70.9K subscribers
Explore the podcast
193 episodes
Fast Politics w/ Molly Jong-Fast on YouTube
Fast Politics w/ Molly Jong-Fast
Follow along using the transcript.
Transcript
Speaker 1: Welcome, welcome, Congressman Garcia.
Speaker 2: Hey, Molly. Good to hear you.
Speaker 1: So we're deep in this Epstein file stuff.
Speaker 1: What do we have so far and what are we waiting for?
Speaker 1: Like News Channel 4, the UK channel, said that there's only 4% of the files that have been released.
Speaker 1: But I don't think that's right.
Speaker 1: Tell us what you think from what you've read and what you've seen that's out there.
Speaker
2: Yeah, I mean, look, it's hard to know an exact number, but we, our
oversight team, our best estimate right now is that over half of the
files, and remember, files are also artifacts, photos, videos, it's
data, right?
Speaker
2: But we think that a little over half of all of the Epsyn files are
still in the possession of the DOJ and have not been released in the
Congress or the public.
Speaker 2: So you're talking the majority of what is in the hands of the DOJ is not public.
Speaker 2: And when you think about just the magnitude of that, it just goes to show you that this is really a cover up.
Speaker 2: This is a Trump, Pam Bondi directed cover up.
Speaker 2: They don't want the truth out.
Speaker 2: They're protecting, obviously, powerful men who they're protecting pedophiles or protecting criminals.
Speaker 2: And we're not going to stop till we get that truth.
Speaker
1: So Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was in the House until a few months
ago, not even months, weeks, was told by Trump the reason he didn't want
to release the files was because it could hurt some of his friends.
Speaker 1: You think that's accurate?
Speaker 2: I think it's very accurate.
Speaker
2: I mean, if you think just about some of the consequences of the last
few weeks, you're starting to see some accountability happen.
Speaker 2: Certainly around the world, right?
Speaker 2: I mean, look what's happening now with Mendelssohn and the former prince.
Speaker
2: And here in the U.S., you're beginning to see some folks step down
from their positions and be removed from their boards.
Speaker 2: And that's appropriate.
Speaker 2: And I'm glad that that is beginning to happen.
Speaker
2: But we know that those that were deeply connected with Epstein and
those that actually did the abuse themselves, those men continue to be
protected.
Speaker 2: Those we know to be some of the most powerful individuals, wealthy individuals.
Speaker 2: And those people, there have to be justice for the survivors.
Speaker 2: Now, look, we've begun to unravel some of that.
Speaker 2: We have some really strong leads in the investigation.
Speaker 2: But the truth is that we're not going to be able to get any sort of closure until we get the rest of the files.
Speaker 2: And the DOJ is required to give out those files.
Speaker 2: They may want to use the Epstein Transparency Act as an excuse for not releasing them.
Speaker 2: They can't do the same for the subpoena, which is why we did both.
Speaker 2: The subpoena doesn't include the interagency communication exemptions.
Speaker 2: It doesn't include the ongoing investigation exemptions.
Speaker 2: You have to continue to defy both the subpoena and the Transparency Act.
Speaker 1: Talk to me about the redactions.
Speaker 1: Explain to me, because I know there was writing in the files about redactions, and weren't
Speaker 1: they supposed to talk you through the redactions?
Speaker 1: And hasn't that not really happened because there were two sets of redactions?
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 2: Look, this is essentially what we have.
Speaker 2: Now, the DOJ has not confirmed this to us, but we pretty much pieced together what's really happened.
Speaker
2: If we remember, months ago, there was reports at the FBI and they
were doing all sorts of redactions, millions of pages of redactions to
the files.
Speaker 2: And it was kind of came out of nowhere, that reporting.
Speaker 2: Well, what happens is it looks like now is the DOJ basically what they are showing to Congress,
Speaker 2: their response to the law has been to essentially give us redacted pages.
Speaker 2: Then they've gone through a second set of redactions, redacted more.
Speaker 2: And so what we're getting Congress, which is different than the public,
Speaker 2: is that second set of redactions that the FBI made to give to us.
Speaker 2: But what they received, what the DOJ actually received, were already redacted files by a
Speaker 2: different set of FBI agents that happened months ago.
Speaker 2: So if you could imagine, months ago, you had the full files.
Speaker 2: Some group or team at the FBI redacts those files.
Speaker 2: Then the law passes.
Speaker 2: Then those redacted files get sent to the DOJ, to another department.
Speaker 2: And then they get redacted even more.
Speaker
2: And so when we asked the DOJ, well, why is this redaction still in
place after viewing the quote unquote unredacted files?
Speaker 2: That's because that's the way they received them from the initial team.
Speaker 2: And so it's basically a layered approach the DOJ has taken.
Speaker
2: And that's, I think, part of the huge problem is we don't, and even
the DOJ contacts that are working with Congress, they're unable to
explain why what they received prior to giving us files were already
pre-redacted.
Speaker 1: So you won't be able to figure out what the names, those names.
Speaker
1: So, for example, like there's this unindicted co-conspirators list
that was redacted and then there's some still redactions in it.
Speaker 1: You don't get to see the unredacted version of that list.
Speaker 2: We don't because it came to the DOJ already redacted by some other team.
Speaker 2: And so they can't explain why they're redacted either.
Speaker 2: And so, no, I mean, they're not following the law.
Speaker 2: And I think what Pam Bondi will say is that, well, they're protecting victims and survivors.
Speaker
2: Well, we know that's total BS because they have literally posted the
names of survivors and victims all throughout the release file.
Speaker 1: And addresses.
Speaker 2: And addresses.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, I've told people this is the single largest cover-up in American history.
Speaker 2: I can't call another one.
Speaker 2: I mean, Watergate is just nothing compared to this.
Speaker 2: I mean, and the amount of harm and terror that this has caused so many women and girls, I think, is so it's awful.
Speaker 2: It's sad. It's infuriating. It's all those things.
Speaker
1: So let's talk about one of the things you guys have done is even
though you're not in the majority, you've been able to have interviews.
Speaker 1: I think it's been really great.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's no other word for it.
Speaker 1: So we had Pam Bondi.
Speaker 1: She was mad about the Dow, refused to answer any questions.
Speaker 1: Was that how you thought it would go?
Speaker 1: Were you disappointed?
Speaker 1: Is there anywhere else you can go with that?
Speaker
2: Look, I mean, first of all, I think all of us are pretty just upset
and just furious at the way she responded to members of Congress asking
real questions.
Speaker 2: I mean, she couldn't even turn and look at the survivors who were there in the room.
Speaker 2: It's pretty sick, you know, and I think that the level of disrespect was clear on display.
Speaker
2: But look, she's the key figure that has been delaying, trying to
deflect attention, certainly leading this cover up for the president.
Speaker 2: And so it shouldn't come as no surprise that she's not going to give us any answers.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is the same attorney general that early on tried to say, oh, the files are released.
Speaker 2: And then she puts them out to a bunch of right wing influencers and then they were on her desk and then they weren't.
Speaker 2: And then the investigation was over. And now, look, the investigation just started.
Speaker 2: And we're just collecting all the critical information that we need now.
Speaker 2: And so Pam Bondi should be held in contempt.
Speaker 2: She should resign.
Speaker 2: She should be fired.
Speaker 2: She's been a horrible AG.
Speaker
2: And she's done nothing but try to deflect us away from the White
House when all signs and arrows point directly back to the Trump White
House.
Speaker 1: Les Wexner, you did a deposition there.
Speaker 1: Just talk us through what happened there.
Speaker
2: It was really enlightening, I think, to see just the level of
deception that was happening. I mean, first, this is a man, to be clear,
that provided more wealth and financial support to Jeffrey Epstein than
any single other person.
Speaker 2: So the reason why there is the Epstein home in New York and the island and the plain is because of Wexner.
Speaker 2: He gave him hundreds of millions of dollars.
Speaker 2: He controlled even more in assets and stocks for Wexner.
Speaker 2: He had this power of attorney over Wexner's estate.
Speaker 2: He's someone that was the co-president with Wexner of a development community he built out in Ohio.
Speaker 2: He was intimately involved and spent considerable time with Epstein.
Speaker 2: And yet Wexner wouldn't even admit that Epstein was even a friend of his.
Speaker
2: And so we won't even admit a friendship when you're signing birthday
books, signed your friend Leslie, and you're sending tons of emails and
communicating constantly and going to the island.
Speaker 2: Then you're just not going to be an honest witness at that point.
Speaker 2: Right. You're just not going to be truthful.
Speaker
2: And so it's hard to take anything he says seriously. He basically
claimed that he was duped and that Epstein was a con man. He never saw
abuse. He doesn't know anything. Not credible, not believable. What was,
though, really interesting, one is he said everything under oath.
Speaker
2: And so we have now our testimony and we have a lot of information
that's coming in and financial information and other information that
allows us to put together a case and and especially build evidence as
our investigation moves forward.
Speaker
2: And the second thing that was important is he also made it clear
that even though he was the key central wealth manager, supporter of
Epstein's, he provided this funding, that the FBI and DOJ never even
contacted him.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And interviewed him.
Speaker
2: So if they're not going to interview Les Wexner, then essentially
they made the choice to absolve everyone and turn their backs on the
investigation.
Speaker
2: So now nothing to me was more revealing from that interview than the
clear understanding that our government chose to not investigate
Epstein's crimes and turn their back.
Speaker 2: And so that to me was a critical moment.
Speaker 2: I asked Wexner that direct question about the FBI and the DOJ, and it was pretty hard to hear his response.
Speaker 1: I did want to ask you about that because I thought that was sort of shocking.
Speaker 1: Doesn't it seem like there's some criminal culpability here for the FBI?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 2: And in fact, that's one of the things that we're investigating.
Speaker 2: We don't understand why, you know, there's so...
Speaker 2: Look, if you look back, take, for example, Annie Maria Farmer and the case with the sisters.
Speaker 2: You look at the initial report that was made.
Speaker 2: In the 90s.
Speaker 2: In the 90s.
Speaker 2: And what happens there?
Speaker 2: The FBI and DOJ turn their back and choose not to investigate.
Speaker 2: If you look at what happened with Acosta and happened in Florida, what happens there?
Speaker 2: A case is put forward by the line prosecutor, yet the U.S. attorney chooses to turn their
Speaker 2: back and not move forward with real charges against Epstein and Maxwell.
Speaker 2: If you look at now these other complaints that are happening, there are complaints about
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, we know in the Epstein files.
Speaker 2: What are we beginning to see?
Speaker 2: That there's very little investigation and action.
Speaker
2: Les Wexner, he comes in and is financing essentially the crimes and
the trafficking ring that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell together.
Speaker 2: What happens?
Speaker 2: He's not even interviewed by the DOJ and the FBI.
Speaker 2: So, you know, there's a pattern here.
Speaker 2: And I think it's important for us to note this pattern has existed not just under the Trump administration,
Speaker 2: but this is a pattern that has existed through multiple presidents, both Republican and Democrat.
Speaker 2: And so this is a complete failure of our government at the highest level by all presidents and all DOJs.
Speaker 2: And so I think it's fair to ask the question, why was the FBI protecting people?
Speaker 2: Were they being told not to investigate?
Speaker 2: Are these people so powerful that we're just looking the other way?
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I think that's what's really sad to me.
Speaker
2: And yet really opens up so many more questions, which is why I think
you why I think the government at the highest level is trying to
deflect and stop this investigation.
Speaker
1: And, you know, if there is accountability to for the FBI who covered
this up for whoever it was in the government who did that, then you
will have more prosecution of domestic violence and sex trafficking and
all of that stuff going forward because agents and, you know,
prosecutors and judges and whoever else is involved in this will be
afraid of being held responsible.
Speaker 1: Like it can be the kind of meaningful prosecution that can create a sea change.
Speaker 2: 100%.
Speaker 2: I think two things have really crystallized for me in the last few weeks.
Speaker 2: One is that this investigation is so large in scope.
Speaker
2: This is something that impacts the way this country views sexual
abuse and the way this country views and is able to uplift the stories
and the horrors that women and children, when they experience sexual
abuse and rape and trafficking, what is our response as a nation going
to look like?
Speaker 2: And how do we actually support those survivors?
Speaker 2: And so this is not just about Epstein.
Speaker 2: This is about our entire system of God and how we respond.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The second thing that has been really clear to me is that people early on, we would get,
Speaker 2: you and I have talked about this, we would get this response.
Speaker 2: Well, this isn't about our affordability crisis.
Speaker 2: You should move on to something else.
Speaker 2: Get on message.
Speaker 2: And I would be told this by other folks.
Speaker 2: We stuck on it because it's important.
Speaker 2: But at the same time, I've realized now that there is a link, right?
Speaker 2: The real link is that there is this class of people that are very wealthy.
Speaker
2: The same people with the power to transfer wealth from working class
people to their own companies are the same people that are covering up
for themselves because they're so powerful and they're abusing and
raping women and children.
Speaker
2: And it's this class of people, this Epstein class that people have
been talking about, that it is we've got to bring these people down.
Speaker 2: They feel invincible.
Speaker 2: They feel that they will continue to take from the government.
Speaker 2: They're going to take from working people.
Speaker 2: They're going to traffic women and girls because they have the power to do so.
Speaker 2: And it's all connected.
Speaker
2: And so I think it's our job at this moment to be very clear about
that and to stop the manipulation of our government and our institutions
by the wealthiest and most powerful people in this country.
Speaker
1: I also think Wexner is a major GOP donor in Ohio. And when I
interviewed Maria Farmer, she talked about how the reason that when she
wanted to report some of this, they said, no, the sheriff is involved.
The lower law enforcement people are involved. You can't, you know, it
will get nowhere.
Speaker 1: And she describes calling 911 and 911 being like, we don't go to that house.
Speaker 1: I mean, that is certainly possible, right, in this scenario.
Speaker 2: Not only is it possible.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Wexner created that community.
Speaker 2: He basically founded this New Albany community.
Speaker 2: It was farmland.
Speaker 2: Who was the co-president on the deed of the creation of New Albany and the association
Speaker 2: that created that community?
Speaker 2: With Wexner, Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 2: Wexner made Epstein the co-president of the creation of this whole community.
Speaker 2: Yet they weren't even friends, Molly, according to Wexner.
Speaker 2: They had no real relationship, according to Wexner.
Speaker 2: And so he creates this community for the ultra-wealthy in part so he's able to commit, continue his crimes.
Speaker 2: And it was everything from whether it was law enforcement through the highest levels of government.
Speaker 2: Wexner is the richest man in Ohio.
Speaker 2: He's one of the single largest donors to Republicans in Ohio and across the country.
Speaker
2: And so, look, we have to be clear and honest about what's happening
and be committed to staying on this investigation until there's justice.
Speaker 1: Unbelievable.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not surprised, but it's unbelievable.
Speaker
1: Talk to me about the New Mexico ranch, because from what I
understand, we interviewed Raul Torres and he said, yes, that there had
not been a search of that property and that he wasn't there at the time,
but that they we were told that they were told that the FBI came to
local and said, we're handling it and don't get involved.
Speaker 1: And then no one ever handled it.
Speaker 1: So can you talk about that?
Speaker 2: It's outrageous.
Speaker 2: I mean, I think the more that we're learning about the New Mexico property, the more questions we have.
Speaker 2: And we're starting to actually hear from survivors that were at the New Mexico property.
Speaker 2: And so that has been producing a lot of information.
Speaker 2: I'm really proud of the New Mexico legislature for moving forward.
Speaker 2: And this is going to be, I think, very interesting to see what happens.
Speaker 2: And quite frankly, I would welcome.
Speaker 2: I think we're going to be getting some conversations with the COVID governor's office in New York.
Speaker 2: and certainly even in the mayor,
Speaker 2: and I think, you know, Mayor Mondami and others,
Speaker 2: like I would love to see a similar effort in New York
Speaker 2: because at the end of the day,
Speaker 2: New York, New Mexico, Florida,
Speaker 2: these are the key locations where this all happened.
Speaker 2: And the government, the federal government,
Speaker 2: is only going to get us so far.
Speaker 2: But with folks in New York that I know are as interested
Speaker 2: as we are in getting the truth,
Speaker 2: I think there could be a lot of support there at the state level.
Speaker 1: One last question.
Speaker 1: Howard Lutnick.
Speaker 2: I mean, unbelievable.
Speaker 2: The man should resign right now.
Speaker
2: I mean, we just also, there's reports now that this business venture
that Lutnick, of course, denied actually went on for years.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And Molly, I want to make sure folks listening understand this, because I think people are not getting this, clearly.
Speaker 2: Lutnick says multiple times in interviews that he stopped talking to Jeffrey Epstein after 2005.
Speaker 2: That was just a flat out lie.
Speaker 2: Not only did he continue talking to him,
Speaker 2: but he goes and visits the island aft.
Speaker 2: His wife communicates with him.
Speaker 2: He goes to business with him.
Speaker 2: He communicates with him multiple times.
Speaker 2: So this is an ongoing relationship
Speaker 2: that Lutnick, for whatever reason,
Speaker 2: thought we wouldn't find out about.
Speaker 2: And this man's our commerce secretary?
Speaker 2: Step down immediately.
Speaker 1: Congressman Garcia, thank you, thank you,
Speaker 1: thank you for joining us.
Speaker 2: Anytime. Thank you.
Fast Politics w/ Molly Jong-Fast
70.9K subscribers
