Trump’s Ghislaine Maxwell Problem Comes Roaring Back
25m 34s
The transcript highlights a series of explosive developments tied to the Epstein Files and the ongoing cover-up by the Trump administration. Ghislaine Maxwell’s attempt to overturn her conviction for sex trafficking was dismissed by a federal judge, who deemed her appeal frivolous and barred further appeals. Her family claims she will not yield, emphasizing that the Epstein Files may prove her innocence and expose Donald Trump’s involvement. Meanwhile, Katie Fang’s lawsuit against Todd Blanche and the DOJ demands transparency, specifically the production of FBI handwritten notes tied to allegations against Trump and the removal of redactions. The DOJ responded by filing an appeal, arguing that handwritten notes are duplicative and pose risks to victim privacy, while refusing to produce documents or allow in-camera review. The response is widely criticized as a cover-up, especially given the Trump administration’s prior obstruction of transparency. Additional revelations from Amanda Ungaro, who claims Paolo Zampolli trafficked young women, introduced Melania to Trump, and ran a diplomatic passport scam involving Chinese nationals, further expose deep ties between elite figures and criminal networks. The combination of legal setbacks, public allegations, and political distractions underscores a coordinated effort to suppress truth about child trafficking and power corruption. The Midas Touch Network positions these events as direct evidence of systemic cover-ups, with Katie Fang’s reporting standing as a cornerstone of accountability.
We are not going to be distracted, Donald. We know this is all about your cover-up of a child
sex trafficking ring with the Epstein Files. We know this is all about your cover-up of references
to you in the Epstein Files. So, of course, we're going to call you out when you attack Canada.
We're going to call you out when you engage in deranged behavior. But we are also always going
to remind our audience and community here at the Midas Touch Network what they already know,
that this is all about your cover-up of the Epstein Files. That's one of the main reasons
you drag the United States and the world into this catastrophic war in Iran. And Midas Touch
hosts like Katie Fang are leading the way. Katie Fang's lawsuit against Todd Blanche and the
Department of Justice and the Trump regime.
Continues to make sure that transparency for the survivors is always at the forefront of what we do
at the Midas Touch Network and what Katie Fang's reporting and what her independent journalism
is all about. Now, Donald Trump's distraction machine was on steroids this week, even for him.
Why was that? I want you to think about some of the developments that happened this week
in Katie Fang's lawsuit against Donald Trump.
The Ghislaine Maxwell request to have her conviction overturned in federal court and
Amanda Ungaro, one of Melania's former closest friends who surfaced yet again,
gave an interview with a well-known reporter in Portuguese where she called out Paulo Zampolli,
the individual who introduced Melania to Donald Trump at the Kit Kat Club in the late 90s,
Zampoli would bring in young Eastern European girls and women to become models in the United
States. He would then help them get visas. He would help them come over with passports,
and he would help them become models where they would then meet these rich, wealthy Manhattan men,
and the rest is history, and then they would get these Einstein visas. We'll talk about that in a
moment, and we'll talk about what Amanda Ungaro said, because she had some bombshell allegations
that she was making as well. So, what happened this week? Well, Ghislaine Maxwell lost her effort
to overturn her conviction in federal court in New York before Judge Engelmeyer, who called her
appeal frivolous, and in fact, the federal judge said that her appeal and her paperwork,
was so frivolous that she should not even be permitted to file an appeal to the Second
Circuit. The court said that the court certifies that any appeal from this order would not be taken
in good faith, and so she should be prohibited from challenging her conviction, for which she
was convicted of sex trafficking and other heinous acts against children and against others. She was
sentenced to over 20 years. The Trump regime then moved her.
From the facility that she was at in Tallahassee to a club fed at Camp Bryan in Texas after she said
positive things about Donald Trump to Trump's criminal defense lawyer-turned-attorney general,
but this federal judge said she should not even be permitted to take any further appeals.
It's so frivolous. Here's what her family said, though, and this is what has Donald Trump a little
bit shaken right now.
Our sister is not going to let the matter rest, Ghislaine Maxwell's family said. The district
court's ruling contains multiple concrete errors that she intends to challenge fully. The family
said that they have encouraged Maxwell to seek the, quote, necessary relief. Necessary relief?
Our sister is not going to let the matter rest? Sounds like that's a message for Donald, eh?
Also, the Maxwell family said that they despised that the federal judge
used a very sarcastic tone. They called the judge's decision shocking, and they blasted
the federal judge for showing disdain to Ghislaine Maxwell. She was convicted of sex trafficking and
sentenced to 20 years, one of the most heinous crimes there are. And what she was trying to argue
was that the Epstein files vindicated her. She said that the Epstein files showed that she was
innocent or that it provided exculpatory information that she wasn't permitted to show during her
criminal trial six years ago or so, to which the federal judge was like, Ghislaine, I read those
files. They're very bad for you. They make it worse for you, not better. If anything, the release
of these documents means you can't get out of jail. You can't get out of jail. You can't get out of
court. It means you could have been charged with more. I don't read these files and go, you know
what? That's an innocent person. You know, and what's fascinating as well is, you know, all of
the references to Donald Trump in those files. And of course, the references that Donald Trump
is trying to cover up. But indeed, you have Ghislaine Maxwell's family saying she will not
let this matter rest. We know that she knows and Trump knows that she knows all about Donald Trump's
disgusting and dark pasts.
And she's not going to let it go until she gets a pardon or commutation. So I want you all to pay
attention there. But that's not the only development this week. The other major development
in Katie Fang's lawsuit against Todd Blanche, Donald Trump's former criminal defense lawyer,
now the attorney general of the United States, which is pretty sickening.
In her lawsuit against Blanche and the DOJ, the federal judge ordered that a number of categories
of documents be produced, that certain documents that have redactions, which appear to be redactions
of co-conspirators and the bad guys, be submitted in camera to the judge so the judge can see it
and make the determination to remove the redactions. The other part of the judge's order
involves a process for the production of the redaction log or the privilege log to show the
Trump regime continues to withhold. And the other part of the order by the federal judge
involves the FBI notes that were prepared that relate to a 13-year-old who made very
serious allegations against Trump. Trump denies the allegations. We have the FBI 302 reports
themselves, but the Trump regime has refused to produce the notes, the handwritten notes,
that go along with the reports. There's no exception not to produce the notes. But the Trump
regime's like, yeah, the handwritten notes are duplicative, so we're not going to produce the
notes at all. We'll just give you the reports. Like, dude, just produce the notes and the reports
that they're different documents. Produce them. But they're covering up notes involving an underage
girl that makes allegations against Trump. Trump denies the allegations, but those are notes that
are being withheld. And so what did Donald Trump do? He didn't do anything. Donald Trump's DOJ do? Did they just say, okay, federal judge, you ordered us to turn over the
notes. You ordered us to do the redactions and remove the redactions. You ordered us to produce
the privilege log, the redaction log of all of the documents being withheld. Federal judge,
we hear you. There's Epstein Transparency Act. You've made your ruling. Judge, we agree. Nope.
The DOJ signaled this week it will appeal the ruling requiring
removal of redactions to the Epstein files and some other aspects of the judge's order.
Look at what was filed right here. Document 36. And by the way, the Trump regime has thrown this
guy, Andrew Block, under the bus. He's their fall guy, in my opinion, for everything. Blanche isn't
signing these documents. They pick someone who doesn't really know about the Epstein files.
He shows up in court. Apparently, he looks incredibly nervous and lost. And his whole
role is like, I don't know. I don't know what I'm doing. And just
to get yelled at by the federal judge. So here's the defendant's notice of appeal. Defendant
respectfully files its notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
of this court's June 25th, 2026 order. In view of the United States, whether the district court's
June 25th, 2026 order is appealable is inconclusive. Accordingly, the United States submits this
protective notice of appeal.
To the extent that any aspect of this order grants plaintiff injunctive relief,
it is immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. Section 1292A1. And they did that right at
the 60-day deadline from when the federal judge's initial order was. So what the federal judge also
asked the Trump regime do is to respond to Katie Fang's request that these documents be turned over.
The judge said,
the judge ordered that these documents, the categories I told you about, the FBI handwritten
notes, removing redactions of who appear to be co-conspirators and bad guys, and produce the
privilege or redaction log. The judge ordered that the
parties submit a proposed order for the judge to sign. That just restates what the judge ordered.
So that happened. Katie Fang submitted a proposed order. And then the Trump regime this past week
filed this document. Defendant's response to minute order. Defendant, this is the DOJ,
respectfully submits this response pursuant to the court's minute order. The plaintiff,
Katie Fang's, proposed order, if entered by the court, would require the Department of Justice
to submit to the court handwritten notes underlying the EFTA numbers. And it lists
the Bates numbers. It identifies those handwritten notes that likely reference Trump.
This is the DOJ writing this. EFTA is Epstein Files Transparency Act. So these are the documents
are labeled that. It would also require a declaration from defendant,
Todd.
Or a representative of the Department of Justice with personal knowledge
regarding the federal register notice. And it goes on and says,
with respect to the handwritten notes, within 72 days of President Trump signing the Epstein
Files Transparency Act into law, the Department of Justice published millions of pages of records
in compliance with the act. The task involved more than 500 attorneys
and reviewers from the department who reviewed millions of pages of documents,
on a compressed timeline, working days, nights, weekends, and holidays,
including Christmas Day, New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day. As the department's January 30 letter
explains, considering various factors, including the volume of documents reviewed, the presence
of duplicative and partially duplicative documents, and the number of attorneys and reviewers involved,
inconsistencies will likely exist in how reviewers applied redactions. So the fact
that the Department of Justice has a lot of evidence against the Department of Justice,
and the fact that the plaintiff, Katie Fang, has identified some handwritten notes
underlying the FBI 302 interview reports in the library, does not undermine the government's
stated rationale for withholding such notes, that they are duplicative, the quality control
checks are less effective on handwritten material, and that the risk of inadvertent
disclosure of victim information is substantially higher, nor does it amount to a waiver or
concession as to other documents. What in the hell word salad was that? The Epstein Transparency Act
DOJ says that you need to turn over these documents. You can create your own exception
that handwritten notes don't apply. Just read the handwritten notes and turn them over.
In your own reading, you feel they're duplicative. They're not. There's a 302 report,
which is a typed report. Then there are notes. The report purports to be based on notes. So just
produce both. Look, I was a litigator, and I was involved in cases involving massive document
productions of terabytes of documents. I never said, can't turn over those handwritten notes,
duplicative of the report. That would never fly. They're different documents. Just turn them over.
What are you even talking about here? Then the DOJ says, it bears noting that with respect to
victims' names, plaintiff confidently averred defendants' redactions and rationales were not
for the victim. Rather, she claimed the redactions were a pattern of dissembling and dishonesty in
this matter. This is false. Okay, if it's false, then just show it to the judge and shut up and
stop whining and stop hiding it. That said, the department respectfully maintains its objections
to producing any such documents. Why would you reserve your objections? If you have nothing to
hide, just show them. You obviously look like you're hiding something because you are. The
DOJ says, in camera review of any document or redaction, a litigant claims is a violation of
the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That wasn't a misspeak by me. What the Trump argues, what the
Trump DOJ argues, the federal judge, you should hesitate, please judge, hesitate before ordering
in camera review of the documents. In camera review just means the judge views it confidentially.
It doesn't get produced.
It doesn't get produced until the judge first sees it. Why should the judge not look at it? You're
trying to hide it from the judge also? Hmm, sounds like you're hiding something. Then the judge can
see it. And if indeed there's an issue about victims or some other issue, the judge can make
the call. Okay, I'm not going to produce it because of this, that, or the other. But you
want to hide it from the judge and you're objecting to that? That's why I want to read you these
documents because I don't want to have like a debate about what it says. I just want to read you.
This is what the DOJ's writing. The DOJ says, "Such a precedent will open the door to a process
that would likely ultimately result in the line-by-line review of redactions to millions of
pages of documents." Pause. Even if that was the case, which it isn't, you should have produced
the documents to begin with. So there are millions of documents being withheld and millions of
redactions that need to be looked at. Thanks for that admission.
Right there. Andrew Block. And also if the federal judge is saying he's going to review it, let the
federal judge review the document. If this court determines this process is necessary, however, the
department respectfully asked the court to stay its order to allow the government to appeal the
jurisdictional issues before the court alters the status quo. Without a stay and order requiring
from limited-in-camera review would have the effect of irreversibly altering the status quo.
Yeah, the status quo is you're covering up child sex trafficking. I want to reverse the status quo
so that the people can see what's in the files. I mean, is this the craziest document you've ever
read? I mean, the Trump regime files a lot of crazy things, but this is pretty freaking crazy,
eh? For these reasons, the defendant asked the court not to require a declaration regarding the
notice. No declaration from Todd Bland should be done and do not order the production of the
interview notes and do not order a review of the documents that are redacted. Signed, Andrew Block.
That's a real crazy document. Now, finally, if you want to know Donald Trump's distraction machine
on steroids this week, what was behind it as well, bring in Amanda Ungaro. She was trafficked into the
United States by Epstein. She was trafficked
by Epstein's trafficker, Jean-Luc Brunel. When she was 17 years old, she met Paolo Zampolli,
the guy who was bringing in young Eastern European girls and women. Zampolli brought in Melania
as well, introduced Melania to Donald Trump. And Ungaro never married Zampolli. They had a kid
together. She describes this relation with him as just one of the most horrible things ever.
They had a custody dispute. She alleges, and the New York Times,
did an expose on this, that he used his connections within the Trump regime. He's
currently an ambassador. He's got an ambassador position. During Trump's first term, Ungaro was
like the ambassador to Granada. She had an ambassador position as well because they were
very close with Donald and Melania because that was the crew, right? Zampolli introduced Melania
to Donald. They all stayed close. Zampolli was an ambassador to Dominica in Trump's first term.
Also, where Truth Social did one of its shady deals where it appeared that there was
foreign money that was involved that bailed out Truth Social back in like 2021. I did reports
that was like the island of Dominica, but I digress. And then Zampolli's got this ambassadorship
position right now. He does all of these foreign events for Donald Trump. And Ungaro has previously
come out with a statement about Melania. I will tear down your corrupt system. This was a message
to Bondi. Even if it's the last thing I do in my life, I will go all the way. I'm not afraid.
Maybe you should be afraid of what I know of who you are and who your husband is. This is what the
Melania. She said in a post that was dated April 8th and tagged the first lady's ex account. She
threatened legal action against the first lady and your pedophile husband is what she said. Then
Melania called the impromptu press conference at the White House to deny that she had any relationship
with Epstein.
But Ungaro said the following, ex-Brazilian model with ties to Melania links Trump envoy to
corruption scheme. In an interview she gave to Brazilian journalist live streamed over the past
few days, Ungaro did not implicate Zampolli in the death of the former UN General Assembly
president who died under mysterious circumstances, John Ash.
But she said that he was murdered by Chinese nationals who were involved in a passport scheme.
She explained that Zampolli helped her obtain a diplomatic passport, which gave her tax exemptions.
She claimed he made purchases on her accounts so that he would not have to pay taxes on those
items. At the same time, she said he was running another scam selling passports.
They ran a diplomatic passport scheme selling them. Countries paying one another for votes
in the Security Council. It's all corrupt there. It's like a game, Ungaro said. Zampolli started selling
diplomatic passports for $250,000 with this group. John Ash, who was president of the General
Assembly of the United Nations, was killed, she said, explaining he died because of the scheme.
A former U.N. ambassador from Antigua and Barbuda, Ash served as president of the U.N. General
Assembly from 2013 to 2014. At the time of his death, he was under indictment for taking bribes
from Chinese businessmen. Seven others were charged in the scheme. Ongaro said she was told
that Ash was killed by the Chinese, but she provided no other specifics. I came forward
publicly after I was arrested because this guy wouldn't let me live my life, referring to
Zampoli. So you have all of these incidents coming out right now. And so no wonder Donald
Trump turned on his WMD, his weapon of mass distraction, right?
For all to see. So I wanted to give you those updates, Ghislaine. I wanted to give you the
updates of Ongaro and then what the Trump DOJ was doing in response to the lawsuit filed by
Katie Fang under the Epstein Transparency Act. Thanks so much for watching, everybody. We
appreciate you. Subscribe. Let's get to 7 million. Before you go, our book WTF America is available
for pre-order now. It's the story of how we got here.
And how we fight our way back. To pre-order, scan the QR code or click the link in the
description. Let's do this.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
Ghislaine Maxwell lost her appeal to overturn her conviction for sex trafficking, with a federal judge declaring her appeal frivolous and refusing to allow further challenges.
Maxwell’s family insists she will not let the matter rest, criticizing the judge’s tone and asserting that the Epstein Files could exonerate her, which directly implicates Donald Trump’s cover-up.
The Trump DOJ opposed Katie Fang’s lawsuit under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, refusing to produce FBI handwritten notes linked to a 13-year-old allegation against Trump, and filed an appeal to block in-camera document review, while designating Andrew Block as a fall guy.
Summary:
The transcript highlights a series of explosive developments tied to the Epstein Files and the ongoing cover-up by the Trump administration. Ghislaine Maxwell’s attempt to overturn her conviction for sex trafficking was dismissed by a federal judge, who deemed her appeal frivolous and barred further appeals. Her family claims she will not yield, emphasizing that the Epstein Files may prove her innocence and expose Donald Trump’s involvement.
Meanwhile, Katie Fang’s lawsuit against Todd Blanche and the DOJ demands transparency, specifically the production of FBI handwritten notes tied to allegations against Trump and the removal of redactions. The DOJ responded by filing an appeal, arguing that handwritten notes are duplicative and pose risks to victim privacy, while refusing to produce documents or allow in-camera review. The response is widely criticized as a cover-up, especially given the Trump administration’s prior obstruction of transparency.
Additional revelations from Amanda Ungaro, who claims Paolo Zampolli trafficked young women, introduced Melania to Trump, and ran a diplomatic passport scam involving Chinese nationals, further expose deep ties between elite figures and criminal networks. The combination of legal setbacks, public allegations, and political distractions underscores a coordinated effort to suppress truth about child trafficking and power corruption. The Midas Touch Network positions these events as direct evidence of systemic cover-ups, with Katie Fang’s reporting standing as a cornerstone of accountability.
FAQs
Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal to overturn her conviction was rejected by a federal judge in New York, who called the appeal frivolous and ruled she should not be allowed to file further appeals.
The Maxwell family claims the federal judge's decision contained concrete errors and asserts that Maxwell will not let the matter rest, including seeking a pardon or commutation.
The judge ordered the DOJ to produce redacted documents, including FBI handwritten notes and redaction logs, for in-camera review to assess potential violations of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The DOJ argued the handwritten notes were duplicative of the official 302 reports and claimed they posed a higher risk of disclosing victim information, citing quality control concerns.
Amanda Ungaro claimed Zampolli trafficked young women, introduced Melania Trump to Donald Trump, helped her obtain diplomatic passports, and ran a corrupt passport scheme involving Chinese nationals and the murder of UN Ambassador John Ash.
The DOJ filed an appeal to block the production of redacted documents and the in-camera review, arguing it would lead to an unmanageable, line-by-line review of millions of pages of documents.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.