Latest / DEEP INSIGHT / BREAKING - Trump DOJ releases new Epstein files tied to unsubstantiated Trump allegations

Transcript

BREAKING - Trump DOJ releases new Epstein files tied to unsubstantiated Trump allegations · DEEP INSIGHT

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Let's get to some breaking news that is still unfolding.
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: The Trump Justice Department has just uploaded new FBI documents
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: missing from the initial releases of the Epstein files. Right now,
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: ms NOW is pouring through these new files. We are
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: taking our time to make sure we get it right,
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: and we want to be careful on what we report
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: on air.
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: Here is what we can tell you right now.
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: Three of these documents are FBI three or two memos
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: notes that FBI agents used to summarize witness interviews. These
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: notes contain unsubstantiated sexual assault allegations against Donald Trump.
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: Specifically, they detail.
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: An unsubstantiated account of a woman who accused Donald Trump
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: and Jeffrey Epstein sexually assaulting her decades earlier, when she
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: was just a teenager. One of the new documents reads,
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: in part quote redacted was asked whether she felt comfortable
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: detailing her contacts with Trump. Redacted again asked what the
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: point would be of providing information at this point in
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: her life when there was a strong possibility nothing could
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: be done about it. There are many redactions on these forms.
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: Trump has long denied any wrongdoing connected to Jeffrey Epstein.
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: To discuss, let's bring an ms now senior legal reporter,
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: you sar roof Lisa.
• 1:08
  Speaker 3: Again, I want to just reiterate what Alicia just said
• 1:12
  Speaker 3: for our viewers is we are we are definitely calling
• 1:15
  Speaker 3: through all of these because these are the three oh two's,
• 1:17
  Speaker 3: These forms, these FBI interview intake forms, were the thing that,
• 1:22
  Speaker 3: as we have interviewed survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and Gaila
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: Maxwell's abuse over the course of the last couple of months,
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: the things that they themselves most wanted to see in
• 1:32
  Speaker 3: the files. And so the fact that today we've gotten
• 1:35
  Speaker 3: at least two of these by and by my account,
• 1:37
  Speaker 3: you may have more, I think it's important and it
• 1:39
  Speaker 3: is important that we get this right. Talk to us.
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: There's a lot in here.
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: Anybody that has had a chance to take a look
• 1:45
  Speaker 3: at these, they talk a little bit about blackmail, they
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: talk about an intimidation campaign obviously those allegations against then
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: citizen Donald Trump. Walk us through how we should be
• 1:56
  Speaker 3: looking through all this.
• 1:58
  Speaker 4: So, simone, we have already seen a initial interview with
• 2:03
  Speaker 4: this same alleged victim and accuser of both Donald Trump
• 2:07
  Speaker 4: and Jeffrey Epstein. In the files, we knew that there
• 2:10
  Speaker 4: were three others. In fact, MS now joined NPR and
• 2:13
  Speaker 4: an independent journalist, Roger Sollenberger and reporting on how we
• 2:16
  Speaker 4: figured out that those documents were in fact missing from
• 2:19
  Speaker 4: prior production. So the first thing I want to say
• 2:22
  Speaker 4: is that we now know that these in fact existed,
• 2:24
  Speaker 4: that they were in the Department of Justice's possession, and
• 2:27
  Speaker 4: that their claims that these documents were duplicates is just
• 2:31
  Speaker 4: not credible because in reading them, they don't sound like
• 2:34
  Speaker 4: any document that any lawyer considers a duplicate.
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: A duplicate is usually an email.
• 2:38
  Speaker 4: Exchange or a text exchange where you produce one portion
• 2:41
  Speaker 4: of it and then maybe you later see a longer
• 2:44
  Speaker 4: portion of it. That is not what this is. What
• 2:47
  Speaker 4: these are. Our three additional Form three H two is
• 2:50
  Speaker 4: reflecting three additional interviews of this same woman, culminating in
• 2:54
  Speaker 4: an October twenty nineteen interview, where as Alicia just said,
• 2:58
  Speaker 4: she tells the FBI that she is aware that because
• 3:02
  Speaker 4: of when she alleges her abuse occurred, and specifically because
• 3:05
  Speaker 4: it was in the nineteen eighties and we're now talking
• 3:07
  Speaker 4: to her in twenty nineteen, she tells the agents that
• 3:10
  Speaker 4: she's aware the statutes of limitation of any viable federal
• 3:15
  Speaker 4: violation may have run. She asks the agents, what's the point?
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: And I think the.
• 3:19
  Speaker 4: Agent's response here is just as interesting as some of
• 3:22
  Speaker 4: her allegations, as salacious as they are, and as unverifiable
• 3:27
  Speaker 4: and unverified as they are, because the agent says, all
• 3:30
  Speaker 4: victims of crime should have the opportunity to tell their story,
• 3:34
  Speaker 4: and they wanted to give her that opportunity. Is she
• 3:37
  Speaker 4: wanted to and she just didn't take it.
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: To me.
• 3:41
  Speaker 4: This is significant because we knew that this woman had
• 3:43
  Speaker 4: allegations about Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump, who she says
• 3:47
  Speaker 4: she met when she was a teenager, and that both
• 3:49
  Speaker 4: of them sexually abused her. What we didn't know is
• 3:51
  Speaker 4: how it ended, And now we're seeing that the way
• 3:54
  Speaker 4: that it likely ended is that the woman refused to
• 3:57
  Speaker 4: cooperate with federal law enforcement authorities. She said that she
• 4:01
  Speaker 4: understood that Trump was the president, she had contact with
• 4:05
  Speaker 4: him when she was a minor, and when she was
• 4:07
  Speaker 4: asked if she was comfortable detailing it, she just again reiterated,
• 4:10
  Speaker 4: what would be the point of providing this information at
• 4:13
  Speaker 4: this point in my life when there was a strong
• 4:15
  Speaker 4: possibility nothing could be done about it? That's at that
• 4:18
  Speaker 4: point in the interview the agents and I'm reading from
• 4:21
  Speaker 4: this three to zero two, or rather I'm trying to
• 4:23
  Speaker 4: characterize it, basically said go home, take an opportunity to
• 4:26
  Speaker 4: think about it. We're here if you want us to be.
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: And it doesn't appear that the woman ever availed herself
• 4:32
  Speaker 4: of that opportunity. Instead, two weeks later, as we know
• 4:34
  Speaker 4: from documents that are already in the files, one of
• 4:37
  Speaker 4: her lawyers contacted the FBI and said, basically, from now forward,
• 4:40
  Speaker 4: your communications with this alleged victim, they go through us.
• 4:46
  Speaker 5: You know, Lisa, just listening to you describe and share
• 4:52
  Speaker 5: that aspect of it, you can feel the frustration of
• 4:58
  Speaker 5: the victim there. You can feel the anxiety, and it
• 5:02
  Speaker 5: really you know, for me, y'all have heard me press
• 5:07
  Speaker 5: this around this table, and certainly our audience has about
• 5:11
  Speaker 5: the redactions and the importance of exposing who these men are.
• 5:18
  Speaker 5: You already referenced Lysia did as well in the intro
• 5:21
  Speaker 5: about how heavily redacted these documents are not just the
• 5:27
  Speaker 5: documents that we've already seen, but these three h twos
• 5:29
  Speaker 5: in particular, talk a little bit more about the redaction.
• 5:32
  Speaker 5: Is there anything that can be done about the redaction,
• 5:35
  Speaker 5: because I firmly believe the moment you can pull back
• 5:38
  Speaker 5: the cover on a name and expose it fully, you
• 5:42
  Speaker 5: have vindicated these women, and that frustration that you just
• 5:46
  Speaker 5: that I felt when you were reading what she said
• 5:50
  Speaker 5: to that agent can be addressed.
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: Michael.
• 5:55
  Speaker 4: It's a really really tricky thing, right because I agree
• 5:59
  Speaker 4: with you. I talked to a lot of these survivors,
• 6:00
  Speaker 4: including survivors for whom three zero twos are already in
• 6:04
  Speaker 4: the files, and when I speak to them, I often
• 6:07
  Speaker 4: learn things that you can't see in these produced three
• 6:10
  Speaker 4: twos because of how heavy the redactions are. I'm thinking
• 6:13
  Speaker 4: about someone I even spoke to earlier today. At the
• 6:17
  Speaker 4: same time, there are members of Congress who, obviously we know,
• 6:20
  Speaker 4: have access to see these files. They can see what
• 6:23
  Speaker 4: we cannot. And yet we know from the experiences of
• 6:27
  Speaker 4: certain members that when they try to put those names
• 6:29
  Speaker 4: in the public domain, oftentimes they're not the people that
• 6:32
  Speaker 4: they think they are. They make assertions about who they
• 6:35
  Speaker 4: believe these people to be, and then find out, lo
• 6:38
  Speaker 4: and behold, they are not those folks at all. It's
• 6:41
  Speaker 4: somewhat of a dangerous game that we are all playing here,
• 6:45
  Speaker 4: and the only people that are able to see these
• 6:47
  Speaker 4: documents in their fully unredacted form either work at the
• 6:51
  Speaker 4: Department or Justice, or they are elected as members of
• 6:53
  Speaker 4: the House of Representatives in the United States Senate. And
• 6:56
  Speaker 4: that is the unfortunate reality in which all of us,
• 6:58
  Speaker 4: including and most importantly the survivors, are living right now.
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: This comes as just yesterday the House Oversight Committee voters
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: to subpoena Pambondi in this probe.
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: What do you make of the timing of this release.
• 7:10
  Speaker 4: I think that this release has a lot to do
• 7:13
  Speaker 4: with that response. There was some reporting last week in
• 7:16
  Speaker 4: both The Guardian and in Breitbart discrediting this particular accuser,
• 7:22
  Speaker 4: quoting from the same three to twos that had been produced,
• 7:24
  Speaker 4: and of course people like me were wondering how did
• 7:27
  Speaker 4: they possibly see those So the fact that they are
• 7:30
  Speaker 4: in the public domain right now, I think is an
• 7:32
  Speaker 4: effort to quell some of the loud shouting that folks
• 7:36
  Speaker 4: have done about our reporting and others identifying these as
• 7:40
  Speaker 4: documents that are missing from the production. And all I'll
• 7:42
  Speaker 4: say about that is these may be the most salacious
• 7:45
  Speaker 4: missing documents from the production, but they are hardly the
• 7:48
  Speaker 4: only one. The Department of Justice has left behind indices
• 7:52
  Speaker 4: of prior witness statements for more than five hundred people,
• 7:56
  Speaker 4: almost six hundred people. And if you look at those
• 7:58
  Speaker 4: indices carefully and you sort of reverse engineer it, you
• 8:01
  Speaker 4: can see all sorts of instances where people whose names
• 8:04
  Speaker 4: are known and people whose names are not known have
• 8:07
  Speaker 4: prior statements in the form of three to two s
• 8:09
  Speaker 4: or handwritten notes that are missing from the files. Some
• 8:12
  Speaker 4: of those people have also made allegations Alicia against other
• 8:15
  Speaker 4: prominent people in American life. They may not have ever
• 8:17
  Speaker 4: been elected president, but they are people that the committee
• 8:20
  Speaker 4: might be interested in. There's certainly people for whom the
• 8:23
  Speaker 4: survivor community is interested in seeing some accountability. I would
• 8:28
  Speaker 4: like the Department of Justice to take seriously the possibility
• 8:31
  Speaker 4: that their production was under inclusive and non compliant with
• 8:34
  Speaker 4: the law. Yeah.
• 8:35
  Speaker 3: Yeah, to say the least, to say the leaf they've
• 8:38
  Speaker 3: broke the law, I would argue. Also, I mean, Howard
• 8:42
  Speaker 3: Lutnik is now going to testify one the Edsein files.
• 8:46
  Speaker 3: Just from this from Axios, this is what Lutnik told Axios.
• 8:50
  Speaker 3: I look forward to appearing before the committee. I've done
• 8:52
  Speaker 3: nothing wrong and I want to set the record straight.
• 8:55
  Speaker 3: It's worth mentioning that the reason Howard Lutnik has to
• 8:58
  Speaker 3: be subpoenaed and before the committee is is, in fact,
• 9:03
  Speaker 3: because he went on a podcast and told what we
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: now found out to be a lie about his association
• 9:10
  Speaker 3: or the lack there of.
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: But Jeffrey Epstein, come on now,