New Documents, Old Questions: The Unfinished Epstein Investigation

Epstein files and questions about Trump. Newly released Justice Department records are raising renewed scrutiny over previously withheld documents in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. FBI interview summaries from 2019 describe a woman who alleged that Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump in the 1980s when she says she was between 13 15 years old and that Trump sexually assaulted her. You may want to send children out of the room. I will brief you on the exact nature of those charges in just a moment. But first, Trump has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. This is all fake news, and investigators did not substantiate the allegations or bring criminal charges. That's what Trump is saying. It's true. They did not bring criminal charges. What's drawing attention now is is the investigative record. The FBI interviewed the woman not once, not twice, not three times, but four times during the Epstein investigation. Now, that's something investigators rarely do with claims that they immediately dismiss as completely non-credible. At the same time, journalists report that dozens of pages tied to those interviews remain missing or were previously removed from public databases before later being restored, prompting new scrutiny from lawmakers. So this is what's bizarre here. Now you can say, well, well, TJ, uh, that doesn't sound credible. You know, anyone can say anything about anyone. That's true, you're absolutely correct. But— and this is a big but— if someone just says, oh, I don't know, your father assassinated Fidel Castro and they call the FBI and— or assassinated John F. Kennedy, shall we say, and the FBI does a quick analysis and turns out the person you're talking about wasn't even alive when John F. Kennedy was assassinated. They don't then schedule another interview with you and then another interview with you and then another interview. They might respectfully listen to you if somehow they were to meet with you in person They might look at you, take a few notes, but the notes would say, this person is clearly delusional. Let's not waste any more time here. And the case would be closed. There would be an investigative record of those notes that states exactly why they think you're cuckoo. Here's the problem. The records of those meetings have suddenly disappeared. Again, maybe they all say the same thing. It's possible that there was some bureaucratic snafu, and each time members of the FBI met with this woman, who was an adult woman at the time, they came to the conclusion she was crazier than a bedbug because she's stating things that can't factually be true. She's saying, "Well, Epstein took me and Trump on a spaceship to Mars, and I was assaulted there." If she said something that outrageous and crazy, It would be in the notes, and any fair-minded person, myself included, would come to the conclusion, well, clearly Donald Trump is innocent here. These are false allegations, but records are missing. Why is that? Now, it's certainly possible that the woman made allegations that seemed extraordinarily credible. It could be she said things that matched up with other things we knew. It could be that she came across as sane. As sensible as someone who was in fact abused and troubled by it and trying to do her best to not relive the worst moments of her life but give honest and accurate, fair information to FBI investigators, not once, not twice, not three times, but on four separate occasions. Now, she has since said, I don't want to have anything more to do with this. She allegedly too concerned about security. I can certainly understand that. But here's what's bothering me tremendously. I think this means Trump has won. The fact that so few media organizations are even talking about this means Trump has won. And Trump essentially won by getting us to, don't look here. Hey, I'm going to start a war over here that could cause World War III, according to the former president of Russia. Hey, that's more exciting than these Epstein files, right? Well, yeah, the prospects of World War III is exciting. There's no doubt about that. But should it be this easy to just push legitimate stories off the front page? I mean, I'm old enough to remember where people were just horrified that Bill Clinton would have a dalliance of a sexual nature with an adult woman. Yeah, I would love to see all these Republicans who talked about how awful it was for Clinton to be involved with a 23-year-old because she was a mere child. And now we have FBI records purporting the idea that Clinton— excuse me, not Clinton— Trump had sexual activity with a 13-year-old. Now, you can certainly criticize Bill Clinton, as many have, for having any kind of sexual contact with a staff member. And you could certainly say, well, at age 23, maybe she was a little bit too deferential to the president of the United States. You could make that case. But you can't really make a case that Donald Trump, and I'll go ahead and tell you what the allegations are. The woman has stated, and this is in the FBI records, this is not me passing along just willy-nilly rumors floating on the internet, this is in FBI records as released by the Epstein report, by the Epstein files. She is alleging that Epstein led her to Trump and that Trump demanded to receive oral sex from her and that she bit him in a certain place, and he then hit her upside the head and said, get out of here. Those are the allegations. Again, I don't know if they're credible. I would love to know. And the reason we don't know is these files that are coded in the Epstein files as existing, the individual files, have suddenly disappeared. What's the possible reason for it disappearing? You could say, well, maybe there's someone who really dislikes Trump and these reports all say why the woman was crazy, or she was a girl at the time, why the woman at the point of testimony was crazy and why it wasn't followed up and investigated. I'm being fair now, folks. It may be that there's some dastardly anti-Trump partisan in the Department of Justice who removed those files. Because they all suddenly made Trump look innocent. That's one theory. Doesn't sound very plausible to me given who's running the Department of Justice these days. But if you're theorizing in a fair way and not just in a conspiracy-minded way to make someone look bad you don't like, that's a possibility. However, there's another possibility. The possibility is the actual reports from these 4 separate interviews with this woman making these hideous criminal allegations against the current president of the United States. Another scenario is that she seemed very credible, she seemed honest, she didn't seem like she was making up anything. Everything she said factually comported with the world as we know it. Maybe some of it she couldn't prove, maybe most of it she couldn't prove, But it was not like, for example, Donald Trump just saying Barack Obama was born in Kenya. It wasn't just saying outlandish things. It wasn't like President Trump just purporting that Ted Cruz's father killed JFK, things that were obviously the rantings of a lunatic that could be fact-checked and proven as false. So to me, that is far and away the more reasonable assessment as to what happened. Is someone who is pro-Trump, i.e., Kash Patel, Pam Bondi, everyone with any authority in the Department of Justice these days, saw these reports and said, hmm, this makes the president look really— we want to help the guy, otherwise we're going to get run out of office too. We could all go to jail, or certainly we'll lose our job, and we'll have to do honest work for a living, and that's going to be hard because we're unqualified. Let's hide the reports. I don't know what other possible explanation makes sense. So these FBI interviews took place in August and October of 2019. Hmm, who was president in August and October of 2019 who might want something like this hidden? Hmm, might want it buried, might want it deleted. Hmm, who could that have been? Oh yeah, Donald Trump. The interviews documented in official FBI Form 302 reports. So the woman, again, she's alleging that the abuse happened when she was between the ages of 13 and 15. Now you could say, well, she doesn't remember the difference between age of 13 and 15. If you want to discount her for that reason, okay, be my guest. She's alleging that Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump, that the incident occurred in the 1980s. I was trying to be fair here to Trump. So I used every kind of Google, every kind of ChatGPT to, to say, is there something with her timeline that makes it impossible for this to have occurred when she said? And nothing came back. Doesn't mean he's guilty. But if she alleged this happened in, you know, 1978 and Epstein was still a high school teacher, then we could say, okay, this is incredible. But that's not what's happened. Now, no criminal charges were filed against Trump, but let's be fair. These investigations happened while he was president. The Department of Justice released additional interview records in 2026. They claim that the files were mistakenly labeled as duplicates, but they're not claiming that there was only one interview with this. See, that again, it would make sense if they're saying there were 4 separate interviews. Oops, we had a problem with duplicates. There was only one interview. Maybe you could say, okay, that makes sense. Let's see the transcript of the interview. We're not seeing that. 15 additional documents were later released after re-review. I should point out that Congress passed a law signed by Donald Trump ordering them to release every single file related to Jeffrey Epstein, but we continue to see stuff like this. Oh yeah, there's more. Oh yeah, we didn't quite give you it. Let's, let's dribble out a little more. Again and again and again, it's happening. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need it? You know, the people who were so quick to say, well, Hillary Clinton must be running a pedophile ring in a basement from a pizzeria in Washington, D.C., let's go there with guns, even though the pizzeria had no basement and Hillary Clinton was not involved. Why aren't they excited about this? I also have to tell you, this is a perfect example of how the so-called liberal media isn't. If the so-called mainstream media, the New York Times, and CNN, not to mention MSNBC, if they were anything analogous to Fox News Channel, forget aside just making up stuff in line, if they in any way acted in a truly partisan way, in a strategic way to hurt one party, this is literally the only story that would have been on the news for the last 5 days. And yet it was buried. If you're hearing it from me saying, I don't remember hearing about this, then you're proving my point. Here we have evidence that reports are missing about Donald Trump that could help us all determine whether in fact he did sexually abuse a 13-year-old girl, as alleged. And all of the official FBI interviews are just missing, or at least 37 pages are missing. I should point that out. We do have evidence that these interviews did take place, but we don't know what the FBI investigator wrote down. Wouldn't it be nice to know? Again, if you like Donald Trump and you think he's completely blameless on all things, wouldn't you like to know that the FBI investigator made that conclusion, that the young woman was perhaps delusional or making— wouldn't you like to know that? Wouldn't you like to know the person who actually sat down and talked to this young woman on multiple occasions what their thought was on her perspective, her state of mind. Not just inquiring minds want to know this. I think everyone wants to know this because there's not much agreement in American politics anymore. People can disagree over tax policy, whether global warming and global change and environmental change is real, whether trans athletes should be able to participate. There's all sorts of disagreements. But I thought there was one area of agreement still left in America. And that is pedophiles bad. Pedophiles shouldn't have the most powerful prestigious office in the world, i.e., the presidency. I thought that that was still one thing that brought us together. Maybe I'm wrong, but I would love to know what's in this. Hats off to Congressman Massey, the Republican, and most Democrats in the House who are not giving up on this. But I frankly find it bizarre that every single Democratic member of the House and Senate is not filibustering on this issue, saying there will be no work done by this Congress until this is released because we fear there's a pedophile running our government. I think it's frankly outrageous that they're not talking about this nonstop and filibustering on it every single day. But, you know, there's a lot going on in Washington these days. Stay tuned.