Transcript of GOP Hides Smoking Gun on Trump’s Dark Past at Hearing

I want to very methodically go over with you what just went down in the past 24 hours as Republicans blocked our access, we the people, our access to critical information about Donald Trump's dark past. What the GOP did happened in plain view, and I don't want to resort to hyperbolic language or partisan tropes. I just want to show you the receipts of what went at one of the House Committee hearings yesterday. Now, I'm sure you know by now, the Cash-Patel testimony, which was an utter disaster for Patel. We covered it a ton on the Midas Touch Network. We showed Patel saying that there were no other co-conspirators involved with Epstein. It was just Epstein as a lone wolf. Then Cash Patel said he didn't know how many times Donald Trump's name was on the Epstein files. If it was one or 10,000 or 10,000 times. He has no memory. But there are other instances that I think are even more powerful that are not getting enough attention. This occurred when Democrats tried to force votes to issue subpoenas on certain things, to get documents and records. Who would be opposed to getting documents and records regarding the financial transaction of Epstein regarding why Ghislaine Maxwell was moved from a maximum security facility after she was sentenced for child sex trafficking in Tallahassee to a minimum security facility at Camp Brian, Texas, after Donald Trump's former criminal defense attorney, Todd Blanch, who became the number two in charge at the Department of Justice, interviewed her and gave her immunity.

I want to show you Why is it that Dan Bongino, who knows a lot, why isn't he testifying before Congress after he apparently threatened to quit for the cover up of the Epstein files, also in its relationship to Donald Trump's dark past? Let's just go through it as I would if I were a trial lawyer like I was back in the day, and I was presenting the evidence to a jury. So why don't you be my jury and let me just bring out the receipts one by one of what went yesterday. So at this House Committee meeting, at this House Committee hearing, all of the Republicans, everyone except for Republican Thomas Massey, blocked a motion from Democratic Congress member Raskin to subpoena the banks for information related to Epstein. The banks, they blocked that. Why would you block subpoenas to the banks to get information about Epstein's financial transactions. Here, watch it go down for yourself. Play this clip.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, there are four banks, J. P. Morgan, Bank of New York, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank.

Can someone state his motion?

The motion is to subpoena the CEOs of these four banks to bring in all records relating to their relationship to Jeffrey Epstein and to produce all records reflecting it. These four banks have flagged to the government 1. 5 billion in suspicious transactions relating to- Chairman, I moved the table. Mr. Dimon just released a statement saying you would be happy to comply.

Chairman, we don't need to- The motion to table, the motion offered by the gentleman from Maryland. The motion table is not debatable. The question occurs on the motion is table. Those in favor say Aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. No. Pinn of the chair, the eyes have it. The motion is table.

Now, in this next clip, I'm going to show you, you will see all of the Republicans, again, it's other than Massey, but I'll just say all of the Republicans, blocking an effort by the Democrats to subpoena Dan Bongino to testify on the Epstein files. Bongino had reportedly considered resigning from his position over the refusal to release the full Epstein files, but they want to prevent Dan Bongino from testifying? I thought Dan Bongino is a tough guy. He's a former podcaster. He was out there when he was a podcaster saying that the FBI was covering up the Epstein files and he was going to make it his life mission to release it. Why wouldn't you show up and testify? Are you scared, Bongino? Are you scared? What's the Republican Party scared of? Why Why did they vote down this subpoena? Ask yourself that question. Let's not view it in terms of Democrats, Republicans, red, blue, purple. Why wouldn't you go and testify, Here's what happened, unless you're hiding Seeing something, right? Am I wrong about that? Here, play this clip.

I move that the committee's subpoena Deputy FBI Director Dan Bucino to produce and testify what the director is unwilling to discuss and share with Congress, the files related to Jeffrey Epstein, including witness interview records, including FBI Forms 302, search warrant materials, records relating to the initiation of investigations, records relating to financial transactions and payments, evidence collected from wiretaps. The FBI director said today that they've already released these documents. Bonvino has reportedly considered resigning from his position over the refusal to release the Paul Epstein file.

I'm delighted to see that my colleague can read, and I move to lay his motion on the table. Motion is not debatable. The question occurs on the motion on table. Those in favor will say Aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. No. No. Opinion of the Chair. The Eyes have it, and the motion is table.

I also can call for a vote, Mr. Chairman, a recorded vote.

A recorded vote being requested. The clerk will call the roll.

Mr..

Chairman, there are 21 Eyes and 16 Nos.

Motion table is successful.

But it gets worse. Republicans also block the effort of Democrats to subpoena the head of the Bureau of Prisons to explain why Jeffrey Epstein's co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, was transferred to a minimum security prison in violation of Bureau of Prison policies. Because convicted sex traffickers are not allowed to go to minimum security facilities, especially when, like Camp Ryan, is right on the Texas A&M campus. There's a great degree of cooperation between the women in the minimum security facility in Camp Ryan and Texas A&M doing criminal justice research, rehabilitation. There's like puppy-raising programs and restorative justice programs. Watch Republicans block this subpoena play this clip.

I move that the committee subpoena the head of the Bureau of Prisons, William K. Marshall, to discuss and produce all records relating to the transfer of Jeffrey Epstein, co-conspirator and child sex trafficker, Galay Maxwell, in apparent violation of BOP policies regarding sex offenders to include all BOP communications with DOJ, FBI, and the White House. Bop transferred Maxwell to a minimum security champ following her interview with President Trump's former personal attorney, and now Deputy Attorney General, Ty Blanch. I am done reading now.

This question is not debatable. This question occurs on the motion of table. Those in favor will say Aye. Aye. No is opposed. No. No. Then in the chair, the eyes have it.

I'd ask for a recorded vote.

A recorded vote being requested.

Click on report.

Mr..

Chairman, there are 21 eyes and 6 nos.

The motion to table is agreed to.

Then finally, you will see here, Republicans blocking efforts by Democrats to subpoena Trump's Treasury Secretary, who has in his possession records relating to, get this, $1. 5 billion in suspicious transactions flagged by banks that are related to Epstein's sex trafficking ring. Why Why would the Treasury Department just turn this over? Why are Republicans blocking this subpoena? Just ask yourself, why would they block this subpoena? At the same time, you have Cash Patel now saying, There's been no no one else actually linked to Jeffrey Epstein. He was a lone wolf. Come on, we're not buying that. We know you're covering this up, and we know that Donald Trump's name appears repeatedly on the Epstein files. This is beyond pathetic, and it's so offensive to the survivors. Here, play this clip. I move that the committee subpoena US Treasury Secretary Besson to produce or otherwise make available to the committee all suspicious activity reports in the possession of the Treasury Department, identifying the roughly $1. 5 billion in suspicious transaction.

California is recognized. I move to lay the motion on the table. The motion is not debatable.

I didn't finish.

She hadn't completed the motion. Is it proper to cut it off before it's completed, Mr. Sherman?

Finish your last sentence there. The gentle lady can finish.

Okay, so we're asking them to identify the roughly $1. 5 billion in suspicious transactions related to the sex trafficking crimes of Epstein, Maxwell, and their co-conspirators. As we know, Mr. Mr. Patel said that the treasurer. We have to lay the motion on the table. Yes.

The motion is not debatable. The question occurs on the motion of table. Those in favor say, Aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. No.

I request a recorded vote.

A recorded vote being requested. The clerk will call the roll.

Mr. Chairman, there are 23 eyes and 16 nos.

Motion of table carries.

Ever wake up, sweating, freezing, or just uncomfortable? The temperature in your bedroom can make or break your sleep. That's why I switched to Miracle Made sheets. They're inspired by NASA technology and They use silver-infused temperature-regulating fabric to help you sleep perfectly all night long. Miracle Made sheets are crafted with NASA-inspired silver-infused fabric that helps regulate your body temperature. Hot sleeper, cold sleeper, it doesn't matter. These sheets help keep you in the comfort zone all night long. Thanks to their antibacterial silver technology, Miracle Made sheets stay cleaner and fresher up to three times longer than regular sheets. That means fewer odors, fewer wash cycles, and way less laundry. Category. They feel just as good, if not better, than sheets you'd find at a five-star hotel, but without the steep price tag. Smooth, breathable, and ridiculously comfortable. Upgrade your sleep or give the gift a better rest. Go to trymiracle. Com/mitis to try Miracle Made sheets today. You'll save over 40%, and when you use promo code MITIS, you'll get an extra 20% off plus a free three-piece towel set. They make an amazing gift. With a 30-day money-back guarantee, there's no risk. That's trymiracle. Com/mitis, code MITIS at checkout.

Thanks to Miracle Made for sponsoring this episode.

Okay, so I just showed you four instances, right? I mean, I'm just bringing out the receipts. Democrats saying, Let's get the records, business records, bank records, Treasury Department records, Bureau of Prison records. We should want the info. We should want the data. By the way, it was the Republicans promising that they were going to make this stuff available. That was there. They ran on the issue. Now the Democrats are subpoening and Republicans are blocking it. I want to show you this, though, as well. Because during the testimony by Cash Patel, one of his latest lies was that the federal courts are blocking Trump and the DOJ from turning over the Epstein files. We'd like to, but a court is blocking us from doing it. Okay. Well, then what I want to show you, because again, we're receipt-based, we're fact-based, we're evidence-based. I'm a former litigator. This is what I did. This is what I do. Then I want to show you what the federal judge actually said. Federal Judge Richard Bermann from the Southern district of New York, the judge in charge of all of this. I'm going to read you portions of his order where the federal judge says, I believe, the judge says, I believe that this is in the possession of the federal government and the Trump administration should turn it over.

I'm literally going to read you the judge saying the exact opposite of what Cash Patel said. Why am I going to read this to you? Because facts matter. Orders matter. I'm going to show you here that it would appear, it would appear that Cash Patel just committed perjury, that he just committed perjury, that he just committed perjury. Here, play this clip of Congress member Dan Goldman, who was a former federal prosecutor, questioning Patel. Then let's get right into the court order. Here, play this clip.

Let's talk about the witness interviews. 302 In terms of witness interviews, 302s of witness interviews. Those are not subject to the court order. Those are not subject to any fictional sealed order for a search warrant. Why aren't you releasing those with the redacted names of the victims?

We are releasing as much as legally allowed. That's why we went back to the court.

How is that not legally allowed?

Sir, do you know how court orders work? Do you know how protective orders work?

Actually, Mr..

Patel, I was a real prosecutor for 10 years.

I know exactly how court orders- So I was a fake one?

I want to understand What the court order prevents you from releasing witness statements that the FBI took.

You should know that as a real prosecutor, when the court hand down a protective order and a motion to seal, the material is sealed unless that judge fazed it.

So your testimony here is that All of those witness statements are under a court order, a protective order.

We are providing everything we can legally provide.

Now, that's not my question. My question is, why are those witness statements that are not grand jury testimony, that if they were under a protective order, are no longer under a protective order, why are they not being released?

How are they not under a protective order?

Why are you not going to the court like you did for the grand jury testimony to unseal on those records?

The DOJ did go to the court.

No, not on those records. Why aren't you going? You just went on grand jury.

I'm with the gentleman that's expired.

You are hiding the Epstein files, Mr. Patel.

I'm with the gentleman that's expired.

Okay, well, you heard that for yourself. Well, let's look at what the court ruled. August 20th 2025, this order is in connection with the DOJ, requesting that the court release grand jury transcripts, which the court would not otherwise be allowed to produce because there is a rule under the federal rules of criminal procedure, which basically say grand jury testimony is not allowed to be produced. It's not even helpful, the grand jury testimony here, because it's just one former FBI officer who was just testifying very broadly about the investigation just of Ghislaine and Jeffrey Epstein. No one else. And it was done in a few hours. This is not the files, and this is not the stuff that the DOJ has. The DOJ has three to four terabytes of information, meaning enough info that could basically fill three or four skyscrapers from the basement to the titty top of the skyscraper. So the federal judge is like, Why would I turn over grand jury transcripts? That's against the law. But you have the files, DOJ. Turn over the files is what the judge said. Not it's subject to a protective order. It can't be turned over.

The judge, what is it? A A month ago at this point? Exactly a month ago? I said, No, you turn it over. Here's what the judge says. Having reviewed, among other things, the government's motion, the grand jury transcripts, et cetera, the court says, The court denies the government's motion to unseal the Epstein grand jury transcripts and exhibits. But let's go to page 6 and 7. It says, The government is seeking this disclosure of the grand jury testimony. Then the court says, A significant and compelling reason to reject the government's position in this litigation, the Trump administration, in this litigation, is that the government has already undertaken a comprehensive investigation into the Epstein case, and not surprisingly, has assembled a trove of Epstein documents, interviews, and exhibits, and the government committed that it would share its Epstein investigation materials with the public. See press release of Pam Bondi, phase one declassification. The government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70 odd pages of Epstein grand jury material. The government's Epstein files are something that should be produced. They are investigatory and not subject to federal rule of criminal procedure 6e. The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein files.

By comparison, the instant grand jury motion appears to be a diversion from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct. In February 2025, the government, as noted, was prepared to release their Epstein files to the public. But then on July 6, the government announced it would not make the files available to the public. Then the court goes on to say on the last page of the order, The information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts pails in comparison to the Epstein investigation information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice. For the reason stated above, that's why the grand jury testimony was rejected, but basically produce the records is what is being said there. But Cash Patel continued on with his lies. When Cash Patel was asked by Congress member Swalwell whether or not the FBI told or whether he told Bondi that Trump's name is in the Epstein files. Take a watch at what Patel responds. Play this clip.

Remembering your oath to tell the truth, did you ever tell Donald Trump his name is in the files?

I have never spoken to President Trump about the Epstein files.

Did you ever tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?

The attorney general and I have had numerous discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team.

Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Files.

We have released where President Trump's name is in the attorney's file. It's a simple question.

Did you tell the attorney general that the President's name is in the Epstein files?

During many conversations that the attorney general and I have had on the matter of Epstein, we have reviewed- The question is simple.

Who can- Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?

Yes or no?

Why don't you try spelling it out? Yes or no, director. Use the alphabet. Yes or no? No. A, B, C, D, F.

Director, it sounds like you don't want to tell us. Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name was in the Epstein files?

Why don't you try serving your constituency by focusing on reducing violent crime in this country and the number of pedophiles that are legally harbored in your sanctuary cities in California? I'll work with you on that.

I'm the lawful gentleman from California.

Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?

The question has been asked and answered.

You've not answered it, and we will take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt.

Even Republican Senator John Kennedy is starting to feel uneasy about all of this. Here he is on CNN when he's asked, Why do you think it is that the FBI won't release these files? Play this clip.

I thought you were questioning Cash Patel, and I They just keep coming back to this question. Why do you think it is that they won't put these files out? I don't know, but they're going to have to put them out sooner or later. Are they covering for people? I don't know. I have no idea. But I have been saying since the beginning of this, it's not complicated. Here's what the American people were thinking. They've been listening to all this for several years, and they followed it pretty closely. Here's what they're thinking. Okay, Epstein was a pig. Epstein trafficked young women, some of whom were minors. He trafficked them in part, or maybe in hope to himself. But he had a lot of friends and a lot of important people. Who else did he traffic these young girls to? Now, that's a very appropriate question. The Justice Department, to which the President has kicked this issue, is going to have to answer It's just that simple. It's not going away.

Here's Kennedy again when asked about Trump.

Do you think that the President is potentially one of those people? I have no idea. Are they trying to cover up for the President? I asked Cash yesterday, point blank. I said, Who else, if anyone, besides Epstein, were these young women trafficked to? And he said, Nobody. It's not in our files. And that's fine. I'm not saying he's lying. I don't know one way or the other. I'm just saying that after all the rhetoric, they're going to have to release the files and let people decide for themselves.

And finally, here's what Kennedy says about Trump. Here, play this clip.

But the problem with that is that many people in the administration talked frequently before they became part of the administration, and some afterwards, about how there's some really important people there involved, and the American people need to know, and now they've got to come clean. I'm ready to get past it. If it were up to me, I just release the documents and let the chips fall where they may. Could the President be mentioned in them? Maybe. Wouldn't be surprised if he was because he and Epstein, many years ago, were friends. But we'll never get past this on the other important things until they release the documents.

Lastly, I want to leave you with what Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett had to say. Here, play this clip.

There has been so much today, and I I truly don't know where to start. I'm just going to make sure that we start off with a few facts. A couple of facts that we need to make clear for everyone is that, number one, director Christopher Ray, when he was appointed to be the head of the FBI was appointed by Donald Trump. Now, I will agree that I definitely take issue with a number of decisions that Donald Trump makes, especially when it comes to the people that he decides to appoint to very important positions, including this one, because I did have to make sure that I wasn't going crazy. But when I say that you are the least qualified FBI director in the history of the FBI, that is real, because you are the only one that never even served with the FBI prior to joining. Yet we are supposed to believe that you are the greatest thing since Slidesprade. I didn't ask you a question. Now, what I want to go through is to talk about why you are a failure and why, honestly, we just need to tell you bye-bye.

Well, there you have it, folks. Let me know what you think. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 6 Million Subscribers.

Thanks for listening. Want to stay plugged in? Become a subscriber for our sub stack at midisplus. Com. You'll get daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski, ad-free episodes of our podcast, and more exclusive content, only available at mitisplus. Com.