Trump’s DARK PAST Surfaces AS REDACTIONS SMOKED OUT!!!

Donald Trump's dark past continues to. surface as Midas touch host Katie Phang. smokes him out and smokes out his DOJ's. cover-up of the Epstein files in the. latest DOJ filing in response to Katie. Phang's lawsuit for the release of the. Epstein files where a federal judge. ordered Todd Blanche to turn over. certain documents that Todd Blanche is. claiming to be privileged and that are.

redacted and are being withheld from the. public. Todd Blanche was forced to make. a stunning admission that he was. improperly redacting the email address. and information of Jeffrey Epstein from. one of the documents being withheld that. Katie Phang was calling out specifically. to try to determine if information was. being improperly redacted. I'll show you. in a moment in the filing what Todd. Blanche was forced to admit only after.

Katie Phang cornered him. Also, another. massive finding after the latest DOJ. filing that Katie Phang was able to. expose. So, a lot of the redactions of. individuals who the Trump regime and the. Trump regime DOJ are claiming are. victims are people who are. co-conspirators. or. potential targets who could potentially. be investigated or individuals whose.

lawyers are simply going to the DOJ and. saying we believe our client is a victim. even if they were on a co-conspirator. list. And so, the DOJ is saying, "Well, if you tell us that you are a victim. even if you're a co-conspirator, we now. treat you like a victim." Think about. the ultimate insult to the actual. victims and survivors that people who. were likely identified as the. co-conspirators, as the perpetrators, as.

the bad actors, or the people who were. involved in doing potentially really. horrific things with Jeffrey Epstein, that their lawyers right now are. apparently going to the DOJ under a. loophole exception that Trump created. for them, and that Blanche created for. them, it seems, and they could just say, "Well, we're victims, too." And if they. utter the magic words "we're victims", they get redacted and removed. It's. admitted right here in the filing. So,

just to give you the quick sequence of. events, Katie Fang sues Todd Blanche, release the Epstein files. She wins a. preliminary injunction in DC federal. court. The judge orders Blanche to turn. over a certain group of categories of. the Epstein files that are subject to. Katie Fang's preliminary injunction. Blanche refuses to do it. Katie Fang. says, "Hold Blanche in contempt." And. Judge "Why don't you do what's called an. in camera review? Review this group of. documents. Doesn't have to be everyone.

Let's just take a look at this group of. documents, a smaller sample, and see if there are any red flags with. the smaller sample." The federal judge, Judge Sullivan, uh granted that request by Katie Fang. Said, "Okay, let me take a look at this. smaller group of documents uh in camera, so I could determine if they're red. flags. Turn it over by I think it was. like close of business on Friday.". Blanche did the notice of com- He filed. something called a notice of compliance,

but even though the filing by the DOJ. says notice of compliance, that's, you know, they lie about everything. It actually. was an admission of non-compliance. with the Epstein Transparency Act. Look. at this. "Defendant's notice of. compliance with court order." And it. says, "Defendant Todd Blanche in his. official capacity as acting attorney. general. filing through counsel submits this. notice of compliance. And then it says. defendants submitted hard copies to the.

court's chamber. So the federal judge. reviews it in camera, meaning Katie Fang. and the DOJ are not there with the. judge. The judge reviews it privately. and confidentially alone for now. Blanche says the submitted documents. show that the justification in. defendants briefing on this issue. supports each redaction. Each file. listed in the court's order is addressed. below. So take a look at number two. It. lists one of the Bates number documents. EFTA 01187999.

The in camera documents show that the. redacted text contains the identity as a. victim, rather contains the identity of. a victim as that term is defined in the. memorandum titled attorney review. protocol for Epstein files dated January. 4th 2026. Specifically, this individual is. represented by counsel with whom the. Department of Justice has communicated,

and that counsel has requested the. individual be treated as a victim. Upon. closer evaluation of this document, it. was also discovered there was an. inadvertent redaction to Epstein's email. address, which has since been lifted. Now this is just a small subset of the. documents. It's like eight documents. And on one of those that Katie Fang says. are suspicious, what the DOJ is claiming.

now is that they've created a memorandum. titled attorney review protocol for. Epstein files. So the DOJ creates their. own memorandum and then says that. pursuant to their own memo, we redacted. the name of of individual because their. lawyer contacted us and said that the. co-conspirator or the individual. identified here was actually a victim. So, we said, "Sure, if you tell us he's. a victim, we'll we'll now say that he he. or she they're a victim because you say.

so and now we won't turn it over." So, just think about it. If you're part of. Trump's Epstein class crew, if you're. part of that Mar-a-Lago crew, what do. you do right now? Well, you just say you're a victim. And as the. ultimate insult to the real victims and. the survivors, you know, just think. about it. Blanche Trump, hey, just go. reach out to Blanche and just say you're. a victim and we'll redact you. So, think. about throughout the files the. potentially tens of thousands of other.

references to victims who are not. actually the victims, but who are the. co-conspirators, who just think about it. The real. victims and survivors, they had their. names leaked. They had their private information. leaked. They had photos of themselves, compromising horrific photos of. themselves, leaked by the DOJ to. traumatize them. Whereas the. co-conspirators, whereas the perpetrators, whereas the. bad actors, they then go to Blanche. Do.

you see what Katie Fang exposed? They go. to Blanche and they say, "Actually, we. are the real victims." And then the DOJ. gives them a pass and says, "Okay, we're. going to redact your name and we're. going to protect you." How utterly. horrific, how utterly horrible right. there, right? And then you go through it. over here, too, and it says, "Upon. closer evaluation of this document, it. was also discovered there was an. inadvertent redaction to Epstein's email.

address, which has since been lifted.". You were redacting Epstein's emails and. Epstein's email address. And it just so. happens in this group of eight. documents, one of them have those two. issues. Is this the biggest red flag? Great work by Katie Fang to expose this. stuff. And that's what they say about. these other documents. We redacted the. name of co-conspirator X, Y, and Z. because their lawyer contacted us and. said they're a victim, so we said, "Okay, you're a victim. We're going to.

hide your name because the memorandum. that the DOJ created apparently back in. January 4th, 2026. created the pretext for them to follow. their own BS memorandum. Are you. freaking kidding me? Let me just show. you what Katie Fang has to say how she. is undeterred and she is going to get to. the bottom of this. Here's what Katie. Fang said. Let's play it. >> Where's the redaction log? Where are the. foreign language translations? And where. are the handwritten FBI interview notes.

for those four interviews that were done. of the victim who was 13 years old when. she alleged that she was abused sexually. and physically by convicted felon Donald. Trump. Where are those? Still remain open. I am still forging ahead. But again, look how far we have made it. Look how far we have come. This is just. a preliminary injunction, people. This. is not even my entire lawsuit, which. seeks all of the files to be released. with appropriate redactions. We are. chipping away,

chipping away at the opaque, just. block of of of of this black. box that the DOJ thinks is okay, but. it's not because it's illegal. And we're not going to take it. >> Here's how Katie Fang describes Todd. Blanche admitting in his filing. yesterday that Epstein's email address. was redacted. Let's play it. >> I want to go back to 1187999.

This is the Wilhelmina model agency one. And the reason why I want to go back to. this one is there's something very. important that happened with this email. Todd Blanche admitted in his filing. yesterday that Jeffrey Epstein's email. address was. redacted. He calls it an inadvertent redaction, but it's been redacted and it's since. been lifted. Now, you may not think that's a big. deal, but I think it's a very, very, very big deal. And in fact, that is the. biggest red flag that you could find. from what has happened here. Put aside.

all the other stuff. Why? Because it. shows that the way that the redactions. were done here was wrong. This wasn't some one-off mistake. We. know for a fact that the Department of. Justice released over and over again. hundreds and hundreds of times the. personally identifying information of. several victims. Victims whose names have been submitted. on a list to the DOJ. People like Danny. Bensky. We know that the process was flawed. We.

know that it didn't work. And now we. know that it also worked to protect the. identity of Jeffrey Epstein. The main perpetrator of these crimes. that we are focusing on right now. And. the DOJ's want to say, "Oops, sorry, we. missed it. There's something flawed with. the process." And that is what a special. master needs to needs to get to the. bottom of. Because this, folks, is just a small. subset of the millions of documents that. have been publicly released in addition. to those that are being squatted on by.

Todd Blanche. >> Now, I want to bring in Katie Phang as. well to discuss what's been going on in. her case against Todd Blanche. Katie. Phang, an American hero, it's so it's. such an honor to have her be a part of. the Midas Touch Network. Let me just. show you what Katie Phang had to say. about this. Let's bring in Katie Phang. >> Todd Blanche, the acting Attorney. General of the United States, produced to Federal Judge Emmett. Sullivan in the District Court in DC.

produced unredacted emails and documents. for purposes of a in camera or in in. chambers review. I'm not allowed to be there. It's. something for the judge to be able to do. on his own. It is pursuant to an order that was. entered on July 25th, 2026 that we've. covered here at Katie Fang News. This order was specific, excuse me, about the Bates stamp documents that. were to be submitted and accompanying.

those unredacted Bates stamp documents, Todd Blanche was to provide. documentation. supporting his representations that the. redactions that were done were compliant. with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That's really an important nuanced kind. of detail. that we're going to talk about in just a. minute. Because as we sit here right now, Friday, July 31st, 2026,

Todd Blanche continues to violate the. Epstein Files Transparency Act. I also want to say at the get-go the. following. There's been some I'll call it chatter. on social media and beyond, maybe. internet, that I am. doing something that's running a foul of. protecting the confidentiality and the. privacy of frankly any abuse survivor, but specifically survivors of Jeffrey. Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and others.

It is one of the most offensive. suggestions to make to me. or about me. Um if if you've done so, you don't know. me. If you have done so, you haven't. been following my work. Um this is not. the pursuit of money on my behalf. This is not the pursuit of anything but. the ability to achieve accountability. and justice. I spent a good portion of. my career as a lawyer, as a prosecutor. I believe in the rule of law. I believe.

in our judicial system. I have made that. explicitly clear from day one here, not. only at Katie Phang News, but even. before when I was at MSNBC, and before. then when I was doing legal analysis, and before then, and even now as I am. presently a member of the Florida bar. and other jurisdictions. I'm very serious about the work that I. am doing. I have no desire to. abuse, exploit, or do anything to harm. any survivor or victim.

So, the idea that I am pursuing that in. any way is, for lack of a better word, So, if you hear it, put it to bed. Help me tamp it down because. if you know me, you know it's not about me. All righty. So, let's talk about the. notice of compliance that was filed. yesterday. On July 30th, it cites that hand delivery was made of.

the ordered documents at 2:28 p.m. Eastern on July 30th. And according to. Todd Blanche's representations, the. submitted documents show that the. justifications that were cited in his. briefing, and what is he referencing? He's referencing this, his response to. the order to show cause, Blanche says. that the submitted documents show that. those justifications cited in this. document support each redaction. Let's take a minute. What is still not produced? The.

redaction log that the Epstein Files. Transparency Act requires by law for the. Attorney General to submit. In addition to the summary of redactions. and withholds that Todd Blanche seems to. think covers all bases. He's wrong on. the law. Judge Sullivan granted the redaction log. as a part of my preliminary injunction, and as we sit here today on July 31st, still no redaction lock. Remember that. But, thank you, Todd, for laboring so.

hard, okay, to support each redaction with an. explanation, like you were supposed to. do for all of the redactions. But, okay. Now, let's start with the first the. first document, EFTA 00749245. I want to do this with you. I think it's important. to go through these emails. This is the I loved the torture video. email. This is the email.

that Todd Blanche wanted to say that if. I had just Googled it, I would have. found out that it's Sultan bin Sulayem. Maybe it is. Maybe it's not. I don't. have to trust Todd Blanche. I don't even. have to trust Tom Massie's word for it. I don't have to trust anybody's word for. it. I get to see the unredacted email. As I've said before, there is no trust. me, bro exemption in the Epstein Files. Transparency Act. that gives Todd Blanche cover to.

continuously violate not only the law, but Judge Sullivan's order. Now, the email address and name remain. redacted. This was provided to Judge Sullivan. yesterday unredacted with the name and. the email address unredacted. What does. Todd say? Todd says that the in camera. document show that the redacted text. contains only emails address that are. consistent with the government's. briefing. That's not even English,

number one. It's grammatically wrong. But, number two, his briefing, as I've said, says that. when it pertains to the torture video. email, as we are calling this, he says, "Well, it's a private email. address, and there's no purpose beyond. sharing that private email address. Oh, I beg to differ, Todd. The email is to show one, a potential. perpetrator of crimes against the. survivors of Epstein, Maxwell, and.

others. Two, I'm not supposed to give. quarter to somebody who loves torture. videos. Let me be clear. Todd Blanche by. insisting on maintaining the redaction. of the sender of this email about their. love of torture videos, Todd Blanche as. the acting Attorney General of the. United States is saying that if you love. torture videos, that you have a safe. space with him.

And. by extension, the Trump Department of. Justice. I want you to sit on that for a. hot second. Because that. is one of the most offensive things that. anyone could say, let alone somebody who. wants to be the top cop of our country. But Todd wants to spare the exposure of. a private email address for somebody who. loves torture videos. Why, Todd? Because the Epstein Files. Transparency Act explicitly states you.

are not allowed to do redactions or. withholdings to spare somebody. embarrassment, shame, or any type of. political humiliation. And yet Todd. seems to think that that is a priority. So, that's this email. Next, EFTA 1187999. That is email chain. dated January 17th, 2013 from somebody.

working at the Mademoiselle Agency, which again, if you go and you Google. that is a modeling agency in Paris, France. According to Todd Blanche, the. names that have been redacted and email. addresses are victims that are. represented by counsel. Now, why is this one so important? EFTA. 1187999. Well, Blanche says that the victims in this. email are represented by counsel and.

have requested that the individuals. whose names and email addresses appear. in this this particular document, that. they want to be quote treated as a. victim. End quote. Todd also references something called an. attorney review protocol for Epstein. files dated January 4th, 2026. Let's take 1 minute to go over that. because that's a very important thing. that we should talk about. So, this. memorandum is dated January 4th, 2026.

I'm going to do an entirely separate. episode about this memorandum cuz it's. worth detailing. But, I want to. highlight in this memorandum, the. subject heading is attorney review. protocol for Epstein files. What Todd. Blanche has done in order to, for. example, protect the name and email. address of the torture video lover and. in order to also protect um the the. names and the email addresses of the uh. people in the Mademoiselle modeling.

agency email is the following. So, in. this memorandum, what he did was he said that victims. personal identifica identifying. information includes email addresses. Okay, fine. That's okay. But, if you go. to the beginning of the protocol, he says that what they're defining as. victims now. is not just victims that have been. identified through investigations,

but individuals who have identified. themselves as victims or potential. victims either through prosecutions of. Epstein and Maxwell as well as all. individuals who have self-identified as. well as those that have been identified. and that have reported to the Department. of Justice as being potential victims of. state or federal offenses or other. claims of sexual exploitation and. misconduct by Epstein or Maxwell. So, what Todd Blanche has done has taken a. non-existent definition of victim and. expanded it to include victims,

potential victims, and people. that arguably. arguably. were co-conspirators, co-defendants, and. co-perpetrators of abuse. to allow them to self-identify as. victims. As such, their identities. have been redacted. I think it merits a conversation. and I. want to be able to talk about it. In the. interest of time, I do think we should.

probably talk about it at another time, but I wanted you to understand why this. information will continue to remain. redacted based upon how the victims have. been identified in the withholding and. redactions here. So, that's for EFTA. 1187999. Now, let's move on. Let's go to EFTA. 1930501. Again, according to Todd Blanche, the sender of. this email is a victim represented by.

counsel and that counsel has requested. that the individual be treated as a. victim and that's why that information. is not unredacted. EFTA 1928255. Now, that. is another email where within it the. redacted text are the identities of. victims, plural, who are represented by. counsel and they have requested that. these individuals be treated as victims. Now, this one is the long soft blonde.

hair beautiful little girl one. And. the one before, the 1930501, my apologies that I didn't address this. This is the your littlest girl was a. little naughty. Now, this is why there is already a. conversation about whether it is. appropriate to allow those names of. people that were helping, allegedly, Jeffrey Epstein and other to be able to.

recruit, to groom, to be able to. participate in these offenses, whether. it is okay to allow them to have their. identities remain unredacted. Again, conversation, excuse me, redacted. Again, conversation for another time, but I want you to understand the context. of what is happening here. EFTA 628112. Now, this is another one that really. upsets me. This is the email dated February 2nd, 2015, sent from a redacted sender that. talks about.

being called a sexual pervert is no fun. The key are the 14 to 15-year-old girls. I am a sexual pervert because I say that. they are now reproductive age. According to Todd Blanche, the Privacy. Act allows this person's identity to. remain confidential. And according to the attorney review. protocol for Epstein files, Todd Blanche. said that the Privacy Act allows. identities of people like this person, their email addresses, to remain. confidential.

So, once again, the acting attorney. general of the United States wants. somebody who thinks it is okay to have. sex with 14 and 15-year-old girls. because they are, quote, now. reproductive age. He wants this person's. identity to remain confidential from you. because he wants to, um, keep. keep their private email address. not released. Why, Todd? Why are you. protecting this person? They're not a. victim. But according to you, it would be a.

shame that their private email address. be exposed. I think it's a shame if you. don't expose somebody who thinks that. it's okay to have sex with a 14 and. 15-year-old girl. All righty. EFTA 264. 8868. Again, Todd Blanche says that the. redacted text, this is the she is like. Lolita from Nabokov. Tomorrow we travel. to burn for visas. Visas for what? Modeling? Modeling visas? Um May 23rd, 2017, this person is.

represented by counsel and claims that. this person is a victim and that's why. their identity is redacted. EFTA 2504630. March 19th, 2018, sender is redacted. I. found at least three very good young. poor, but we was so tired. The sender is a victim represented by. counsel. I will cover up this week. Meet this one. not the beauty queen, but we both like. her a lot. Is this a recruiting email? Is this somebody who is out working for.

Epstein trying to find. find other victims? Is that what's. happening here? Let's go to EFTA now. 1022356. Email chain dated September 21st, 2018. According to Todd Blanche, the names and. the email addresses pertain to two. victims. The recipient of the email is a. potential victim and the name in the. email that is redacted is the potential. victim talking about my favorite from. Lithuania. redacted 19 will meet when I am there.

Again, according to Todd Blanche, because they. are represented by counsel or potential. victims, their names are not going to be. unredacted. But what are they doing for Jeffrey. Epstein is the question. Moving on. EFTA. 00038227. Now, this is another one. The email addresses, sender and. recipient, these are law enforcement. personnel and according to Todd Blanche, you should be protecting the identity of.

law enforcement personnel. Again, that. is not in the Epstein files transparency. act, but that is in this attorney. protocol that the DOJ generated. Why are you protecting the names of. government employees? Why? Why is that? What's also not addressed here. is that the redactions. that are here that are identified as. co-conspirators, their names are redacted.

The Ghislaine Maxwell and Leslie Groff, their names are not. And according to Todd, in his response. to the order to show cause, Leslie Groff. has not asked to be identified as a. victim and that's why her name is made. available. And EFTA 194840, I didn't print out. It. is the draft indictment that was. prepared by the US Attorney's Office, Southern District of Florida. And the one that was never presented and. the one that eventually was was what.

what resulted, the non-prosecution. agreement that benefited uh Jeffrey. Epstein and his co-conspirators and then. he got that sweetheart plea. deal. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That one, according to Todd Blanche, shows that the co-defendants. are actually represented by counsel who. have asked that the co-defendants be. treated as victims. Again, having issues. But, I want to go back to 1187999.

This is the Maemoiselle Model Agency. one. And the reason why I want to go. back to this one is there's something. very important that happened with this. email. Todd Blanche admitted in his filing. yesterday that Jeffrey Epstein's email. address was. redacted. He calls it an inadvertent redaction, but it's been redacted and it's since. been lifted. Now, you may not think that's a big. deal, but I think it's a very very very. big deal. And in fact, that is the. biggest red flag that you could find. from what has happened here. Put aside.

all the other stuff. Why? Because it. shows that the way that the redactions. were done here was wrong. This wasn't some one-off mistake. We. know for a fact that the Department of. Justice released over and over again. hundreds and hundreds of times the. personally identifying information of. several victims. Victims whose names have been submitted. on a list to the DOJ. People like Danny. Betensky. We know that the process was flawed. We.

know that it didn't work. And now we. know that it also worked to protect the. identity of Jeffrey Epstein. The main perpetrator of these crimes. that we are focusing on right now. And. the DOJ's want to say "Oops, sorry. We. missed it. There's something flawed with. the process." And that is what a special. master that needs to get to the bottom. of. Because this, folks, is just a small. subset of the millions of documents that. have been publicly released in addition.

to those that are being squatted on by. Todd Blanche. There is so much more work that needs to. be done. But I am thrilled that we have. made it this far together. The hands of it's now in the hands of. Judge Sullivan. He has to review the. unredacted stuff, review the supporting. documentation that was allegedly. provided cuz I kind of have an issue. with that. The submitted documents show the. justification cited in the defendant's.

briefing support each redaction. Now, I'm curious. Did Todd also submit the. correspondence from the lawyers that are. representing the alleged victims to show. that they asked to be. identified as victims because it doesn't. say that here. And according to the. order from Judge Sullivan, Blanche is. supposed to bring with him proof that. these redactions were appropriate. Not. just a. "Hey, here's an unredacted email. And. hey, I'm just letting you know that.

these people are represented by. counsel." And so there's a lot of. open-ended questions that still remain, including where's the redaction log, where are the foreign language. translations, and where are the. handwritten FBI interview notes for. those of four interviews that were done. of the victim who was 13 years old when. she alleged that she was abused sexually. and physically by convicted felon Donald. Trump. Where are those? Still remain open. I am still forging ahead. But again, look how far we have made it. Look how far we have come. This is just.

a preliminary injunction, people. This. is not even my entire lawsuit, which. seeks all of the files to be released. with appropriate redactions. We are. chipping away. chipping away at the opaque, just. block of of of of this black. box that the DOJ thinks is okay. But. it's not, because it's illegal. And we're not going to take it. So much more to unpack. I'll do more. episodes, but in the meantime, thank you.

from the bottom of my heart. Thank you. for the support, for the caring, for the. words of encouragement. There There is. nothing that keeps me going. more so than knowing that we are in this. fight together. And as always, a. shout-out to my amazing lawyers, Brendan. Ballou and Sam War Packer at Public. Integrity Project. I couldn't do this. without them, just like I couldn't do. this without you. Be mad, be outraged, demand accountability. I'm off to rattle. some more top Blanche cages.

>> Hey, if you want the full story how. democracy got here and how we take it. back, pre-order our new book WTF America. today. Just scan the QR code or click. the link in the description. Let's do. this.