Connect with us

International

Trump DOJ to share Epstein documents with House Oversight Committee this week

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Rep. James Comer said the Department of Justice complied with a request to provide the records before the deadline.

The Trump administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) is preparing to share documents pertaining to notorious dead predator Jeffrey Epstein with members of Congress by Friday, House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer announced.

“Officials with the Department of Justice have informed us that the Department will begin to provide Epstein-related records to the Oversight Committee this week on Friday,” Comer, a Republican from Kentucky, announced Monday, according to a Daily Wire report. “There are many records in DOJ’s custody, and it will take the Department time to produce all the records and ensure the identification of victims and any child sexual abuse material are redacted. I appreciate the Trump Administration’s commitment to transparency and efforts to provide the American people with information about this matter.”

Comer filed a subpoena for the material on August 5; the deadline for compliance was August 19.

A prominent investor with years of associations throughout American politics, business, and high society, Epstein killed himself in his cell at New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in August 2019 while being held on charges of trafficking underaged girls to be raped by himself and wealthy associates in a high-profile case that was believed to implicate many prominent figures around the world.

The case has long been a source of concern due to the mysteries surrounding the billionaire financier’s private Caribbean retreat (dubbed “Pedophile Island” by locals), Epstein’s close association with major public figures such as former President Bill Clinton, President Donald Trump, and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates; and the botched past prosecutions and lax punishment for his previous crimes. Epstein’s death ended any possibility of him naming any public figures who may have taken part in his crimes, sparking impassioned conspiracy speculation online.

Many hoped the election of Trump would bring with it new disclosures (egged on by MAGA personalities such as future Vice President JD Vance), but instead the issue has become a political headache for the administration. The White House elicited a backlash in February when several prominent MAGA influencers were invited for exclusive first access to what was billed as “The Epstein Files: Phase 1,” but turned out to largely consist of old, already-public material.

After months of dueling and contradictory statements from administration officials about who was in possession of what and the state of the review, in July the DOJ and FBI released a joint memo declaring the review complete, affirming Epstein killed himself after all, declining to release previously sealed material, and most controversially announcing, “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

Discontent swelled to outrage on social media, for reasons ranging from fear that there remain unidentified offenders evading justice, to suspicion that powerful figures still had enough influence to maintain a cover-up, to simple belief that influencers had gotten audiences’ hopes up by over-promising dramatic twists that reality was never going to match.

Taking on renewed relevance amid this tumult was Epstein’s former lover and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year prison sentence. In attempts to mollify critics, the Trump DOJ moved to re-interview Maxwell and have her grand jury materials unsealed, though a judge blocked the latter.

Trump and Epstein were friendly associates in the president’s days as a liberal celebrity businessman, through which Trump flew on Epstein’s private jet, but no evidence linking Trump to Epstein’s crimes has ever emerged, and in fact Trump eventually banned him from his Mar-a-Lago club for assaulting an underage girl (though Trump himself has strangely offered a less-flattering explanation for their falling out in recent months, that Epstein poached employees from him).

“I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein’s defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump,” attorney David Schoen says.

In July, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump was one of several people who contributed a “bawdy letter” to an album for Epstein’s 50th birthday. Among the salacious details of Trump’s submission were lines that the two “have certain things in common” and a wish that “every day be another wonderful secret.” Trump vociferously denied writing the letter, an original copy of which has not yet been produced.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Automotive

Big Auto Wants Your Data. Trump and Congress Aren’t Having It.

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Ken Blackwell

Congress is not going to allow Big Auto to sideline consumer privacy and safety while getting subsidized massively by the federal government.

That is because, in late September, by an overwhelming vote of 50 to 1, Chairman Brett Guthrie’s (R-KY) House Energy & Commerce Committee joined the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee in passing the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act.

This legislation is in response to some automakers removing AM radios from new model vehicles despite pleas from America’s public safety community not to do so.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

Advisors to President Trump have argued they continue doing so for financial reasons — because they want to force increased traffic onto their infotainment systems, which collects drivers’ personal information and sells it to third parties.

“They’d rather force consumers to use their infotainment devices — which collect and sell their third-party data — than protect American lives,” Corey Lewandowski, President Trump’s 2016 campaign manager and senior adviser to his 2020 and 2024 campaigns, stated.

 No one in Congress likes that the auto companies are doing this. That is why the bill has broad bipartisan support with over 300 cosponsors in the House as well as a filibuster-proof level of support in the Senate.

The entirety of America’s public safety community spanning the federal, state, and local levels, insists AM radio remaining in cars is critical for protecting the nation’s emergency alerting systems. These systems rely heavily upon AM radio, the only communication method that has stayed reliably accessible during many disasters such as the Sept.11 terrorist attack and major disasters like Hurricanes Katrina, Sandy, and most recently, Helene.

Brendan Carr, the current chairman of President Trump’s FCC, nominated by President Trump, has also endorsed the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act. In a statement, Carr said that “millions of Americans depend on the value of AM radio and the local news that AM broadcasters offer in communities across the country.” He also recounted hearing firsthand stories of Hurricane Helene victims who “could only access lifesaving information in the days following the storm by tuning into their AM radios.”

AM radio also serves another purpose that the elites in Silicon Valley and Detroit often forget: it keeps rural and working-class America connected. Millions of people outside the big cities rely on AM for local news, farm reports, weather alerts, and even community events. For many small towns, AM stations are a lifeline—far more reliable than expensive streaming services or spotty cell coverage. Pulling it out of cars is yet another way of telling Middle America: “you don’t matter.”

Of course, no good idea in Washington is safe from special interests.

Despite the broad support within Congress, the administration, and throughout the public safety and first responder communities, the bill has faced a full-court press by the musicFIRST Coalition — a group backed by the Recording Industry of America — to tank the legislation unless it is tied to unrelated music royalty reform legislation.  That’s cronyism politics at its worst—holding public safety hostage to squeeze out another payday.

However, now that the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act has passed both committees by overwhelming margins, the only stop left for the legislation is the House and Senate Floor — meaning Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and House Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) must call it up for a roll call vote.

At the heart of this fight is more than just whether a radio dial stays in your dashboard. It’s about whether Americans can trust that their safety won’t be sacrificed for corporate profit.

It’s also about data privacy. Automakers and Big Tech are eager to funnel drivers into infotainment systems that monitor every move, harvest personal information, and sell it to the highest bidder. AM radio doesn’t spy on you. It doesn’t crash when the grid goes down. It doesn’t put profit ahead of people. It just works.

For the sake of both public safety and personal freedom, Congress should make sure it stays that way.

Ken Blackwell (@KenBlackwell) is an adviser to the Family Research Council and a chair at the America First Policy Institute. He is a former Mayor of Cincinnati, Ohio, Ohio Treasurer and Secretary of State, and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. He is also a former member of the Trump transition team.

Continue Reading

International

Trump says U.S. in ‘armed conflict’ with drug cartels in Caribbean

Published on

President Donald Trump told Congress that the U.S. is engaged in “armed conflict” with drug cartels in the Caribbean shortly after ordering four military strikes on suspected drug boats in the region.

“The President determined that the United States is in a non-international armed conflict with these designated terrorist organizations,” according to the confidential notice the administration sent to Congress. Trump directed the U.S. Department of War to “conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict.”

“The United States has now reached a critical point where we must use force in self-defense and defense of others against the ongoing attacks by these designated terrorist organizations,” the memo said.

Trump ordered military strikes on Sept. 2, Sept. 15, Sept. 19 and Oct. 3 on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean. Trump said the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was using the boats to smuggle drugs to the U.S.

On his second day in office in his second term, Trump issued an executive order designating Mexican cartels, the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, and Salvadoran La Mara Salvatrucha (known as MS-13), as foreign terrorist organizations and specially designated global terrorists under the U.S. Constitution, Immigration and Nationality Act and International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The U.S. said the four boat strikes resulted in 21 deaths. The Sept. 2 attack killed 11. The strike on Sept. 15 killed three, as did the strike on Sept. 19. The Oct. 3 attack killed four. U.S. officials have released a few details about the strikes. Trump posted videos of two strikes on social media. He told reporters about the third. U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth posted a video of the fourth strike, which killed four people, on social media on Friday.

“Our intelligence, without a doubt, confirmed that this vessel was trafficking narcotics, the people onboard were narco-terrorists, and they were operating on a known narco-trafficking transit route,” the secretary of War wrote. “These strikes will continue until the attacks on the American people are over!!!!”

David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, said the military strikes were a significant change in U.S. policy and could pose legal challenges.

“The strikes are both illegal and unconstitutional,” he told The Center Square. “The law is clear that the military is only authorized to intercept vessels to communicate with them and refer them to civilian law enforcement. The Constitution prohibits war without congressional authorization, and even in a war, the military may not intentionally kill civilians.”

After one of the U.S. strikes against a speedboat, agents from the Dominican Republic’s National Drug Control Directorate and the Dominican Republic Navy seized 377 packages of suspected cocaine about 80 nautical miles south of Beata Island, Pedernales province.

Bier said President Barack Obama and Trump, during their first terms, used the military to kill suspected terrorists abroad, but not drug suspects.

“There is some precedent for the U.S. covertly helping foreign countries use their militaries to kill drug suspects, which was exposed in 2011 when the CIA helped kill a U.S. missionary in Peru,” he said.

However, Trump’s tactics won’t dent drug supplies in the U.S significantly, Bier said.

“It will certainly reduce drug trafficking by boats near Venezuela, but will do little to reduce total supply coming to the United States because drug trafficking is a global phenomenon with a variety of channels,” Bier told The Center Square.

The White House said the president is protecting Americans.

“As we have said many times, the President acted in line with the law of armed conflict to protect our country from those trying to bring deadly poison to our shores, and he is delivering on his promise to take on the cartels and eliminate these national security threats from murdering more Americans,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said.

After the first boat strike on Sept. 2, Trump warned smugglers operating in the area.

“The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the United States,” Trump wrote in a social media post. “The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE!”

In late September, Colombian President Gustavo Petro called for a criminal investigation into Trump and other U.S. officials after the deadly strikes on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean. Petro said “unarmed young people are being shot at with missiles in the open seas” moments after taking the podium at the annual meeting of the U.N. General Assembly in New York City.

“Criminal proceedings must be opened against those officials, who are from the U.S., even if it includes the highest-ranking official who gave the order: President Trump,” Petro said.

Vice President J.D. Vance has defended the strikes over the objections of some members of his own party.

“Killing cartel members who poison our fellow citizens is the highest and best use of our military,” Vance wrote Sept. 6 on social media.

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., pushed back.

“Vance says killing people he accuses of a crime is the ‘highest and best use of the military.’ Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird? Did he ever wonder what might happen if the accused were immediately executed without trial or representation?? What a despicable and thoughtless sentiment it is to glorify killing someone without a trial,” Paul responded.

Continue Reading

Trending

X