type of person?
And another thing that I think is a lot of people are missing here is Trump is an amazing coalition builder.
You like him, love him, hate him.
He does a great job of building coalitions.
But what Trump did was, and the monster has become too big for him to control, he got the conspiracy people over here, he got the QAnon people together.
Then he went with RFK.
He went and got the Maha people together.
He went and got everyone's different conspiracy theory together.
But at some point, these people are going to want some food on their table.
So he tremendously over-promised and tremendously under-delivered.
On top of that, he chose to handle the comms problem himself, which only further exacerbated the issues that he had.
How do we get out of this problem?
We're going to have to start electing people that really do care about other people.
People like myself, like Jason, like Scott, like Johnny, we're going to have to get in the room and figure out what is our red line.
You know, are we willing to accept A, B, C, D, E, and F just so we can get this one thing over here?
Or do we want a more balanced government?
A lot of people they went with Trump because Trump promised them that they were going to lower the price of eggs and we're going to get out of wars on days one.
We'd be no new wars, all of this stuff.
A lot of that stuff has not come true.
Are we going to keep electing politicians that try to sell us these dreams?
Are we going to elect politicians that say, you know what?
I would love to end that war over there in Ukraine, but there's only so much influence that I have.
I'm going to do the very best I can to try to get us out of that war.
You know what?
Inflation is high right now.
I know a lot of the numbers say inflation is not that high right now, but I hear you.
I listen to you.
I feel your pain.
I know prices are too high right now.
But if you give me a little bit, give me some more feedback, give me a little bit more time, and I promise you that I will work on these problems.
If we start electing candidates like that, then I think we can get trust back in our institutions.
But if we keep on this current status quo, we're just going to keep going to our own individual tribes where no one gets anything accomplished.
And then eventually we're living in the movie idiocracy.
Robert, I'm going to start with you because I have a final question.
I'm going to go through the panel for this final question.
So I'll start with you.
Again, this is another long-term spade.
We're going to have more of this.
We're going to have more.
So please make sure you join us.
But Robert, my final question, and it's going to be the same for everybody.
What do you think is the next step?
Do you think the Trump administration telling Pam Bon D try to get it unsealed?
Do you think that's Trump's last step?
Say, see, I did everything I could, and he hopes he rides it out.
Or do you think there's going to be other steps they take to try to mitigate this, let's say, political drama or crisis?
I think if they're smart, there's going to be, that's going to be the beginning, but not the end.
If that's the end, he hasn't solved his problem.
He's mitigated some of the severity of the downside, but by no means has he resolved it.
If he wants to rebuild and restore confidence with a substantial part of his voter base, then he needs more information revealed in the Epstein case.
He also needs to see corrective action taken in other lawfare high-profile cases, whether it's, you know, I represent the Amish farmer Amos Miller, whether it's the Comey and Brennan and Russia gate stuff, whether it's other aspects that there needs to be, this needs to be part of a comprehensive corrective remedy so that people can have faith and confidence that the government actually cares about them instead of protecting corrupt elites.
If he doesn't do it, he will damage his legacy.
He will impair his political capital.
JD Vance will be at political jeopardy and the Republican Party can kiss the midterms goodbye.
So that's what's at stake.
And it'll be up to Trump to whether to negotiate his way through.
Because to Mike's point, you make certain promises and it turns out those promises were pie in the sky.
Only you can get away with that to a degree.
You can't do what he did so far here.
So hopefully he takes corrective action.
One benefit of Trump is nobody can dance to a different tune faster than him when he needs to get out of Dodge.
So I hope that's what he does for the sake of the American people because we cannot continue a government and continue as a society where large numbers of Americans believe they're don't believe in voting, don't believe in their government, don't believe in their law authority, don't believe in any aspect of it.
That is a recipe for disaster.
Thanks, everybody.
I got to hop off.
Appreciate everybody's contributions.
Thank you very much.
Robert, Johnny, I'll ask you the same question.
What do you think is next?
Well, I think there's a couple of points to make, really interesting points as well, because I mean, the fact is, is that Trump is going to find that more people are against him over the coming year than two years.
And this is not going to be solved.
Even if they promise to release stuff, they're going to redact everything.
It's not going to be good enough for people.
And even the stuff that's out there that they're releasing now, they're redacted.
So there's not going to be any peace on this.
And I think it's going to be a political football that hands over to the next election where they say the other side say, hey, you know, this guy was a friend of Epstein.
These guys were all in with Epstein and they covered it up.
And now you want to vote for us so that we can get into power.
On a bigger note, though, it's all a big globalist technocratic show.
And we're going to go on to be at late stage capitalism.
They're going to try and install stakeholder capitalism.
And then we'll have a much bigger, terrible, more worrying world that's created by companies like Vanguard, State Street, and BlackRock, and people like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, of course.
Oh, the almighty Elon Musk.
Scott, let me go to you.
Yeah, so everybody's been right so far.
He's got to do the full disclosure.
That's what the American people deserve.
Full disclosure, 100%.
But not only do they need to do that, they've also got themselves in a position where they need to explain why they didn't do full disclosure at the beginning.
So it's going to be harder now.
But if they don't do it, then everybody's going to be wondering, what else are they hiding?
This is a pedophile ring that they've been just covering up.
And now all of a sudden there's nothing to see here.
Like what?
So it's so blatantly obvious.
And he's losing his base over it.
So you got to have the base to win the midterms.
You got to have the base to get JD Vance in there in three and a half years, whatever.
So he's got to do full disclosure.
I don't know if he will.
He'll probably just try to do just enough and hope that gets him through.
I don't know that it will.
Mike.
If this birthday card thing turns out to be fake, which it's very difficult to see that being fake, I don't see Robert Murdoch wanting another $800 million lawsuit.
But if that turns out to be fake, this will be over with in two weeks and we'll be having a different conversation.
Trump will be just fine.
But in a broader sense, being honest and keeping it real, Trump is in a world of hurt right now.
He was very right.
And the fact that he pushed that big beautiful bill, as they call it, through so fast, and he kept urging his members and all the Beltway talk was like, this is a once opportunity.
We have to do it now.
And then he gave that artificial deadline by July 4th.
When you look back at it at hindsight now, it almost, you can almost see that maybe he saw that there was some writing on the wall or he saw there were some things in the pipeline that was going to make it much more difficult to get that legislation, which we have John Holly now that approved it last week that's already trying to make amendments to it this week.
So it's already very unpopular.
It's almost, it's got a lot of poison pills in it.
So why was he trying to get that passed so fast?
It really makes your head spin.
This guy really is the Teflon Don.
I've never seen anything like it in my life.
Every time you try to take another analog, you take another situation, history, you can even go back to Europe and you can go back to different eras.
Nothing seems to apply to Don.
But one day I had an epiphany and I tell this to myself every time I start to talk about Donald Trump.
He's not an ideologue.
He is not a Republican.
He's kind of a Democrat.
He's got a little libertarian in there, but he's not a Republican.
He is an actor.
And what he is doing, and he is hurting true Americans.
The MAGA doesn't have a cap on patriotism.
We are all our patriotisms.
We all are patriots and we're all at each other's throat right now.
We have to get into a situation where we trust and we can talk to each other.
And that's my biggest fear right now.
I don't want to keep having these conversations and keep having these spaces when we're always at each other's throat and we're cussing each other out.
I want to start having boring conversations about tax policy and national forest again.
Jason.
Yeah.
I'm ready for you to share your screen.
You know, I was going to, so don't worry about it.
You bet I am.
Before we even get going, if people want to really understand how the world works, I encourage them to watch all of my documentary films for free and share them.
Fabled Enemies, Loose Change Final Cut on 9-11, Invisible Empire, a New World Order to find and shade the motion picture.
The broader deal, you can see them not only on my ex, but over on YouTube.
And just to back up my talk, I mean, again, you built casinos next to New York in New Jersey.
Next Big Space Stories00:05:48
You can go and see some of the relationships he had with former mafia bosses.
You know, I don't, that's Fox News, everybody.
It's not Jason Burmes.
So again, I think that Robert Barnes is right.
If he really wants to try to quote unquote gain the respect of people back, he would have to go multi-level.
Comey ain't going to jail.
Brennan ain't going to jail.
I'm not saying they're not lifelong criminals.
Robert Mueller, lifelong criminal, also best buddies with Bill Barr during the Noriega situation, that same Iran-Contra time period.
I think it is inevitable.
You know, Mike, I'm sorry.
We're not going to be talking tax policy.
This is at least going into the midterms 100%.
And they will probably appoint a special counsel and they will try to push the political aspects dealing with the Clintons because they are there.
And I mean, again, to deny that, not only did you have the White House visits, not only did you have the plane rides, not only did you have the Clintons own estate on Zorro Ranch.
And let's just, again, I think people need to really understand.
It's hard to see it because that's a helipad and a ranch in the middle of the desert that the president of the United States and his wife, who would become secretary of state, used to go to all the time with Epstein.
Nothing to see there, never investigated there.
Okay, they're going to push that angle of the story.
Barnes is right.
They will have maneuvers where they can leverage certain information.
I think the media, though, is going to go into the social aspects and the business dealings of Epstein like never before.
And I think they're going to try to reach out to Ghelane.
The problem is, again, if you think, and again, people can think this, that Epstein killed himself.
I just got to reiterate that Epstein is the only person to successfully kill himself in that prison in almost 20 years now.
Okay, 14 years before, there was another death.
There has not been one since.
And keep in mind, he tried to kill himself before, so he was on the radar.
One guy in 20 years, and it's the most high-profile guy ever, American citizen, ever to be detained.
So, Lick, I tell everybody all the time, Stefano's about left.
Yeah, it's not about left or right.
It's always about right and wrong.
I love you for doing this.
And you want to talk other policy?
I'm ready to go, bro.
Epstein's, you know, just a small part of what I cover.
I mean, I've been doing, I don't know, good.
God bless you all for covering this as much as you are.
I mean, this is something that I just say, I mean, I always think, okay, what's the next one?
What's the next one?
What's the next space going to be on, you know, domestic, whatever, or foreign policy?
And it's Epstein, Epstein, Epstein.
But it shows the interest.
This is the predominant news story.
And then this is maybe where there's an agreement now, family, between every Echelon except the Trump administration, where everybody is in agreement.
No, this is the story.
It's the mainstream media, it's alternative media, it's social media, it's influencers, Republican, Democrat, Independent.
Everywhere you look at, this is the main story now.
This is what's driving the news.
And the only people who probably don't want this to be in the news is the Trump administration.
Full stop.
They're the only ones.
President Trump specifically does not want this to be in the news, but everybody else is.
And at the end of the day, we determine what is going to be in the news cycle.
And this is where it's going.
Either Mario's spaces, Mario's live stream, Jason, Johnny, you know, Mike, Scott, everybody we've had.
This is the conversation.
I literally did a breaking news phase yesterday when we started, I think, at 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, went over till 10.
This one, and this continues.
I think almost every day now we had some way, shape, or form a live stream or something about this topic, and it's not going away.
I'm going to be flat out on this.
And to be just as I started this live stream, I'll end it with this.
I'm hearing there's more stories coming.
That's the rumor that's going on.
More mainstream media organizations, maybe it might be the Wall Street Journal, maybe it's the New York Times, maybe who knows which organization, but something and more are coming.
And I think the only reason why these stories are coming, and my personal opinion is because the Trump administration didn't know how to handle it.
They brought in people who wanted the truth and they feel like they're being silenced.
So they're going to the press.
And they're hoping that with the accumulation of pressure, both from the media and in Congress, who also wants this story out and the files release, that and then really it just becomes politically impossible for the Trump administration to stop this.
I don't know what's going to be the end goal.
I don't know what the end result's going to look like.
Hopefully we'll learn soon what's going on and why the Trump administration is so hesitant to release it and why now they're trying to call this a Jeffrey Epstein hoax.
But it does look like at least some of the pressure is working because at least the directive, even though it might be a red herring or a distraction, at least Pam Bondi is not going to release the grand jury testimony, but that's going to take time.
But with that being said, make sure you follow everybody who's been the speaker.
I want to thank everybody for joining us.
Please make sure you follow Mario's account.
Make sure you follow just to make sure when the next space is going to happen or live stream, because I promise you it's coming and we're all waiting for the next set of breaking news.
And when it does, we'll be here to cover it.
And with that, thank you everybody so much.
And that is going to wrap it up, folks.
You know the drill.
Check out all of the documentary films for free.
Support the broadcast down below.
Thumbs up, subscribe, share, let people know.
And remember, it is not about left or right, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative.