patrick.net

CBS' 60 Minutes teased its interview of Greene in a post to X on Friday. In the clip, reporter Lesley Stahl is seen asking the Georgia Republican about behind-the-scenes conversations she had with the president about her push to compel the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all remaining evidence on Epstein from his two federal criminal investigations.

"We did talk about the Epstein files, and he was extremely angry at me that I had signed the discharge petition to release the files," Greene said. "I fully believe that those women deserve everything they're asking, they're asking for all of it to come out. And they deserve it. And he was furious with me."

"What did he say?'" Stahl asked.

"He said that it was going to hurt people," Greene replied.

It’s finally here! Right in time for Christmas. Yesterday, ABC ran a story headlined, “After years of speculation, DOJ faces Friday deadline to release remaining Epstein files.” Today —December 19th— is the statutory deadline for the DOJ to release the remaining Epstein files under the so-called Epstein Accountability Act.

The media coverage is schizophrenic. The same corporate media that ran novella-length articles on a daily basis before Trump signed the Epstein Accountability law now seems unable to decide what to say. Now, the articles are terse and, if anything, appear designed to lower expectations.

Expect the DOJ to start releasing documents today. I would expect the full rollout to happen over weeks, if not months.

Most stories, including ABC’s, focus on all the loopholes. The DOJ need not release files related to ongoing investigations. It may redact victims’ identifying information. And it may withhold documents that could compromise national security.

What the articles don’t mention, for some reason, is that whenever the DOJ redacts or withholds something, it must list the withheld evidence on an unclassified log along with an explanation. So it’s not exactly a free pass, either. There’s no point speculating about how it will all shake out, since we’ll know for sure very soon now.

But there was one remarkable development. All through the week, the New York Times rushed out a series of Epstein exclusives, one after another, including all sorts of never-before-published details. The Grey Lady claimed it was just “investigating” the case, but it seems unlikely these massive stories could have been both researched and written in under a month.

It feels like another limited hangout. The truth is, the Times helped cover for Epstein more than anybody. It knew all this stuff the whole time. It just wants to get ahead of the document dump.

The first, and biggest Times exclusive story allegedly answered one of the most persistent and vexing mysteries of the Jeffrey Epstein saga— where his money came from. On Tuesday, the Times purported to provide an answer:

Scams, Schemes, Ruthless Cons: The Untold Story of How Jeffrey Epstein Got Rich
For years, rumors swirled about where his wealth came from. A
Times investigation reveals the truth of how a college dropout
clawed his way to the pinnacle of American finance and society.

It’s a long, detailed, fascinating read, and I will not try to summarize it here. Epstein watchers will be engrossed. But if I could boil it down to the essence, the article described a classic high-end con man.

It doesn’t answer everything, but it is feasible.

Purely coincidentally, I happen to have some experience in this area. When I started my law career at an Orlando litigation firm, I worked in a smaller department with a half-dozen lawyers representing banks in Ponzi-scheme cases in Central Florida. In one high-profile case, my firm represented Bank of America against Lou Pearlman, the scoundrel who repped the Back Street Boys, built Church Street in Downtown Orlando, and had a fake international airline. In another case, I represented a regional bank that’d loaned money to a real estate schemer who defrauded hundreds of notable locals, including most of the Orlando elite establishment. (He shot himself before trial.)

There were others.

Through that experience, I learned a few things about con men. They are enigmatic and mysterious, almost a separate species. They enjoy a kind of rare manipulative genius, combined with chameleon-like powers of camouflage, a nearly irresistible personal magnetism, and complete moral flexibility. They aren’t smart, not in the way you would normally consider intelligence, and that’s obvious, since all their business ventures consistently fail and their plans almost always inevitably collapse into a heap of disgrace.

No, they are not smart (although they can act smarter than everyone). They are intensely cunning. They have an almost genetic ability to sense exactly what people, especially wealthy or powerful people, need to hear— coupled with an Oscar-level ability to deliver. As far as I know, they are also all male. And tall. Tall men.

Psychologists might call them permissive narcissists.

Anyway, that’s the kind of person the New York Times described, in almost overwhelming detail, to a “T.” From the time he graduated high school. Epstein was tall, attractive, smart-sounding, well spoken, and incredibly persuasive.

Although the article studiously avoided mentioning the well-known occasions when Epstein obviously interacted with and enjoyed the protection of U.S., British, and Israeli intelligence services, the details it did provide were the most compelling portrait yet of the so-called “International Man of Mystery.”

Who knows whether this small novel on Epstein’s rise to power, along with the Times’ other Epstein disclosures, will move the needle. But I find the timing incredibly suspect, and very suggestive that the Times is worried the DOJ might dump a lot more than anybody is expecting. We shall await further developments with great interest.

Former President Bill Clinton shocked his own aides ahead of Moroccan King Mohammed VI’s 2002 wedding by demanding to bring two unrelated plus-ones — the now-notorious Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell — to the royal nuptials, The Post has learned.

Clinton, who had earned goodwill in the North African nation by attending the funeral of the king’s father, Hassan II, while president three years prior, beamed with Epstein, Maxwell and his daughter, Chelsea, in a group photo shared exclusively with The Post for this story.

“[Clinton] brought them as guests to a king’s wedding. I mean, it almost sounds made up,” said one source familiar with the matter.

The account is surfacing as Clinton downplays his ties to Epstein — and as the Justice Department faces a congressionally mandated Friday deadline to release files on the financier’s crimes, which were not publicly known at the time of the Moroccan king’s wedding.

A second source said the 42nd president’s staff “insisted” and “pushed” to bring Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex-trafficking conspiracy and other offenses, and Epstein, who died in jail in August 2019 while awaiting his own trial on federal sex-trafficking charges.

Holy Shit!

New footage of Bill Clinton at Epstein Island just fucking dropped!

Notice how they dropped this at 9pm EST on a Friday night?