Trump & Bondi issue Epstein ANNOUNCEMENT, instantly get SKEWERED

Trump & Bondi issue Epstein ANNOUNCEMENT, instantly get SKEWERED

You’re watching the legal breakdown. Glenn, the Epstein pressure is very clearly getting to Trump because he just had to offer a concession up to his audience. He took to social writing based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein. I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent grand jury testimony subject to court approval. This scam perpetuated by the Democrats should end right now. And then Pam Bondi chimed in and said, “President Trump, we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.” And so again, they’re trying to offer up the optics that they’re giving a concession. But can you dig into what this actually means that they’re focusing on grand jury testimony, that they’re focusing on pertinent testimony? Will we be getting all of the information that we were promised? You know, we may be getting exactly zero information because the court would have to order the release of grand jury transcripts. This feels more like a Hollywood production, maybe another episode of The Apprentice, right? This is a reality show. It’s not in fact reality. And here’s why, Brian. First of all, we have to start with the rules that govern grand jury transcripts and all grand jury materials. It’s federal rule of criminal procedure 6E. Here’s what it stands for. Grand jury information. That means witness testimony, records that are produced pursuant to grand jury subpoenas, um telephone records, f photographs, videotapes, you name it. It is all protected by grand jury secrecy. And here’s what everybody needs to know. The rules only provide that a court, a judge may order the release of grand jury materials for only very specific and limited reasons like and and I lived this for decades. So, for example, I’m prosecuting somebody. I’m putting witnesses before the grand jury and they say, “Oh, you know what? the target of this investigation not only killed somebody in DC, but he killed somebody in Maryland and he killed somebody in Virginia as well. That was our lived experience in the DC sniper case. And so what we would do, we would go to the judge, we would file a motion to seek permission to release those grand jury transcripts, that witness testimony to whom? law enforcement authorities, police and prosecutors in Maryland and in Virginia. That’s one of the very limited reasons, lawful reasons to ask a judge to release grand jury materials. You can read the rules, the grand jury rules 6E forward and backward and nowhere in there, Brian, is the authorized release for public relations purposes or in in the public interest. it doesn’t exist. So, this is a hollow promise. This is nothing more than Donald Trump, you know, using this as a pretext to try to claim, look, look, look, I’m being transparent. No, you’re not. Because the rules don’t provide for release of grand jury materials under these circumstances. Now, let me hasten to add. There are some federal circuits that have decided, even though it doesn’t appear anywhere in the rules of criminal procedure or in the laws, that um judges can release things in exceptional circumstances when there is a searing public interest. Let me say some federal circuits have said, you know what, we think because the grand jury is actually a product of the courts. The the prosecutors don’t control the grand jury. Notwithstanding, I think, you know, the popular belief that we could get the grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. It’s actually overseen and orchestrated by and controlled by the judges, the courts. So, some judges have said, you know, I think even though the rules don’t provide for it, I have the inherent authority in my capacity as overseeing the grand jury to order the release of grand jury materials in exceptional or um unusual circumstances if it is in the public interest to do so. So, there’s a split in the circuits. So, I’m not saying it’s impossible. some judges might be willing to do it even though the rules don’t support it. Um, but in this circumstance, Brian, when you just read what Donald Trump said and how Pam Bondi responded, you know what’s pertinent? Okay. Well, Pam Bondi might say, well, what’s pertinent is anything that might incriminate anybody other than Donald Trump. Or what’s pertinent is anything that might make a Democrat look bad. Ooh, I deem that to be pertinent. So, let me ask the judge to release that bit of grand jury information. All of this is for show. None of it, in my opinion, is for substance, and it’s very unlikely to produce much of anything. And and that’s the part I wanted to dig in on, the part that you had mentioned at the end, because let’s let’s grant the administration that this actually works. Maybe they they look at the fact that, you know, Jeffrey Epstein is dead, so there’s no prejudice. There’s no harm to his reputation. And so, let’s say a court does opt to grant uh the grand jury transcripts over to to the Trump administration. There’s nothing stopping them from just only picking what they want to expose while secretting the rest of that. Is that correct? Exactly. And and think about this. Not everything that prosecutors come into possession of during a criminal investigation is necessarily grand jury material. For example, somebody could conduct a search warrant and get all kinds of incriminating videotapes from, you know, the Jeffrey Epstein’s Island and that’s not grand jury material. So, that literally has nothing to do with what Donald Trump just posted saying, I’m directing Pam Bondi to, you know, release pertinent grand jury material. There are so many games that are being played here, semantic games and otherwise that you know I I think this is all for show. Glenn, can you talk about what the grand jury information is versus what the rest of the files would be in the Epstein files? The grand jury testimony only accounts for some small percentage of of the information contained within the broader file. Is that correct? That’s correct. However, grand jury materials are far more expansive than that. And here here’s why. Anytime we issue a grand jury subpoena, it may be for witness testimony. So once that witness testifies before the grand jury, that’s a secret proceeding by law. The transcript of that witness’s testimony, clearly grand jury protected material. However, people should know some other things. When we subpoena somebody to the grand jury, we almost always will sit down with them in advance of their grand jury testimony in my office, for example, with an agent or a detective present to witness everything and document it. And we’ll do a very, very long interview in advance of the grand jury because we want to make sure that this witness has relevant evidence to provide, is prepared to provide it in an organized way. We might even do a a sample Q&A, a test run, so they’re comfortable with respect to their upcoming testimony before the grand jury. And all of that um interaction in my office that provides tons of information relevant to the investigation, that’s also covered by 6E um secrecy laws. Beyond that, if I issue a grand jury subpoena for bank records or phone records or cellside information or social media records or videotapes or all of that once it’s acquired by a grand jury subpoena, that is all grand jury privileged material. So, you know, there there it’s a it’s a pretty big umbrella under which so much of the evidence sits that is protected by grand jury secrecy rules. However, the flip side of the coin is if I invite a witness in, maybe a friendly witness, uh maybe some victims or some eyewitnesses to some of what Jeffrey Epstein did. If I invite them into my office for an interview without issuing them a grand jury subpoena, I’m down in the legal weeds now. But guess what? That’s not grand jury protected material. Right. So, so in theory, prosecutors could have spoken with people, even people that were heavily involved in the whole Jeffrey Epstein saga, and they wouldn’t even be present in that grand jury information. Tons and tons and tons of evidence and information pours in to a sizable criminal investigation that is not grand jury material. Therefore, there is no prohibition against releasing it. At least not a grand jury secrecy prohibition. And I mean DOJ is typically not in the business of just kind of willy-nilly releasing information about a pending case or an ongoing investigation. Now people might say, well this investigation is no longer pending. Indeed, you know, the criminal cases seem to be complete even though Gileain Maxwell has asked the Supreme Court to review her conviction. Um, but do you think there are other people in the Epstein files who may have criminal exposure for, you know, what they did, you know, with or, you know, that was arranged by Jeffrey Epstein, maybe. So, you know, so many moving pieces here, but, you know, what I keep coming back to is I have a feeling Pam Bondi will continue to protect Donald Trump. This is an attorney general, Brian, who is sending DOJ lawyers into court every day to argue that the unlawful acts of Donald Trump are lawful and the unconstitutional acts of Donald Trump are constitutional. Do we really think she’s going to release anything that might make Donald Trump look bad, never mind make it look like he might have criminal exposure? There’s also the fact that right now Donald Trump, what he wants more than anything is delay. He needs to get the heat off of him. And so, first of all, they’re they’re the Congress is heading toward uh its recess, so they’ll have some heat off of them because they’ve uh been asked multiple times by the Democrats to release the files. Every time they refuse to do it, they block these efforts by the Democrats. But Trump needs to buy himself some time. And so, I guess the question here becomes, how long will this process take? Because the alternative is releasing the files that they have. Pam Bondi herself said they were on her desk. Presumably, the attorney general of the United States would have direct access to this stuff. And so if she wanted to get this stuff out quickly, she has the ability to do so. But by going this route, by going the grand jury route where she needs to get uh approval by a judge, how long can this all take? Well, here here’s the thing. You can get uh court approval very rapidly, literally within 24 or 48 hours if there’s a demonstrated need to secure that court approval, that um that approval by a judge quickly. Um, but they can also drag this out as long as they want. But here’s what I’ll say about the strategy, the tactic of dragging everything out until people either forget about it or Trump does something else lawless and outrageous that then captures the public’s attention and obsesses the media in the process. It it looks like this story may have legs in a way other stories um have not. And the reason I say that is because it looks like there is a segment of MAGA world that has turned against Donald Trump and in response he’s turned on them. He’s called them weaklings if they continue to obsess about or be interested in the Epstein story. You’ve got hard right-wing social media influencers who are almost always on Donald Trump’s side who are now seemingly turning against him. some of them. You have members of Congress, including MAGA Mike Johnson, who’s now calling for transparency when it comes to the Epstein files. I mean, it looks like dragging this out may only build the opposition against Trump from people who are usually in his corner. So, the the calculation in this one feels a little bit different given the reporting. All right. Finally, Glenn, let’s finish off with this. Are we going to have any insight into exactly what Pam Bondi asks the judge here? So, if if she, for example, wants to offer up some narrow search, I feel like that would be important for us to know. Like, if she’s just looking at something that doesn’t have to do with Donald Trump or has to do with with Democrats, for example, that would be relevant information for the broader public to have some insight into. And so, are we going to be able to have some exposure into what she’s asking, or is that completely opaque and between the attorney general and the judge who she’s requesting this info from? Ryan, I’m glad you asked that question. Um, in knee-jerk fashion, I want to say that we will have no transparency into what Pam Bondi requests the judge to release or authorize the release of. The reason I say that is when we file a motion seeking the release of or discussing in any way grand jury protected material, we always file it under seal. So it is not publicly available. But here’s the thing. Judges after they’ve made a decision on a motion, let’s assume a judge grants Pam Bondi’s motion to release some portion of the grand jury materials. The judge will then have the authority to unseal the motion that that DOJ that Pam Bondi filed seeking the release of certain materials. So, you know, Pam Bondi might be able to keep under wraps for a certain amount of time what her attorneys, what the DOJ attorneys, who for whatever reason don’t really have any need for their bar license, so they engage in this kind of behavior on behalf of a corrupt president, um, she may have some opportunity to keep it under seal for a period of time, but ultimately once it’s in the hands of the judge and the judge rules, the judge will then have the authority to order it unsealed so the public can see that maybe what Pam Bondi requested be unsealed is not quite as thorough, sweeping, and comprehensive as it could have been. Right. Well, look, things are moving very quickly and we get new updates by the day. So, for those who are watching right now, if you’d like to follow along and get these updates as they break, please make sure to subscribe to both of our channels. The links are right here on the screen. Completely free to subscribe, but it’s the best way to support our work. I’m Brian Tyler Cohen and I’m Glenn Kersner. You’re watching the Legal Breakdown. [Music]

Legal Breakdown episode 559: @GlennKirschner2 discusses Trump & Bondi offering a small concession on Epstein case.

For more from Brian Tyler Cohen:
Straight-news titled YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@briantylercohennews
YouTube (español): https://www.youtube.com/@briantylercohenespanol
Order my #1 NYT bestselling book: https://www.harpercollins.com/pages/shameless
Newsletter: https://plus.briantylercohen.com
Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/briantylercohen
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/36UvEHs
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0066rKCBIycIMI4os6Ec5V
Twitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohen
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohen
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohen
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@briantylercohen
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/briantylercohen.bsky.social
Threads: https://www.threads.net/@briantylercohen