Transcript of Trump’s Ghislaine Maxwell Problem Comes Roaring Back

We are not going to be distracted, Donald. We know this is all about your cover-up of a child sex trafficking ring with the Epstein Files. We know this is all about your cover-up of references to you in the Epstein Files. So of course, we're going to call you out when you attack Canada. We're going to call you out when you engage in deranged behavior.

But we are also always going to remind our audience and community here at the Midas Touch Network what they already know. That this is all about your coverup of the Epstein files. That's one of the main reasons you dragged the United States and the world into this catastrophic war in Iran. And Midas Touch hosts like Katie Fang are leading the way. Katie Fang's lawsuit against Todd Blanche and the Department of Justice and the Trump regime continues to make sure that transparency for the survivors is always at the forefront of what we do at the Midas Touch Network and what Katie Phang's reporting and what her independent journalism is all about.

Now, Donald Trump's distraction machine was on steroids this week, even for him. Why was that? I want you to think about some of the developments that happened this week in Katie Phang's lawsuit against Donald Trump, in the Ghislaine Maxwell request to have her conviction overturned in federal court, and Amanda Ungaro. One of Melania's former closest friends who surfaced yet again, gave an interview with a well-known reporter in Portuguese where she called out Paolo Zampolli, the individual who introduced Melania to Donald Trump at the Kit Kat Club in the late '90s. Zampolli would bring in young Eastern European girls and women to become models in the United States.

He would then help them get visas. He would help them come over with passports. And he would help them become models where they would then meet these rich, wealthy Manhattan men. And the rest is history. And then they would get these Einstein visas.

We'll talk about that in a moment. And we'll talk about what Amanda Ungaro said, because she had some bombshell allegations that she was making as well. So what happened this week? Well, Ghislaine Maxwell lost her effort to overturn her conviction in federal court in New York before Judge Engelmeyer, who called her appeal frivolous. And in fact, the federal judge said that her appeal and her paperwork was so frivolous that she should not even be permitted to file an appeal to the Second Circuit.

The court said that the court certifies that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. And so she should be prohibited from challenging her conviction, for which she was convicted of sex trafficking and other heinous acts against children and against others. She was sentenced to over 20 years. The Trump regime then moved her from the facility that she was at in Tallahassee to a club fed at Camp Bryan in Texas after she said positive things about Donald Trump to Trump's criminal defense lawyer turned attorney general. Uh, but this federal judge, uh, said she should not even be permitted to take any further appeals.

It's so frivolous. Here's what her family said though. And this is what has Donald Trump a little bit shaken right now. Our sister is not going to let the matter rest. Ghislaine Maxwell's family said the district court's ruling contains multiple concrete errors that she intends to challenge fully.

The family said that they have encouraged Maxwell to seek the, quote, necessary relief. Necessary relief. Our sister's not going to let the matter rest. Sounds like that's a message for Donald, eh? Also, the Maxwell family said that they despised that the federal judge used a very sarcastic tone.

They called the judge's decision shocking, and they blasted the federal judge for showing disdain to Ghislaine Maxwell. She was convicted of sex trafficking and sentenced to 20 years, the most, one of the most heinous crimes there are. And What she was trying to argue was that the Epstein files vindicated her. She said that the Epstein files showed that she was innocent or that it provided exculpatory information that she wasn't permitted to show during her criminal trial 6 years ago or so, to which the federal judge was like, Ghislaine, I read those files. They're very bad for you.

They make it worse for you, not better. If anything, the release of these documents means you could have been charged with more. I don't read these files and go, you know what? That's an innocent person. You know, and what's fascinating as well is, you know, all of the references to Donald Trump in those files.

And of course the references that Donald Trump is trying to cover up. But indeed you have Ghislaine Maxwell's family saying she will not let this matter rest. We know that she knows, and Trump knows that she knows all about Donald Trump's disgusting and dark past. And she's not going to let it go until she gets a pardon or commutation. So I want you all to pay attention there, but that's not the only development this week.

The other major development in Katie Fang's lawsuit against Todd Blanche, Donald Trump's former criminal defense lawyer, now the Attorney General of the United States, which is pretty sickening. Um, In her lawsuit against Blanche and the DOJ, the federal judge ordered that a number of categories of documents be produced, that certain documents that have redactions, which appear to be redactions of co-conspirators and the bad guys, be submitted in camera to the judge so the judge can see it and make the determination to remove the redactions. The other part of the judge's order involves a process for the production of the redaction log or the privilege log to show the millions of documents that the Trump regime continues to withhold. And the other part of the order by federal, by the federal judge involves the FBI notes that were prepared, um, that relate to a 13-year-old who made very serious allegations against Trump. Trump denies the allegations.

We have the FBI 302 reports themselves, but the Trump regime has refused to produce the notes, the handwritten notes that go along with the reports. There's no exception not to produce the notes, but the Trump regime's like, yeah, the handwritten notes are duplicative. So we're not going to produce the notes at all. We'll just give you the reports. Like, dude, just produce the notes and the reports that they're, they're different documents, produce them.

But they're covering up notes. Involving an underage girl that makes allegations against Trump. Trump denies the allegations, but those are notes that are being withheld. And so what did Donald Trump's DOJ do? Did they just say, okay, federal judge, you ordered us to turn over the notes, you ordered us to do the redactions and remove the redactions, you ordered us to produce the privilege log, the redaction log of all of the documents being withheld.

Federal judge, we hear you. There's Epstein Transparency Act. You've made your ruling, judge. We agree. Nope.

The DOJ signaled this week it will appeal the ruling requiring removal of redactions to the Epstein files and some other aspects of the judge's order. Look at what was filed right here, document 36. And by the way, the Trump regime has thrown this guy Andrew Block under the bus. He's their fall guy, in my opinion, for everything. Blanche, like, isn't signing these documents.

They pick someone who doesn't really know about the Epstein files. He shows up in court. Apparently he looks incredibly nervous and lost, and his whole role is like, I don't know. I don't know what I'm doing. I don't know what I'm doing.

And just to get yelled at by the federal judge. So here's the defendant's notice of appeal. Defendant respectfully files its notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit of this court's June 25th, 2026 order. In view of the United States, whether the district court's June 25th, '26 order is appealable is inconclusive. Accordingly, the United States submits this protective notice of appeal.

To the extent that any aspect of this order grants plaintiff injunctive relief, it is immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. Section 1292. And they did that right at the 60-day deadline from when the federal judges initial order was. So what the federal judge also asked the Trump regime do is to respond to Katie Phang's request that these documents be turned over. The judge ordered that these documents, the categories I told you about, the FBI handwritten notes, removing redactions of who appear to be co-conspirators and bad guys, and produce the privilege or redaction log.

The judge ordered that the parties submit a proposed order for the judge to sign that just restates what the judge ordered. So that happened. Katie Fang submitted a proposed order, and then the Trump regime this past week filed this document, Defendant's Response to Minute Order. Defendant— this is the DOJ— respectfully submits this response pursuant to the court's minute order. The plaintiff, Katie Fang's proposed order, if entered by the court, would require the Department of Justice to submit to the court handwritten notes underlying the EFTA numbers.

And it lists the Bates numbers. It identifies those handwritten notes that likely reference Trump. This is the DOJ writing this. EFTA is Epstein Files Transparency Act. So it's like, these are the documents are labeled that.

It would also require a declaration from defendant Todd Blanche, or a representative of the Department of Justice with personal knowledge regarding the Federal Register notice. Then it goes on and says, with respect to the handwritten notes, within 72 days of President Trump signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law, the Department of Justice published millions of pages of records in compliance with the act. The task involved more than 500 attorneys and reviewers, from the department who reviewed millions of pages of documents on a compressed timeline, working days, nights, weekends, and holidays, including Christmas Day, New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day. As the department's January 30th letter explains, considering various factors including the volume of documents reviewed, the presence of duplicative and partially duplicative documents, and the number of attorneys and reviewers involved, Inconsistencies will likely exist in how reviewers applied redactions. So the fact that the plaintiff, Katie Fang, has identified some handwritten notes underlying the FBI 302 interview reports in the library does not undermine the government's stated rationale for withholding such notes, that they are duplicative, the quality control checks are less effective on handwritten material, And that the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim information is substantially higher, nor does it amount to a waiver or concession as to other documents.

What in the hell word salad was that? The Epstein Transparency Act DOJ says that you need to turn over these documents. You can create your own exception that handwritten notes don't apply. Just read the handwritten notes and turn 'em over. In your own reading, you feel they're duplicative.

They're not. There's a 302 report, which is a typed report. Then there are notes. The report purports to be based on notes. So just produce both.

Look, I was a litigator and I was involved in cases involving massive document productions of terabytes of documents. I never said, can't turn over those handwritten notes, duplicative of the report. That would never fly. They're different documents. Just turn them over.

What are you even talking about here? Then the DOJ says, it bears noting that with respect to victims' names, plaintiff confidently averred defendants' redactions and rationales were not for the victim. Rather, she claimed the redactions were a pattern of dissembling and dishonesty in this matter. This is false. Okay, if it's false, then just show it to the judge and shut up and stop whining and stop hiding it.

That said, the department respectfully maintains its objections To producing any such documents. Why are you— why would you reserve your objections if you have nothing to hide? Just show them. Like, you obviously look like you're hiding something because you are. The court should hesitate before ordering in-camera review of any document or redaction a litigant claims is a violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

That wasn't a misspeak by me. What did Trump argue? What the Trump DOJ argues, the federal judge, you should hesitate, please, judge, hesitate before ordering in-camera review of the documents. In-camera review just means the judge views it confidentially. It doesn't get produced until the judge first sees it.

Why should the judge not look at it? You're trying to hide it from the judge also. Hmm. Sounds like you're hiding something. Then the judge can see it, and if indeed there's an issue about victims or some other issue, the judge can make the call.

Okay, I'm not going to produce it because of this, that, or the other. But you want to hide it from the judge and you're objecting to that? That's why I want to read you these documents, because I don't want to have like a debate about what it says. I just want to read you— this is what the DOJ is writing. The DOJ says, such a precedent will open the door to a process that would likely ultimately result in the line-by-line review of redactions to millions of pages of documents.

Pause. Even if that was the case, which it isn't, you should have produced the documents to begin with. So there are millions of documents being withheld and millions of redactions that need to be looked at. Thanks for that admission right there, Andrew Block. And also, if the federal judge is saying he's going to review it, let the federal judge review the document.

If this court determines this process is necessary, however, the department respectfully asks the court to stay its order to allow the government to appeal the jurisdictional issues before the court alters the status quo. Without a stay, an order requiring production aside from limited in-camera review would have the effect of irreversibly altering the status quo. Yeah. The status quo is you're covering up child sex trafficking. I want to reverse the status quo so that the people can see what's in the files.

I mean, is this the craziest document you've ever read? I mean, the Trump regime files a lot of crazy things, but this is pretty freaking crazy. Eh, for these reasons, the defendant asked the court not to require a declaration regarding the notice. No declaration from Todd Bland should be done, and do not order the production of the interview notes, and do not order a review of the documents that are redacted. Signed, Andrew Block.

Like, that's a real crazy document. Now, finally, if you want to know Donald Trump's distraction machine on steroids this week, what was behind it as well, bring in Amanda Ungaro. She was trafficked into the United States by Epstein's trafficker, Jean-Luc Brunel. When she was 17 years old, she met Paolo Zampolli, the guy who was bringing in young Eastern European girls and women. Zampolli brought in Melania as well, introduced Melania to Donald Trump, and Ungaro never married Zampolli.

They had a kid together. She describes this relation with him as just one of the most horrible things ever. They had a custody dispute. She alleges, and the New York Times did an exposé on this, that he used his connections within the Trump regime. He's currently an ambassador.

He's got an ambassador position. During Trump's first term, Ungaro was like the ambassador to Grenada. Like she had an ambassador position as well, because they were very close with Donald and Melania. Because that was the crew, right? Zampolli introduced Melania to Donald.

They all stayed close. Zampolli was an ambassador, uh, to Dominica in Trump's first term. Dominica's also where Truth Social did one of its shady deals where it appeared that there was foreign money that was involved that bailed out Truth Social back in like 2021. I did reports on that. That was like the island of Dominica, but I digress.

And then, uh, Zampolli's got this ambassadorship position right now. He does all of these foreign events for Donald Trump. Um, and Ungaro has previously come out with a statement about Melania. I will tear down your corrupt system. This was a message to Bondi.

I will tear down your corrupt system, even if it's the last thing I do in my life. I will go all the way. I'm not afraid. Maybe you should be afraid of what I know of who you are and who your husband is. This is what Melania— she said in a post that was dated April 8th and tagged the first lady's X account.

She threatened legal action against the first lady and your pedophile husband is what she said. Then Melania called the impromptu press conference at the White House to deny that she had any relationship with Epstein. But Ungaro said the following: ex-Brazilian model with ties to Melania links Trump envoy to corruption scheme. Uh, in an interview she gave to Brazilian journalists livestreamed over the past few days, Angaro did not implicate Zampolli in the death of the former UN General Assembly president who died under mysterious circumstances, John Ashe, but she said that he was murdered by Chinese nationals who were involved in a passport scheme. She explained that Zampolli helped her obtain a diplomatic passport, which gave her tax exemptions.

She claimed he made purchases on her accounts so that he would not have to pay taxes on those items. At the same time, she said he was running another scam selling passports. They ran a diplomatic passport scheme selling them. Countries paying one another for votes on the Security Council. It's all corrupt there.

It's like a game, Ungaro said. Zampolli started selling diplomatic passports for $250,000 with this group. John Ashe, who was president of the General Assembly of the United Nations, was killed, she said, explaining he died because of the scheme. A former UN ambassador from Antigua and Barbuda, Ashe served as president of the UN General Assembly from 2013 to 2014. At the time of his death, he was under indictment for taking bribes from Chinese businessmen.

7 others were charged in the scheme. Ungaro said she was told that Ash was killed by the Chinese, but she provided no other specifics. I came forward publicly after I was arrested because this guy wouldn't let me live my life, referring to Zampolli. So you have all of these incidents coming out right now. And so no wonder Donald Trump turned on his WMD, his weapon of mass distraction, right there for all to see.

So I wanted to give you those updates. Ghislaine, I wanted to give you the updates of Ungaro, and then what the Trump DOJ was doing in response to the lawsuit filed by Katie Fang under the Epstein Transparency Act. Thanks so much for watching, everybody. We appreciate you. Subscribe.

Let's get to 7 million. Before you go, our book WTF America is available for preorder now. It's the story of how we got here and how we fight our way back. To preorder, scan the QR code or click the link in the description. Let's do this.