[00:00] They held it at 45 years for 10 months. In fact, one of the assistant US attorneys who later became the assistant attorney general for the criminal division in the Biden administration, she said to me, "Take a deal and you might live to meet your grandchildren, Mr. Kyriakou." So, I said, "I'm not going to do 45 minutes." I told her. So, they they stuck to that for 10 months. Then they came down to 10 years. Take a plea to an espionage charge, do 10 years. I said, "No." Then 8 years, "No." And then 5 years, "No." And my lawyer,
[00:30] who was what the Washington Post called a legal titan, Plato Cacheris, he said to me, "You know, I've been a lawyer in this town for 50 years and I've never seen them come down in time. Usually, if you say no to 10, they go to 12, 15, 20." I said, "Why are they coming down?" He said, "Because they have a case and they know it's and that's why we're going to trial." So, finally they came down to five. I said, "No." Then three and a half and I said, "No." And then they said, "Best and final offer, 3 years." I stayed up all night with my wife. We talked about
[01:00] it literally all night and I said, "No." >> Mhm. >> So, the lawyers were very upset with me. They came to the house the next day. Plato was the first one in the house and he said, "You stupid son of a take the deal." He said like that. The second, Bob Trout, lovely like southern gentleman, he said, "If you were my own brother, I would beg you to take the deal." And then the third attorney, I had 11 attorneys. The the third of the big ones, yeah. This was a big case. >> you afford 11 attorneys? >> I only paid six of them and I ended up
[01:31] uh well, I ended up filing for bankruptcy cuz I owed them $1.15 million. So, who is the >> lawyers? I want to return to that. I want you to keep going with the story, but >> So, Mark McDougall from Akin Gump and Strauss, he said to me, he pulled me aside and he said, "You know what your problem is? Your problem is you think this is about justice and it's not about justice. It's about mitigating damage. Take the deal." >> Mitigating What does that mean, mitigating damage? >> That if I screw around and go go trial, and this is what I asked him. I said, "Okay, I get it, but if I go to trial and I'm convicted, what am I seriously looking at?" And he said, "12 to 18
[02:02] years, take the deal." And so, I took a deal for 2 and 1/2 years. I did 23 months. I had five kids at home. >> You have five children >> I wanted this to go away. >> the time? >> Let me think. This was 14 years ago. So, they were 19, 16, 9, 7, and 1. >> Well, good good good math. Yeah, the 19th you you ranged the gamut. 1 7 9 16 19. And and and what do your children
[02:32] what do your what did your what do your children think of all of this? >> To tell you the truth, uh three of the five don't speak to me because of this. >> Which part? Which part of >> I'm I'm a criminal, and having a a convicted felon as a father holds them back in their careers. I I have an unusual name. If you Google them, I pop up. >> And so, you know, one is a bond trader in in Chicago, and and one is a an elementary school teacher in Raleigh,
[03:03] North Carolina. They're embarrassed by all this. >> They're ambitious people. >> And I stand in the way of that. >> Did they get that from their mother or from some other Okay. >> Yeah, they got it from their mother. >> Um well, in the O'Keefe family, I I think that they they would see through that. Not a convicted felon, but I'm a I'm a convicted misdemeanant. >> That's okay. >> That's a story for >> Wear it like a badge of honor. >> Wear it I think things have So, this was 19 years ago, right? Or 2007? >> I was prosecuted Well, see, I blew the whistle during the Bush administration.
[03:33] >> but when was the sentence? >> It was the Obama administration that went after me. So, I was sentenced in in 20 January of 2013, and I went to prison in February of 2013. >> world has changed in 2025 and 2026. It'd be a totally different dynamic for you, right? >> Oh my god. Listen, I always considered myself to be a part of what I called the libertarian left. Uh and I've long been a strong believer that the ideological spectrum is not Yes. The ideological spectrum is a circle and
[04:03] it meets. And with the advent of the MAGA movement, that's where I feel like I found an ideological home. >> Yes. Um political realignment. >> Yes. >> You have You had a political realignment. You You said you were third generation Democrat. >> Yes. >> But that you left the party and the actions by Obama and Brennan confirmed that decision. By the way, what was the guy I want to go to this, but the the um your take on the uh not the guy, the the court cases involving Snowden >> Yeah. >> and um
[04:34] >> Assange. >> Assange. Just what's your 30-second take on both of the above cases? >> I believe that Ed Snowden's a bonafide American hero. It is illegal, not just illegal, it's a part of NSA's charter that it cannot spy on Americans. And in fact, most of what it does is to spy on Americans. We wouldn't know that had it not been for Ed Snowden. Uh Julian Assange, Julian's a a tough guy to like. Um he's a guy who's you know publicly on the spectrum. Uh you just have to accept it, but what
[05:04] he did was very brave. The American people had the right to know what the likes of Hillary Clinton and uh and John Podesta were saying and planning and doing in the name of the American people. >> But did um and you you probably don't know the answer to this cuz you'd be making a speculation, but in the criminal affidavit or the indictment of Assange, they alleged that he cooperated with Manning or conspired with Manning to hack into the thing and we don't know if he did or not. >> No, he didn't do that. >> think he did it? >> No, I don't think he did it. In fact,
[05:35] the only person who said that was a convicted Icelandic pedophile who had also been convicted of making false statements. He went to the FBI uh agent who was uh who was assigned to the American Embassy in Reykjavik and offered up all this false information in exchange for money and then had to retract all of it. >> Is that was that in the indictment that Icelandic guy? >> that's that's that's where that information came from. >> So he didn't probably conspire with Assange. >> He did not. >> the role of a journalist receiving the
[06:05] information. >> That was exactly it. >> that I know this because it's very similar to my case with the FBI because they alleged I stole a diary. I never stole anything. But the Supreme Court case is about Nike V Vavra 2001. A journalist can receive information that was stolen as long as the journalist plays no part. So Assange in the indictment it said I think it said curious eyes don't run dry. He's telling Manning give feed me more stuff. >> Yeah. >> So that's a very fine line. >> a fine line. >> It is a in in >> But he never tasked Manning. >> He never tasked Manning.
[06:36] >> And that's what this Ziggy Thordarson alleged. >> What what was his name? >> Ziggy Thordarson. >> Ziggy Thordarson worked worked with Assange in some capacity or >> He was in Assange's orbit for a year or two in in the Iceland office of WikiLeaks and then just decided hey I can make this work for myself. >> Um So so I mean and and Julian Assange has really paid a price. Rotting away in a in a room in England for >> Multiple suicide attempts.
[07:06] >> Yeah. >> It was terrible. >> Um and the guy was Brennan and Hayden one of the Clapper when asked under oath do you spy and he did this whole thing >> Mhm. >> which for a spy to do it's like the worst tell ever in Congress. You know the video I'm talking about. Oh no not willingly. I mean what type of spy behaves that way in a congressional hearing? I guess when you're guilty. >> And you remember the question was was whether he spied on Americans. >> Right. >> he said no which >> Which is a crime. It's a lie. >> It was a lie. It was he was lying under oath. >> Lying under oath. But no but no one no one's held accountable.
[07:37] >> No. >> Okay. I want to go to your political realignment but I'm jumping around here because I'm there's so many things to ask you. Why is nobody held accountable? >> This is James O'Keefe. You know me for exposing the truth and holding the corrupt elite responsible and accountable. However, today I want to tell you about protecting your own freedom, your finances. Before you buy any gold or silver, hear this. We're going through one of the biggest financial shifts of our lifetime. Dedollarization, nations like China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia are pulling away from the US dollar. And that
[08:09] threatens your savings and retirement security. Legendary investor Ray Dalio warns skyrocketing debt, relentless money printing, and a weakening dollar are all part of a dangerous cycle that can impact you. That's why more Americans are turning to real assets like physical gold and silver. Gold just surged past $3,700 per ounce, and momentum is building. I've partnered with veteran-owned American Independence Gold to help you take action. Open a qualifying account today and get up to $10,000 in bonus
[08:39] gold and our free gold protection guide. And here is the best part, a portion of every sale supports Tunnel to Towers and Wounded Warriors. Freedom isn't given, it's secured. This is James O'Keefe. As always, this is not financial advice. Always check with your licensed financial advisor before you invest. Let's face it, healthcare is a mess. Outrageous premiums, surprise bills, denied claims, and now the rates are climbing again. Medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy, even for people with insurance. That's why I
[09:10] switched to Impact Health Sharing. No networks, no woke nonsense, just real savings and up to 50%. You can pick your doctor, there's no surprise bills, there's 24/7 telehealth and maternity support. Take control of your healthcare before the system decides for you. Go to impactomg.com, that's impactomg.com, or call 855-378-6777 now. Impact Health Sharing, built differently. Yeah, you know, this is this is the
[09:40] Washington of of the 21st century. Either you're in or you're not one of the one of the swells who's in. And the the the system, the swamp, takes care of its own. That's why you have somebody like John Brennan who can commit felony after felony after felony and literally never pay a price. The swamp takes care of its own. Well, let's let's unpack that. >> Okay. >> So, the Republicans have the the the White House, Trump's in there. I I support the president. I support what
[10:12] he's doing to clean up. >> Mhm. >> I support DOJ. I support what he alone is doing. The swamp takes care of its own. But but but what happens? Like, is it that they is it they get lobbied by the bad guys? Do they take money legally? I mean, what what >> actually even more simple than that. Taking the CIA as an example because it's the example that I know the best. Presidents come and go every four years, every eight years. If you're at the CIA, especially if you're in the senior intelligence service, you're going to be
[10:42] there for 25, 30, 35 years. I worked with one guy, a national intelligence officer, who was there for 42 years. And you know, presidents come and go. And they're most likely not going to fire you even though at the CIA we served at the at the pleasure of the president. We didn't have We didn't have the same protections from the Civil Service Act that everybody else in government did. But um if you don't like this president, you just don't ignore him. You ignore his orders. You know he's going to be gone in three or four years.
[11:14] And then you just wait for the next guy. >> Mhm. Mhm. So, it's just the incentives. It's just the the the the incentives are I mean, just walk me through this because >> Well, the biggest problem, it's not just the incentives. The biggest problem is that there is really no congressional oversight. There's just none. Especially in intelligence. The The intelligence committees are no more than cheerleaders for the CIA and the rest of the intelligence community. >> Well, I'll give you a real-life example.
[11:45] When I got out of prison, I was invited to dinner at the Greek ambassador's residence. And I went there, and Senator Ron Wyden was one of the guests. And he walked up to me and he said, "Hey, welcome home. We were really rooting for you. We were pulling for you." I said, "Come on, Senator. I said, I expected more, especially from you." He got very angry, and he says, "Look, it took everything I had just to not lose my security clearance." >> Mhm. >> And I said, "Oh, you're afraid of them." >> Oh. >> That's what it is. You're afraid of
[12:15] them. >> Afraid of losing his clearance, or afraid of what exactly? >> Oh, I think on the first level, afraid of losing his clearance. On the second level, afraid of them maybe turning on him and starting to look at him and You know, listen, there's this book There's this book called Three Felonies a Day by Dr. Harvey Silverglate. He's a professor of law at Harvard University, and he says that we are so over-criminalized, so over-regulated in this country, that the average American on the average day,
[12:46] going about his or her normal business, commits three felonies every single day. With the point being, if they want to get you, they're going to get you. >> case, they made up felonies that I didn't even commit. >> And then there's that. >> Which is a whole other dark >> Yeah. >> So, you're you're you're in the What was the name of that congress >> Three That was Senator Ron Wyden. >> Senator Ron Wyden from Is it Oregon? >> And and he got upset at you that you weren't more grateful to him for, you know, >> For what? I have no idea. >> Yeah, it's kind of strange. It It really
[13:18] is a the issue, I would say, of our time, of today, of tomorrow, of this year. And every I'm an investigative reporter, and I put out the stuff people like, "But, nothing happens to these people." That's That's just how people feel, which, you know, I I believe that exposure, you know, Benjamin Franklin said, "I'd rather have newspapers with no government than government with no newspapers." I believe exposure is the accountability that that people see. >> that we need. >> disinfectant. But, what the hell is going on is the I don't know the answer
[13:48] to this. It's It's And I think you've answered it to a degree that the swamp takes care of its own, that the administrative state is there for 42 years, that that that senator is afraid of his security thing taken away. I I think about this question, and I To me, it's almost like I I I don't know. The The The The incentives are completely off. Like, in other words, my my hypothesis is if I hold a bad guy accountable in my life, let's say I I can I hold people
[14:19] accountable every week. I catch people on tape. They admit to doing things they shouldn't be doing. They lose their contracts. They lose their job. They People get fired in my videos. So, as a result of that, they sue me. >> Right. >> Now, like, it's your fault. They Yeah. Now, under a tortious theory of damage and blah blah blah. Now, that probably won't work in in a federal court if I litigate it to to summary judgment. But, that's what they do. So, I I get I get pain inflicted upon me >> Mhm.
[14:49] >> for for exposing them, for doing the right thing, for reporting what they say, for revealing it to the American people. And you you you went through something similar. You went to prison with really bad ombres >> Yeah. >> for speaking out against something that what appears to be unconstitutional. Is that correct? >> I agree. >> So, the people that tell the truth get punished. >> Yes. >> Um so, my theory, tell me if this is right or wrong, is that the people in charge, the attorney general, the the the powers that be, don't don't go after the bad guys because they will
[15:21] be punished if they do that. >> Yes. That's That's exactly what my belief is. That's my position. Yes. >> Tell us more about that. Like how does that Like is it because they're going to take away their security clearance? They're going to you know, not allow them to run for re-election? Like is it is that what it's about? >> I think it's it's even not as straightforward as that. Um there's there's this fear that you're not going to be an insider anymore. You're not going to be a part of the the group, the clique.
[15:53] You know, who gets all the the great secret inside information. There was this brief period from 1975 to 1982 where the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence did honest-to-god oversight, right? Where the CIA >> were those? >> 75 to 82. Where the CIA had to operate within the confines of the law. And if you don't like that the law puts handcuffs on you, then change the law. >> Mhm. >> Right? We can all agree to disagree. And if you disagree sponsor legislation and
[16:26] we can have that that debate. But then starting around 1982 and and really culminating in around 1995 the oversight committees just decided to give up. And on the one hand, it's impossible for a staff of 60, 70, 80 people on Capitol Hill to oversee an intelligence community of what? 60,000? 70,000 people? It's just not possible. And so you pick and choose your battles until you can't even do that anymore. I
[16:56] think that's what we've seen. >> They stop binders of classified things they they bring into a skiff and you can't bring a phone and >> That's right. >> It's like you know, thousand congressman was one congressman was telling me about that. I was like, "Whoa." >> Yeah. >> And then hey, what was what is that What is that word that one word for that secret operation? And then they bring out another binder just for for one. >> Exactly. And then you have to sign a secrecy agreement to open that bind. >> That's insane. >> Mhm. >> That's wild. Terrible. >> And do they get I mean the general public assumes that they get compromat, they get compromising material on all
[17:26] these politicians. Is that Is that happening? >> You know, I've always been of the belief that yeah, that was true at the FBI. That wasn't my experience at the CIA just because they don't have the wherewithal to do it domestically. I will say though that my first boss, now this is dated, but my first boss told me that his first job at the CIA was as an intern. He was a grad fellow in the office of What was it called? Counterintelligence. And on his first day, he went in there and there was an entire wall just of
[17:58] file folders and the secretary told him, "You might find yourself to be the only person in the office once or twice. Whatever you do, don't look at those files." And he said, "Well, of course, you know, the minute that he's the only person in the office, he went and looked at the files." And every single one of those files was on an American citizen. >> Woah. >> Mhm. >> That was in the CIA guy said that. That was a dumb thing for him to say. Don't look at that. >> Don't look at that file. >> that a spy shouldn't say. >> But yeah, to answer your question, I I believe that that compromat is something that the FBI and God knows the stories
[18:28] from J. Edgar Hoover. He was collecting that stuff from the 1920s. >> Yeah, I when I was raided by the FBI, I'm also don't consider myself a particularly fearful person, but what struck me when they raided me, this is in 2020 2021, they got secret warrants against me to spy on my newsroom. This is its own constitutional crisis. The attorney general expressly forbids it, blah blah blah. The two two parts of fear struck me when they did that to me. Number one, it was like you said you said they enforced the law between 75 and 82. It was the breakdown of the law itself.
[18:59] That there was no the concept of justice is proportional. We're all equal before the law. The law means something. But when words cease to have meaning, when when Merrick Garland can say, "You cannot raid a newsroom." and then raids a newsroom. Yeah, it became like Animal Farm. All All animals are equal but some are equal than others. That's when the fear set in to me. I was like, "Whoa, this is a post-constitutional dynamic." And the second thing that really hit me hard, and again I'm being very vulnerable for the audience to give them some background into what you're
[19:30] saying, was after the raid, um I had nothing in my apartment except books and clothes. They were looking for contraband, looking for weapons. And it it was like, "Are they putting child porn in my drawer? Are they putting cocaine in the My mind went to went to places I didn't I didn't want it to go." And I never felt that before. And I was I was totally I mean I mean this sincerely. I was totally overcome by a paralysis of fear. >> Oh my god, yes. >> Have you ever been there? >> Yes. And I've actually written about exactly that.
[20:01] After my case, which Donald Trump's first US attorney in Utah called the Democratic Party's template for lawfare. Um there was a a series of four or five whistleblower cases where, like magic, child pornography was found on every one of these computers. >> Mhm. >> And I wrote this piece. I said, "Isn't that a strange coincidence that child porn is always on the whistleblowers'
[20:33] uh computers?" And in fact, there was one whistleblower uh from the US Army who said, "I never had any child pornography on my computer." And then when the judge demanded to see the pornography that was pulled off the computer, the prosecution couldn't produce it. >> Mhm. >> So yeah, that's a great fear of mine and I think it's something that all Americans should fear. Again, if they want to get you, they're going to get you. >> Has that changed has the dynamic changed present day? And I And I've got about 15 minutes left with you. I want to go to
[21:03] Epstein. Has the dynamic changed in that that the Musk's purchase of acts, sort of populist social media movements that we're seeing that that's like come on. It's like remember the old 60 Minutes Mike Wallace question? Oh, come on. There's child porn on the journalist phone. Or is it still a huge threat? >> No, I think it's I think it's significantly better under Donald Trump. >> Mhm. >> Yeah, significantly better. >> Let's talk about Jeff Epstein. And you've you've talked about this on so many podcasts. I'm going to try to ask you questions you haven't been asked.
[21:34] And I'm going to start by talking about Andrew. If we could pull up the clips specifically on the CIA. By the way, we have two pieces of footage from investigations that we've done from individuals who have claimed they work with or for the CIA. >> seen them. >> You've seen the guy? Remember the guy that was fired in in Langley for saying he withheld information from Trump? Which by the way, I went to Langley to do an on-camera. And people were driving Well, I was on the the the highway outside the building. I forget the name of the road there. >> Yeah, Dolly Madison Highway. >> Yeah, that. And and I was standing as
[22:05] close as I could with the officer saying, "You set foot 2 ft that way, we'll arrest you." And as people were driving out of of the building, they actually rolled down the way "Keep going, O'Keefe." The the FBI wouldn't do that. >> No, the FBI wouldn't do that. >> The FBI wouldn't do that. And and I think it was Congressman Nunes who said that and this is a broad generalization, but I've heard this from a number of conservatives, that generally speaking, this is in 2023-24, that the FBI was more corrupt than the the CIA. That's the that's the
[22:35] >> I always believed that. And in fact, since my conviction, um I've received emails from three of the FBI agents involved in my case apologizing for targeting me and prosecuting me. They said that they were ordered to do so. >> Yeah. >> And there was nothing they could do. >> Following orders. Well, there is something they could do. They could resign. >> They could resign. >> But they're not they don't choose to do that. >> See, again, it's the same at the CIA. You don't want to rock the boat. You don't want to jeopardize that pension. >> the the the the hate to use this term. It's a it's a not a correct term of art, but
[23:06] the rank and file Yes. of the CIA, I would generally good people. >> Yeah. >> 80% or whatever. >> Patriotic, smart, hard-working people who want to do nothing more than to serve the American people. So, let's go to this clip from this is Glenn Prager on an airplane. We recorded this earlier this year speaking about Epstein and he works with or for the FBI interviewing the Epstein victims. Glenn Prager, go ahead. A CIA, go ahead. >> They all talk about the effort to assume come out
[23:37] that he was a CIA. >> He was a CIA. >> He was a CIA. I think he's protecting a lot of other people. It's not he's not protecting himself because there's nothing there. But he's protecting a lot of people because Trump is now saying it's a hoax of the case that they got hoaxed or something. I mean Well, you know it's not a hoax. He's been on the plane, you know, many times. >> Mhm. >> It's just he was never on the plane with a kid. >> I've seen the itineraries and I've interviewed all of the victims. There's never >> been an instance where Trump was on a plane with these kids. >> Mhm. >> And Hillary Clinton But that can't be said for Trump. And it can't be said for others. While
[24:08] the Clintons were on the plane, while Bill Clinton >> And we have another clip where Prager talks about Epstein being um Was it was it Israel? Some comment he made. Working with Israel, working for Israel. Uh but in any event, he he talks about um I guess first your reaction to that just watching that. This is a guy just some context. This is Glenn Prager in review of the victims in Palm Beach County uh for the Department of Justice. >> about the effort to assume come >> on what he thinks is the case. What's
[24:40] your perspective? >> Yeah, I I think that most Americans who have followed this story assumed that that was the case. And now that we've had this tranche of 3 million more documents, it's pretty well proven it. >> And and uh you've you going through those documents? Have you been >> Yeah, I have. >> Any any highlights? Any pullaways that you've >> Yeah, there are headlines that you've come across >> There's something that's been very very intriguing to me. The former Obama White House counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler, who's now the general counsel for Goldman
[25:11] Sachs, making probably more money than she can count, uh repeatedly repeatedly tried to get uh CIA Director John Brennan to have lunch with Jeffrey Epstein. She and Epstein apparently were very close. That wasn't necessarily new, but uh there was one email that was new where she emailed Epstein and said, "CIA Director John Brennan gave me the CIA's highest honor this morning. Pretty cool, huh?" Or "Pretty neat, huh?" And um and then when Epstein was going
[25:42] to be in Washington, she repeatedly went back to him saying, "Let me set up a lunch with John Brennan. You're going to like John Brennan. Let me set up this lunch with John Brennan." We don't know if they had ended up having lunch, but she was working very hard to get John Brennan together with Jeffrey Epstein. >> Why? >> Oh, I've gone through so many of these documents. It's It's It's 100% fact now that that Epstein was working for the Israelis, but he doesn't appear to just have been an an Israeli
[26:12] access agent. It looks like he had sort of offered himself up to the CIA, to MI6, to MI5, to maybe the Germans. There There could have been other services as well. And then we we learned what just a few days ago that his attorneys actually sought confirmation from the CIA and from the National Security Council that Epstein was acting as an informant. >> Access agent to the to the foreign interest? >> Yes. >> Uh an Epstein uh is an informant and an
[26:43] access agent to the foreign interest the same thing or different? >> Uh Uh there are minor differences. The The point that I've been making is that if you're a foreign intelligence service, let's say in this case you're the you're the Mossad, you're not going to recruit Bill Clinton or Prince Andrew, you're not going to recruit Bill Gates. So, you do the next best thing. You recruit somebody who has access to them and who these guys trust. And then if you have a little compromise hanging over their heads at the same time, that's even better. So,
[27:14] >> We'll We'll get to We'll get to the the Israel thing in a minute cuz I mean I mean I'm I'm going to be honest with you. This is a This is a hot This is a hot button. This is a hot topic. >> Kirk, close friend. He was a friend to a lot of people, but I went to the Turning Point thing in July and Tucker was on stage and he said the thing and it really upset a lot of people. It upset a lot of donors to the conservative movement. And I'm I'm trying to be fair. I'm trying to be factual. So, how do you know with 100% certainty that Epstein was Mossad as a fact? How do you know that? >> I think that the documents There are too many documents talking about too many
[27:46] incidents of contact with senior Israeli military and intelligence leaders to come to any other conclusion. I happen to be on the Piers Morgan show a couple of months ago. Uh I Scott Horton and I were on one side, Alan Dershowitz and Danny Ayalon were on the other side. And um and I said factually, Israeli spy on the United States. >> Mhm. >> It's a fact, right? Jonathan Pollard was not an anomaly. The FBI will tell you that there are at least 187 undeclared Israeli intelligence officers
[28:16] spread all across the United States stealing our defense secrets. But they're Israelis and we're close to the Israelis and so we just pretend that that's not a problem. Dershowitz practically had a stroke when I said it and said first that that Epstein was not an Israeli access agent. That if he had been, he said, "I was his lawyer. If he had been working for the Israelis, I could have gone to the White House and I could have gotten him a more favorable sentence." >> There There are documents in this in this tranche of of 3 million
[28:48] emails or what what it as specific as you can what what facts or documents or exhibits or that that that show that connection to Israel. I mean this guy says it. Prager Prager in the video says it but you know it's it's hearsay. We don't know if it's I can't verify what the guy in the FBI is saying is true or false but what documents have you seen? >> The documents I've seen are documents where he's telling for example Prime Minister Ehud Barak former Prime Minister Ehud Barak that he's secured documents from the likes of Peter Mandelson
[29:19] and Prince Andrew. We just learned this what yesterday day before yesterday Peter Mandelson the former former British Ambassador to the United States that he has then sent to the Israelis. >> Um I know I know we got to go but I want to spend another I want to show the other two clips Andrew of the of the Epstein footage and get John's reaction. Let's go to Attorney General Pam Bondi Attorney General of the United States. This is this is footage that we broke in May of this year and it's been re-going viral now. So if we could pull that clip up and just for some context while we're
[29:49] getting that clip the Attorney General was in a restaurant. Pause the clip. The Attorney General is in a restaurant and I don't I don't send people out to do this. Sometimes people send me stuff or they say hey I'm in a position where I can record this. Um and I and I this was a tough one for me because I don't want to you know it's this is the tough one to to whether we publish this and then Bondi went to the White House and said what she was caught on the video saying. Play the footage in the restaurant in DC from May of 2025.
[30:21] >> And I've seen files are going to get released. >> Um we hope soon the FBI has been helpful. >> Okay. So any dates? >> No. You know what it is that >> I know there's some files in 80 years. >> Yeah and there's all these little kids. >> So they have to go through every month. >> There are tens of thousands of videos with little kids. Now was it Cash or or Blanche or someone said recently oh there's no there's no there's no play the comparison play the other one of the other statement I want to get John's reaction. This is the
[30:53] latest statement from Department of Justice. >> of thousands of videos with children or child porn. >> If there was a video of some guy committing felonies and I and I'm in charge don't you think you take All right so that was an interesting What are your thoughts on the child the children and the child porn and all that? >> First of all there's no in my mind there's no more horrible crime that exists than a crime on a child.
[31:24] Um I I would like to think that Pam Bondi was speaking off the cuff and was talking about what she expected to learn expected to see. I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt here. Um I really believe that Cash Patel is telling us the truth when he says if there was any evidence of a crime by God he would be the the guy to demand that it be prosecuted. Um that's why I celebrated his appointment as as FBI director because we we needed somebody who's going to tear the place down to
[31:55] the bare studs >> you think he's doing? >> it. I think he's having a tough time. I think he's facing a lot of headwinds and I think that he would tell you that he has not accomplished what he thought he could accomplish as he said bureaucracy >> I I I would say that if if you >> pointed Jesus well Jesus can walk on water so maybe that's a bad example but it's tough it's a tough job. >> It's a tough job. >> So how do you think Pam Bondi's doing? >> I like Pam Bondi. And I think she means well but I don't think she's accomplished as much as most of us
[32:26] expected she would have accomplished by now. >> So she so she could have been speaking off the cuff like many subjects do. >> believe that's true. >> It is a little The question is should the Attorney General of the United States to sharing all this with a stranger in a in a in a coffee shop. >> No. >> Is that that there questions about the discernment and the judgment of the chief law enforcement officer Department of Justice there. And then do we have any other clips from from Epstein team? Schneck, one one more one more. This is Schneck talking about Ghislaine Maxwell
[32:59] and then the deal or the alleged secret deal that she got. Let's play this guy who was fired from the Department of Justice after we reported this. >> small person >> Yeah. >> and also in bad >> She got transferred to a minimum security prison too. >> Oh. >> Which is against BOP policy because she's as she's a convicted sex offender. >> Oh. >> And they're not supposed to be put in a security prison which is an interesting detail because she's getting a benefit which means they're not following or something keeping her >> Transferred to a minimum security prison in exchange for a deal. Your thoughts on
[33:29] the Maxwell dynamic. >> Yeah, I've written about this too. It is absolutely anathema to BOP regulation to allow a child sex offender to be anywhere near a minimum security prison. They can't be in maximum or medium because they'll be killed there. They can't be in minimum because they can just walk away >> Right. >> and have access to a child again. >> the solution? >> They have to be in a low security prison which is where she was until her transfer was ordered. Something I just have no understanding of. >> believe that what that man said is
[34:00] probably true? >> Yeah. >> To keep her mouth shut. >> I think it I think it is. >> And and and again I keep I keep going back to accountability but people are demanding to know why weren't they arresting anybody as it pertains to Epstein. Why? >> You know, I hate to say it. It's it the simplest reason I think is the correct one. The statute of limitations on just about all of these crimes has expired. >> Including including against Was it 5 years for rape? >> 5 years. >> 5 5 5 >> Unless you can you can prove an ongoing
[34:31] conspiracy in which case the statute of limitations would reset itself every day. >> Well, that's what the guy said in our video last last week. The FBI guy said, "Yeah, they'll run the statute out. There'll be a different president." Yeah. He was just being honest. >> Yeah, he was being honest. >> him for being honest. >> There it is. That's Washington. >> This is quote, Harry Truman said, "If you want a friend in Washington, buy a dog." >> I mean, it's almost true of human nature, isn't it? They fire you for being honest, and the child rapists go free. >> That's right. >> And it's not necessarily you know, I'm just This is my commentary. I don't know
[35:02] if it's Cash's fault. I I I like Cash. I like Cash. I don't think Bondy's a I I don't I don't actually can't make a comment on on her. I've met her once at a dinner. I I don't know if it's the individuals. I think it's the nature of humanity, human nature. >> I I think you're right. >> bureaucracy >> I think you're right. >> So, in many ways, what you're fighting against and what I'm fighting against appears to be human nature itself. >> Mhm. And that's why it's such a tough fight. >> It is It is a It's a It's a difficult fight. And and the American republic, the American experiment, we
[35:33] have a very unique framework cuz we have a bicameral legislature and separation of powers. Um This is a very big question I'm asking you, but are we at the end of the rope for the American experiment? >> You know what? As things stand today, I think actually that we are. I hate to say that, but there's going to have to be a major constitutional reset where the legislative and and judicial branches of government reassert their coequal authorities. Otherwise, you know, we're we're kind of
[36:04] devolving into into chaos. >> Mhm. Factions like like the Federalist Papers? >> I think so. >> Is that what you mean? Like mobs? >> Yeah, I do. I think so. >> Like in the Minnesota, you saw in the agitation. And and and I hate to ask predict the future questions. I don't answer them, but I am going to ask you a predict the future question. Are we looking at like a few years? Is it the next election? Like what's going to happen here? >> I think this is an incremental process. I really do. I I don't think it's going to be revolutionary in any way. I think it it'll be evolutionary. It'll continue
[36:35] to get worse, but it it's not just going to explode. I don't think we're seeing 1968, 1969 all over again. But I think we're getting there incrementally. >> me is the political prosecutions because they go after all the Republicans and now Trump's kind of attempting with Lemon and these others, but I don't know if they're I don't I don't know if those cases are going to are going to go anywhere. And Biden raided my newsroom and that was dropped cuz that what there wasn't even a colorable crime. >> Right. >> But is there going to be a detente like where both sides or is it just going to be
[37:05] like Brazil? These guys get in power and they go to prison. What's your what's your prediction? >> We're going to have to back away from that. It's it's it's certain death for the system. It really is because it's only going to get worse unless the two sides back off. And and we really have to be able to believe in the judiciary again. >> I I think we've lost faith in our institutions. Everyone asks which which party appointed the judge? >> Yeah. >> the first question. >> And that's the I mean I I reject the premise. I mean and and some Article 3 courts are not corrupt. I I I federal
[37:37] judges, this is my opinion, probably the least corrupt thing I've seen. I've seen a lot as have you. They're still as for example, the First Amendment is still generally upheld in Article 3 courts. They haven't taken that away yet. >> That's right. >> But you got to litigate. You know who stands to gain from all the political prosecutions is the lawyers. >> Yeah. >> They get rich. 1.1 million >> 1.15 million is what I still owe. >> You still owe that? >> Yeah. >> And in our case, yeah, it's 25% of our budget. The process is the punishment. >> Well, >> is the punishment. >> We're out of time and I could talk to you for 5 more hours. It's been fun. >> Is there any closing comments you have
[38:08] about any of what we've talked about or anything you'd like to share? >> I were talking about just before we we started filming, in our guts, we know what the right thing to do is. Always trust your gut. >> Trust your gut. >> Yeah, your children are going to be proud of you and you'll be able to sleep at night. >> Sometimes it's hard. It's hard for even if we know the right thing to to how how do you trust? How do you know what is your gut? How do you How do you know what that is? That sensation. >> I I've I've always believed that that human nature is such that
[38:40] intellectually we know what the right thing to do is, even if we don't always do the right thing because because it's you maybe it's easier to do the wrong thing. Maybe you get a temporary benefit. Uh but deep down we really know what the right thing to do is. And I think that even when it harms us personally, I've been ruined. I I went bankrupt. Friends and family members walked away from me. I'm unemployable. I I have to work for myself essentially.
[39:10] But I like my life and I respect myself. And I think for all of us that's really what it comes down to. >> find that people which one follow up question to that that people you're you hold a mirror up to the other guys who didn't make the difficult decisions that you made, therefore they kind of resent you or they hate you because you have the balls to do something they didn't. >> I get that. I The day after I blew the whistle a retired deputy director of the CIA emailed me and he said, "You've chosen a difficult road.
[39:41] I only wish I had had the guts to do it myself. I only wish." >> Mhm. Or people will say to you, "I can't do what you do." >> Mhm. >> Then your response is, "Yeah, you you could." >> Everybody could do what I did. >> Everybody could, but they choose You make a decision not to. I don't know if we can save the country unless people do what you do. >> Thank you. >> As hard as it is. >> It's by the way, this is hard. >> It is hard. >> This is This is brutal. >> Mhm. >> Brutal. I don't mean to make a joke, but
[40:11] it's like Shakespeare said, "Put all the lawyers at the bottom of the ocean." I don't I mean I'm I'm I'm sorry, but I'm not sorry. They profit off corruption and human suffering. >> Mhm. >> And I'm trying to get lawyers hired here. And if you're watching and you want to work as a as a general counsel, I will pay you. We'll pay you a quarter of a million dollars a year, $300,000 a year, but you're still going to have to take a pay cut from that $1,000 an hour. It's all about greed, isn't it? >> Yeah. >> And I could have had a life where I where I made a million dollars a year using my talents. It's It's It's It's That's the thing that gets me. It's the betrayal of the
[40:42] good people that do nothing. The good people that do nothing. All that is required for the triumph of evil is for good people. I'm not angry at the evil. I'm angry at the good who do nothing. Do you feel the same way? >> I do. 100% I do. That's how I feel every day. >> Well, nice nice meeting you and nice talking to you. We'll talk again. What is your price? I that. Thank you. What is your price? I guess if your price is not your life, then you are for sale.