https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbfU9CwGtjI
Transcript:
So, this is big
This is big Epstein news that Donald Trump definitely does not want us talking about, but I'm going to talk about it
And there are some things about this that I want to explain
Now, we've learned that the Epstein estate settled with a victim, but the estate did not settle with the victim just on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein.
and whatever he did to this victim, but also on behalf of Donald Trump
Watch this. >> But we do know that Khan Epstein's uh accountant testified that the Epstein estate settled with Jane Doe number four, a very important Jane Doe
Jane Doe number four's files were hidden until Trump bombed Iran and changed the subject.
Jane Doe's number four files were only found missing because of the Maxwell discovery and people noticed that bait stamps numbers numbers that lawyers use to identify documents were missing
So we get finally right after bombing Iran, we get the Jane Doe number four files
Now lying to the FBI is a crime.
Martha Stewart went to jail for it
All people interviewed by the FBI are told that Jane do number four alleged to the FBI that Epstein abused her when she was 13 and that Trump abused her when he she she was 15
Khan Epstein's accountant testified that the Epstein estate settled with Jane Joe number four for both Epstein and Trump
His lawyer tried to walk that back.
Inde refused to confirm or deny that
Now, how do we get to the bottom of that
Congress passes a law invalidating all NDAs from the Trump or the Trump Organization, from Epstein, any of his entities, from the estate, or based on any activities at the Epstein properties
Let's have the truth
We want the truth
No NDAs.
So Jane Doe number four told the FBI that when she was a teenager that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her
Now we've already known this
I've I've talked about this several times
The FBI interviewed this victim on multiple occasions and they found her to be credible
That the FBI does not interview a victim over and over again if they do not find that victim to be credible.
And according to the files, the FBI wanted to pursue this, but that the victim didn't want to
She didn't want to go any further for fear of retribution
Now, what's also important to note, and as was mentioned in this clip, is that when you make a statement to the FBI, if you lie, that is a felony
You can go to prison for lying to the FBI.
Many people have gone to prison for lying to the FBI
It happens all the time when they when they are going after people if there's an investigation often times they go after people for lying to the FBI when they can't get any other criminal charges to stick but they know that people have lied to them in the course of their investigation.
They go after them for lying
So this is actually a fairly common crime
It happens all the time that people are prosecuted for lying to the FBI and they are warned at the outset before giving a statement
They are warned if you lie to us you can go to prison
And yet this woman testified many times or told the FBI many times about what happened to her, what was done to her by Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump.
and she's never been charged with lying to the FBI
Now, this tells you everything you need to know about how Donald Trump has conducted himself over the last year and it tells you why he is so desperate for his party to maintain control of Congress in the midterms and why he will stop at nothing to rig the outcome of the election if he possibly can.
because this is exactly the kind of thing that can be exposed and God only knows what else is in those files that they're covering up because remember this is what's been released
There are millions of pages of documents that have not been released and if we have already learned this stuff, imagine what is still being covered up.
And that's why Donald Trump will do whatever it takes including starting an illegal war with Iran
I am convinced that the timing of this war had everything to do with the Epstein Trump coverup
Now, we may have Trump may have done this at some point in time anyway, but I think the timing was a panic move.
And there's other things to indicate that they did not plan to go in when they did
For example, uh the fact that they were completely unprepared to deal with Iran's closing of the Strait of Hormuz, which of course was anticipated
Uh they certainly would have been advised that Iran would do this
Trump didn't care
He had to cover this up because what was happening right before Trump went into Iran, Trump knew this was coming out and so he started bombing Iran to distract from this.
Also, at the time, there was a bunch of other stuff coming out that was starting to get traction that was very, very bad for Donald Trump
So, all of this is is is coming um to a head on the Friday before we started bombing Iran
And when did when did that happen
Early Saturday morning, Trump couldn't take it anymore
It the story was starting to get traction.
So, bomb Iran
So, they weren't prepared for the straight of horm
They weren't prepared to evacuate Americans out of the Middle East
Remember that the State Department told Americans to get the hell out of the Middle East after the war started, but said, "Sorry, h we can't we can't get you out
There's nothing we can do.
" Those are the kinds of things that would have been done in advance or they at least would have had a plan to evacuate these people
They had no plan because they weren't planning to go in when they did
This was a panic move
Anyway, and by the way, one more thing about the midterms, covering his ass for what he did to children with his best friend Jeffrey Epstein and all of the other things that he has done, all the other crimes that he has committed before he took office and since taking office.
That's what he's trying to cover up
He doesn't give a [ __ ] about losing control of Congress because he cares about passing legislation
He doesn't pass legislation for the most part
He does everything on his own
He does everything by executive order
His party controls both houses of Congress as it is.
And he goes around them all the time
He spends money without congressional approval
He raises money, taxes, and illegal tariffs and all these things without congressional approval
He goes to war without congressional approval
He doesn't need Congress
He doesn't care about Congress
So if Democrats win control of Congress from a legislative standpoint, does that really matter
No, he doesn't give a [ __ ] He doesn't legislate and he doesn't care much about policy or anyway.
I mean, he doesn't care about any of that stuff
He cares about himself
So, the only reason he cares about maintaining control of Congress is to continue to cover his ass
That's the only reason
Now, I want to deal with something that she said in this video because I hear this all the time.
In the age of Trump, we have heard a lot about NDAs, non-disclosure agreements, because Donald Trump for decades has been forcing people he works with and does business with and all of this to sign non-disclosure agreements to keep their mouths shut because he's such a [ __ ] slimeball
He's such a criminal
He's got to cover his ass.
And this is one of the things he learned from from uh Roy Conn to get these non-disclosure agreements from everyone
And so this is really important because in all of the discussions over all these years about non-disclosure agreements, there's never any discussion about what the hell is a non-disclosure agreement and what effect do they have
Are they even lawful
How do you how do you enforce a non-disclosure agreement
And what happens if you violate a non-disclosure agreement
And and these things are particularly particularly pertinent here when it
comes to Donald Trump's cover up of what he did with his best friend Jeffrey Epstein
Now, the recommendation that this attorney offers in this video is to for Congress to pass a law invalidating all non-disclosure agreements relative to all of this Epstein stuff
So, anything having to do with Epstein and Trump and all these Epstein victims and everything having to do with this that you would just pass a law saying those non-disclosure agreements are null and void.
And so that would allow people who are subject to these NDAs uh to come forward and speak
But beyond that, really as a legal matter for most of these NDAs, you don't even need to because here's what you need to know
Here's the truth about non-disclosure agreements
They're just contracts.
That's what a non-disclosure agreement is
It's a contract whereby you are bound legally to keep your mouth shut about whatever it is
However, you can easily get around a lot of these NDAs
As I said, an NDA is just a contract
So, it needs the requisites that make all contracts binding
For example, there must be consideration given by both parties to a contract.
So if if there is a victim or anyone else who Donald Trump wants to keep quiet and who is forced to sign an NDA, if they did not receive something of value in exchange for signing that NDA, then that NDA has no legal no legal weight whatsoever
It's null and void
It's mean it's a meaningless piece of paper
Now, how would you let's step back for a second.
How would you enforce an NDA
Right
Say someone was required to keep their mouth shut about Donald Trump and they spill the beans
They're like, "Fuck this
I don't care about the NDA
I'm going to I'm going to tell you what I know about this slime ball." What could happen
Is it a crime
Could they go to Could they be prosecuted for this
No, it's not a crime.
So, the only thing that could happen is that Donald Trump could sue them
That's it
So what would he sue them for
If he gave them money to keep their mouth shut, he can sue them to recoup that money
That's pretty much it
And if he didn't give them any money or anything else of value in exchange for signing that NDA, then when he goes to sue that person, the court, the judge is going to throw it out of court.
There's going to the first motion that's going to be made is that there was no there was nothing enforceable
This is not an an enforcable contract
There was no consideration given
My client didn't get [ __ ] for signing this NDA
So that's a basic of contract law
If there's no consideration, then there is no contract.
You don't have a valid legal contract just because you sign your name to something
there's other prerequisites that are required legally to make that a binding contract
So consideration is one thing and then even if again it's not a crime
So even if there was consideration given and it is a binding legal contract
So then what's the worst that can happen
Now you got to give the money back that you were given to keep your mouth shut.
Now as to that let me tell you something
If any of these victims came forward and told what they know about Trump and Trump sued them and won and they had to cough over some money, uh, I guarantee you we can crowdsource way more money than those victims will have had to pay over to Donald Trump
Okay
We can compensate those victims just through a GoFundMe or or some other form of crowdsourcing.
In fact, they will make so much more money above what they had to shell out to Donald Trump from the crowd sourcing
But that's not going to happen anyway
Donald Trump's not going to sue anybody
Have you noticed he never sues anybody over Epstein
He sues people over anything
He sues people over polls that he doesn't like.
Yet, look at what everybody has said about him
People have literally accused him of raping children
He hasn't sued anyone
Why do you think that is
because he doesn't want to have to go through discovery
He doesn't want to have to testify under oath about what he and his best friend Jeffrey Epstein did to children because that's what would happen.
Okay
There's no fifth amendment right to remain silent in a civil lawsuit
You sue somebody, you're going to be put under oath and everything else, subpoenas and all of this stuff that's going to be part of of discovery
Witnesses of all kinds are going to have to testify
No way
There's no way Trump is going to put himself through that.
Which is exactly why he has never sued anyone over the Epstein stuff
And in in addition to the fact that truth is an absolute defense to defamation
So if somebody made an allegation against Trump, say accused him of having done something criminal to a child, guess what
Establishing that he did that is an absolute defense to a defamation uh lawsuit.
But he's not going to sue anyone anyway
Now, but that's the only way you go about invalidating or that's the only way you go about enforcing an NDA
If somebody talks that was subject to an NDA, that's the only way to enforce it
You'd have to bring a lawsuit
Nobody's going to jail
It's not a crime
Maybe if you lose, you have to cough up some money.
Now, talked about ways to get around an NDA
So you have lack of consideration as a way to get around a cont any contract but specifically here an NDA
Uh if an NDA is overly broad a court can find that that NDA is null and void
You know if it says you can never talk about me in any way
All right that's going to be void on its face for being overly broad.
Now, here are some things that are really pertinent to any NDAs relevant to Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein
You cannot, it is null and void
It would be an illegal NDA that a court would give no weight to if that NDA, the purpose of the NDA was to hide a crime
So, if Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump committed crimes against this person and the NDA that they made her sign was to cover up that crime, a judge is going to throw that throw that out.
They're going to say, "All right, this this uh this NDA is null and void." Or more broadly speaking, if the NDA violates public policy in some way, for example, to silence a whistleblower, right
And this is especially pertinent in terms of all these people inside the government that Donald Trump has forced to sign NDAs, which he does with people in the government
Okay, those are void.
They're void on their face
If someone has found out about something illegal that is happening in the Trump administration and they want to come forward as a whistleblower, an NDA is not going to stop them
If what's Trump going to do
He's gonna instruct the Department of Justice to sue that person for coming forward as a whistleblower
Okay, fine.
A judge is going to toss that lawsuit like that
They're going to say that that violates public policy
You can't use NDAs to silent whistleblowers
You can't use NDAs, as another example, to prevent someone from from cooperating with law enforcement
If Trump and Epstein had NDAs with victims that said, "You can't tell [ __ ] to the police.
You're gonna have to keep your mouth shut and not tell any law enforcement what we did to you
All right, that violate that that that violates uh public policy
That's against public policy
A judge would throw that out in a second
That NDA, even if they were given consideration, even if they gave that person a ton of money to keep their mouth shut, the purpose of the NDA is for them not to cooperate with law enforcement and be thrown out of there.
or even even if just in the application um of the NDA, in the invocation of the NDA were to stop or or to punish a person for um cooperating with law enforcement, that would violate public policy and a judge would throw it out
Or for another example, if Congress wants a person to testify, that's public policy right there.
And for someone to say, "Well, I I signed an NDA." And you know, you see this kind of thing all the time
Witnesses say, "Oh, well, I I'd like to tell you, but I signed an NDA." [ __ ] That's not a valid reason not to testify
What's going to happen if you testify
They should make these [ __ ] testify because what's going to happen
Okay, then Trump sues them for testifying before Congress.
That's going to get thrown right out of court just like that
And then of course if the if the person signs an NDA and they were coerced or they signed under duress or as a result of fraud, they were threatened, whatever it is, whether they got money, whether there was consideration involved or not
Look, if you put a gun to somebody's head and say, "Hey, if you don't want this to go very badly for you, take this million dollars and sign this NDA.
" That's not legal
Just because you gave them a million dollars, that was under duress
That was under the threat that their brains would be splattered all over the desk if they didn't sign
That that NDA is null and void and would be given no legal weight by a court
Anyway, now I say this all in the context of victims of Epstein and Trump who may have signed non-disclosure agreements.
Now, I'm not talking about them specifically
I don't know their specific situations
I don't know why they have not spoken out publicly
You know, there's lots of reasons other than just an NDA why some of these victims might want to keep their mouth shut and not come forward
Uh not the least of which is they would be they would immediately become a target for Trump's violent mob.
And so that's I mean that's a pretty compelling reason that these people in addition to all kinds of other reasons not wanting I mean not wanting to talk about that publicly but certainly having a target put on you
Okay
Nobody knows what this violent Trump mob would do
They're violent
They're criminal
So, I can understand.
But just generally speaking, I'm so sick of hearing about NDAs
Oh, well, Trump keeps everybody quiet by NDAs
So [ __ ] what
I guarantee you that most of these NDAs have are void
They would be void if they were ever challenged
And again, the only way they get challenged is if Trump sues the person
That's it
The police aren't going to come knocking on anyone's door if someone violates an NDA
It's not a crime.
It would be a civil lawsuit at worst
And that's only if Trump brought a lawsuit
And then for all of these reasons, most of which probably would apply in most of these situations, these NDAs would be null and void
I I people seem to think that there's some magic legal principle that if you sign your name to something, that's it.
Now it's a legal binding contract because you put your name on a piece of paper
No, that's not how contract law works
There's got to be a whole other things that go along with that contract to make it legally binding
And I bet you in most if not all of these NDAs that Donald Trump has, certainly the ones with respect to his victims victims of various kinds over the years who he has sought to keep quiet.
I guarantee you that all most if not all of those would be legally null and void
Just because someone signs it, that doesn't mean anything
Anyway, um as much as Donald Trump wants all this Epstein stuff to go away, it ain't going away
I mean, his war in Iran, his illegal war in Iran has been very successful thus far in its primary goal.
You know, you hear a lot of conversation about, oh, what's the goal
What's the objective
Regime change, degrade Iran's military, uh, destroy, obliterate their nuclear program
You hear all of these shifting uh, objectives for this illegal war
They all missed the mark
That's not the reason Trump went to war with Iran.
Epstein, what Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein did to children is why Donald Trump went to war with Iran
That's it
And in and given that that was the objective to distract from Epstein, what he did with Epstein, um, in that regard at least, this war with Iran has been highly successful because not too many people right now are focused on Epstein, but it's still percolating out there.
It's not going away
Maybe it's the thing that brings this criminal piece of [ __ ] down
One can only hope
All right, that's it.