🚨Trump’s EPSTEIN PROBLEM Just GOT WORSE…

Donald Trump and his regime are in. Jeffrey Epstein hell. You can run, but. you can hide. And run indeed is what. they try. The Midas Touch Network now. has a White House correspondent. We're. right there on the White House grounds. We're in the press brief room. Shout out. to Luke Rael, the Midas Touch White. House press correspondent over there. And so, you know, when Todd Blanch is. heading into the Oval Office, what do. you think we're going to ask him about?

Not what everybody else in the press is. asking, not that access journalism. We're going to press him about the. Epstein files and about and about his. violation of the law while he's covering. up the Epstein files. So, we've got Luke. Gradel over there pressing Todd Blanch. I'll show you that in a moment as Blanch. runs away from us. And then separately, you have Katie Fang, Midas Touch. correspondent, suing Todd Blanch. And. she just filed a new document in federal.

court after Todd Blanch has repeatedly. violated the Epstein Transparency Act. And Katie Fang won the injunction in. federal court. And Blanch and the Trump. regime supposed to turn over the. documents. Show us the documents. And. then separately, the Midas Touch Network. has a number of correspondents on. Capitol Hill. You know what we're asking. those MAGA Republican members? We're. asking them about their cover up of the. Epstein files as well. This is what you.

wanted with the Midas Touch expansion. And this is how we are expanding. You're. seeing it in action right now. So, make. sure you subscribe to the Midas Touch. YouTube channel. Subscribe to Katie. Fang's YouTube channel. Let me show you. here. Luke Rael might as touch White. House correspondent asking Todd Blanch a. very basic question and Todd Blanch runs. away. Bye-bye Todd. You don't want to. answer any questions about the Epstein. files that you're covering up the child.

sex trafficking ring that the Trump. regime is covering up. Watch for. yourself right here. Here, let's play. this clip. >> Mr. Attorney General, why have you. complied with the Epstein Files. Transparency Act? >> Excuse us. Will you release the. unredacted handwritten notes from the. FBI relating to the president? Mr. Attorney General. >> Okay. Then the Midas Touch Network uh. Capitol Hill correspondent Pablo. Monriquez, he was pressing MAGA. Republican Congress member Nells about.

the MAGA Republicans cover up of the. Epstein files. And Nells, this MAGA. Republican Congress member, he's like, "No one talks about the Epstein files. anymore." You understand? We've dealt. with that. We have no We don't even talk. about Epstein anymore. It's done. The. DOJ's handling it here. Play this clip. >> Mr. Mills, real quick, do you think. you'll sign on to the second uh Epstein? >> Do you think you'll be signing on to the. second Epstein pil?

It's over with. I think that uh listen. uh the DOJ, everybody's getting to the. bottom of it. We need to focus on other. things and everybody wants to bring. Epstein up and the Democrats want to. bring Epstein up. Some of the. anti-Trumpers want to bring Epstein up. because we're what, two months away from. a a general election. So, uh Epstein, let's just we got other things to focus. on. So then we asked Republican Congress. member Thomas Massie, who was pushed out. and forced out and lost his primary um. because the Trump regime didn't like.

that he was calling for the release of. the Epstein files. Here's what Thomas. Massie told us about his effort to get. the discharge petition signed. another. discharge petition that would empower. the survivors of Epstein to sue to get. the files because the Trump regime is. arguing nobody has standing to sue. Although Katie Fang has demonstrated. that she has standing to sue. But in any. event, watch what Thomas Massie says.

Play this clip. Um, so I know that you. you're working on the Epstein files uh. discharge petition part two, but there's. another discharge petition that's one. away from ripening. It's the uh one for. the Dream and Promise Act. Just. wondering if you'd consider signing on. to the Dream and Promise Act discharge. petition by uh by uh Sylvia Garcia. >> No, I'm not going to sign that. >> No. Okay. >> No, there's another discharge petition. that's won away. >> called the Major Richard Star Act, and I. am a signature on that. >> What's that one about? uh to give uh.

benefits to to veterans. Uh I think it's. an important issue. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Got it. Thank you. And have you had any. more luck with uh the uh getting. Republicans on board with the the second. discharge petition on the FC files? >> So the math's exactly the same as it was. a year ago. We need four Republicans, myself and three others. We've already. got Nancy Mace and myself. I think we'll. get two other Republicans. >> Yeah, there was a lot of people there. were a lot of people uh Republicans. yesterday who said they were interested. in signing on. you got. >> well they all voted for the Epstein.

files bill right. >> and this is just an extension of it an. improvement of it and and here's the. reality if this gets to the floor. they'll all vote for it. now let me bring in Katie Fang make sure. you all subscribe to Katie Fang's. YouTube channel and here Katie Fang. talks to us about her filing uh from. today in her lawsuit against Todd Blanch. and the DOJ and this comes at the same. times separately that Epstein. billionaire Leon Black filed a lawsuit.

to block the House Oversight Committee. from taking his deposition regarding his. name in the Epstein files and his. financial connections with Epstein. He. argues there's no legitimate legislative. purpose to look into the Epstein. billionaires. It should all be covered. up. So, he's filed a lawsuit to block. his deposition. I kid you not. this. Epstein class stuff. These people are. lunatics. So, you have Leon Black, Epstein billionaire, saying Epstein.

billionaires should not be uh questioned. by the House of Representatives. Separately, Katie Fang's filing her. motion papers today against the. despicable Trump regime. Take a listen. to what Katie Fang has to say about her. filing. >> I hear you. I read the comments and I. share your sentiment. I have to keep my. foot on the neck of Attorney General. Todd Blanch because that's just the way. things have to go these days. Isn't that.

the case? And my litigation remains the. only lawsuit that has been brought. pursuant to the Epstein Files. Transparency Act. And because I abide by. the court's orders, I have now filed a. reply to the latest stream of excuses. from Blanch as to why he is protecting. convicted felon Donald Trump and other. members of the Epstein elite. As in, he's withholding and illegally redacting. files, documents, materials that are.

legally required to be produced pursuant. to federal statute. And yet, the top cop. in the land, the attorney general of the. United States, remains committed to the. bit of being personal counsel to. convicted felon Donald Trump. Let's get. into the latest. Here's my reply. It was. just filed September 2nd, 2026. It's. entitled Reply on Proposed Order. It's. because Judge EMTT Sullivan ordered. Blanch to file a response to the notice.

that I have covered here at Katy Fang. News in a prior episode that told the. court that Blanch was wrong when his. council said that it's too hard or they. haven't produced redacted handwritten. FBI notes pursuant to uh FBI 302 reports. and also the proposed order that dealt. with the publication of a redaction log. in the Federal Register. and beyond. Now, my reply is succinct. It's a little. bit under seven pages, and it makes.

clear that Blanch continues to refuse to. comply with not only the law, but with. the court's orders. June 25th, Judge. Sullivan granted my motion for. preliminary injunction, setting forth. very specific things that Blanch was. required to do. Blanch failed to do. that, thereby forcing the court to have. to issue an order for a status hearing. I went a few weeks ago in DC and for two. hours the lawyer for Todd Blanch, this.

kid named Andrew Block, a lawyer for the. Department of Justice, failed to give. reasons to the court as to why Blanch. was unable to comply with the court's. orders and directives. >> [snorts]. >> The arguments that were set forth were. specious at best. They were unsupported. by the facts and the evidence and they. sat there like a rank smell in that. courtroom. Now, we have provided the. notice of the several examples of.

redacted handwritten notes being. produced in the Epstein files. We also. submitted the proposed order as was. required by Judge Sullivan. The. defendant, Todd Blanch, has now chosen. to ignore the notice that we provided to. the court and has done some half-assed. explanation as to whether or not he's. actually complied with a section of the. law that requires the publication of the. redaction log. But as I noted here on. another episode at Katy Fang News, um. Todd Blanch is just a dumbass and has. cited to the Ron section. Now, let's get.

into some of the details because I. continue to tell Judge Sullivan to order. Blanch to produce the unredacted. handwritten FBI notes that relate to. four separate interviews conducted by. the FBI based on allegations made by a. woman who says that when she was just 13. years old, between the span of 13 and 15. years old, [snorts] that she was. sexually assaulted by convicted felon. Donald Trump and that she was also. physically battered by him and others, by the way. But notably and tellingly,

there is this insanity of trying to. protect Donald Trump because why not. produce the redacted handwritten notes. to the public and then why not produce. the unredacted handwritten notes to. Judge Sullivan as has been ordered by. him now repeatedly. The excuses provided. by Blanch as to these handwritten notes. are legion and they're dumb. The first. one that he did in writing was, "Oh, they are substantially similar to the. FBI 302 reports." Well, let me tell you.

something, and I've said it again. The. Epstein files doesn't provide for a. quote substantially similar exception to. production. Judge Sullivan's order did. not recognize a substantially similar. exception. In court, the lawyer for Todd. Blanch says that the handwritten notes. are duplicative. Again, there is a major. material difference between something. being substantially similar versus being. duplicative. But even if they were. duplicative, there's still no exception. in the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

that would allow Todd Blanch to withhold. production of these handwritten FBI. notes. As such, and because even the court. pressed the lawyer for Todd Blanch. during that status hearing to explain, you may be right that these things are. duplicative. You may be right that these. things are substantially similar, but. the court needs to be in a position to. say the court either agrees with the. Department of Justice or disagrees. In. other words, we don't take your word for. it. We don't trust you, Department of.

Justice, Todd Blanch. So, you got to. give the court something to be able to. rely upon. And as we sit here today, September 2nd, 2026, Todd Blanch. continues to refuse to comply with the. court's order to produce these. unredacted notes. So the judge can. decide whether to produce them or not in. redacted forms, redacted only to. eliminate and remove any potential. exposure for the victims in this case. That's it. So, in this reply, we asked.

Judge Sullivan to order Blanch to. produce the unredacted FBI handwritten. notes within 5 days of entry of an. order. Next, we also address the following, the. redaction [snorts] log. And I spent a. decent amount of time just a few days. ago, just last week, talking about how. there are two separate sections in the. Epstein Files Transparency Act. One is. section three that says you do the. summary and you give it to Congress and. you publish it in the F federal.

register. And then there's one that we. are traveling under that we keep on. harping on which is section 2 subsection. C subsection 2. I'm going to put it up. on the screen now because it's very. important that we focus on this language. because Todd Blanch cannot read basic. English. So here's the Epstein files. transparency act. I want you to focus on. section two entitled release of. documents relating to Jeffrey Epstein. And we know subsection A very broad. comprehensive what has to be produced. We know Blanch has already violated this. because he hasn't produced everything.

that is listed here. Subsection B says. these are actually grounds for. withholding that you're not allowed to. use as an excuse. Embarrassment, reputational harm, or political. sensitivity, including for any. government official, public figure, or. foreign dignitary. We know Blanch has. violated this because we know that he's. withholding if not redacting information. that would pose embarrassment, harm, and. political sensitivity to, I don't know, Donald Trump and others. Well, let's go to section two. All.

redactions must be accompanied by a. written justification published in the. Federal Register and submitted to. Congress. That's some plain English. All. redactions must be accompanied by a. written justification. Now, what does. Todd Blanch say? Judge, judge, judge, judge, look what I did. I published this. in the Federal Register, judge. But Blanch sites to an entirely. different section. He doesn't site to.

section 2C2. [clears throat]. He cites to section 3, report to. Congress. Within 15 days of completion. of this release, the attorney general. shall submit to the House and Senate. committees on the judiciary a report. listing all categories of records. released and withheld and a summary of. redactions made, including legal basis. Number one, way beyond the 15 days, but. number two, where did it say here in section three. that you have to publish it in the. Federal Register? So once again, Todd. Blanch intentionally, negligently,

either way, he's horrible, is conflating. two sections, but we you and I both know. he can read basic English, right? He can. read basic English. He's intentionally. doing this. He's trying to pull a fast. one on the court, which is unethical and. terrible, but he's also trying to. confuse people because unless you. actually, you know, look at the statute, you may get understandably confused. But. in our reply and as we've said. repeatedly, we've made it clear to the. court, you can't snow the court. Court's too.

smart. Number one, but number two, you haven't provided for all of the. redactions. You haven't given a written. justification. And what he has done is. [snorts] he's published in the Federal. Register a six-page letter it gave to. Congress more than six months ago. And. he tries to say that he's satisfied the. redaction log. And the answer is no, he. hasn't. And we cite to. are you ready? Justice Scalia. The. cardinal rule of statutory.

interpretation is that no provision. should be construed to be entirely. redundant. Section 2C2 requires an. explanation for each individual. redaction. While section 3 requires only. a summary of all redactions. I don't want the summary. I want what. the law requires the attorney general to. do. And this is important because it. forces Todd Blanch's hand to have to. admit that he has done redactions that. are illegal and impermissible pursuant. to a federal law. And that's why he is.

fighting this tooth and nail. [snorts]. They give away the game always. Their. objections, their opposition, their. efforts to delay and offiscate and hide. They give away the game. and they also violate the law. Not to. mention the multiple court orders from. Judge Sullivan. So, we've asked the court to order Todd. Blanch to publish within 10 days the. written justification for quote all. redactions made as is required by the. Epstein Files Transparency Act. >> More from Katie Fang right here as she.

talks about the importance of her. filing. Let's bring her in. >> And finally, as usual, Todd Blanch is. begging the court for a stay. Todd. Blanch is begging the court for more. time because he wants to be able to. figure out if he can appeal. Now. remember, for months he's been like, I don't know. if I can appeal because the preliminary. injunction hasn't been granted. But then. just a few weeks ago, he's like, I'm. filing a protective notice of appeal. because, as I said, he's thinking, I got. a 50-50 chance of getting this appeal,

right? Never actually filed the appeal, right? Just did a notice of appeal. But. here's the problem, too. He never. actually asked for a stay by way of any. motion. He didn't file a motion to stay. the preliminary injunction or the bigger. lawsuit which continues behind the. scenes. And because of that, any ask for. stay should be dismissed. But we also. have the law on our side. In the DC. circuit, a court assesses four factors. when considering a motion to stay an.

injunction pending appeal. Number one, the moving parties. The moving party is. Blanch. Blanch's likelihood of success. on the merits of his appeal. Number two, whether Blanch will suffer irreparable. injury. Number three, whether the. issuance of this stay would. substantially harm other parties in this. proceeding and subsection four, the. public interest. Now, look, Judge. Sullivan granted my motion for. preliminary injunction and already. resolved factors 1, three, and four in. my favor. So, the really the only one.

that remains whether there's irreparable. harm to Blanch in having to not get a. stay that he is seeking. Well, Blanch. cannot. circumvent wellestablished law. recognizing that administrative burdens. and staffing limitations fail to. constitute irreparable harms in this. manner. In other words, if Blanch says, "Judge, I'm going to have all this. irreparable harm because I'm going to. have to go and I'm going to have to do. all these, you know, explanations for.

all of these redactions.". It's not an excuse. So that's why we say the attorney. general of the United States must spend. time and effort to follow the law, but. that is not a harm, let alone an. irreparable one. It is a labor of love doing this. lawsuit. It is a lot to do this lawsuit. Um, but. I am determined to see this thing.

through. And as I said a few minutes. ago, the lawsuit, the big lawsuit, seeks the production of the entirety of. the Epstein files with proper legal. redactions. And not just the ones that. have been published so far publicly, but. the ones that Todd Blanch continues to. sit on claiming that they are what? Duplicative and non-responsive. We all. know that we cannot trust what Todd. Blanch says. haven't been able to trust. what Todd Blanch says for a long time, but especially when it comes to the. Epstein files, we most certainly can't.

trust him. This preliminary injunction. has been incredibly important. It has. dislodged a lot of information from. Blanch and the Department of Justice. It. has exposed them for their cover up, for. their concealment, for their violations. of the law, and it has made them. scramble to try to stay consistent on. excuses. and they get revealed each and. every step of the way. But like I said, it becomes a labor of.

love because we have to continue to push. it forward knowing that we have to. comply with not only rules of procedure. in the law, but with what the judge. tells us to do. Thus the reason, pursuant to the court's order, we have. filed this reply today. Hot off the. presses, you have it here at Katy Fang. News exclusively. >> And there you have it, everybody. Make. sure you subscribe to Katie Fang's. YouTube channel. Thanks for watching. everybody. We appreciate you. We're. grateful for you. Great work Luke. Great. work Katie. Great work Pablo Monriquez.

on Capitol Hill. Scott McFarland and the. whole team, man. It's all coming. together. Hey, hit subscribe. Let's get. to 7 million. Thanks for watching. everybody. 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.