Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Congress Moves to Give the Epstein Files Law Real Enforcement Power

Transcript

Congress Moves to Give the Epstein Files Law Real Enforcement Power · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. I don't think it's any surprise to anybody
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: who's been following along when I say that I believe
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: that the DOJ is engaging in a cover-up. And I
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: also think that the Epstein Files Transparency Act wasn't robust enough.
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: It had no teeth and no enforcement mechanism. And it
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: should have had that. Because without it, well, you see
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: the result. Does anyone really think that someone like Todd
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: Blanche is going to follow the rules, is going to
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: do what's right because it's the right thing to do?
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: People like that have to be compelled. And that's why
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: I think that the Transparency Act, while a good thing, obviously,
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: didn't go far enough. Well, now we have some lawmakers
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: pushing for a stronger, more stringent version of the Transparency Act.
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: But the question is, would Donald Trump play ball? Today
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: we have an article from The Guardian and the headline,
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: Lawmakers Push for More Robust Epstein Files Transparency Act, But
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: Would Trump Sign It? This article was authored by Victoria B. Kempis.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: As Jeffrey Epstein survivors and their supporters continue searching for
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: justice and transparency in the U.S., a bipartisan group of
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: politicians is trying to rework legislation that heralded the release
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: of long-hidden investigative files on the scandal. While the Epstein
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Files Transparency Act signed into law by Donald Trump on
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: November 19th mandated that the Justice Department release all investigative
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: files within 30 days with limited exceptions, survivors and their
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: supporters have repeatedly grappled with missed deadlines and what they
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: say are incomplete disclosures. Well, that's because it's true. Everything's
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: been arbitrary to them. They just do whatever they want.
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: And there's no mechanism to hold them accountable. Now, obviously,
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: oversight is Congress's job. But when has Congress ever done
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: their job? Certainly not recently. And certainly not when it
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: comes to Epstein. So if we're waiting for Congress to
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: do something about this, we're going to be waiting a
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: long time. And that's why I think a more robust,
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: a beefed up bill is a good idea. They have
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: also accused the Justice Department of disclosing survivors' personal information
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: while withholding names of men involved in Epstein's sexual abuse
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: of teen girls and young women. So now politicians from
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: both the Senate and House and both main political parties
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: announced on July 15th the introduction of the Epstein Files
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: Transparency Act II, the FTA II. The plan law, addresses
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: what legal observers and public records advocates have described as
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: shortfalls in the original EFTA, namely a lack of a
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: hardy enforcement mechanism. And if you go back to the beginning,
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: that's what I was yelling and screaming about. Look, it's
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: great to have a law on the books, but how
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: do you enforce that law? What's the mechanism behind it?
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: And what are the penalties? All of it has to
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: be written in black and white. or else these guys
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: are going to find loopholes and technicalities and a way
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: to avoid the law. Because remember, the law is for
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: me and you, not for Jeffrey Epstein's buddies, and certainly
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: not for the DOJ. If the proposed legislation becomes law,
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: survivors would also have the right to full, unredacted records
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: concerning themselves or the harm that they suffered, including transcripts
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: of FBI interviews. The Justice Department would also have to
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: provide state and local prosecutors with unredacted records needed for investigations, prosecutions,
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: and judicial proceedings, including secure access to classified material. Why
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: would anyone be against this? Unless, of course, you have
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: some shit to hide. But besides that, I don't see
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: how anyone could be against this. The EFTA too would
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: also enforce compliance with the existing law, by subjecting Justice
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: Department and FBI officials to existing federal criminal penalties for
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: knowingly concealing, destroying, falsifying, withholding, or misrepresenting files, supporters said,
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: and there has to be teeth. And the people that
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: are making the decisions that lead to this systemic breakdown, well,
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: they need to be held accountable. Isn't that what this
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: is all about? Accountability? And finding out what went wrong
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: and who was in control? That's what we should be doing.
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: But how can we do that if we never have
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: any names? How can we do that if we don't
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: know what officials at the DOJ were involved? And I
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: thought that's what the Epstein Files Transparency Act was looking
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: to fix. But of course, we can't even get basic
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: information from the Department of Justice. And remember, that's all
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: by design. They want you to be confused, and they
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: hope that there's enough slop in there that people actually
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: ignore the the criminal activity that was occurring. And that
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: was always the goal. Flood the zone, baby. Flood the zone.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: Legal veterans say the proposed law does have the potential
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: to foster transparency, but noted that practical issues remain. Not
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: only does this bill face political hurdles to actually pass
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: into law, but if it does, record seekers would also
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: have to deal with the same Justice Department necessitating it
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: in the first place. And round and round we go, right?
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: Let's have the Justice Department investigate themselves, and let's have
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: them hold themselves accountable, because that works out great for
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: everybody involved. Once again, I'm calling for a special counsel.
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: You want to get to the bottom of this? That's
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: how we get there. Sure, the EFTA too would be great,
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: but a special counsel with full power? That's how we
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: get to the bottom of this. Oleg Nekretin An attorney
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: with the law offices of Robert J. DeGroote said that
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: the EFTA was a pretty robust bill, enabling state attorneys
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: generals to get the records they demand. Under the first
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: Epstein Files Transparency Act, people were permitted to search for
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: various records, but people criticized those specific records because a
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: lot of them were redacted. They were difficult to read,
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: and critics said they didn't even disclose individuals who may
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: have been involved in various criminal acts. Nacretin said, This bill,
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: Nacretin explained, grants state attorneys general access to unredacted records.
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: If they aren't provided access by the U.S. Attorney's Office,
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: they're permitted to file actions. Nacretin noted that many state
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: attorneys general think that the Trump administration has acted unlawfully
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: in a variety of areas. With Epstein, they may believe
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: that the United States government isn't taking sufficient steps to
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: investigate or prosecute obscene crimes, and they're not. And we
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: all know why. There's way too much to lose for
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: the people that pay the bills and for the institutions themselves.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: So they're going to do everything they possibly can all
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: the way down to the final hour to not give
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: us the transparency that we demand. But I think this
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: time they bit off more than they can chew because
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: this is going to outlast this administration. It's going to
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: keep going unless we get to some resolution. People aren't
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: just going to wake up one day and be like, oh, well,
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: it's over and done with now. Let's all just move on.
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: That toothpaste is already out of the tube. And not
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: just out of the tube, somebody stomped on it. So
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: it's never going back in. And the best course of action,
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: and the best thing for the DOJ, is to just
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: take their lumps and be honest with us. So if
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: state attorney generals can get all the records, they may
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: do their own investigation, follow leads, etc., He also noted
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: that survivors will have access to the records that involve them,
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: and they should. Imagine you had this whole file built
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: on you and on the allegations you made against Epstein,
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: and then you can't even access that information. How is
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: that confidential? I'm the one who made the report. How
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: come I can't see it? How come I can't access it?
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: That never made sense to me. And I know if
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: it was me, I'd want those records. So what? You
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: don't think these girls, these women, want these records? They
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: most certainly do. If passed, it'll be a game changer
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: for individuals who want to investigate further or learn more
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: about Epstein or individuals associated with him. Carl Tobias, Williams' chair-in-law,
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: said his first thought is, can it pass? Can they
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: move it in the House or maybe even more difficult,
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: in the Senate? Tobias said that if House members... can
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: convince their colleagues to greenlight the bill, there would still
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: need to be 60 Senate votes. Then the question remains,
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: would Trump sign it? Well, if it comes in unanimous,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: he has no choice. But would it come in unanimous?
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: I doubt it. There are way too many Trump loyalists
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: at this point who are willing to go down with
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: the ship for whatever reason. And it really escapes me.
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: These people are willing to go down with this ship.
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: I would think that their legacy would be important. I
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: would think that, you know, the rule of law would
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: be important. But appeasing Trump seems to be the most
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: important thing to a lot of these people. And I'll
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: never understand it. Tobias noted many of the lawmakers publicly
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: behind the bill have long been committed to transparency and
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: describe its intent as a good idea. They include Kentucky
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: Republican Thomas Massey, California Democrat Ro Khanna, New Mexico Democrat
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: Teresa Leger Fernandez, Oregon Democrat Jeff Merkley, and New Mexico
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: Democrat Ben Ray Lujan. They're very dissatisfied with what's happened
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: at the Justice Department, and so I think they want
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: to provide avenues for victims and for state attorneys general
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: to bring the Justice Department into court and try to
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: bring more transparency. Well, the first EFTA was a monumental battle.
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: And I was very surprised when it ended up passing.
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: So will this one have the same success? I don't know.
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: We'll have to wait and see for it to advance
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: a little bit and see who comes out in support.
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: But it's going to need some Republican support, right? So
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: are there any Republicans willing to step up and support
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: this kind of bill? I don't know. With Marjorie Taylor
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: Greene gone and Massey about to leave... The pickings are slim,
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: so we'll keep an eye on it. And when we
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: have some more information one way or the other, we'll
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: get it added to the catalog. All the information that
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: goes with this episode can be found in the description box.