🚨 Trump gets ORDER HE FEARED on Epstein Files!!

Donald Trump and his Department of. Justice were just hit with a federal. court order that they feared the most in. connection with Midas Touch host Katie. Fang's lawsuit against acting Attorney. General Todd Blanche pursuant to the. Epstein Transparency Act as Donald Trump. and his DOJ tried to cover up Trump's. dark past and continue to cover up the. Epstein files and the child sex. trafficking ring contained within those. Epstein files and the co-conspirators. continue uh to try to have their names.

concealed. Katie Fang went on the. offense. She sued Todd Blanche in. federal court in Washington, D.C. Recently, the federal judge ordered that. Todd Blanche turn over certain documents. that had not been produced to the. federal judge, Judge Sullivan, for. something called in camera review where. the federal judge will review the. documents to see if the Department of. Justice is complying or lying. Todd. Blanche claimed he followed that order.

and turned over the documents for in. camera review and this federal judge. said, "Nope, you are a liar. You did not. comply with my order and I am hereby. ordering you to appear for a hearing. that will be taking place at 1:00 p.m. on August 13th. Todd Blanche, DOJ, you. now need to show up and explain why you. just violated this court order. Why are. you lying to this court? I asked you. specific things," the federal judge. said. "I want understandings why you.

redacted these co-conspirator names. You're claiming they're victims. You. were supposed to provide the backup. documentation to prove that these were. actually victims and not. co-conspirators. Instead, you just. responded, 'Trust me, bro.' No, we don't. trust you. You did not provide the. documents. In addition, we want to see. the federal judges I want to see the. privilege logs or the redaction logs. So, on August 13th, I'm not asking you. whether or not you will produce the. redaction logs. You will produce the.

redaction logs. I want to know the. timeline when you intend to produce the. redaction logs. So, show up and be. prepared to uh discuss that. Also, why. have you not turned over the FBI notes. to the FD-302s, those 302s reports, those FBI 302s that involve allegations. against Donald Trump? You're claiming. that I don't get to see it or you're not. turning it over because they're quote. "substantially similar" to the final FBI.

302 reports. There's no similarly. uh substantially similar exception. Those documents, those notes need to be. turned over. We want you to explain that. on August 13th when you show up to a. federal court appearance. It is so. ordered. Show up in court. Let's bring. in Katie Phang right now. And by the. way, make sure you all subscribe right. now to Katie Phang's YouTube channel. That channel needs to get 1 million. subscribers. And subscribe to her audio. podcast Sidebar with Katie Phang. Katie.

Phang, a hero. Let's bring in Katie. Phang right now and ask her this the. exclusive first interview with Katie. Phang on the big news that Judge. Sullivan just handed down this order. moments ago. Now, I want to bring in Katie Phang to. break down the latest order uh in her. case against Todd Blanche under the. Epstein Transparency Act. Katie, great. to see you. Judge Sullivan's order. basically saying Todd Blanche is not. complying with Judge Sullivan's previous. order about turning over certain.

categories of documents. Also, addressing the issue of the redaction. log, uh which I thought was very. significant also. Um and you know, it seemed that Judge. Sullivan may have been waiting to see. were they going to respond to his order. and comply to see how to handle the. redaction log. And when they seemed to. be deceiving the judge there, He then. said, "Oh, I didn't forget about that. redaction log, by the way." Talk to us. about this order, what happened, and. then I want to talk about some other. stuff as well. Let's start with.

>> You never want to underestimate a. federal judge. But for a second there, I. was like, did did he forget that I that. he had ordered Todd to turn over the. stuff? So yes, so the breaking news is, and I'm going to start with the. It's the primacy recency, right right, Ben? I'm going to start with the most. recent thing that just happened, which. is an order that just got entered within. the last hour by Federal Judge Emmet. Sullivan in my lawsuit against Todd. Blanche. The reason why this is so. momentous is Judge Sullivan has now set. a status hearing for next week, August. 13th, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern, in court,

ordering both parties, as in me and Todd. Blanche, to have to appear. And he has pretty much said in this. order, "Todd Blanche, you have now. defied my orders." And I think this is a. really important moment when it comes to. compliance and whether or not this judge. is going to allow Todd Blanche to. continue to violate not only the Epstein. files transparency act, but the judge's. own orders. The judge, notably, when he. did an order back on July 25th, Ben, just to refresh people's recollection, >> [snorts]. >> told Todd Blanche to come to chambers so.

that the judge could do an in-chambers. inspection of the unredacted documents, and a specific small subset of them. And. he told Todd Blanche, pretty much, "I. don't believe you when you make. representations in your court filings. about why you have redacted certain. things. So you have to bring with you. proof." Kind of I call it show your. work. If you are legitimately redacting. pursuant to the law, then you'll be able. to support those allegedly legitimate.

redactions. Okay. So, that being said, the next thing that happens is we get. this order, and the judge is like, "You. told me that you were going to bring it, or I told you, excuse me, you had to. bring it." And according to Judge. Sullivan, he says, "No, defendant did. not provide such documentation.". So, now you have to come to court and. you have to you shall, not permissibly, you could, it's you shall be prepared to. discuss what documentation you can you. will provide to support your assertions.

that these truly are victims that you. have redacted. In addition, and really. interestingly, there's some handwritten. FBI interview notes that pertain to the. victim who alleges that when she was 13. years old, she was sexually abused and. physically battered by Donald Trump. Now, the 302s, as they're called, these. FBI reports, they've been released. publicly with heavy redactions, but the. underlying FBI interview notes, I know. that they exist. They were actually. turned over in discovery in Ghislaine.

Maxwell's criminal prosecution in the. Southern District of New York. According. to Todd Blanche, he has them, but he. told the court, "I'm not turning them. over because they're substantially. similar to what the 302s, the ultimate. official kind of report, end up. reading." And so, what did Judge. Sullivan say? He says, "Hmm, Blanche, [clears throat]. you never pointed to the provision in. the Epstein Files Transparency Act that. contains an exception that allows you to. withhold it, um and you haven't pointed. to the exception that says that. something's duplicative that you don't.

have to turn it over. And in fact, but. what was fantastic about what Judge. Sullivan does here is he also says, 'And. hey, Blanche, you actually admitted in. your own filing that you've published. quote substantially similar draft. indictments.' And that's the reason why. you're not turning over some other. indictments. And so, you know what? You. got to come to court on the 13th of. August and explain why the handwritten. notes cannot be redacted manually or why. the redactions cannot be accomplished in. another way, which means we're going to. get these handwritten interview notes by.

the FBI over four interviews done with. this victim who alleges that she was. abused by Donald Trump. And then. finally, here's the redaction log you. mentioned. This redaction log was. required to be done by the law, and it's. to log each and every individual. redaction that's been done. And Blanche. said, "Oh, I did a summary. It's okay. I. don't need to do it." And Judge Sullivan. says, "Nope. Come to court, and you. shall be prepared to discuss the timing. for complying with this requirement. Not. a come to court and tell me why I can't. do it. It's come to court and tell me. when you're going to do it." And I think.

then this is a really important. inflection point in my litigation, because this is the time when Judge. Sullivan says, "Take a you know what or. get off the pot.". >> You know, it's all a really big deal, but that redaction log piece of it. provides the road map to everything. they're hiding. And the same way Blanche. is claiming, "Well, we didn't turn over. the notes about these allegations. against Trump because we've invented a.

substantially similar carve out that. doesn't exist in the Epstein. Transparency Act." When we are able to. now see this redaction log of the. millions of millions of documents. they're withholding, we'll look through. them and say, "That's not executive. privilege. That's not a real exception. What's that? Foreign language ex- You. just made up another exception." So, we. can now go line by line. And by the way, Katie, this is what we do as litigators. The whole thing you and I as litigators.

have had cases with terabytes of. documents, and you have a team of. associates. I was part of those teams. when I was litigator. And you do you you. draft these things. You draft these. logs. It's not fun to do. It's one of. the most tedious tasks. That's what. lawyers do. It's like when you build the. building, you got people who are the. welders and do the concrete. This is. what's what you do. >> And you know what is so beautiful about. Midas Touch is the following. Um you. have brought so many of us together, including my friend and colleague. Allison Gill. And the reason why I bring.

up Allison right now is this is really. important. She and I were doing an. episode on her the her show called. Breakdown on Midas Touch. And she and I. were talking about how she had the DOJ. admit that they have training videos for. FBI analysts that were provided last. spring in 2025 before the Epstein files. transparency act was even a glimmer in. the eyes of Ro Khanna and Tom Massie. And those training videos told these. analysts that they had to flag not only. Trump's name, but other VIPs, and that.

they had to redact it and log it. So, we. know, Ben, that the FBI, at a minimum, knows how to hell do this because the. DOJ in the Trump administration told. them how to do it. So, everybody knows. how to do a redaction log. This is not. some big secret thing that's. particularly complex. You could whip out. a table on Microsoft Word and do it if. you really did not want to do it, you. know, in a more sophisticated way. But, what's really important is in a. filing that was just done in my lawsuit, Top Ranch said, "Hey, judge, there's a.

thing called the Privacy Act, and the. Privacy Act says that I can protect. email addresses that aren't even. victims, that are people that are actual. perpetrators, etc., right?" And so, that's another exception that Top Ranch. in the Trump DOJ just pulled out of thin. air. But, it's really important because. that protocol, like the orders that were. given to be able to justify how these. redactions were done, it's dated January.

of 2026, Ben, and the timing is. important because we remember the. deadline under the Epstein files. transparency act for these redactions to. be done and for it to be released was. December of 2025. And so, what they've. done is they've created this memorandum. internally at the DOJ that they've. published trying to justify why they've. redacted so much. But, if we get this. redaction log, and assuming our guendo. is actually accurate and credible, then. to your point, we can see each and every. individual redaction, and then I can.

challenge them. But, without this. redaction log, I'm supposed to just take. his word for it? I call it the trust me, bro exception that Blanche has decided. to adopt for the entirety of these. files, which is why I'm grateful that. Judge Sullivan has said, "There ain't no. thing called a trust me, bro exception. in the Epstein files transparency act.". >> Well, look, and we saw, for example, the. fake deposition of Pam Bondi, which was. supposed to be under oath and with the. video camera, and it wasn't. And we saw. the DOJ objections there, where the DOJ.

created fake exceptions. Pre-2025. exception. Okay, what was it? The. pre-2020, what are you even talking. about? We've got another exception. Can't be anything that happened in the. White House or the Oval Office. Okay, that's an exception. So, they create. these exceptions, but one of the kind of. real sick and disturbing things amongst. the many, which I think you've. identified, is what it seems that Trump. and Blanche were doing is that they were. going to co-conspirators and saying, "Here's how we protect you. Call me up.

and say you're a victim. And if your. lawyer gives me a ring and says that. you're a victim, we then don't challenge. that. We'll declare you a victim, and. then we'll redact you under the victim. exception." So, they've leaked the. victims publicly, and the. co-conspirators had their powerful law. firms call up and say, "We're the. victims." That to me is what Sullivan. knows. That to me is what you know. That's what's what's really going on. here with that category, and it's why.

you and your brilliant lawyer surgically. focused on that is because I think. that's what you wanted to prove, that. you've declared the perpetrators the. victims in order to conceal their names. And if that's what you were willing to. do there, that's the tip of the iceberg. And. that's what I think's going, that's. telling me, I think that's part of the. strategy behind what you and your. lawyers. were doing. >> Part of it, but but but but here, let's. let's let's pull on that thread a little. bit more. Let's this back even more, right? Cuz think about that. If you.

allow as the DOJ to expand the. definition of a victim vis-a-vis. Epstein, Maxwell, and others, and you. allow people to self-identify, then. ultimately, Ben, what's going to happen? You're going to have everybody. self-identifying as a victim. You're. going to have Ghislaine Maxwell say, "Well, I was duped by Jeffrey Epstein.". Or "I was taken advantage of by Jeffrey. Epstein." And that results in what? Blanche, the DOJ, which controls the. FBI, never investigating anyone. Because. then Blanche says everybody's a victim, and so we're not going to investigate a.

victim, cuz God forbid we ever. investigate a victim. And what's wild is. it occurred to me while I was chewing on. on this idea of him allowing everybody. to self-identify as a victim, why is it then, if let's say Jane Smith. comes forward and says, "I am a victim, and that's the reason why my name has to. be redacted." Why is it the FBI is now. not investigating. what happened to Jane Smith? Let's just say credibly, this person. comes forward and says, "I am a victim,

and it wasn't just Jeffrey Epstein.". Let's say it was, you know, one of. Donald Trump's friends. Why is the FBI not running down these. leads? Ah, because according to Todd. Blanche, there's no evidence that. Epstein trafficked anyone to anyone. else, to any third party. And Todd. Blanche also says, "I don't have. anything to do because the victims. haven't given me any type of thing to. chase down, and so I'm going to be. willfully ignorant and willfully blind. and not do my job because somebody is. telling him not to do his job, right?".

Which he's willingly saying, "I'm not. going to do it." But it all smells of a. cover-up, a concealment, and that is the. real criminality that's going on here, that there are real victims that aren't. getting the justice that they deserve. Because you have somebody who's in the. pocket of the convicted felon Donald. Trump. >> Finally, talk to us about the default. You called out Blanche for not meeting. the deadline to respond I do they not. know that when there's a preliminary. injunction there's also an underlying. operative complaint that requires.

responsive pleadings to both and I mean. one of the things that you and I both. kind of call out them as well is not. just the evil and maliciousness but all. of those characteristics that I had seen. when I was a litigator and when I would. be watching it show up in court you'd. watch really bad law firms and and you'd. sit there sometimes and you'd be like. how do these people pass the bar what. are they doing it was like the judge was. you know and you see oh my gosh the DOJ. has just become like a bad law firm with.

a bad reputation they they don't even do. the most basic stuff it's like it's a. deadline you respond to the preliminary. and the operative complaint there's. deadlines it's called court what it to. talk to us about what we're. >> court. It's so what's outrageous is when you. sue somebody you have to respond you. either answer the allegations by either. admitting or denying them or you file. something maybe like a motion to dismiss. right whatever is supported by the law. and the rules of procedure. I sued Todd. Blanche at the end of April of 2026.

his answer was due within 60 days which. would have been June 29th of 2026 we sit. here on August 6th and I have nothing. and so my lawyers reached out and said. hey. hey you might want to respond we're. going to be gracious and give you some. time of just a few days but you got to. respond and they're like no you're so. wrong the preliminary injunction issue. remains open the judge hasn't ruled on. your motion for a preliminary injunction.

which Ben then what the hell has Todd. Blanche been turning over to the judge. so far that's all pursuant to a. preliminary injunction order and then. they also said and hey by the way we. want an additional 60 days after. everything is said and done to explore. whether or not we want to appeal and we. think this is such a great idea and we. were like, "No, peace out. That's not. going to happen." So, what do they file? And it's got Jeanine Pirro's name on it, Ben, which I think is also delicious. So, they file a motion to stay all of. the deadlines nunc pro tunc pending.

resolution of the motion for preliminary. injunction and motion to set briefing. schedule. So, I walk through this on my. channel, Katie Phang News, to explain. that in this motion. Blanche admits he blew the deadline. And he goes in this motion and he says, Ben, "Hey, I have something called. excusable neglect. >> [snorts]. >> I missed the deadline. and it was oversight that was.

regrettable but not intentional. And so, you know what? What I need is I need you. to wind the hands of time back to when. it was originally due in June. I need. you to give me more time even though. that deadline has now way past. And. then, I need you to also give me another. 60 days." But what's the point of the. delay? We all know it's because they. don't want to have to turn the stuff. over. But strategically, Ben, you and I. also know this too as litigators, this. is a surefire way of pissing off the.

judge even more. You're telling this. judge that the order he entered on my. motion for preliminary injunction that. says explicitly "Plaintiff's motion for. preliminary injunction granted." You're. telling this judge that he never ruled. on it and still open. But then, you also. in the same filing admit that you missed. the deadline. It's the games. It's the. gaslighting. It's become a brand for. this DOJ and this is the wrong judge to. try. >> You know, and this is how they handle. everything. I mean, the catastrophic war. in Iran, fake nego- it's games. When the.

other side doesn't play your games, though, and you're dealing with these. other issues also or when you don't have. a Trump appointed judge like the BBC. case where it just so happens it's a. judge Trump appointed in 2019 and goes, "Oh, good injure." When you actually. have the systems working, Trump can't. handle it. That's why he wants to break. the systems, but it's why you're. fighting every day on the Katie Phang. News Channel. Everybody subscribe to. Katie Phang News on YouTube. That's a. channel that should be at a million. subscribers yesterday. Let's get that.

channel 1 million subscribers today or. tomorrow then. So, after this video's. over, everybody, please go subscribe to. Katie Phang's YouTube channel. Put in. the comments that you saw this video and. also subscribe to Sidebar with Katie. Phang. That's the audio podcast. So, wherever you get audio podcast, subscribe to Sidebar with Katie Phang. there and the YouTube channel. Katie, thanks for your heroic work. It is an. honor to be your colleague here at the. Midas Touch Network. >> Ben, thanks always to you and everyone,

Brett, Jordy, everybody here at Midas. Touch. This really is this community. that is the Midas Nation that is really. pushing this forward. Um and I am always. uh privileged to be able to say all of. you are on this fight with me. I'm not. alone. I may be the named plaintiff in. this, but I'm doing this alongside all. of you. So, I'm very grateful for the. help. >> Oh, we're grateful for you. Everybody. hit subscribe here. More importantly, subscribe to Katie Phang's YouTube. channel. Thanks, Katie.

>> Thanks, Ben. >> Hey, 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 find. our way back. To pre-order, scan the QR. code or click the link in the. description. Let's do this. >> [music]. [music].