[0:08]I now welcome our second panel, Chairman Comr and Ranking Member Garcia from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Your full statement will be submitted for the record and we ask you
[0:20]summarize your statement in five minutes. Chairman Comr, I welcome your testimony. >> Thank you, Dr. Fox and Mr. McGovern. Today, the oversight committee met with
[0:30]survivors of the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and Gileain Maxwell. Their stories are heartbreaking. What they have suffered and endured should never have happened and is
[0:42]sickening. They were not only victims of crimes, but were betrayed by their own government. Since 1996,
[0:51]let me repeat that. Since 1996, the FBI has ignored tips. Then, US attorneys gave Epstein a sweetheart deal
[1:02]to avoid significant jail time. The government simply disregarded the law and ignored the victims of these crimes.
[1:12]It was and is unacceptable. For the past six weeks, the House Oversight Committee has worked tirelessly to request documents and testimony regarding Epstein and Maxwell.
[1:23]We have subpoenaed Maxwell for a deposition, DOJ for documents, 10 former federal officials for depositions, the Epstein estate for documents, and agreed
[1:34]to a transcribed interview with Alex Aosta. This is the most thorough investigation into Epstein and Maxwell to date and we
[1:44]are getting results. We have already deposed former Attorney General Bill Barr. The Department of Justice provided nearly 34,000 pages of documents and
[1:56]will produce more which are being made public as we speak. When I conclude when we conclude this, all those documents should be online unless we have a crash
[2:06]or something with the computer. The estate will begin producing documents September the 8th. That's the Epstein estate. The committee is working
[2:16]at an unprecedented pace and doing the work as it is supposed to be done. What we heard today is that these survivors support these efforts and support transparency and accountability.
[2:28]Goals we all share. This resolution furthers those goals. It supports our work. It supports the release of documents. And most importantly, it achieves what the survivors want. There
[2:40]is no question that Epstein and Maxwell were terrible criminals. With your support and the support of the House, we can continue to do the work to provide closure and justice to the hundreds of
[2:52]victims. I urge support of this resolution and I welcome your questions. Madame Chair, I yield back and thank you for uh being in that discussion today as
[3:02]well. >> Thank you, Mr. comr. Mr. Garcia, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to just begin um think in a
[3:13]very bipartisan manner earlier today Republicans and Democrats got a chance to hear just horrific horrific stories and to hear these
[3:24]incredible and brave women. Thank you. Uh earlier today we heard of course these horrific stories um from these women who are incredibly brave and the
[3:35]courage that they showed to be here uh to share stories of sexual abuse some of them when they were girls young girls uh
[3:45]is I think has shaken a lot of us on this committee and reaffirmed our commitment to the truth and transparency. Now, the oversight committee, particularly Democrats, are going to continue to investigate the Epstein
[3:56]files and bring justice to the victims of these heinous crimes. After meeting with the survivors, of course, of Epstein and Galain Maxwell,
[4:06]we're once again reminded of the monstrous actions that they took against over a thousand women and girls. It's important that we center their
[4:16]stories and work for accountability. And I want to just remind this committee and the public that Jeffrey Epstein and Galain Maxwell are monsters, criminals,
[4:28]liars, and in no way should they be lionized or supported. And it is it is a outrage that Galileain Maxwell has been moved
[4:40]to a facility where she is now more comfortable. And I think it's also appropriate to say that that was also horrifying to the women in the testimony that we
[4:52]heard today. And retraumatizing the victims because of this move is shameful and should never have happened in this country.
[5:02]When you harm innocent women and girls, you should be held accountable. And I'm hopeful that in a bipartisan way, this committee will do that. Now, I
[5:10]appreciate that. Of course, close to 33 34,000 pages of documents have been released by the Department of Justice. That is complying with the subpoena, of
[5:21]course, that was that was put forward. But over 97% of those documents have already been released to the public. And I'm glad that we're releasing all those files to the American public. Most of
[5:32]it's already in the public record. What we need right now is full compliance with the subpoena. And the attorney general who once said that the files
[5:42]were on her desk should release all the files immediately. There cannot be additional failures or
[5:51]additional coverups by this government that has already failed these victims now for decades. That cannot continue. We've got to follow the facts. We got to
[6:02]get all the files out to the public. and we've got to ensure that there's justice for all the victims and the girls. I also just want to add that oversight
[6:13]Democrats have supported every single time there's been an opportunity to support transparency. We of course forced a vote to release and get the subpoena out. We will continue to take those actions. But any
[6:25]action that promotes transparency, we're going to support. If there's going to be a resolution, of course, it's going to come in front of the Congress to support additional
[6:35]transparency and openness in the Epstein files. We are going to support that. And any other committee that brings forward any other resolutions, we will support.
[6:44]But that does not somehow supplant the work on the discharge petition that Congressman Connor and Congressman Massie are moving forward. We will continue to support that
[6:56]discharge petition and we will support any other resolutions that come forward that also holds Epstein, Glain Maxwell and anyone else accountable. And I'll
[7:07]conclude just by saying that it is our hope that this investigation takes on and leads us to the truth. And we do not care how powerful you are, what
[7:17]political party you're in, how much wealth you have, or how connected you are. If you cause harm to these women and these girls, then we're coming after you, and justice should be served. And
[7:28]with that, I yield back. >> Thank you very much, Chairman Comr. Would you like to respond to anything
[7:36]Ranking Member Garcia had to say? No. I appreciate his uh statement that uh this has been
[7:47]bipartisan thus far. I think this is an opportunity for this committee to demonstrate that we can work together in a bipartisan way. This is a bipartisan
[7:57]issue. Uh every Republican I know in Congress wants the Epstein files to be released. Every
[8:06]Republican in Congress I know wants the uh the the people that were trafficking
[8:16]women to be held accountable. Uh every single Republican I know wants the government officials who were involved in any potential cover up or or blackmail
[8:27]operation, if there was one, uh to be uh outed and held accountable. So, we're going to try to do everything we can to to get this. And I think we've
[8:38]demonstrated that. Uh I'm I'm a Republican. We f we subpoenaed Bill Barr. We subpoenaed Alex Aosta. We we
[8:48]subpoenaed uh Pam Bondi for the Epstein documents. I don't remember when I was in the minority a Democrat
[8:58]chairman subpoenaed any uh Democrat officials in the administration. So, we've demonstrated we don't care about political party. We don't care about
[9:09]what your la what your last name is. We don't care uh how powerful you are. We want to know the truth. And we're doing everything we can. and I hope that the Democrats will will work with us in this
[9:20]endeavor and not and not politicize it. >> Um, thank you. I I agree with you and I was in that hearing for most or the
[9:31]meeting with the victims today and I appreciated very much, Mr. Garcia, what you said about this being a bipartisan
[9:40]effort and there being so many Democrat members there. But I also agree that there hasn't been this level of interest
[9:51]in this issue before. I've been here a long time. >> It dates back what we learned from today. It dates back to 96. It dates back six administrations, six prior
[10:00]administrations. So there have been many other administrations that that could have released it for whatever reason hasn't. But uh thus far this administration is producing documents
[10:11]like we've asked and I appreciate that. >> Right. So would you you've stated a little bit already the information that you've already received from the Trump
[10:22]administration after the subpoena for the records was executed and how quickly the committee started receiving the information. >> Yeah, we uh as soon as the subpoena went
[10:33]out, we heard from the Department of Justice, their attorneys started communicating with our attorneys and they they started uh gathering the documents and I think we got the documents in record time. I can't
[10:44]remember a time when we subpoenaed the Meritt Garland Department of Justice and never got anything from them. So, I applaud the Pam Bondi and the Trump
[10:56]administration for working with the committee uh and for being transparent >> and um as as you just mentioned um there
[11:07]have been times when you have requested information. I can remember what I'd been here three months and I was on the oversight committee on a subcommittee
[11:19]and we had a a bureaucrat come in and the chairman of the committee said, "I've asked you for three years to give us information." And the person just sat
[11:28]there and wouldn't say a word and wouldn't respond in any way. Wouldn't you rather have a subpoena in hand above
[11:38]everything else, even a law passed by Congress? Absolutely. >> Which can be challenged in court immediately to get this information. >> Abs. Absolutely. We're doing what that
[11:48]uh discharge petition wants done. And we are we're three steps ahead of that discharge petition. We've already deposed former Attorney General Bill Barr. We've already subpoenaed the
[11:59]estate, the Epstein estate for all the documents. We've already >> September 8th the material would come from them. >> I'm sorry. You said the Epstein estate is going to start producing the
[12:10]>> September 8th. >> September 8th, they're going to produce the documents from the estate. I believe September the 16th or 19th one, Alex Aosta coming in for a deposition. And uh
[12:22]I know that during our discussion, uh Miss Crockett and and Raj Christ, I believe, asked questions about what we should ask Okcasta. So everybody, both
[12:33]sides are going to get equal time to interview Augusta on on all of that. And and again, uh the administration has complied with with our request and um
[12:44]you know, they're they're I think we're we're getting those documents and as we speak, they should be being uploaded to a website right now. And it it's my understanding that the
[12:56]Massie um document, the Massie legislation only asks only for information from the administration. Is that correct?
[13:08]>> That's right. >> It it doesn't go beyond the administration. >> And we're going to go beyond it. We've already we're already getting the the documents from the administration and we've got we've moved way past because
[13:20]that that discharge petition was filed six weeks ago. We we've we've already deposed, you know, again, the former attorney general. We've got dates set
[13:29]for uh others to come in. We've got we're downloading 34,000 pages of documents. We met with the victims today and got more names that they said in
[13:41]front of uh you know in front of the minority and and we're we're going to press forward with that. So we're we're way ahead of this discharge petition. I don't think it's necessary at all.
[13:51]>> And the and you are going to be in a very unique position of being the arbiter of any needed redactions keeping
[14:02]that decision in the hands of members of Congress. Correct. Correct. And and there were one of the victims today made it very clear she didn't want her name, you know, made public. Others said they
[14:14]were willing to let their names be public and and were willing to testify in a public hearing. And so, uh, you know, that's you have to know,
[14:24]you have to have, uh, grant privacy, the privacy rights to the victims. Some of the victims want their names out there and some want their names to be redacted. And it's my understanding that
[14:35]was not sufficiently uh taken care of. That's correct. In the mass correct and I also want to mention that Mike Johnson, Speaker Johnson sat through the whole meeting today with the
[14:47]victims, the entire 2 and 1 half hour uh discussion. We had bipartisan discussion >> and and what I heard from the victims
[14:56]was that they feel for the first time that they're being heard. They they they they feel that they're being heard, but they made it very clear they're they don't have a lot of trust
[15:07]in anyone affiliated with the government because they believe that their government has let them down. And the timeline of that would date over both Republican and Democrat administrations
[15:18]in the past. >> Correct. So, let me see if I can put all this together. Do you believe a formalized investigation by the House is the best
[15:29]path forward to obtain the records and disclose them to the people? >> You've made a commitment
[15:39]>> and our resolution makes a commitment to disclose everything that can possibly be disclosed short of violating the privacy
[15:51]rights of others. >> Yes, ma'am. 100%. And by having the full House vote and speak in support of this investigation,
[16:01]it will be helpful to you in executing the mission that you're about. Is that correct? >> Absolutely. If we have to go to court for something, if it's a good bipartisan vote in the House of Representatives,
[16:11]that that only helps. >> Okay. I appreciate that very much. Mr. McGovern, >> thank you very much. But first, I I think I I want to ask unanimous consent
[16:21]to insert into the record the Massie counter resolution because you keep on saying that it uh it doesn't protect the victims, but it's there's in yellow here
[16:32]there's some pretty explicit language about protecting the identity of the victims. So, I don't want there to be any confusion. >> Without objection. >> And you know, and um and uh Mr. Comr
[16:42]says it's unnecessary, but this bill we're doing right now is unnecessary because you're already doing something. Um, so I I I can't help but feel that this is like cover. And I got to be
[16:54]honest with you, I've been, you know, we've been trying to bring um, you know, legislation to the floor. We've tried to, you know, amend bills to try to uh, get this administration to do what Trump
[17:06]said he was going to do during the campaign, and that is release all the files. Um, and uh, you know, I mean, we had to recess early because we didn't people didn't want to take a vote on it. Um, and I think, you know, let's I you
[17:17]know, I appreciate the the nicities uh of both of you appearing before this committee right now, but I I gotta tell you, I think uh I think what's going on here today is the Republicans are
[17:26]terrified. Um and you know uh and and I think we all know why. Uh and that is because the president uh doesn't want to
[17:37]release all the files. I mean, after promising that he would release them during the campaign, uh, then he, as you that was in 2024, and then 2025, he says
[17:46]it's all a big hoax. It's perpetrated by Democrats and some stupid Republicans. That that's his quote verbatim. So, when you say all Republicans want this stuff
[17:58]released, I don't think that guy does. >> That's right. >> Um, and what you're telling us, you're going to release some of the files uh tonight. Um, if I heard Mr. you guys see
[18:07]it correctly. 97% of which is already out in public. So, we get 3% that that that's new. I don't know what it's going to say. Uh but I just don't understand
[18:17]what the big deal is. Why can't the administration just release the files? Uh you could do the investigation, but just release all the files. Um you know,
[18:27]be be u you know, Trump and the people he put in charge of the FBI and the DOJ promised that they would. And it's just kind of strange that they haven't done
[18:37]so yet. I mean, don't you think? I mean, we just want to know what are they trying to hide? Why is this such a a difficult thing for them to do? You know, before we left for recess, you
[18:47]guys all told us that you wanted to release the files and that a non-binding resolution authored by Mr. Norman was an important step forward to getting the Epstein files released. Why hasn't that
[18:58]been called up yet? Mr. Scott um had the authority to do so for weeks. uh he could do so this week. Uh hasn't done it. I don't know why not. Maybe Mr.
[19:09]Norman can explain to us why his Epstein resolution never made it to the floor. Maybe Mr. Scott can tell us why uh would like to share with us why he decided not to call up the rule for it consideration
[19:20]when it was well within his power to do so. But honestly, the answers they give really don't matter because the resolution was nothing more than a distraction to buy time. And I think
[19:31]we're doing the same again today. Uh, but today's resolution is even worse. At least Mr. Norman's do nothing resolution had a deadline of 30 days. If I'm reading your resolution correctly,
[19:43]there's no deadline. It's just an open-ended distraction with the same goal. Uh, protect the powerful, hide the files, and buy some time for people to
[19:52]forget. So, you know, all that has to happen for the files to be released is one thing. The Trump administration needs to release them. That is all. Uh,
[20:04]and if that's too complicated for some Republicans to get their arms around, that's okay because they're in luck. Someone has already done the work for them because there is a bipartisan bill offered by Mr. Massie and Mr. Connor
[20:15]that would force the administration to release the Epstein files while protecting the victims. And Mr. Tacoma, I just just for the record, I think you I think you're not in support of the
[20:25]Massie counter bill, but let me ask you formally, I mean, do you support the Massie counter bill to release the Epstein files? >> We're doing that as we speak. And and you said uh some of the documents were
[20:36]going to be released, all 34,000 documents will be online. Hopefully in the next 5 minutes, if they're not now. >> Yeah. But 97% of which we've we've already seen. Mr. Garcia.
[20:46]>> Yeah. I just want to add I mean first appreciate the um the comments but let's let's we should be clear if if it's true as as the chairman said that every Republican supports disclosure around
[20:58]the Epstein files then every Republican should sign the discharge petition from Congressman Kana and Congressman Massie there's no no question and the diff key difference in that petition as well is that petition ensures one that members
[21:09]of Congress are all on the record on releasing the files and two that petition as you have in front of you also ensures that that the files actually go to the American public, that
[21:19]they're actually released to the public. I appreciate that the subpoena that we forced a vote on is going to our committee and it's important work. Most of the most of the documents that were
[21:31]sent to our committee, those initial documents were given to right-wing influencers back in February. The files and the full report, according to the attorney general, were sitting on her
[21:42]desk ready to be released. We know that the attorney general herself has shared with the president directly that he was also in the files. The reason and we
[21:53]don't understand why this cover up by the president continues to not release the full files. And so the discharge petition is an important additional step forward for the Congress, the full
[22:04]Congress to be on record to release the full files. So that piece is important and and it's clear that while maybe there are some Republicans in Congress and hopefully all that want to see
[22:15]disclosure, that is not the case with the Republicans in the White House and the Department of Justice. >> So 7 months uh to get released uh docu 97% of which already been released. But again, Mr. Comr, I mean, do do you
[22:27]support the Massie counter resolution? Yes or no? >> We're already doing it. And and Mr. No, the discharge petition does not have the force of law. We've already subpoenaed it.
[22:39]>> You can be you can be and I'll let Mr. McGover. It's very disappointing that you're trying to politicize this. We're trying to get answers. We're trying to do everything that's in this discharge
[22:50]petition, but but you're trying to politicize it. >> No, no, it's a yes or no question. It's not a trick question. I mean, do you think >> we've already done what the discharge petition's asking? Do you think the
[23:01]resolution saying to keep doing what you were doing is better than a bill that could become law? >> The bill The bill has no force of law. It has no force of the law. You're just
[23:12]trying to do a political stunt. >> Look, ask the question, Mr. >> Well, I was asking a question. He interrupted me. >> Okay.
[23:22]>> It's a simple yes or no question. Simple yes or no question. Do you >> We're already doing it. >> All right. Well, that's not a yes or no, but but do you think the resolution saying to keep doing what you were doing
[23:32]is better than a bill that can become law, which would require the release of all the files? >> It doesn't have the force of the law. It's just a political stunt. It's just a political stunt. And and you know,
[23:43]>> this is a resolution. Um the count of is Massie bill uh would become law. If all you Republicans want everything released, then you know, you could vote for it and then if he decides to veto
[23:55]it, you could override the veto. >> The subpoena goes further than the discharge petition. Discharge petition is just a political stunt. Just a political stunt. >> Are so you
[24:07]>> and look, we've we have done everything bipartisan in this investigation. This is an opportunity. And I think most of the Democrats on the oversight committee want to be bipartisan in this, Mr. McGovern. So, so you're not going to
[24:19]answer my question, but look, we we're meeting here under an emergency procedure uh to consider this resolution, which if I'm reading it right, simply tells your committee to continue doing what you're doing. Do you
[24:31]need this resolution to continue doing what you're doing, Mr. Garcia? I mean, we don't we uh the resolution as presented is not necessary. Uh again, we want we want disclosure. We want the
[24:42]files released, but this what should have happened is we should vote on the discharge petition and move it forward and then continue our work. Can I say one more thing, Mr. Mr. Ranking member? I also want to be clear that the DOJ has
[24:53]not been forthcoming or presented everything that we've asked for in the subpoena. And I think it's important that even in our recent interactions with the DOJ, they're essentially now not giving us any new additional information as to when we're receiving
[25:05]the rest of the files. And so having Congress act and taking a vote on the full release of the files is an important additional step which is why the discharge petition is important and
[25:15]the resolution should not somehow take precedent or discourage members from somehow signing the discharge petition. >> So help me understand what we're considering right now. Does this
[25:25]resolution grant you any new authority? >> No. I think the resolution will send a signal if we end up in court. If, as the
[25:35]victim stated today, there some of the most powerful and some of the richest names in the world were involved in a cover up, we're going to end up in court. And I think the resolution will
[25:46]demonstrate that that Congress is working in a bipartisan manner, not trying to be partisan to get the truth to the American people and hold people accountable. >> Yeah. Why don't why don't we do both? I
[25:57]mean, Mr. Massie, last time I checked, is a Republican. Other Republicans will sign that. I mean, it's a I mean, we Why can't we do both? I >> I think we can. I think >> would the Excuse me, Mr. McCart. Would
[26:07]the gentleman yield him? >> We can. We certainly can do both. >> We'll pass this resolution here and then if sufficient people sign the discharge
[26:18]petition, then it will come out. And it's my understanding there is a significant difference in the resolution that we have here and the Massie um
[26:29]resolution and that is it dem our this resolution demands disclosure whereas the Massie resolution does not. So I
[26:39]think we can do both and let that happen that we want to show that we want this done in a very in a very important way.
[26:50]>> Well, if we can do both, then why is the rules committee standing in the way of allowing I'm I'm going to have a vote on the Massie um uh counter resolution. Why would the rules comm why would
[27:02]Republicans of the rules committee block us from just bringing it to the floor? Um, we could we could vote on both >> because it they've already started the discharge process. >> Well, that does you
[27:13]>> they've already started it. >> Yeah. Well, I that's a nice Well, that's what whatever that's I I don't even want to say what I'm thinking about that answer, but uh uh let me um let me let
[27:23]me uh let me just ask this a yes or no question. Does the administration have the power to release the Epstein files with appropriate redactions to
[27:33]protect the victims and the survivors? Do they have the authority to do that? >> I I think so with the subpoena. >> Yes. >> All right. They do. So, but they're not.
[27:44]Um, and Mr. Comey, this resolution that we're that is before us right now says that you're investigating mismanagement that led to Mr. Epstein's death.
[27:55]>> Um, who was the president of the United States when Mr. Epstein died in custody? >> It would have I would assume it would have been Trump.
[28:04]>> Yeah. And one I I have another just one last question. Um, you you referred to Gileain Maxwell as a terrible
[28:13]individual. Um, and I guess the question is maybe you can elite us. What do you what have you done to investigate why Miss Maxwell was moved to a minimum security
[28:24]facility? I mean, she's a convicted child predator. Um, uh, sent to prison. She testifies before, uh, some people in the
[28:35]administr, she she, um, answers questions, um, that are put forward by somebody in this administration. Um she basically says the president didn't do
[28:47]anything wrong and then all of a sudden is moved to a minimum security um facility. Um are you are you going to do have you done a hearing on that? Are you doing a hearing on that?
[28:58]>> We're we've subpoenaed Miss Maxwell. uh she sent a letter via her attorneys and said uh that she requested that we wait
[29:09]for the deposition until after the Supreme Court rules on her appeal. Uh that should we we're hoping that's this month. So as soon as the Supreme Court
[29:19]rules on her appeal, we'll go in and do a formal deposition. So Mr. Garcia will be there, I'll be there if he wants to be there. >> I'm not interested. >> And and those questions can be asked. Those are legitimate questions. Well, I
[29:30]but I don't I don't think Miss Maxwell can answer those questions. I mean, I I listened to some of her interview and it sounded like there was no cross-examination. I'm just curious why after she said what she said was she
[29:41]moved. So, it's not about Miss Maxwell, it's about somebody made the decision to move her. Uh, which I I don't think uh was expected. Mr. Garcia. >> Yeah. I mean, look, let's be let's be
[29:53]really clear. Um, first of all, Democrats on the committee, we did not support moving Gla Maxwell's testim testimony after the Supreme Court heard her heard her appeal. In fact, that was a decision that um the majority made
[30:04]that we did not support. We think that Miss Maxwell before she was interviewed by Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, should have been in front of a bipartisan committee and a deposition.
[30:14]And so to be clear, and I think it's safe to say that it's an outrage and shameful that Gain Maxwell was moved to a facility where she is now more
[30:25]comfortable and has more access uh to to folks both on the outside and her ability to to move freely when she has victimized over o hundreds and hundreds
[30:35]of women. And I'll and I'll add one more thing to that. We've written to the DOJ, the Federal Bureau of Prisons demanding answers, yet no response from the attorney general. We have no idea why
[30:46]she was moved and who actually at whose direction was she moved to that position. >> But she was moved and correct me if I'm wrong, by this current administration. Right. >> Absolutely. I mean, I I
[30:57]>> I just and I and I again, I I I would think that, you know, I mean, this is so outrageous that that that a big part of the investigation of your oversight
[31:07]committee should be on that as well. Um, and I mean I I I hope that I hope that you pursue that. But but again, I mean I um
[31:17]I I think it is imperative that we pass the Massie kind of bill. Um because I think it does have the the force of law.
[31:26]Um and um because I don't I don't trust this administration uh to basically I mean something's going on here. I don't know what, but there's a reason why everybody went from we're going to
[31:37]release the files one day to the next day saying we're not. Um, so in the in the spirit of full transparency and the spirit of demanding that they do what they said they were going to do, I think
[31:46]it's it I think we need to do more uh than what we're doing. Mr. Comr. >> Yeah. U I was just told by council the documents pertaining to the move would fall under the Department of Justice
[31:58]subpoena. So I think that's a fair question that that I'm confident if we don't ask it, Mr. Garcia will in a whenever we're >> Yeah, I'll tell you this whole episode
[32:08]has been outrageous and it's disgusting. Um, and it's been strange, especially the way this Congress has dealt with it up to this point. And so, uh, so, so
[32:19]some of us believe we ought, you know, we ought to also pass the Massie uh, bill. And I hope that we will do that. And I hope my friends on the rules committee will allow us to offer it. Um, because I'll bring it up as an
[32:30]amendment. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. McGovern. Miss Fishbach, you're recognized. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. And I I
[32:39]I am confused because the oversight committee is trying to do the investigation, trying to get the information, trying to get it released.
[32:50]They have been working on it most of August to significant port part of August. Um, so I am confused as to why
[32:58]the Democrats are opposing this because you are doing it in the way that it should be done, not some resolution added, you know, that like it like the
[33:09]Democrats attempted to um in rules committee in the middle of well it wasn't in the middle of the night in the evening, but instead this is a thoughtful >> way that you are handling this
[33:21]>> bipartisanly. Um, I And so I I am just really confused about that. And I just want to say that I thank you for doing what you're doing
[33:31]because we obviously need to figure this out in a in a respectful manner. So we are protecting those those um victims
[33:42]who don't want to be um publicized. We're doing it in an organized manner so that things happen in a transparent manner. And we are going to and you're
[33:53]my understanding is you are going to disclose and publish everything everything >> everything that >> and so I um I don't know if you have anything you want to add to that but I
[34:04]just wanted to point out how confused I am about this because >> this is just grandstanding and and and political theater >> absolutely >> from the other side because you're doing
[34:15]what you're supposed to be doing. We we want to know. I want to know. Uh if you look at the roster of the committee, Marjorie Taylor Green, Anna Pelina Luna,
[34:25]Nancy Bass, they want to know. I mean, they ask tough questions. And and look, when Acasta is interviewed, there'll be some tough questions for him. He has a
[34:36]lot of questions that need to be answered with respect to some things. So, we we've not put a line down. We're only going after the Democrat. that
[34:46]happened in in the past when the Democrats were in charge, they only went after Republican. We want to get the truth and it it it goes back it scans
[34:54]spans six administration. So, u look for for whatever reason according to the victims today and Dr.
[35:05]Fox was in there, Mr. Garcia was in there. The uh you know, they've been giving interviews to FBI and other government officials, people
[35:16]in in various departments of justice for for decades and and name names and nothing's nothing's been done. You know, the the Biden administration had an opportunity
[35:27]to release the Epstein files and they didn't do it. uh you know, you you go back uh I mean this this is something that we're committed to doing and and we
[35:37]want to do it. I want to be able to say the oversight committee, this was a big investigation. The American people are watching. I want everything out in the open. So, uh you know, we're trying to do it and we're trying to be bipartisan
[35:49]and and hopefully my friends across the aisle, my I think the majority of the oversight Democrats are sincere and want to do this in a
[35:58]bipartisan way. Hopefully the Democrat leadership will let this be bipartisan and not play political games. >> Thank you. >> Would the gentle lady yield?
[36:09]>> I will yield. >> I'm I'm confused too about something um that Mr. McGovern said that 97% of
[36:19]what's been released was already public information. I'm I'm not sure why that is that's negative because they keep
[36:29]saying that >> okay 3% is new >> but now it's all available to the public. Is that correct? Cuz you're >> maybe it was released to some people but
[36:41]now it's released to everybody. Right. So everyone can see it. Absolutely. I don't know what the 3% is that hadn't been released before and whether it has any significance, but I'm confused as
[36:52]the gentleoman from Minnesota's confused as to why are they downplaying that or why are they saying that's a waste of time?
[37:02]>> I I I don't know. It's not. And you know, I think all of us during August, if we went out and met with constituents, they were all asking about this. The American people want to know.
[37:14]Uh they want to they would like I' I've said this in a million interviews. They want to know you know who all was involved in in the the sex trafficking
[37:25]what big names were were uh victim take taking advantage of those girls and was the government involved. Those are the three questions and and I
[37:36]hope we'll be able to get as much information as possible. Look, this dates back according to what what we heard today from the victims as far back as 96. So, you know, we're have let's hope that
[37:48]there's still documents around. I've I've always had a huge distrust of the FBI and the Department of Justice under uh various administrations and and I've
[37:59]always had a theory that sometimes documents don't survive from one administration to the other. uh we're going to do everything we can to to get that information and and I think this resolution's a step in the in the right
[38:10]direction. I think uh I don't think the other thing's needed. >> I thank the lady for yielding. >> Thank you. Um but and and just to just
[38:20]to reiterate, um I just hope that the Democrats will stop the grandstanding and really, >> you know, work on the bipartisan
[38:31]oversight uh committee and making sure that these things are dealt with. I think it's a disservice to all of the victims >> to not work and to pretend that this is
[38:41]somehow bad. Um, but focus on it and and and make sure make sure I'm asking the Democrats, make sure that it's bipartisan. Make sure that you're doing what needs to be done, the disclosures
[38:52]done, and the investigation is done. >> Um, because it's this isn't something that should be about political, >> right? >> This is about something that we should investigate. And so with that, um, I
[39:04]just hope that they would come with us and help with the oversight committee investigation. >> Thank you. >> With that, I yield back. Thank you, >> Miss Ganlin. You're recognized. >> And I would yield to Mr. McGovern for a minute.
[39:16]>> I'm sorry there's so much confusion on the Republican side of the aisle. Um I mean I mean I don't understand why we're just not
[39:27]all demanding that the administration release all the files and we could do that if we were able to vote on the Mass Eye counter resolution, but apparently we can't do that. And
[39:38]forgive me if I'm just a little bit suspicious about all that's going on here because I mean I' I've been on this committee all year with all of you and I have watched as we have weaved and
[39:49]dodged and avoided uh bringing anything to the floor dealing with this. And I've also you know you you we we we began our August recess early because you none of
[39:59]you wanted to take a vote and hold this administration accountable and you ran out of time. Um, so, um, so again, uh, and you know, want to do something bipartisan, maybe we all can join on a
[40:09]bipartisan appeal to this, uh, administration to find out why Galain Maxwell was moved to a cushy, uh, facility, uh, after she exonerated
[40:21]Donald Trump. Um, so I'm I'm sorry. I mean, we we've we've lived through the last several weeks as Republicans have tried to avoid dealing with this issue. And so I hope, you know, and I trust
[40:33]that there's bipartisan cooperation on the oversight committee. Uh, and I I I want that investigation to move forward, but for the life of me, I do not understand why the administration, after
[40:43]promising to release all the files, has chosen not to. Uh, so that's what I'm confused about. I thank the gentle lady for yielding.
[40:52]>> Thank you. Um, Mr. Comr, I think in your introduction, just for folks who are trying to play catch-up here because there's a lot of details and a lot of names being uh thrown around. You said
[41:03]that one of the issues here is that the US attorney who initially handled Mr. Epstein's case gave him a sweetheart deal. That's right, isn't it?
[41:14]>> Was was the initial US attorney was who? >> Well, you didn't name him, but it was Alex Aoster, right? >> I don't know if he was the initial, but he was one of them. Yeah. He gave him
[41:24]Yeah. He was the US attorney appointed by George Bush in whatever district and he's the one that gave the deal to Epstein where he served a couple months but basically got out on release every
[41:35]day despite all the horrific crimes that we now know occurred. >> Okay. And in his later career he became Secretary of Labor in the first Trump administration. Right. >> Mhm.
[41:45]>> And he had to leave after reporting disclosed this sweetheart deal. Is that right? I I don't know what caused him to leave, but >> Okay. >> It was about that time.
[41:56]>> Okay. >> Um, so, Mr. Garcia, I I know we've heard that you've received some materials. Are
[42:06]there redactions in those materials? >> Yeah, there there are uh appropriate redactions. We we've we'll be able to review the full materials. there there'll be some opportunity to review the materials without some redactions
[42:18]for from the committee staff and committee members that don't put any of the victims in harm's way. But there are some again the the reality about the materials though is there's nothing really with a small amount a couple
[42:29]thousand pages of new information and all the information was first given to right-wing influencers back in February and then has been released to the public whether it's been through the media or
[42:39]or other ways. And so uh we can get the full files today. We know the DOJ has them. They're not answering our questions. We're asking when are we getting the rest of the files. We get no
[42:49]response. And to clarify one one thing, um, Miss Gallen, I think it was said earlier by another member of the committee that we're somehow opposing this resolution or we're not opposing
[42:59]anything. We want full disclosure. If the majority wants to put together a resolution uh to add to more disclosure, that's fine. But that resolution should in no way supplant the discharge
[43:10]petition or serve as some kind of distraction to not get the full Congress on record to release all the files. >> Okay. I I mean I guess I was asking about the redactions because there's been reporting that under Attorney
[43:21]General Bondi um hundreds of FBI and DOJ men hours have been dedicated to redacting all references to the president. Um, so is there anything to
[43:32]indicate that the materials you've received thus far contain some of those redactions? >> So, we we believe that the materials that we've received so far um have there there are there are redactions in there.
[43:43]We are reviewing some of those redactions. Currently, the team still is, but we believe that that again that a vast majority of those documents are actually not presenting any new information. Uh, and we do believe there
[43:55]are important and critical documents that we have not yet received from the DOJ that contain important information to this investigation and we have yet to see those.
[44:05]>> Um, do you have explanations for the redactions that you have seen thus far? Have those been provided by DOJ? >> We we do have some explanation of some of the redactions, but there are no
[44:15]documents in what we have been presented that are of concern as it relates to redactions. I'm I'm just concerned because that is one of the pieces of the
[44:24]Massie underlying reg uh underlying legislation which is that to the extent the DOJ turned over any materials it would have to explain any redactions or
[44:36]um claims of privilege or whatever >> but but that's important certainly in future documents. So as more documents come forward ensuring that that is a piece of it is going to be important.
[44:47]Um, and I guess going back to this issue of Glain Maxwell getting this cushy assignment, my understanding is that
[44:57]when she was moved to this new facility, that was against Bureau of Prison regulations and someone higher up from the White House or the Attorney General's office would have had to uh
[45:08]excuse um that normal Bureau of Prison uh rule. >> That is correct. >> Okay, that's what I thought. Okay. Thank you. Anything else you want to add? >> Uh just just that I think that
[45:20]Republicans should join uh Democrats on the oversight committee and others in demanding answers as to why Gain Maxwell was moved and who gave the orders to move Gain Maxwell. We still don't know
[45:31]that question, that answer. >> I think that's an important part as well and uh pleased to have been able to sign the discharge petition before we came up for this hearing. So, thank you.
[45:42]>> Thank you, Miss Scan. Mr. Norman, you're recognized. Thank thank both of you for coming. Um, you know, I think what's interesting about this hearing, Mr. Govern, you've
[45:53]been kind of very critical of everything that's been going on here and about you need answers and some of it uh we do need answers on, but the biggest and you
[46:05]you said things were outrageous and whatnot. You're, you know, confused. What I'm confused about, you were
[46:13]elected to Congress in 1997, 28 years. You were chairman of this committee, the rules committee from 2019
[46:22]to 23. Now, if this is all of a sudden so important when you was chairman, you had every right to bring up everything we're talking about now. What do we hear
[46:32]from you? Crickets. So, that's the big confusion I have. and J represent Commer the U thing about political grandstanding that's all this
[46:42]is and I didn't campaign files >> if I've got the floor I recognize you but I'm not we're not going to talk over each other have some decency this is an
[46:53]anti-Trump you're asking all these questions uh you know who released Jelene Maxwell when you had the opportunity you didn't say one word this is anti-Trump and it's it's coming out
[47:05]for that >> let me ask ask you this. How many how many victims were interviewed today? >> Six. >> And you think it's hundreds? >> They said it was hundreds. Hundreds.
[47:16]Like close to a thousand, but hundreds. That's what the attorneys for the vict There were the attorneys were represented by four. The the the victims were represented by four attorneys and
[47:27]that they said as many as a thousand. >> Well, the process is moving forward. We all know the discharge petition. I don't I don't mind having two tracks. Uh but the bottom line is Mr. Governor knows it
[47:39]has to go to the Senate. Uh I don't know what they'll do with it, but it's going to take time. You're not waiting on anything? No. >> You're moving forward. >> We're moving forward. >> And like uh Chairman Fox said, everything's going to get released. Now,
[47:50]let me ask you this. Are the flight logs public information? Who flew on the planes? [Music]
[48:00]>> Okay. Uh, some are, but the estate subpoena should cover >> more of that. >> We all know anybody that's How far back with the flight logs? You can't alter a
[48:11]flight log on an air. If you're flying on a plane, you can't >> back to 1990. >> Okay. 1990. We know people that were on that flight weren't going over there to have Bible studies, >> right?
[48:23]>> They were doing other things. So, we'll see is your opinion all the flight logs of whoever went >> uh Doesn't matter that will be released.
[48:33]>> Yeah. I mean that I want to know. I think everybody wants to know. >> You hit it on the head, James. I mean, people want to know the names. If a crime has been committed against the, you know, thousands of women, young
[48:44]girls. >> This transcends politics. That's why I I don't The fact that you're politicizing this is not right. This transcends this
[48:52]is young girls getting abused. Um, so the fact that the flight logs will be released, we'll know the names of who flew over there
[49:04]>> and then the public I think that's the big name. If crimes have been committed, who did it, >> right? >> And then let them face a trial. Let them face a um >> the a jury appears.
[49:15]>> Now, I think Miss Scandlin said the redactions by Attorney General Bondi contained things with President Trump. Now, what did you say, M Representative
[49:26]Garcia, that was not right, >> right? I I think well, first to be clear, I think the attorney general herself has said that President Trump is in the Epstein files to be to be clear. That's been that's been reported.
[49:37]>> And as far as what redactions include the president, we don't have the files yet to know what those what those redactions actually are. >> And when you get the files, y'all, both
[49:47]of you will ask the question, why were they reacted redacted? Who did it? And as far as who put Miss Maxwell in in another
[49:58]prison, I assume that will come forward. >> Well, and to be clear, our request has been to redact the names of the victims. Uh there shouldn't be circumstances, nor would we support redacting the names of
[50:09]the perpetrators or anyone that actually committed the harm. And so that would not be our expectation. And so we're we're we think the full release of the files is important to check that work, of course.
[50:20]>> Okay. So if if so it's not nothing with with do President Trump was has been redacted to your knowledge of what's been released so far. >> If anything with President Trump's name
[50:32]has been redacted. It has not been um it's not something that's been in anything. It's not any new information. >> So that that presenter to the public. >> So this just further illustrates this is
[50:42]just a hatred of of a president who has got support of 77 million people. I mean sir, I mean it's it's the president that actually campaigned on releasing the full files when he was running. I mean this this he had made this the central issue of his
[50:54]one of the central issues of his campaign. >> Aside from that though, you had four years under the bid administration. He was chairman of a committee. He could have brought it up day one. He didn't do
[51:04]it. So if all of a sudden the interest and I to be honest, I'm glad it's coming out now. It's been a lot transpired with Gelain Maxwell, the death of I don't
[51:12]even know when did when did Epstein die? August >> 2019 August >> 2019. Okay. So, a lot's happened over the
[51:21]>> 20 years of this. Um, well, I think thank you for what you're doing. Um, I think that public needs to know uh as they do on most everything. There are a lot of questions of the government
[51:32]involved and then the shooting of President Trump. I mean, that's going to come out at some point. >> Not only Butler, Pennsylvania, but the golf course. So, uh, is there anything you want to add to what Mr. RC or any
[51:44]>> No, I just think that, you know, the subpoena covers everything. I mean, if there are flight logs with the estate, that'll fall under the subpoena. If there are questions about why Maxwell
[51:55]was moved from Florida to Texas, that'll fall under the DOJ subpoena. So, we we we are moving forward and and the Department of Justice has been uh
[52:06]working with us to to turn over those documents. It takes a long time to gather and uh transfer 34,000 pages and u we're hopeful there's more and we'll
[52:17]look at that and then post it online as quick as we can. >> Okay. >> Mr. Norman, would you yield for a minute? >> Pardon me. >> Would you yield for a minute? >> Oh, yes ma'am. I'll yield. >> Sure. I just wanted to seek unanimous
[52:29]consent to put in the Newsweek article from August 1st of this year. So just last month in which it talks about the fact that Trump's name was in the just three epstein files and that a thousand
[52:40]FBI agents were redacting those files to remove his name and others. So it's an August 1st 2025 uh Newsweek report. It was also in Bloomberg and several other things but I know we were on break so
[52:52]you might have missed it. >> I without objection. >> So what she just said y'all will be able to get into that won't you? >> So you'll be able to answer every question. Now Mr. government fairness to you. You want to answer why when you
[53:03]were chairman of this committee, you didn't bring up anything about Jeffrey Epstein? >> Uh yeah, I mean I I one is I didn't campaign that I was going to release the Epstein file. Donald Trump made it into a big issue and then we all expected it
[53:15]was going to be released and then he decided at the last minute to change his mind. Called people said it was a big hoax. Said Republicans were stupid as like for going along with it. Um and so
[53:27]those are his words. Um uh and by the way, Glame Maxwell just got transferred like what a month ago. Um so I I wasn't chairman then um of of the committee.
[53:36]>> No no of 2019 to 20 I I would have >> Yeah. I mean if I if if if people have brought to my attention uh that there was something there I I would have
[53:48]demanded that they be released. >> The victims No. >> Well, I if the victims came to to us Yeah. But the victims want want the files released and Republicans have been
[53:59]frustrating that effort for months and months and months. And we we you you even adjourned early >> to uh to avoid having to vote on it. That is not so we want we want the we I
[54:10]want I want the truth out there. I want the files out there. >> Taking my time back. >> I'm take I'm reclaiming my time. The fact is if you had all the interest that you do now, it's just because of Donald
[54:22]Trump. You had four years to do it as chairman of this committee and you've been you've been in Congress 28 years. You and I both know the victims th this has been out that that young girls have
[54:32]been victimized for the last 15 years and you did nothing which is is uh is it shows you the the hatred they have and everything's political up here particularly when it comes to Donald
[54:44]Trump but the American people don't agree with you. Um thank you both of you for testifying. I yel back. >> Thank you Mr. Norman, Miss Leisure Fernandez, you're recognized.
[54:56]>> Hello, Chairwoman. We are back, aren't we? And we're back on Epstein, which is where we were before indeed
[55:07]Johnson shut down Congress early so we would not have to vote on a motion to put on the floor of the House the Massie
[55:17]Kana resolution to force the release of the Epstein files to the public, to pass a bill that would make it law that all
[55:27]of the files would have to be released. And there is no reason why we cannot still have that be a rule
[55:37]and we can do both. But Republicans and Trump especially seemed terrified of those files and
[55:47]seemed willing to do all kinds of things to avoid a vote on that bill. >> I know. Now, I want to go into some other things, but I'm going to uh uh yield
[55:58]some time to my ranking members. >> No, I I just want to respond to Mr. Norman. I I knew there was some there there when this administration was trying to hide everything. Um and uh and that's quite frankly what uh you know uh
[56:10]what has a lot of us concerned about uh what we're not doing here today, and that is not voting on the Massie counter bill. And my understanding is that there's some reporting out now. We're hearing that the White House is calling
[56:22]Republican members asking them not to sign onto the discharge petition. Um, and yeah, and I don't even know what the hell happened to your resolution that you brought up uh before we kind of
[56:33]abruptly uh left early for our August recess, but uh yeah, this doesn't smell right. Um and um I think we need to get to the bottom of this and that means that all the files have to be released.
[56:44]Uh I yield back. I thank the general lady. >> Thank you, ranking member. And you know, I am chair of the Democratic Women's Caucus, and we are always concerned about the fact that in this country,
[56:54]women and children and girls are attacked. They are abused. They are raped. They are trafficked. And
[57:03]they are done so by men like Epstein and by women like Maxwell. And I think that it is an outrage, as
[57:12]you pointed out, ranking member Garcia, that she is now been treated favorably by the Trump administration
[57:22]after saying some things they liked. And what we haven't heard from you, Chair Comr, is a commitment not to say, well, it's going to be in the subpenas, but to
[57:32]have a hearing on why. Will you commit to having a hearing to determine why she was moved to a more favorable conditions after that interview?
[57:43]>> We'll have a hearing to determine the crimes that were committed. The the hearing is going to be geared towards seeking justice for
[57:54]the victims, not scoring political points like you all are. We're concerned about the victims and and their request that someone finally be held accountable
[58:05]because they weren't during the Biden administration. They weren't during the o Obama administration. >> I'm going to take they weren't during the Clinton administration. >> Question was whether you would hold a hearing as we'll have a hearing was
[58:17]transferred why she was transferred after that. >> We'll have a hearing and if someone wants to ask that question they can ask it. You can ask any question. We'll have
[58:27]a hearing. you but it wasn't a hearing on what the question was and right >> you want to have a whole hearing a whole entire hearing not about the victims not about a government cover up not about
[58:39]human trafficking but about uh Maxwell be who you all were like begging to be deposed and I did the subpoena now you want to now you don't
[58:49]now you're mad because she exonerated Trump we brought in Bill Bar who is no you know I don't think it's secret that he and Trump aren't uh best
[59:00]of friends and he >> I'm going to I'm going to reclaim my time. Well, that's >> the time >> the question wasn't about shouldn't we do all these things, but this is
[59:10]something very specific that indeed as I understand the victims raised today, they're outraged that this has happened. And it is indeed a retraumatization when somebody who has done such horrible
[59:22]things is then treated favorably under these conditions. And I think that's where where it's at. And uh I really want to thank you, Ranking Member
[59:32]Garcia, because you focused in your opening remarks about the horrors of what you heard today and of why it is so important for
[59:43]these survivors that they get justice. And it needs to come in many forms. And and I think the fact that Trump doesn't want
[59:53]us to vote on this bill tells you a lot, right? and and and and why are Democrats worried? We are worried because Trump
[1:00:03]keeps distracting and lying about things, right? Anytime he doesn't like something, he distracts and he lies. He claims inflation is down, but America's working families who are
[1:00:14]paying more for energy and groceries know the truth or small businesses are closing because of those tariffs. Trump didn't like the fact that Americans are losing jobs, so he fired the person who
[1:00:26]gathers the data. And with the Epstein files, he's terrified of what's in those files. And he knows his name will keep coming up again and again.
[1:00:37]And it is tied to the fact that Trump himself, Representative Garcia, you know that he's been accused of sexual misconduct at least 28 times. He's found
[1:00:47]liable by a jury of his peers for sexual abuse and defamation. So, we're not going to be surprised when we find out that his when we found out
[1:00:58]that his name has been in his files, and we want to see what they are. Is that correct? >> Absolutely. >> I think we want to know um what Attorney General Bondi uh told the president as
[1:01:10]it relates to his name uh being in the files um and has been widely reported. And I think the American public deserve they have a right to know, >> right? And I think that Americans are
[1:01:20]worried about trusting Republicans on this because now Chairman Comr saying was doing all these things. Had they done anything at all before Democrats
[1:01:32]forced the vote on the subpoena? Had the had oversight done anything on? >> Well, I think that's a good reminder. I mean, the the the vote was a force vote by a subcommittee of Democrats on
[1:01:41]oversight where we got not all but some Republicans to join all Democrats to subpoena the Epstein files. And had
[1:01:50]Democrats not taken that action, we'd have no subpoena and we'd still be much further back in this investigation. >> Right. And there were two Democrats who voted against that subpoena. Is that correct? >> All all Democrats.
[1:02:02]>> I mean, so two Republicans, all V all Democrats. Democrats forced the vote. Oversight had not done anything with regards to this until Democrats forced the vote and then you had two
[1:02:13]Republicans vote against it nevertheless. Is that correct? >> Including the the subcommittee chairman, I believe. >> Including the subcommittee chairman. So leaders in the committee voted against
[1:02:23]the subpoenas. Now they're taking and so this is why Americans might be worried about whether they're going to be forthcoming. Now, Chairman Comr, this
[1:02:31]resolution would give you and only you the power to decide what information in these documents is redacted or withheld.
[1:02:40]Is that correct? >> Well, the uh you know, we're trying to do this in a bipartisan manner. Our staffs are communicating. I think I I
[1:02:52]hope Mr. Garcia would agree. I think our staff's he's new to the new to the job and and I think our staffs are are working together really well and hopefully we'll continue to work well. Like I said, I want this to be
[1:03:04]bipartisan. I don't want members of the committee and members of the committee haven't been making the accusations that members of the rules committee have been making that uh you know this isn't
[1:03:15]bipartisan. We want this to be a bipartisan investigation. We want to get the truth and and uh hopefully we'll do that. and and you know, you're trying to I feel like create a false narrative
[1:03:25]here to say that the Trump administration isn't working. They have been turning over the documents. And I mean, I feel like we we're on a pretty good roll here.
[1:03:36]>> So, uh, Chairman Comr, I appreciate that fact that you said you want to work on a bipartisan uh, basis on this, but the resolution does not
[1:03:47]require you to consult with the ranking member. Only thing that's going to be redacted are names of victims. >> Does the resolution give the ranking
[1:03:56]member any role in approving redactions? And if you want to be bipartisan, would you you would you be willing to uh accept an amendment to >> I'm making a a pledge to work with Mr.
[1:04:08]Garcia. Hopefully, he'll keep Mr. McGovern and Mr. Raskin out of the room and we can get some good things done in a bipartisan manner. Well, a pledge is a wonderful thing, but an amendment that
[1:04:19]actually puts it into writing would be great. Would you be willing to accept that amendment? >> I think we're I think the resolution's good, and hopefully we'll vote it out in
[1:04:29]a bipartisan manner, and if we need to use that as as a basis in court to get more documents, we'll do that. >> Okay. Okay. So, you're not willing to
[1:04:37]actually put it in writing that you will uh that the ranking member will be consulted before you approve. I guarantee that I'll consult with them a heck of a lot more than uh Elijah
[1:04:49]Cummings and Carolyn Maloney consulted with me when they were chairman >> asking about past I'm asking about what this is and this is the problem and and and the reason why we're concerned about
[1:04:59]this is Chairman Comr uh I've read accounts of you describing yourself as a Trump man. >> As a what?
[1:05:08]>> Trump man. I'm a Trump man. You and >> you said I'm a Trump man. I I I mean, >> yes, >> I support I support the president. >> You support the president. And this is
[1:05:20]why it would be important to have in writing the bipartisan nature because we want there to be bipartisanship so that it is not a
[1:05:30]>> I wanted too, but you all are making a good case up here, but I'm trying I'm hopeful that Mr. Garcia is going to see past the behavior of the Democrats on the rules committee. Madam Chair,
[1:05:40]Chairman Comr was speaking and I think that it is important that we have people looking at these docs that are not a Trump man
[1:05:50]so that we can make sure that everything gets responded to because right now we haven't seen it. And that's why we want to make it the law of the land. We want
[1:06:01]to make sure that all the all Republicans vote on the Mass Eye Con resolution so that they can say we want to make sure it becomes available to
[1:06:11]everybody without it going through any process of redaction. I think that's the key to have your investigation, but it's good to have other things, too.
[1:06:22]>> Miss Ledger Fernandez, do you want to vote tonight? Would you like to vote tonight? They're gonna call the vote at
[1:06:31]20 minutes after. And so I I I don't know if you want to finish before we I'm gonna make a recess be done before 20. I I I think less than 40 minutes.
[1:06:42]>> I'm going to call for a recess in about 3 minutes >> so that we can go vote. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> I I wanted to see if there was anything else that uh the ranking member wanted
[1:06:52]to add to this discussion. And I think the only thing that I think is important is um all Republicans who support transparency
[1:07:02]and accountability should support the Thomas Massie resolution. I think it's clear. It it sets it puts everyone on record. Um one would actually be a law
[1:07:12]versus a resolution. And again, we we're happy to support any resolution or any effort to uh support transparency. And I
[1:07:23]think the same should be said for the other side of the h the other side of the aisle in support of this resolution which is bipartisan. >> Right. We can do both. >> We can do both. >> So if we can do both, I look forward to everybody on this committee doing both,
[1:07:34]voting for this and voting and signing on to uh either an amendment or the discharge position. With that, Madam Chair, I yield back. >> Thank you, Miss Lois Fernandez. We were
[1:07:45]warned that they will close the vote after 20 minutes. I don't want anybody to lose the chance to vote. We do have members who have a conflict
[1:07:55]uh right after the votes. So, we're going to delay coming back and for a little bit so that those members can get
[1:08:06]to the other meeting where they have to vote. And but for those members who do not have to go to the other meeting, I ask that you come back at about 7:20
[1:08:18]and we will proceed. And then those of you who cannot be here will get take your place when you get back. We will
[1:08:27]reserve your time for you. Okay. I think it'll it'll take us to about where you want to be. Thank you very much.
[1:08:38]>> 7:30. >> 7:30. Thanks everybody for getting back on
[1:09:02]time. Um, and we'll call the uh committee back to order. I um
[1:09:12]believe that we will um recognize Mr. Scott. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. And uh I'm always sympathetic to people who are sitting at home watching the rules
[1:09:24]committee, but I think if they were sitting there watching at least the first start of this uh especially if they were victims that they were probably uh pleased to see the two
[1:09:34]committee chairs uh working together and uh were both did both of y'all get the opportunity to meet with them today?
[1:09:45]Both of the chair the chair and the ranking members. >> Yes, both. Is that correct, Mr. Ber? You were you did get to meet with the victims today. >> Yeah, we did. >> Um, what I was saying before is I think
[1:09:56]it was good that that if the victims especially and they're the ones that matter the most were watching the start of this, I think they would have been pleased to see the two of you working closely together. And if I if I
[1:10:08]understand correctly, Mr. Garcia, you want both to pass. You want you're in favor of this resolution, but you're also in favor of the um
[1:10:20]Kana Massie or Massie Con or whoever's language it is. You you're supportive of both. Is that correct? >> I I don't know that the resolution per se is necessary, but we're happy to
[1:10:30]support it moving forward, but it should that should not preclude the Massie uh resolution with Conor to move forward. >> Fair enough. And and I'll tell you, I mean, I think the signatures will be there. I'm I'm just talking about my
[1:10:41]opinion. I think the signatures probably are there on the discharge petition. Um and then obviously if the signatures there probably it it would I expect pass
[1:10:50]on the floor of the house and then um you you would you would both agree with me. I would hope though that it'd be in a bill. It will then leave the House and
[1:11:02]go to the Senate and then in order for it to have any effect of anything, it would have to be passed by the Senate and signed by the
[1:11:11]president. Is that correct? >> Both of you say that's correct. Okay. And so, um, we'll see what happens next week. For now, Madam Chair, I'm glad
[1:11:21]that we're we're going to pass this resolution. I think it uh ensures that the committee continues to work for and push forward hopefully in a very bipartisan manner. I care about the
[1:11:31]victims. I don't care about I don't care who the perpetrator is. I don't care if they ride an elephant or a donkey. I hope they get stepped on by
[1:11:39]whichever one uh they're part of. I mean, ultimately um you know, I think I I I actually think the I don't care
[1:11:51]how we get there. I think the files, the aviation files, the people who were flying is probably gonna >> expose expose a lot. But I'm I'm happy the two of you are working together. I'm
[1:12:02]gonna vote for this resolution. I'll make my decision on uh I will not be signing a discharge petition. That is a that's a tool of the minority, as you know, and it it it's it's not something
[1:12:13]that I will do as a member of the rules committee. I will not sign the discharge petition, but I intend to support this resolution. I appreciate both of you working in a bipartisan manner. The victims deserve it. And if I understood
[1:12:23]you, Mr. Comr, how many years did you say some of those victims have been going through depositions? >> According to uh what they said today, this dates back to 1996 where they first
[1:12:34]started reporting u where they were. >> So some of these ladies have been being deposed since 1996 with nothing
[1:12:45]being done. I don't know if it was a deposition, but they've been reporting these crimes dating back to 1996. >> Well, I listen, I I wish you both
[1:12:54]success in in making sure that the truth sees the light of day. And uh as they say, the truth will set you free. And
[1:13:01]with that, Madam Chair, I uh >> Thank you, Mr. Nagus. You're recognized. I'm happy to yield to uh Ranking Member
[1:13:12]Garcia in so far as he has anything that he'd like to add, but absent that, I will uh yield the balance. >> No, I mean, look, I just I'll just reiterate what I said um Congressman
[1:13:22]before, which was that um we in no way oppose any effort for more transparency and accountability. And if that's if the resolution moves forward and it moves forward, at the end of the day though,
[1:13:33]every single Republican that wants transparency and accountability should sign the discharge petition and every member of Congress should be on record supporting the full release of the Eps files. >> Well, I thank the ranking member. I
[1:13:45]certainly agree with him. Uh I just left the floor, just signed the discharge petition. I hope my colleagues will do the same. I'm happy to yield to the ranking member. And the one other thing you could we could do other than signing the discharge petition which I urge
[1:13:55]everybody to do is that we will offer the Massie counter resolution as an amendment to the you know to make it in order under under the rule and we could
[1:14:05]then all vote on it tomorrow as well. I thank the general >> agreed. I I yield back to the chair. >> Thank you Mr. Negus. Mr. Griffith you're recognized.
[1:14:15]>> Thank you Madam Chair. I associate myself with the comments that Mr. Scott made just a couple of minutes ago and I yield back. >> Thank you, Mr. Jack. You're recognized.
[1:14:27]>> Uh thank you, Madam Chair. I you know, I just want to note um as it relates to this resolution, obviously it's my resolution, but you know, I find interesting as it relates to the 24
[1:14:38]election, 74 million Americans voted for House Republicans to lead the House of Representatives. and the body that is responsible for leading it, the Republican party as a steering committee. And on that steering
[1:14:49]committee on which I serve, we unanimously elected Mr. Comr to lead the oversight committee. And then he was unanimously ratified by our conference. So to me, you know, we as a a body have
[1:15:00]spoken as it relates to who we want to lead investigations and investigative work. The oversight committee, as the chairman has no doubt noted throughout this entire hearing, has already yielded
[1:15:12]what is it 34,000 documents that were publicized just hours ago. I mean, unprecedented transparency. And I want to commend him and also just note that
[1:15:22]for the record, you know, your leadership on this committee is an affirmation of how this entire Republican conference feels about your ability to lead uh complex investigations as such. And I think
[1:15:33]that's one of the reasons why this investigation must be housed in oversight and one of the reasons why I support it uh being there. I um I am just curious, obviously Mr. Norman had some, you know, some interesting
[1:15:44]thoughts and comments as it relates to, you know, what happened over the the four years of the Biden administration. If I could just ask Mr. Garcia, do you have any thoughts as to why the Biden administration never released any documents?
[1:15:56]>> I don't I'm not aware as to why uh or what the DOJ was investigating at the time. Uh, what I do know is that the current president campaigned on releasing the files, which is why I think it's of such high interest to so
[1:16:08]many of us now. >> But fair enough, but no no thoughts as to why it wasn't a pressing issue for the Biden DOJ in the four years that that Attorney General Garland led it. >> I'm I'm I'm not sure what the DOJ or
[1:16:19]what their effort was as it relates to this case. I mean, obviously, I know in all previous administrations, there has been work done on this on this case. As to why things were released or not released, I'm not aware. Is that
[1:16:30]something that oversight Democrats would be interested in exploring as to why the Biden Department of Justice refused to investigate this? >> I think I think oversight Democrats are interested in any and all information as it relates to any administration uh as
[1:16:42]to why things were released or not released or what information they have or may not have and we're interested in all of it. >> And and just I want to note and I'll ask the chair and ranking member too, obviously you've served on this
[1:16:53]committee longer than us and this is this resolution is pretty unprecedented. I think it's the first time, you know, this committee has ever directed another committee uh to release documents in this capacity. Is that a fair a fair
[1:17:04]statement, a fair accurate assessment of what this resolution is doing? >> I don't I don't quite frankly understand why we're doing this resolution because the committee is already doing what this
[1:17:13]resolution says it's supposed to do. Um so I I but but I I don't so I don't I I don't think it's earthshattering that we're that we're going to vote on on on this resolution. Uh again, I I think
[1:17:25]that the the reason why some of us are pushing for the Massie counter resolution bill is because um we think all the documents ought to be released.
[1:17:35]Um and the president said promised he would do that uh during his campaign uh and right-wing media said he was going to release it and then um all of a
[1:17:45]sudden his his tone has changed. Uh so uh I I don't have any problem with this resolution that we're dealing with right now. I just I just I think it's unnecessary and I do think we need to
[1:17:56]pass the Massie counter resolution >> and I just fair enough. I just want uh to acknowledge that as I understand it and would welcome you correcting me later on that this is the first time and so far as any of us know that a
[1:18:06]committee has directed another standing committee to act in this manner which I think is very um important and I think it shows the seriousness of this resolution. So I I don't you know view
[1:18:17]it as um anything other than productive. Madam chair, >> if I could if I could answer respond to that also. Um I think the Massie
[1:18:29]resolution has asked for a similar scope of DOG docu DOJ documents, excuse me, but it's
[1:18:38]not binding and and it also doesn't have the force of law. It >> right. and and there's much that is in
[1:18:48]this resolution um that uh is not requested in the massive resolution. So, we're doing a
[1:18:58]lot more than the Massie resolution and mandating it from this committee I think
[1:19:06]puts an extra emphasis on it. Um, and I I want to point out something earlier that was said by Miss Ledger Fernandez.
[1:19:16]She she brought up the issue that Democrats forced this out of the oversight committee. But I if if the
[1:19:27]gentleman would yield >> Sure. >> Mr. Comr, would you explain that because we do have a majority on the oversight
[1:19:35]committee. How could the minority force the chairman of the subcommittee to do anything? >> They they can't. Well, there was a
[1:19:44]motion and uh the Republican subcommittee chair, Mr. Higgins, uh accepted that motion and uh it was voted
[1:19:53]on by a majority of Republicans as well. So, it was we weren't forced to do anything. Uh the the committee wanted to do it. I mean, our oversight committee
[1:20:03]uh has been very vocal that they they would love to take part in investigation with respect to finding out the the truth about Epstein Island. So, our committee's been
[1:20:15]on this and uh there was nothing forced down our throats. We we operated the way we operate. >> Madam Madam Chair, just >> Well, would the gentleman >> Would the gentleman yield?
[1:20:26]>> I'll yield to you. >> Yeah. First of all, I think the subcommittee chair voted no on the subpoena, but but let me let me put that aside for now. Just I just I don't mean
[1:20:35]to correct the the chairwoman, but um the what we're talking about here is a resolution and um and the uh and the and the discharge petition would bring to
[1:20:46]the floor a bill that would become could become law. And a law has more force than than a resolution. Um, and so all we're saying is, you know, let us pass
[1:20:58]the law, um, and put some teeth in it because again, uh, the president of the United States has changed his tune. He now is saying that, uh, this is a hoax and that Republicans who go along with
[1:21:09]it are stupid. That's his quote. I think I think the gentleman or the gentle lady, whoever yielded to me. Well, I think the reason we are involved with
[1:21:18]this in this committee is because the house can bind the the rules committee can bind a committee of the house and
[1:21:29]that's what we're doing. We're binding the committee to do its job and if Mr. comr as the chair doesn't do his job,
[1:21:38]>> I believe he could suffer consequences as a result of this um is this resolution. And I think that's important. It's showing that we mean
[1:21:48]something. And I think as as Mr. Jack said, >> the bill then if you do the the other the um massive resolution has to go to the Senate.
[1:21:59]>> We could do both. We do both. >> Well, we'll see. It's again, it's being there's been a um um the petition is being signed to release it. If it's
[1:22:10]released, fine. But we're doing this today, >> but Republicans could accept my amendment to make it an order, and we could do it immediately. >> Oh, and and we'll have that debate. I'll just close by saying that again, I want
[1:22:22]to commend Chairman Comr under your leadership. More more transparency has ever occurred under this issue because of what you've done over the last three or four weeks. And um it's why I think
[1:22:32]the conference elected you to to to lead the oversight committee and why the conference chose you to be the person responsible for these complex investigations and it's already produced a lot of transparency in that regard. So
[1:22:43]with that, Madam Chair, I will yield back. >> Pardon me. Thank you very much. Um I'm Mr. Roy. I'm going to recognize you then
[1:22:53]Miss Houch and then Mr. Langworthy. >> Thank you, Chairwoman. Um, Chairman Comr, is it not true that it was the Trump
[1:23:04]administration in July of 2019 that arrested and indicted and went after Epstein? >> That's true. >> Um, was it not true that it was the
[1:23:15]Trump administration uh in 2020 that arrested and went after Maxwell? >> True. >> And in fairness, that then proceeded into the Biden administration for the
[1:23:26]ultimate conviction. Correct. >> Right. Correct. >> So that was preceding and so the Department of Justice had a lot of these materials. >> Yes. >> For both of those two prosecutions. Correct. >> Correct.
[1:23:38]>> And so well into the Biden administration, they were prosecuting Maxwell. Correct. >> Correct. >> And so they would have had access to a lot of information, >> 100%.
[1:23:49]>> And didn't do anything to pursue uh our current president. didn't do anything to go pursue any other potential uh criminals that they might want to go
[1:23:59]indict. Didn't do anything material to have legislators in this body or Democratic colleagues offer any resolutions or any legislation. Is that true? >> That is true.
[1:24:10]>> Okay. So, would you not agree with me that this is entirely political? >> It's 100%. Because at the end of the day, we all have the same purpose as stated by and I would assume that the
[1:24:22]ranking member has stated that his purpose uh ranking member Garcia, would you agree to seek the truth wherever it may lead? >> That's what I've heard you say effectively. >> Absolutely. >> Right. and wherever that may lead in
[1:24:34]terms of who that might land on. And I don't think there's anybody in this room or anybody uh affiliated with any of us in the Congress that doesn't want to pursue justice here and that aren't
[1:24:44]horrified by the events and by everything surrounding this whole affair. Would you both gentlemen agree? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And so I I think for me there's a
[1:24:53]fundamental question. I applaud the purpose of the Massie uh bill >> um and Mr. But would the chairman elaborate to the
[1:25:05]extent he hasn't already? Aren't there concerns mechanically with the bill as it relates to the potential unmasking of individuals? Yes. as it relates to
[1:25:16]particular reference to statutes and do we not also believe that is it not your belief as chairman of the committee that you're essentially pursuing all that
[1:25:28]that bill's intent would be to pursue would you agree >> I agree and and and something else the the Massie and Connor resolution doesn't
[1:25:39]have anything to pertaining to financial records >> right >> the even the victims attorneys today quoted something I said on on a TV
[1:25:49]interview, follow the money. And where you where we intend on going with the advice for the council of the
[1:26:01]victims today, which we had already planned on this, but we're we're definitely moving in that direction, is to is to go after the the bank records and the suspicious activity reports, much like we did in the in the Biden
[1:26:12]family influence pedal investigation. identify accounts and and see what the usually the banks catch. Ralph know and and and Langworthy and and Byron and
[1:26:23]everybody that's been involved in banking, they know the banks are are usually on top of any type of suspicious activity like that. So, uh we're going to we're going to go that route that's
[1:26:34]not addressed in the Massie Kana. They're only talking about the Epstein document. There's there there are people to bring in and depose which we're already in the process of doing including the former attorney general
[1:26:46]Bill Bar. There are there are financial documents that we believe uh we can uh subpoena that that will allow us to be able to follow the money just like what
[1:26:56]the victim's attorneys requested. None of this is addressed in the mass econ bill. And so to to the point that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have repeatedly made that well why
[1:27:08]didn't Democrats do something about it for four years and then the answer has been repeatedly well President Trump campaigned on it. >> Mhm. >> Well to the extent that we have a collective bipartisan desire to seek the
[1:27:20]truth wherever it may lead. Is it not a good thing that President Trump campaigned on this great >> and is has a Department of Justice that in the spring released the uh flight
[1:27:30]logs 117 pages whatever it is I don't have it in front of me uh and other information and that now there's been continued efforts such that even now just today we have what 33,000 or 34,000
[1:27:42]records that were released pages of records correct >> correct >> and that through your efforts as the Republican chairman but I would like to say in in working with the Democrat ranking member that you all are pursuing
[1:27:54]truth and having people come forward issuing subpoenas with the full force that a subpoena carries as a congressional committee on oversight. Correct. >> Correct.
[1:28:02]>> And that is all underway and that to in truth there are legitimate questions about the underlying legislation that is attempting to be discharged. Therefore, it might raise questions as to whether
[1:28:14]it would pass the Senate or whether the president would sign it because it raises questions of separation of powers. It raises issues involving grand jury uh secrecy and involves questions
[1:28:25]involving the statutes and the errors that are in it. Whereas we have a resolution with the full force of the House of Representatives that would be
[1:28:34]reinforcing what the oversight committee as led by you but also in in in direct working with with your colleague is carrying forward to bring forward all this information. Is that is that all fair?
[1:28:45]>> They're 100% right. And lastly, is it not true that whatever is being presented to you all, whatever information is given to you, uh, to the extent that you're adding any redactions or anything, your colleagues on the
[1:28:57]other side of the aisle are getting the unredacted material, >> they get exactly what we get. >> So to the extent that you make a determination about releasing something, to the extent there was something politically sensitive or unto it, your
[1:29:08]colleagues on other side of the aisle would have all the same information and they could raise call us out on it >> at that very second. >> Yeah. I look, I just think for the average person watching this, to be very clear, the Trump administration died at
[1:29:20]Epstein. The Trump administration went after Maxwell. The Trump administration released records uh within two months of assuming office. The Trump administration has been complying with subpoenas and providing information to
[1:29:31]the oversight committee. Republican oversight committee has been putting forward information. We now have 35 34,000 more records out for the public to be able to look at. In addition to
[1:29:41]the reality that the people charged with prosecuting crimes have to be able to look at information that isn't necessarily going to be made public and shouldn't be. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Like we don't just say, "Oh, here's the
[1:29:52]mob boss files here, America. Go forward and find all the mobsters." >> We don't do that with drug kingpens or cartels. Right. We don't just say, "Man, there's a lot of bad guys out there. We got a whole file of stuff. Who are you
[1:30:04]protecting? Right. We have oversight. We look at it and you're conducting that oversight on a bipartisan basis. Is that true? >> That's true. >> I yield back. >> Thank you,
[1:30:16]Miss H. Miss Henry. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh we've heard a lot of words tonight from our Democrats uh across the aisle. We've heard words like shameful and does things don't
[1:30:27]smell right. Well, what I think is shameful is playing political games with these victims. What I think it doesn't smell right is only caring about these issues when campaigning on it. Democrats
[1:30:38]under Joe Biden had uh four years to release everything and they didn't release a thing. Chairman Comr, you've now released more than 30,000 pages of
[1:30:48]documents related to the Epstein files. How many pages of documents were released under the Biden administration? >> Zero. >> You know how I know this is political
[1:30:57]gamesmanship? Because now by amendment to unrelated bills in nearly each of our committees, the Democrats have put
[1:31:07]forward Epstein file amendments to unrelated things, including in the rules committee. That's not a serious effort in seeking transparency or justice. If
[1:31:17]they were serious about it, they would have already done it. >> Absolutely. >> Now, it is House Republicans under your chairmanship and your leadership, Mr. Homer providing the only transparency
[1:31:28]that anyone has done to date save for the Trump administration and what they've already done. And it's only because of your work that we know the scope of the number of
[1:31:39]victims today. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> And there are key differences between this resolution that we're considering in our committee and the Massie Connor resolution.
[1:31:50]Mr. Chairman, does the Massie Connor resolution request all documents from the Epstein estate related to Jeffrey Epstein and Maxwell with a subpoena that has the force of law?
[1:32:01]>> No. And we we subpoenaed the estate for all the documents that's not mentioned in the discharge petition. >> Does this current resolution include
[1:32:11]requests that all documents related to the Epstein estate be released under subpoena with a force of law? >> Uh, our resolution does. Yes. >> Does the Massie ei resolution issue any
[1:32:23]deposition subpoenas for testimony? >> No. >> Does our resolution? >> Yes. 11 thus far. >> Does the Massie econor resolution request Jeffrey Epstein and Justlain Maxwell's bank records from the
[1:32:35]Treasury? >> No. >> Does our resolution >> Yes. And that's going to be a big deal. Am I I will predict that will be a big deal. The bank records. >> Does the Mass Eye Conor resolution
[1:32:46]require any interviews to be scheduled? >> No. Does our