- 5 minutes ago
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has made explosive allegations against the U.S. Justice Department, claiming there was a deliberate effort to conceal Jeffrey Epstein-related documents that allegedly mentioned Donald Trump.
According to Whitehouse, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche withheld key files from the public and later conducted a private interview with Ghislaine Maxwell that allegedly resulted in a statement clearing Trump of wrongdoing. Whitehouse also points to Maxwell's subsequent transfer to a lower-security prison as raising further questions.
These allegations have not been proven in court, and no official findings have confirmed the existence of a cover-up. The controversy comes as renewed scrutiny surrounds the handling of the Epstein files and the Justice Department's transparency.
Watch the full report as we examine Senator Whitehouse's allegations, the DOJ's role, Todd Blanche's actions, the Maxwell interview, and the latest developments in the Epstein files controversy.
~PR.460~HT.178~GR.508~ED.532~VG.HM~
According to Whitehouse, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche withheld key files from the public and later conducted a private interview with Ghislaine Maxwell that allegedly resulted in a statement clearing Trump of wrongdoing. Whitehouse also points to Maxwell's subsequent transfer to a lower-security prison as raising further questions.
These allegations have not been proven in court, and no official findings have confirmed the existence of a cover-up. The controversy comes as renewed scrutiny surrounds the handling of the Epstein files and the Justice Department's transparency.
Watch the full report as we examine Senator Whitehouse's allegations, the DOJ's role, Todd Blanche's actions, the Maxwell interview, and the latest developments in the Epstein files controversy.
~PR.460~HT.178~GR.508~ED.532~VG.HM~
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00That's particularly significant when you have Attorney General Bondi saying that it was Todd Blanche who was responsible for the
00:10Epstein Files disaster, the releases of private information and images of victims, the cover-up of documents that named Donald
00:24Trump,
00:24and just the general incompetence of the whole wretched mess.
00:32I'd like to take my time this morning to suggest that combining our oversight hearing of the Department of Justice
00:43with the nominations hearing for Acting Attorney General Blanche
00:51would be a grave mistake for the committee.
00:56I don't believe we did that with Attorney General Garland,
01:01and I think the record of the Department of Justice under Todd Blanche lends itself to very vigorous oversight.
01:15Oversight which we have been denied because when we ask questions,
01:21we get scripted litanies of insult and quarrel rather than actual answers to our questions.
01:30When we ask for documents and records in writing, we get nothing.
01:36We are reduced to filing FOIA requests that are then not even complied with as FOIA requests.
01:43So the oversight function of this committee is really, I think, being systematically disabled.
01:53That's particularly significant when you have Attorney General Bondi saying that it was Todd Blanche who was responsible for the
02:04Epstein Files disaster,
02:06the releases of private information and images of victims, the cover-up of documents that named Donald Trump,
02:19and just the general incompetence of the whole wretched mess.
02:26I don't think that it would be a good idea for this committee to be complicit in covering up the
02:36cover-up of the Epstein files.
02:40Move on to the slush fund, which a great number of my Republican colleagues have expressed real reservations about,
02:48with its attachment of a tax amnesty deal for Trump, the Trump family, and the Trump businesses.
02:58There are very legitimate questions to be asked about that, including,
03:03has that cockamamie idea really been withdrawn, or is it just being hidden briefly so it can resurface in some
03:12other fashion?
03:15We should be looking into this as a committee.
03:18It's important stuff.
03:21And even if we shirk our duties at looking into all of this,
03:25it appears that a Florida court is going to be looking into all of this.
03:30And I think it's a bad look for the committee to be turning a blind eye to what went into
03:36the slush fund deal
03:37and the tax amnesty deal, and then discover through a court proceeding in Florida all the stuff that we failed
03:47to look at.
03:48It's hard to be taken seriously if we have failed to do our own duty,
03:53and then the court proceedings reveal the mischief.
03:58I will say that I've looked, I have never ever heard of senior officials of the Department of Justice
04:12being called before a court with respect to a fraud upon the court.
04:18Look up fraud upon a court.
04:21It's a pretty serious charge.
04:24This one was brought, raised, I guess I should say, by 36, three dozen retired federal judges,
04:30some very, very respected ones, some very, very conservative ones.
04:36And the judge in the proceeding in Florida, out of which the slush fund settlement emerged,
04:41reopened the case to have a look.
04:48She asked for responses.
04:51She suggested that the DOJ might have violated its own policies in the settlement.
04:57She suggested that there was an IRS defense memo out there that would be relevant to the proceedings.
05:08The violation of DOJ policies would obviously be a matter for DOJ to answer.
05:13The IRS client memo would obviously be something for DOJ to answer.
05:19She also questioned whether there was collusion.
05:23It takes two to collude.
05:25It would be a collusion between the Department of Justice lawyers and Trump's private lawyers.
05:32So there's another reason for the Department of Justice to have responded.
05:37What happened last Friday? No response from the Department of Justice.
05:41First ever accusation of senior level Department of Justice people, of fraud upon the court,
05:48with an invitation to rebut the allegations, an invitation specific to Department of Justice conduct, and they duck.
05:58So that is going to continue.
06:02The three dozen judges have their answer this Friday, and then the court will go forward.
06:07I will contend that we don't look like much if that information is being developed in a federal courtroom,
06:13and we haven't been allowed to ask questions, and indeed our oversight has been collapsed into a confirmation hearing.
06:20I have never seen a Department of Justice as badly run as this one.
06:26I have never seen fraud upon the court allegations.
06:29I have never seen so many suggestions of contempt.
06:32I have never seen so many no true bills.
06:34I have never seen so many cases thrown out.
06:36I have never seen so many accusations that Department arguments were false, were pretextual, were designed to fool rather than
06:44inform the court.
06:45And we see that over and over again from judges appointed by every president.
06:50It is now at the point where the Department of Justice and the U.S. government have lost their presumption
06:57of regularity in federal court proceedings.
07:00All of this matters.
07:03All of this is something to which this committee should be paying attention.
07:08And with respect to what our chairman has said about the norms of the committee.
07:14Well, one norm is that U.S. attorneys come through this committee after a process of consultation before they get
07:24to run U.S. attorney's office.
07:26Over and over again, we see these slippery deals where acting U.S. attorneys are appointed and then the first
07:37assistant is fired.
07:39And when the time runs out on the acting U.S. attorney, they slip back into the first attorney position
07:46and leave a vacancy.
07:48It's an obvious scam to get around this committee's norms.
07:55And we have put up with this.
07:57It didn't happen once.
07:58It didn't happen twice.
07:59It has happened over and over and over and over again.
08:03And on top of that, we've seen U.S. attorneys called out for misconduct over and over and over again.
08:10None of this is normal.
08:13None of this is normal.
08:16And the fact that this committee won't look into it, I think, is a shame.
08:20And I think if we try to be complicit in failing in our duty to look into this by combining
08:27the Blanche nomination hearing with the Department of Justice oversight hearing, we will have made a very, very grave mistake.
08:35Thank you, Chairman.
08:36You had an opportunity to go down and talk to Jocelyn Maxwell.
08:42And then a few days later, she was transferred from a high security prison to a very comfortable, very comfortable.
08:52That's just not true.
08:53She was not in a high security prison.
08:55She was transferred from a low security prison to a low security prison.
08:58She had access to a private shower.
09:01She could have pet therapy.
09:04And I don't know if any of that is true.
09:06I'm not disagreeing with you.
09:07It is true.
09:08And you should know it, Mr.
09:09I should know that.
09:10Why did he send you down to talk to her?
09:14He didn't send me.
09:15I went.
09:16What do you mean?
09:17Do you think President Trump called and asked me to go interview a witness in federal prison?
09:20Honestly?
09:21Yes, I do, frankly.
09:22Because you know why?
09:23He didn't.
09:23Because the deal was in.
09:24He needed somebody to rely upon to talk to her and say, what would she say if she was
09:31asked about Jeffrey Epstein?
09:32The president did not have anything to do with my choice to go interview Ms. Maxwell.
09:36If I wouldn't have went and a career would have went, you would have said, why didn't
09:39you go yourself?
09:40Just like you expect me to know whether she has access to her own shower.
09:43Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:45Mr. Blanche, how many taxpayers returns were leaked by the IRS contractor in the 2020 breach?
09:52How many taxpayers, excuse me?
09:53How many taxpayers returns were leaked by the IRS contractor in the 2020 breach?
09:59I don't know the exact amount, but a lot.
10:04405,427.
10:05One of them was Donald Trump, correct?
10:09One of them was Donald Trump, correct?
10:11One of them was Donald Trump and his family or others, correct?
10:14Right.
10:14And Donald Trump was president at the time?
10:17Correct.
10:18So it was his IRS department that allowed this breach of privacy, correct?
10:24It was a criminal who worked in the IRS, yes.
10:29Well, he was hired under Trump's, this is one of the Trump...
10:32Well, there was a criminal breach that led to this, yes.
10:35Very good.
10:38How many of these 400,000 people have received monetary reimbursement for the breach?
10:42I don't think any have, including the president.
10:45No, they haven't.
10:46But you've authorized the president.
10:48Do you agree the president should have a reimbursement, correct?
10:53No, he settled the case.
10:55No, there's no reimbursement to President Trump.
10:59Well, that's interesting.
11:00He filed the case, senator.
11:00So, President Trump, you're going to assure us, President Trump and his family will get
11:04no proceeds from this?
11:06Correct.
11:07He will not.
11:08He will not get?
11:09His family will not get?
11:10Correct.
11:11And who will direct the disposition of these?
11:15Who gets the money?
11:16From the Victims Fund?
11:19All right.
11:19Well, there will be a commission of five individuals that will be set up and they will
11:23take in requests and claims and decide whether to do anything for mission.
11:27Who will name the commissioners?
11:29I will.
11:30The attorney general.
11:30Whoever the attorney general is.
11:32The attorney general.
11:33Okay.
11:34Sorry, just to correct.
11:35And one of them will be done in consultation with leadership of this body.
11:39Consultation.
11:40Well, that's good.
11:41But when he first announced this suit on January 30th, he said, I think what we'll do
11:49is something for charity, where I'll give the money to charity.
11:52I'm talking about the American Cancer Society.
11:55I would say established and respected charities.
11:59Will you fulfill the president's wish that it goes to respected charities?
12:03I'm aware that he put that in or said that, but that's not ultimately what the settlement
12:08calls for.
12:09Well, the settlement was negotiated between his lawyers and the Department of Justice, correct?
12:14Correct.
12:14So his lawyers did not urge that they adopt the president's vision of giving it to a
12:21respectable charity?
12:22I am confident his lawyers urged the president's desires.
12:25Obviously, there's not a charity.
12:32The order that you signed yesterday states that the government pay this settlement if the
12:37Secretary of Treasury has certified the payment.
12:41Is that correct?
12:42Correct.
12:43Is it a coincidence that the general counsel of the Department of Treasury resigned yesterday?
12:49I don't know if it's a coincidence.
12:50Have you looked or checked?
12:52Have I checked?
12:53Yeah.
12:54I have not.
12:55As to why he resigned?
12:57It just seems to be very coincidental that a high-ranking member of the Department of
13:01Treasury, Senate confirmed, would resign the day that the Treasury Department was required,
13:07essentially, to certify these payments?
13:11Well, I believe the IRS signed the settlement agreement as well.
13:15But yes.
13:16But I can't speak to why he resigned, Senator.
13:19Well, this all seems to be an obvious abuse of power by the Department of Justice, by the
13:33President.
13:34He negotiated, essentially, himself.
13:36You're his appointee.
13:38The IRS are his appointees.
13:40He's the plaintiff.
13:42And the American people, I don't think, are surprised that suddenly all this money is
13:46going to his friends or people in his orbit.
13:52Will you ensure that none of this money goes to anyone convicted on the January 6th attack
13:57on the Congress?
13:59Well, the commissioners will determine who is eligible to receive the money.
14:03And who are the commissioners?
14:05They're not named yet.
14:06Who will name them?
14:08I will.
14:09Or the attorney general will.
14:10It's not me.
14:10So, with the suggestion of the president of the United States.
14:14Excuse me?
14:14With the suggestion of the president of the United States, your boss.
14:18I do not make suggestions.
14:19No, no.
14:20He won't make suggestions to you.
14:22I have no idea if he will or not.
14:25I really don't.
14:26I have no idea if he will or not.
14:30I would be shocked if he didn't tell you exactly who to put on.
14:34And I'd be more shocked if you did not put them on.
14:37This is a travesty of the law in the United States and the Constitution.
14:45You had an opportunity to go down and talk to Jocelyn Maxwell.
14:51And then, a few days later, she was transferred from a high security prison to a very comfortable.
14:59That's not true.
15:00Very comfortable.
15:01That's just not true.
15:02She was not in a high security prison.
15:04She was transferred from a low security prison to a low security prison.
15:07I mean, you're looking at me like that's verifiable.
15:12Well, I don't think at the other prison she had her own room.
15:16She had access to a private shower.
15:18She could have pet therapy.
15:22And...
15:22I don't know if any of that is true.
15:24I'm not disagreeing with you.
15:24It is true.
15:25And you should know it, Mr. Attorney General.
15:27I should know that?
15:28You should know.
15:28Whether an inmate has access to her own shower?
15:30No, no.
15:31This is a person of extra special interest to the president of the United States.
15:36He's known her.
15:38Why did he send you down to talk to her?
15:41He didn't send me.
15:43I went.
15:44What do you mean?
15:44Do you think President Trump called and asked me to go interview a witness in federal prison?
15:48Honestly?
15:49Yes, I do, frankly.
15:50Because you know why?
15:51Because the deal was in.
15:52He needed somebody to rely upon to talk to her and say what would she say if she was asked
15:59about Jeffrey Epstein.
16:00And you were the perfect choice.
16:02I...
16:02And you went down there and suddenly, shazam.
16:05She's out of what is a more confining situation into a...
16:11Every word...
16:11A much more relaxed federal prison.
16:14Every word that I asked her is recorded and available to you to review.
16:19If there's criticisms of the question that I asked her, go ahead and make them.
16:24But he did...
16:24The president did not have anything to do with my choice to go interview Ms. Maxwell.
16:28If I wouldn't have went and a career would have went, you would have said, why didn't
16:31you go yourself?
16:32Just like you expect me to know whether she has access to her own shower.
16:35You should.
16:36So I did go.
16:36Everyone in the United States who reads the newspapers know that.
16:40I guess you don't, you know, read things like that.
16:43You know, this...
16:44This whole hearing, I think, is exposing something, which is, to me, very frightening.
16:48You're a very gifted lawyer.
16:51But from my perspective, you have very little faith to the Constitution and the people of
16:58America, and you're the president's consigliore.
17:01Your perspective is completely wrong, Senator.
17:04Respectfully.
17:04Well, I think the facts will prove me right.
17:10Subscribe to One India and never miss an update.
17:14Download the One India app now.
Comments