Tense moments about Epstein files during Kash Patel hearing

— Director Patel, before you joined the FBI, you railed against it for covering up Jeffrey Epstein's human trafficking ring.

Let me refresh your memory with this clip.

— Has Epstein's list, they're sitting on it. That doesn't seem like something you should do. You're protecting the world's foremost predator. That seems like an evil thing to do. Regardless of who may be embarrassed in the release of that list, why is the FBI protecting the greatest pederast, the largest scale pederast

in human history?

Simple, because of who's on that list.

So you finished that December 2023 interview with a challenge to the FBI and harsh words for Republicans in Congress for not getting the Epstein files out to the public.

You can see this clip. And let us know who the pedophiles are.

Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are, you said. You emphasize that the president and FBI director each had complete authority to release Epstein's client list. You said Epstein's black book is under the, quote, direct control of the director of the

FBI.

Look at this clip.

This is way off the topic, but who has Jeffrey Epstein's?

Black Book?

Black Book.

FBI.

But who?

That is, I mean, there's.

Oh, that's under direct control of the director of the FBI.

All right, so you were sworn in as director more than 200 days ago. Now the Black Book is under your direct control. So why haven't you released the names of Epstein's co-conspirators in the rape and sex trafficking of young women and girls?

The Rolodex, which is what everybody colloquially refers to

as the Black Book, has been released.

Oh, no, you're talking about what the journalist got five years ago? No, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about what you were talking about there.

The Black Book under the direct control of FBI director.

We have released more material than anyone else before. The Biden administration, Obama administration had the exact opportunities to release this material. And they never did. And if you are selling the men and women of the FBI, we're not going after child predators. Hang on, you said we're not going after child predators. 1,500 child predators arrested this year.

35% increase.

I'll reclaim my time.

4,700 child victims.

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to reclaim my time if you could instruct the witness. Why have you changed your position? There you were saying it's under the direct control of the FBI director and all of it should be released.

Why have you changed your position? Everything that has been lawfully permitted to be released has been released. And as I told you, the investigation was limited. And let me make something crystal clear. I never said Jeffrey Epstein didn't traffic other people, other women, and they're not other victims. This is the investigation we were given from 2006,

seven and eight, and the search warrants from 2006, seven and eight.

That's what we're working with. Wait, have you released all of the stuff that the FBI has seized from Epstein's house? The computers, the emails, the file cabinets, the documents? What about the financial records?

Have you released all of that?

Everything the court has allowed us to release.

Which court are you talking about?

Three separate federal courts have come in and said. We're talking about the evidence you've got. It's got nothing to do with what those courts have. Do you have any idea how the law works? Do you want me to break the law in a federal judge's order

to satisfy your curiosity? No, I want you to follow your own word, Director Patel. You said up there it was under the direct control of the FBI director.

He had the black book.

And everything I have direct control over, you said. We have gone to court and everything we have direct control over.

Complete your sentence.

You said everything.

We're releasing.

He'd like to complete his answer.

You began the sentence, everything you have direct control over, I, and then you stop that sentence.

You've released everything that you have direct control over.

I have direct control over and can lawfully release.

If you're not familiar with the court orders, that's not my fault.

Oh, I'm perfectly familiar with them.

How did we prosecute Ghislaine Maxwell?

She was prosecuted with the investigatory material that was collected from 2001 and 2005. Because of the non-prosecution agreements and the court orders on the investigations and search warrants, we were not able to develop new information.

And oh, by the way, Jeffrey Epstein was out for 12 years and the Obama and Biden administration did nothing to look at his work, his pedophile network. If you want to blame me, that's fine.

But now you're blaming the men and women

who conducted this great search. No, stop that. I'm not blaming anybody other than you. You're not keeping your word. You said that you would release all of the materials under your direct control.

Has anyone released more information on Epstein than I have? Has anyone? Much more... Did Comey, did Wray? Much, much more...

Did they? But it's coming out in dribs and drabs. Why don't you just release the entire file as you promised to do?

I literally just told you, there are multiple federal court orders. I'm not gonna break the law to satisfy your curiosity. You didn't join us when we filed court to release the court orders. You could have.

You have lawyers. You could have shown up.

You didn't do that.

That's a tiny fraction of the material we're talking about. That is not. It is a tiny fraction. How do you know that? Have you seen everything?

It's all misdirected.

How do you know that?

The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. Patel, does Donald Trump appear anywhere in the Epstein files?

I'm sorry.

Could you say that again?

It's not a complicated question.

Does Donald Trump appear anywhere in the Epstein files? I didn't say it was a complicated question. I just didn't hear you, so my apologies. We have released where President Trump's name's in the Epstein files and everybody else, and all credible information that we are legally allowed

to release has been released.

All right, so let's go through that. You're referring to court orders that prohibit you from releasing grand jury testimony under Rule 6e. Is that what you're referring to when you say, as the law allows?

That's a piece of it.

Really? What other evidence do those three court orders you cited prohibit from being released?

Information that was collected pursuant to those search warrants that were limited in

fashion.

Wrong. That's not what the court order says and that's not under 6E.

And I said that's 6E and I said there was others and I'm answering that there are sealed court order documents, there are protective orders.

They are unsealed as part of discovery given to Ghislaine Maxwell. They are no longer sealed.

That's just not true. We can argue about it all you want.

Okay, well, you agree that there are... So, wait, your testimony here is that the reason why you are not releasing all of the videos that you have acknowledged, there are so many, and that the FBI spent thousands of hours of reviewing, the photographs, all of the,

and the photographs that you have, you're saying that you're not releasing those because there's a court order requiring them to be sealed? Is that your testimony?

Never said that about the videos. On the totality of the videos, of the thousands of images that were seized pursuant to the search warrants executed at the time, the overwhelming majority of that video is pornographic material that was downloaded from the internet and child sexual abuse material.

We will never release that.

Well as you should not release the victims, but if there are videos that relate to others who Epstein trafficked to such as maybe Prince Andrew or photographs that you have total control to release.

Yes, and if it exists.

So why haven't you released it?

Why are you supposing that that is a fact when in fact it is false?

Are you saying that I'm sitting on that evidence?

You're saying that none of the videos relate to anything relevant to the Jeffrey Epstein

trafficking murder?

Every single video that we have collected pursuant to the prior search warrants has been examined for the last 10 years. And every single video has been utilized for whatever prosecutions were able to be legally

brought. I'm not asking about prosecutions. I'm asking about why you aren't releasing the full Epstein files including the names of people who were involved in the sex ring that you promised to do before you became FBI director. I just told you I'm not gonna release downloaded porn of shit on the internet. I'm not asking about that. Fine. I'm asking about all the other files. What other videos? Tell me. Tell me. You're saying there are no videos that would be relevant to anyone else involved in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking.

Pursuant to Mr. Acosta's collection of information based on the search warrants.

That's all we have in our possession.

I understand. And I'm asking you. That stuff. That's all we got. So in that stuff, there's nothing that's related to any other sex trafficking, any other people engaged with Epstein in underage sex.

That's correct.

To my knowledge, no. Okay. Let's talk about the witness interviews. 302s of witness interviews. Those are not subject to the court order. Those are not subject to any fictional sealed order for a search warrant.

Why aren't you releasing those with the redacted names of the victims?

We are releasing as much as legally allowed. That's why we went back to the courts.

How is that not legally allowed?

Sir, do you know how court orders work?

Do you know how protective orders work?

Actually, Mr. Patel, I was a prosecutor, a real prosecutor for 10 years. I know exactly how court orders work. Oh, so I was a fake one. And I want to understand what the court order prevents you from releasing witness statements that the FBI took.

You should know that as a real prosecutor when the court hand downs a protective order

and a motion to seal, the material is sealed unless that judge weighs it.

So your testimony here is that all of those witness statements are under a court order,

a protective order.

We are providing everything we can legally provide.

No, that's not my question. My question is, why are those witness statements that are not grand jury testimony, that if they were under a protective order are no longer under a protective order, why are they not being released?

How are they not under a protective order?

Why are you not going to the court like you did for the grand jury testimony to unseal those records? The DOJ did go to the court. No, not on those records. Why aren't you going? You just went on grand jury. Time of the gentleman is expired. You are hiding the Epstein files. Time of the gentleman is expired. You are part of the cover-up. I've got four

documents I'd like to introduce into the record. The first one is Jeffrey Epstein's sick story played out for years in plain sight. And Acosta is quoted in here saying, I was told Epstein belonged to intelligence and to leave it alone. The second document is entitled, What Epstein's Bodyguard Warned About His CIA Connections. The third document is from Fox Digital. It's titled, Epstein's Private Calendar Reveals

Planned Meetings with Obama Admin Official, CIA Chief. And the last document is Wall Street Journal article that highlights Ehud Barak's 36 meetings with Jeffrey Epstein. He was the former Prime Minister of Israel and head of military intelligence for Israel. It may have held that title when he met Epstein.

And then, yes.

Without objection, the gentleman will hold for a second. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just one UC request. This is Judge Engelmeyer's decision from August in U.S. versus Epstein, stating, the government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files

dwarfs the 70-odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials.

Without objection. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Patel, I watched some of your Senate hearing yesterday when Senator Kennedy asked you, you've seen most of the files, who if anyone did Epstein traffic these women to besides himself? You replied, according to the transcript, there is no credible information that he trafficked them to anyone else.

You also said somewhere in the hearing and here today that the problem is that the case files are constrained by limited search warrants from 2006 to 2007 and that the non-prosecution agreement hamstrung future investigations. Those constraints only apply to Southern District of Florida. They do not apply to Southern District of New York, the location of the 2019 sex trafficking indictment, which produced many things, including a series of FD 302 documents.

According to victims who cooperated with the FBI in that investigation, these documents in FBI possession, your possession, detail at least 20 men including Mr. Jess Staley, CEO of Barclays Bank, who Jeffrey Epstein trafficked victims to. Victims including minors such as Virginia Roberts.

You free?

May she rest in peace. That list also includes at least 19 other individuals, one Hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars, one royal prince, one high profile individual in the music industry, one very prominent banker, one high profile government official, one high-profile government

official, one high-profile former politician, one owner of a car company in Italy, one rock star, one magician, at least six billionaires, including a billionaire from Canada. We know these people exist in the FBI files, the files that you control. I don't know exactly who they are, but the FBI does. Have you launched any investigations into any of these people and have you seen these 302 documents? Sir, I have asked my FBI agents to review

the entirety of the Epstein files and bring forth any credible information. And we're working with Congress not only to divulge that information and produce it to you, but any investigations that arise from any credible investigation will be brought. There have been no new materials brought to me

launching a new indictment.

So is the loophole here, or is it your assertion that these victims aren't credible? That the 302s maybe didn't produce credible statements that rise to a probable cause?

It's not my assertion, sir. It's the assertion of two different United States Attorney's Offices from three separate

administrations who investigated those same materials in live time. The 302 documents in the FBI's possession? They reviewed all that, yes sir. And so have you reviewed those 302 documents that were the victims name, the people who victimized them?

If I personally know, but the FBI has.

So how can you sit here and in front of the Senate and say there are no names? I said all information. I named one today. I said we are not in the we are not in the practice at the Department of Justice FBI of releasing victims names. That is not what we do. We are also not in the habit of releasing incredible

information. That's not what we do. But multiple authorities have looked at the entirety of what we have. Okay I got to move on here. Were you present when the AG had the Weiss House event when she released the binders to social media influencers?

I was, yes.

So if you're willing to meet with social media influencers who stood to benefit from the sensational and sad stories of these victims, will you meet with the victims as well?

The FBI will meet with anyone who has new information.

Will you personally meet with them? The FBI will meet with anyone who has new information. Will you personally meet with them? The FBI and the professionals who are handling the cases will. Were you instructed that it was important to release the documents to the Oversight Committee

on the day of my introduction of the discharge petition to release these files?

I don't know what day that was, so no. Well, they were released that day, and there were victims' names who weren't redacted because they were in such a rush and the victims are not happy about that. Have you investigated any of the CIA connections? Have you seen the CIA file on Jeffrey Epstein?

And if you wanted to see it, would they show it to you? Well, I can speak for the FBI and that's presuming there's a CIA case file, and I've reviewed everything that the interagency, not I, the FBI, that was provided to us. Would you be willing to look at the CIA file on Jeffrey Epstein?

If there is such a file, and if it has not already been turned over to the FBI, the FBI

will look at any new investigative leads.

Director, the first time you saw Donald Trump's name was in the Epstein files. Did you close the files or keep reading? I have reviewed

not the entirety of the files. So you haven't reviewed all of the Epstein files?

Personally, no. You're the director of the FBI. This is the largest sex trafficking case the FBI has ever been a part of. Buck stops at the top, and your testimony today is you have not reviewed all the files.

What I've been doing is busy providing the safest country this country has seen in modern U.S. history in historic speed because the men and women of the FBI are given the resources to reduce the homicide rate, to reduce the drug trafficking rate, to reduce the amount of children that are being trafficked and the number of people that we have arrested is record high.

Well it sounds like those children being trafficked would appreciate the director reviewing the files. You said you don't know the number of times Trump's name appears in the files, so it could at least be a thousand times, is that right?

The number is a total misleading factor. We have not released anyone's name. Would the number at least be a thousand times? We have released every piece of legally permissible

information. Okay. You can characterize the numbers however you want it. You're claiming my time,

Director. It sounds like if you don't know the number it could at least be a thousand times. It's not. It's not. Is it at least 500 times? No. Is it at least 100 times? No. Then what's the number? I don't know the number, but it's not that. Do you think it might be your job to know the number?

My job is to provide for the safety and security of this country. My job is not to engage in political innuendo so you can go out to the sticks and get are being underserved by your representation. If the president is not implicated, why not release everything that involves him? We have released everything, the president and anyone else's side, that is credible and lawfully be able to be released. Your fixation on this matter and baseless accusations that I'm hiding child pedophiles

is disgusting. Anyone that says that needs to look at the stats alone. And go back to the state of California who's receiving the biggest surge in FBI resources through my redeployment

because the cities of Los Angeles, San Diego,

and San Francisco need it. Remembering your oath to tell the truth, did you ever tell Donald Trump his name is in the files?

I have never spoken to President Trump about the Epstein files.

Did you ever tell the Attorney General that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? The

Attorney General and I have had numerous discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team. Did you tell the Attorney

General that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? And we have released where President Trump's name is in the Epstein files. It's a simple question. Did you tell the Attorney General that the President's name is in the Epstein files? During many conversations that the Attorney General and I have had on the

matter of Epstein we have reviewed. The question is simple. Did you tell the Attorney

General that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? Yes or no? Why don't

you try spelling it out? Yes or no? Use the alphabet. Yes or no? No. A, B, C, D, E, F. Don't want to do it?

It sounds like you don't want to tell us. Did you tell the Attorney General that Donald Trump's name was in the Epstein files?

Why don't you try serving your constituency by focusing on reducing violent crime in this country and the number of pedophiles that are legally harbored in your sanctuary cities in California?

I'll work with you on that. Do you want to work with us on that? Regular order, Mr. Chairman. Director, recall your time. I'm a law enforcement gentleman from California.

Did you tell the Attorney General that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?

The question has been asked and answered.

You've not answered it, and we will take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt. Director, did Donald Trump ever say to you, just find and release the entire truth? Don't worry if I'm in it. The instructions from the administration were to release all credible information, and we have done that. Did Donald Trump ever provide information about Jeffrey Epstein as an informant?

Donald Trump has not been, and I can only speak for the FBI, an informant of the FBI.

So, Director, you've played this cute shell game where you say you can't release everything because the court has said that it legally is not allowed to be released, but the court calls it bullshit. Judge Richard Berman said that when you went to the court, quote, information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts pales, pales in comparison to Epstein investigation

information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice. So let's move on, Director. You wrote a book called Government Gangsters. You identified 20 individuals in that book. You put me on that list, at the top of the list. Thank you, my children find it flattering.

20 of those individuals have been investigated or have had adverse actions. Director, considering that you have identified these people as quote, government gangsters, will you recuse yourself from making any investigation

decisions about these individuals? Anyone that has been terminated at the FBI has been done so. No, no, the question again. They failed to meet the muster of their constitutional obligation. Director, I will work on the audio-visual capabilities of the person that will be able to hear me. I'm going to borrow your terminology and call on your entire career in Congress. It has been a disgrace to the American people. You can reclaim your time all you want.

Mr. Chairman, you're going to allow a witness to speak this way?

Mr. Chairman, would you give accuse yourself?

The gentleman has no time to be here.

Mr. Chairman, would you admonish the witness not to insult members?

The gentleman has no time.

Mr. Chairman, just a quick point of order. Could the gentleman be extended an additional 20 seconds to complete his thoughts since the witness decided to interrupt him? And the

witness will be able to respond if he wants. We'll make sure he has time to do that.

My question is, will you, Director, recuse yourself, yes or no, from investigating or making decisions about the 60 individuals, including myself, that you identified as government gangsters? Yes or no? Time of the gentleman has

expired. The witness may respond if he would like.

And the answer was no, as I heard.

Correct.

Thank you, Director Patel, for being here today. The FBI searched Jeffrey Epstein's

Manhattan residence, correct?

I believe that happened in 2018.

I think there was two locations, sir.

It was 2019, and in that residence, the FBI found a safe, correct?

I don't have the catalog of evidence in front of me.

In that residence, the FBI found a safe, correct?

I'll accept your representation.

Okay.

And in that safe, the FBI found topless and lewd photographs of girls, correct?

Again, sir, I'll accept your representation. I don't know.

Thank you. It was all over the media at the time. There's a New York Times article that says Jeffrey Epstein is indicted on sex charges as discovery of nude photos is disclosed. Date of July 8, 2019 in the Times reports,

a trove of lewd photographs of girls was discovered in a safe inside finance near Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan mansion. Author Michael Wolff has conducted numerous interviews of Jeffrey Epstein. I'm going to play for you a video clip of what Michael Wolff said Epstein told him was in the safe and what he showed the author was in the safe.

So let's please play that clip now.

I've been elected. And I was sitting talking to Epstein and's please play that clip now. Elected. And I was sitting talking to Epstein and he said, wait a minute, I gotta show you something. And then he went into his safe and he came out with photographs. They were Polaroids, I think. And he kind of spread them out like playing cards.

And it was Trump, I mean, I think there were a dozen of them and it was Trump with girls of an uncertain age at Epstein's Palm Beach house, where all of the things that he would ultimately be accused of took place. And I remember very vividly three of them.

There are two in which Trump is, the girls, topless girls are sitting on Trump's lap. And then a third in which he has a stain on the front of his pants. And the girls are kind of pointing at it, sort of bent over laughing.

So Director Patel, I'm going to ask you a very broad and general question. As you know, Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were friends. There are, of course, photos showing Donald Trump together with Epstein, correct?

I don't have the entirety of the photographs, but I think they've been photographed in public together.

All right.

Are there any photos showing Donald Trump with girls of an uncertain age?

No.

How do you know that?

Because that information would have been brought to light by multiple administrations and FBI investigators over the course of the last 20 years.

Well, you know what? That's just not true because no one knew about the creepy birthday message that Donald Trump wrote to Jeffrey Epstein Until the Wall Street Journal disclosed it and then all of a sudden the Epstein estate provides it to Congress You certainly you weren't there at the search. You don't know What Epstein may or may not have done with those photographs even prior to the search?

Maybe someone has it. Maybe the Epstein estate has it. You raise a great point.

So I'm gonna ask you, have you asked to talk to Michael Wolff?

You raise a great point. I haven't personally asked to talk to Michael Wolff.

Has the FBI asked?

But the FBI, I'll get back to you if the FBI specifically has ever.

About 100 hours of testimony of Jeffrey Epstein, wouldn't it be good for the FBI to interview Michael Wolfe? I'm not saying they haven't, I just don't know.

Has FBI subpoenaed the tapes that Michael Wolfe has conducted of Jeffrey Epstein?

I don't know.

All right, so if you could provide us an answer, that would be terrific. Sure. Well, let me ask you this question then.

Have you looked at all the photos in Epstein files? I have looked at all the information that the investigators who investigated this case

have provided to run out credible leads.

And in the Epstein files, was there that creepy birthday message that Donald Trump had written to Epstein?

No, that's what I was trying to tell you. You raise a great point. The estate of Jeffrey Epstein has a voluminous amount

of information that they have not released before.

Okay, so that's great. So wouldn't it be great if FBI subpoenaed the estate of Jeffrey Epstein for all that

information? The estate is under no obligation to provide that material, even pursuant to a subpoena.

That's a great point. Yeah, that's just, that's just false. Okay. It's just false. You're the frickin' FBI. you can subpoena information from the state and you better do that. Like to move on. I'm gonna move on now and talk about Epstein's client list. You confirmed that exists,

Attorney General Pambati confirmed earlier this year that exists. I just wanna ask you a simple question. Is Prince Andrew on Epstein's client list?

The material related to Prince Andrew has been made public.

Is Prince Andrew on the client list?

We have released the index of names that were in Jeffrey Epstein's. Is Donald Trump on Epstein's client list? The

index has been released and the index will speak for itself. So I'm just going to say

America is a huge red flag. The FBI director could not answer whether Donald Trump was

on Epstein's client list. Gentlemen, time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Patel, before you joined the FBI, you had very strong opinions about what the FBI was hiding regarding Jeffrey Epstein. In a September 2023 interview with Glenn Beck, you said the Black Book is under the, quote, direct control of the director of the FBI. In December 2023, you said,

let us know who the pedophiles are. Even for a short time after becoming FBI director, in February of 2025, you tweeted, quote, there will be no cover-ups, no missing documents, no stone left unturned. In June, you told Joe Rogan, quote, we've reviewed all the information, we're gonna give you every single thing we have and can. But then suddenly in July, everything changed. You and Attorney General Pam Bondi released one video and said that there was nothing

more to see. Your July memo says you uncovered more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence, but that you had decided no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted. That is a quote. I think what happened, Mr. Patel, is that suddenly you discovered that Donald Trump's name was all over these files, and you started a giant cover-up. So you are under oath, Mr. Patel.

You just testified to Mr. Swalwell that you did not speak to the president about the Epstein files. To your knowledge, did Attorney General Pam Bondi speak to the president about what was in the Epstein files?

I can't speak for Attorney General Pam Bondi.

So to your knowledge, you don't have any information. The question was, do you have any knowledge? Do you have any knowledge?

I can't speak for Attorney General Pam Bondi.

You are refusing to answer the question So let me tell you that the Wall Street Journal reported that in May Bondi told Trump that he was in the Epstein files and at the same meeting Said that the DOJ did not plan to release the files Yesterday you testified to Senator Kennedy that there was, no credible information that Epstein trafficked girls to anyone else, and that you have, quote, continuously and publicly asked the public

to come forward with more information and will look into it. Today, in response to Mr. Massey's question, you appear to say that the survivors were not credible. These are survivors. That's not at all what I said. Okay great I'm gonna ask you this in a second but let me tell you

about the survivors and let's bring them up here into the room. These are women who came to the Hill and testified that they were groomed and raped at the age of 14 and 16 years old and they called to meet with the president and to meet with the FBI and to have people investigate their claims. Some of them have never testified before.

If you are so interested in getting the public to submit any information, why have you not met with them? You said you haven't met with them. Have you met with them? I'll give you one more chance.

My job as the FBI director is to invite all investigative leads. Is the answer yes or no to whether or not you met with these women who were sexually abused and raped? Any insinuation by you or any people on your side that I am not manhunting child predators and sex traffickers, just look at this patch. And you talk about cover-ups, man. You talk about cover-ups. Where were you during the Obama and Biden administrations when these so-called cover-ups were going on?

Why does anyone in those administrations talk to any of these purported witnesses? I have welcomed every single person to provide credible information.

Time belongs to the gentlelady from Washington.

When you accuse the witness of something, he's allowed to respond. Every single person to provide credible information. Time belongs to the gentle lady from Washington. And I'm going to take another couple of minutes.

When you accuse the witness of something, he's allowed to respond. That's how it works.

Listen, he didn't even, excuse me, Mr. Chairman. You have always been fair, but this is not fair. And I'm being fair, and you will get your time. And he said that the witnesses were not credible. I'm going to get an additional minute of time because that's how much time he took.

You won't get a minute, you'll get some seconds, what we think is under five minutes. You don't get to demand how much time you get.

That's not how it works. Mr. Patel, are the victims of the Jeffrey Epstein horrific trafficking ring, are they

credible? Any person with information about ongoing sexual trafficking... I'm asking you if they're credible. Ma'am I'm commenting on the evidence we have. We have routinely asked for people to come forward with more evidence and we will look at it and the evidence that we have was the same evidence that the Biden and Obama Justice Department had. They determined,

not me, they determined that that information was not credible. He's not letting me even ask my questions. You ask

the questions, he gives an answer. You may not like what he says, but that doesn't mean you're going to interrupt him.

He's not answering my question. Mr. Chairman, could we restore the gentlelady 45 seconds so she can

give her additional 30 seconds, which is what I said earlier. I'm going to keep taking my time. Because here's the thing. You'll take the time that you get. You get 30 seconds. You are not answering the question. The question is, is these women, are these women credible? It's a yes or no answer.

I have answered the question. And I keep telling you, I'm the only FBI director that has welcomed new information in this case.

This administration is the only one that has welcomed any new information in this case. Is there a yes or no to whether the victims are credible? Present new credible information. Present new information. Are the victims credible or not? I'll tell you what happened in the last Trump administration. Are they credible or not? You can't even say? Victims credibly came forward and you know what happened? President Trump authorized the indictments of Jeffrey Epstein. President Trump called them a hoax.

Not Biden, not Obama. President Trump called the entire thing a democratic hoax. So I would like to ask you if you will meet, if you will meet, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask if you would meet with the women who were sexually abused and raped and groomed at the ages of 14 and 16 years old. Are you going to cover up? Are you going to continue to cover up for the rich and powerful men, including those

that might be on this committee?

Or are you going to allow them to testify?

Are you going to allow them to testify. The time belongs to the gentleman from New Jersey. I appreciate the gentlelady yielding back.

Are you going to allow them to testify, Mr. Patel? Will you allow them to testify to you, Mr. Patel?

Mr. Patel, thank you for being here.

I want to take your attention back a second. Breaking news. Kash Patel is nominated to be the FBI director. Dan Bongino is nominated to be the number two at the FBI. MAGA celebrates, rejoices, bells are ringing out. The team, Patel, Bongino, that sought out every podcast microphone to talk about the Epstein list.

The names are finally gonna get released. It begins, they produce white binders. Phase one with the podcasters. This is not actually one of them, of course, I made this up. Your name's on it. Right? And the names are going to come out. Pam Bondi says the list is on her desk. Then a memo comes out all of a sudden and says there's no list. Oh, no. No phase two.

Phase two binders never happen. You said the conspiracy theories around Epstein just aren't true. They never have been. And yesterday, in an answer to Senator Kennedy, you said, the FBI is not in possession of any credible evidence that Epstein trafficked girls to anyone but himself. So according to your testimony yesterday and in this committee, according to the evidence the FBI has, the number of names on the list are zero. Zero.

The index has been released and the number of people involved in that trafficking operation were charged in 2008.

Other than Epstein and Jelaine Maxwell, your testimony in the Senate and here is that according to the evidence you have, the number of other names is zero.

That were charged based on credible evidence.

Well, who are the other names? Give me the other names that weren't charged.

We are not releasing the names of anyone because the Department of Justice never does that of anyone that didn't have any credible information

to attack them. Let me move forward. The president has, you've seen the picture of the woman's body with the writing and the president's signature, the president says that's not his. Okay? President says it's not his, the Republican colleagues say it's not his, the administration say it's not his. Will you be opening up an

investigation into the Epstein estate for putting out a fake document with the president's signature linking him to the world's largest pedophile ring. We'll be opening that investigation into that. On what basis? On what basis? They literally put out a fake document, according to the president, with a fake signature. It's a forgery of the president

of the United States' signature. That's the basis.

Sure, I'll do it. Sure, I'll do it.

Okay, I look forward to that investigation. Thanks for watching.