Name: Congressman reveals what he saw in the unredacted Epstein files
Uploaded: 2026-02-10T17:01:33.000Z
Duration: 9 min 47 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Participle clauses

After the Justice Department made millions of unredacted records, unredacted, about convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, available for certain members of Congress to view today.

Adverbs of degree

Here's what Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna said they saw just moments ago.

What I saw that bothered me were the names of at least six men that have been redacted that are likely incriminated by their inclusion in these files.

Our bigger concern is that there's still a lot that's redacted, even in what we're seeing here now.

Joining us, Democratic Congressman Jared Moskowitz of Florida.

He serves on the House Judiciary Committee.

So, Congressman, you got a look at some of these files today.

Now, the Epstein Files Transparency act on only allowed the Justice Department to withhold the personal information of the victims, the survivors, and

material that would jeopardize active federal investigations.

Did the redactions that you saw comply with the law?

And tell us what you saw that concerned you.

First let me say, obviously, we're all hoping for Savannah's mom's speedy return to her family.

So first of all, you go into the Department of Justice today.

The system that they set up for us to view these documents has a 24 page handbook on how to use it.

There's 2.7 million documents that you have to go through.

There's no way to go through them unless you know what you're looking for by batch number.

Try to match up the redacted document and look for it in an unredacted capacity.

But first, let me say that today I saw a worldwide sex trafficking ring with people in other countries sourcing young children for Jeffrey Epstein, co conspirators, names, men and women, clearly other people that might be on the client list, that are on text messages and emails over redaction, dramatic over redaction, it looks like intentionally so.

And then documents that are still redacted.

And when we asked why these were redacted, that's because they were submitted into this electronic system.

And the people that were at our disposal to ask those questions did not know why they were still redacted.

Jake, have could you identify any of the names of individuals who are mentioned in the files that concern you?

And if you're afraid of doing it with me now because of fear of lawsuit, there is the speech and debate clause of the Constitution.

Obviously, you can Go to the floor of the House and you could say it and not be sued.

Well, Jake, we have Pam Bondi coming to the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday.

As you mentioned, it's the first time she's coming to the Judiciary hearing.

She's the only cabinet secretary yet to appear in the House on the committee of jurisdiction.

And I think we're going to give her the opportunity to start naming people.

I think that's what Thomas Massie and Rokhanna have talked about.

I think the DOJ needs to release an unredacted version of these documents while still hoping, while still keeping the victims names secure.

But there are clearly co conspirators in here that they can name.

I mean, in the documents I saw, we got pictures and their names.

There's people in Paris, there's people in Russia, there's people in Czech sourcing girls for Jeffrey Epstein.

And then other people talking about these girls being sent to them.

They refer to them as, you know, we're dropping the child off.

I mean, it's really gross, Jake, on how these people are talking about this stuff in text message and email.

I think the American people need to see it and understand that this is a worldwide network that Jeffrey Epstein was running today.

Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney said she's prepared to speak fully and honestly.

She took the fifth with the House Oversight Committee earlier, but

she said she'll speak fully and honestly, but only if given clemency by President Trump.

And her attorney essentially at the same time was saying, hey, you know, Ghislaine Maxwell is the only person who could clear President Trump and President Clinton and say they're innocent of wrongdoing.

Some people might see that as a quid pro quo.

First of all, why was she moved from the maximum security prison?

I hope we get an answer from Pam Bondi on Wednesday.

Who directed that, what was that exchange for?

By the way, when she talked to Todd Blanche, she didn't claim any fifth Amendment and so her right to remain silent.

So all of a sudden now, I mean, this is another failed, you know, comer, you know, hearing that he has where he says, Ghislaine Maxwell's coming in to talk and we're going to get the truth and when we get nothing, she needs to go back to that maximum security prison.

There should be no deal for clemency for her to bail anybody out.

But at the end of the day, we need to know why, why she was given this deal, why she was moved, what did she trade for?

And what does the administration know that they're not telling us?

Democratic Congressman Jared Moskowitz of Florida, thanks so much.

Joining us now, California Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna sits on the House Oversight Committee, sat in on the Maxwell testimony and viewed some the unredacted files today.

So, Congressman, what are your biggest takeaways after viewing some of those unredacted documents?

Anderson, you'll remember that in March, The FBI had 1,000 personnel going through these files.

Donald Trump had ordered them to go through the files, and they made many redactions.

And it looks like what happened is those files were redacted then.

And then they sent them over to justice, and justice kept those redactions.

they need to unscrub the redactions that the FBI made to comply with the Epstein Transparency Act.

The main 302 statements where survivors talked about who raped them, all of that was still redacted.

Now, we did find information about some excessive redactions where there were six men in the two hours we reviewed who should not have been redacted.

And I do hope the Justice Department makes that public.

Some of the most sensational emails, frankly, some of the redactions may have been legitimate because some of them were from women.

But the broader theme is that a lot of this was redacted back in March before we passed the law.

And, and the law requires an unscrubbing of those files.

So we know who the powerful men were who visited the island and raped these girls, and

You were at Maxwell's deposition with the House Oversight Committee today.

She invoked her Fifth Amendment right multiple times and also promised to clear President Trump's name in exchange for clemency.

I'm wondering what your takeaway was from.

From that and the whole deposition itself.

I mean, she spent hours talking to Deputy Attorney General Blanche and answering his questions.

Yet when it came to the Oversight Committee, whether there were Republican or Democratic questions, she took the blanket Fifth Amendment even when we were asking her.

Nothing about incriminating herself, just asking her who else came to the island.

Who else do you know that could have trafficked in girls?

And then she says, well, I do have this information, I know this information, but

I'm only going to share it if you give me clemency and don't have any prosecution.

Subtitles ListPlay Video

Congressman reveals what he saw in the unredacted Epstein files

elaborate

legitimate

concern

mention