Trump's DOJ Hid Epstein Files Accusing Trump of Assault & Candace Owens vs Erica Kirk Just Got Worse
PDS Published 02/24/2026
-
Trump’s government has been frantically trying to keep him out of the Epstein files conversation as much as possible but now NPR is the first major outlet to confirm what we all knew would be uncovered eventually:
The DOJ withholding 50 plus pages of notes and interviews directly naming Trump as an alleged abuser.
Right, as the Epstein scandal has unfolded - with the release of the files, the redaction issues, the fallout - the open secret here has been that even with all the information in the 3 million released pages, the Trump administration still isn’t telling us everything.
And NPR just validated that - with their investigation finding dozens of documents apparently catalogued in the DOJ database but not released publicly. []
In their analysis of 3 different sets of serial numbers on the files, NPR found 53 pages of interview documents and notes missing from the public Epstein database. []
You know, despite the Trump administration being required by law to release ALL the files.
And I’ll give you three guesses as to what NPR found in these unreleased documents.
Ding ding ding - a woman naming Trump as her sexual abuser when she was just a child.
Specifically, the woman says back in 1983, when she was just 13 years old, Epstein introduced her to Trump who, quote, “subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out." []
This woman was apparently interviewed by the FBI 4 times - but NPR reports that only the first interview makes an appearance in the public database. []
Which is, shocker, the one that doesn’t mention Trump at all and only discusses her time with Epstein specifically - when she identified him and discussed the way he abused her as a child. []
And there’s also another woman’s allegations against Trump that NPR noted was removed from the public files after the initial release and then republished a few weeks later. []
In that case, saying she was 13 years old when Epstein began abusing her and, at one point, she was taken to Trump's Mar-a-Lago club to meet him.
Where she was incredibly uncomfortable as both men laughed about her being, quote, “a good one.” []
Now, as you can imagine, Team Trump wasn’t exactly receptive to NPR’s questions about these omissions.
With White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson saying Trump, quote, "has done more for Epstein's victims than anyone before him." []
Adding,
"Just as President Trump has said, he's been totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein.” []
But Democrats have very quickly honed in on the fact that Trump’s DOJ isn’t releasing everything they way they’re supposed to.
In fact, Representative Robert Garcia, the ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, released a statement confirming NPR’s reporting.
Right, as a member of Congress, he’s got access to the unredacted files.
With his statement saying,
“Oversight Democrats can confirm that the DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews with this survivor who accused President Trump of heinous crimes. Oversight Democrats will open a parallel investigation into this.”
“Covering up direct evidence of a potential assault by the President of the United States is the most serious possible crime in this White House cover up.” []
Now, this is obviously a massive escalation in the Epstein fallout but outside the president, many other prominent figures are also feeling the heat.
Right, celebrity doctor Peter Attia is stepping down from his position with CBS amid the scrutiny about his email exchanges with Epstein.
With a spokesperson saying,
“He stepped back to ensure his involvement didn’t become a distraction from the important work being done at CBS. He wishes the network and its leadership well and has no further comment at this time." []
And then across the pond, the former UK ambassador to the US has been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office because of his connection with Epstein.
Though he’s since been released on bail.
Then there’s Casey Wasserman, who has been facing calls to resign from his position as chair of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics over his emails with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
But the question of any real accountability is still unanswered - for anyone from Casey Wasserman all the way up to Trump.
We’re just going to have to wait and see how this whole thing unfolds.
Visit Wildgrain use code DEFRANCO at checkout and receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life!
-
And as this is unfolding, completely separate allegations of sexual misconduct are rocking the House of Representatives.
Right, a growing number of politicians are calling for Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales to resign and drop out of his re-election bid, including members of his own part y.
In recent weeks, multiple news outlets have been reporting on an affair Gonzales allegedly had with a former staff member.
And that staff member, Regina Santos-Aviles, (Sahn-tose Ahh-vee-les, watch video) died of suicide last year.
According to texts seen by several publications, Gonzales sent sexually explicit messages to her, asking for “sexy” images and what her favorite position is. []
And those messages persisted even though she told him he was going “too far.”
At some points, she even questioned if Gonzales had hired her just because he thought she was “hot.”
Other messages show that they agreed to meet up on multiple occasions and spent time together at a vacation cabin.[]
And Santos-Aviles also allegedly texted a colleague to say she “had an affair with our boss.”
Some of these messages have been shared by her husband, Adrian, who has spoken out about this both online and through his lawyer.
With his lawyer accusing Gonzales of pressuring Santos-Aviles into a relationship and “coerc[ing] her to make requests of a sexual nature,”[]
And while Gonzales has denied that he ever had an affair or committed any wrongdoing here, this is notably coming as he is in the middle of a very heated primary, and voters hit the polls on March 3.
Right, he is fighting to keep his seat to represent Texas’s 23rd district.
And his opponent is political YouTuber Brandon Herrera, (Huh-rare-uh) and in the last primary, Gonzales only beat him by 400 votes.[]
So there was potential for this to be another very close race.
For his part, Herrera is now running ads about this reported affair, with the narrator saying this is:
“An affair that puts Republicans at risk of losing the seat and handing control of Congress to the Democrats. That's a risk we can't afford.” (0:17-9:24)
But Gonzales has slammed his opponent, saying:
“It’s shameful that Brandon Herrera is using a disgruntled former staffer to smear her memory and score political points…I am not going to engage in these personal smears and instead will remain focused on helping President Trump secure the border and improve the lives of all Texans.”
He also is accusing Santos-Aviles’s widower and his lawyer of blackmail, saying it is “Disgusting to see people profit politically and financially off a tragic death.”[]
With him then sharing a screenshot of an alleged email discussing a $300,000 settlement for an NDA.
But the husband shot back by saying:
“We have never blackmailed anyone. What we’ve seen instead is a consistent pattern of evasion, refusal to take accountability, and outright lies to protect your image….Today, though, you still answer to the people you represent—people who deserve the truth, not more deception.”[]
And now, several congress members are asking Gonzales to answer to his people by stepping out of the election.
With Lauren Boebert saying he should resign, Brandon Gill saying “America deserves better," and Nancy Mace releasing a lengthy statement saying:[][]
“These text messages are disgusting and inexcusable. A Member of Congress. Harassing his own staffer in the middle of the night.”[]
“She is gone now. Her son is growing up without his mother. And Tony Gonzales is campaigning like nothing happened.”
“We have ZERO tolerance for those who abuse their power over others. Zero. It does not matter what party you are in.”
“Texans deserve a congressman who does not prey on women.”
For his part, Speaker Mike Johnson has not called for his resignation, but he has addressed the issue, saying that:
“There are serious accusations, and it must be taken seriously, and I’ve told him he’s got to address that with his constituents and, and he’s in the process of doing that.”
With him further adding that investigations in both Texas and the Office of Congressional Conduct need to play out. []
But many want immediate action and justice considering the woman at the center of this is gone.[]
Though, it is worth noting that while some have tied her suicide to this affair, we obviously will never know why such a tragedy happened.
Right, her husband’s lawyer said the affair and the consequences of it factored into her death.
But according to NBC News, Santos-Aviles and her husband were actually estranged at the time of her death, []
And other local outlets have reported that she told first responders that her husband was romantically involved with her best friend.[]
But none of that impacts the severity of the allegations, right, the House previously passed a measure forbidding representatives from engaging in sexual relationships with their staff. []
So you have the New York Times saying this incident kind of puts to test the question of, in Epstein-era politics, can a sex scandal actually derail a major political campaign, particularly in the Republican party?
Right, there clearly is the pressure for resignation in this case, but one:
Will Gonzales actually resign?
And two: do voters respond to this by giving him the boot?
-
And then diving back into the news…
“ICE is teaching cadets to violate the constitution, and they were attempting to cloak it in secrecy by demanding that I lie about it.” (27:21-27:31)
That’s just one part of what ex-ICE agent, Ryan Schwank (Sh-wank), had to say about ICE in front of a Senate hearing yesterday.
After years of working for ICE, Schwank said he resigned because he just couldn't take what the agency has become anymore.
“I swore an oath to uphold the constitution when I joined ICE on August 1st, 2021 as an Assistant Chief Council. I followed that oath for four and a half years working side by side with ICE officers, and I followed it when I resigned on February 13th, 2026, a little over a week ago, so I could speak to you today. I am here because I am dutybound to report that the legally required training program at the ICE Academy is deficient, defective and broken.” (21:59-22:38)
According to Schwank, his experiences included blatant instructions from superiors to train lower-ranking agents to defy the law.
“Five months ago, I was asked to teach the law to new cadets at the ICE Academy in Glynco, GA, where ICE is training its new, inexperienced recruits. On my first day, I received secretive orders to teach new cadets to violate the Constitution by entering homes without a judicial warrant.” (22:39-22:49, 23:04-23:13)
We’ve seen these kinds of constitutional violations play out as the Trump administration has continued to expand ICE presence across the country. []
Schwank spoke next to Teyanna Gibson Brown (Tee-ah-na), whose husband, Garrison Gibson, was arrested after armed ICE agents beat down their door with a battering ram last month. (B-roll 0:00-0:13)
Garrison’s wife spoke about the experience leading up to that point at the hearing, mentioning that the agents ignored Gibson’s request to see a warrant.
“He asked them if they had a warrant. The officers at the door told Garrison that they did have a warrant, and it was signed by a judge. When Garrison asked to see the warrant, the officers simply ignored his request. We knew no one could just barge into our home without a warrant.” (18:45-19:01, 19:29-19:34)
Four days after Gibson’s arrest, a judge ordered his release, ruling that – surprise, surprise – agents violated Gibson’s Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. []
This is just one of many accounts across the country where immigrants fear that even staying behind closed doors can’t keep them safe from ICE.
Schwank testified further to say that refusing to perpetrate these types of violations would have cost him his job.
“On my first day at the Academy, I was instructed to read and return a memo in my supervisor’s presence which claimed ICE officers could enter homes without a judicial warrant. Never in my career had I ever received such a blatant, unlawful order, nor one conveyed in such a troubling matter. Incredibly, I was being shown this memo in secret by my supervisor who made sure that I understood that disobedience could cost me my job.” (26:34-26:44, 27:03-27:20)
Gibson and Schwank are mostly addressing Fourth Amendment violations here, but ICE has reportedly slashed through a litany of constitutional rights, which has left the public wondering if ICE agents are bound to the constitution or the law at all.
Free speech and the right to protest seem more like a suggestion than a right amongst ICE agents as we’ve seen them push back against demonstrators across the country. (B-roll 0:00-0:08)
Free press is definitely under scrutiny as journalists have already been arrested for ICE-related reporting.
And this doesn’t get into ICE’s more general legal violations like racial profiling, observer harassment and excessive use of force.
According to Schwank, these issues are due to DHS gutting ICE’s training, including classes that seem almost fundamental to being a law enforcement officer on any level.
“For the last five months, I watched ICE dismantle the training program, cutting 240 hours of vital classes from a 584-hour program. Classes that teach the Constitution, our legal system, firearms training, the use of force, lawful arrests, proper detention and the limits of officers’ authority.” (23:15-23:39)
This could be the answer to why we’ve continued to see footage of ICE agents openly breaking protocol and often exacerbating existing challenges in their role.
But why would ICE, who is allegedly meant to save us from dangerous immigrants – and “allegedly” is doing a lot of work here – want to risk the liability of having untrained agents? []
Well, Schwank addressed that as well.
“In the name of turning out an endless stream of officers, DHS leadership has dismantled the academic and practical tests that we need to know if cadets can safely and lawfully perform their job. All to satisfy an administration demanding they train thousands of new officers before the end of the year.” (24:11-24:31)
We’ve seen this influx of officers because this administration can’t stop talking about it.
At the top of this year, Homeland Security reported a historic 120% manpower increase, claiming to have doubled the number of officers from 10,000 to 22,000 after receiving more than 220,000 applications within the last year. []
But as that number has increased, we’ve also seen more evidence of the lack of training Schwank testified to.
Despite this rapid growth in ICE agents, DHS has made a statement denying many of the claims Schwank made in his testimony.
They claim ICE officers, quote, “get the best of the best training to arrest and remove murderers, rapists, pedophiles, terrorists, and gang members from our communities. Despite false claims from the media and sanctuary politicians, no training hours have been cut.” []
But later in the statement, they also say, “DHS has streamlined training to cut redundancy and incorporate technology advancements, without sacrificing basic subject matter content.” []
I’m not sure that I, or the American public, would generally want anything to be cut down or streamlined in training from an agency that can already barge down our doors when they see fit.
And Schwank seems to have the same concerns.
“Law enforcement is a deadly serious business. It is not a place for shortcuts.” (27:44-27:50)
Overall, it seems like the push for more ICE officers has left the agency struggling to keep up with training, but also accountability.
And as more whistleblowers like Schwank come out, it does make me wonder what this will all look like when the dust settles.
I mean, Republicans like Steve Bannon have already sounded off about his concerns.
“If we lose the midterms and we lose 2028, some in this room are going to prison – myself included." (0:04-0:11)
Following Alex Pretti’s murder, we also saw a seemingly tense moment between Kristie Noem and Greg Bovino.
The two seemed to start pointing fingers as soon as the blowback from the shooting started, and both seemed to rest on the fact that they had simply been following orders from the president in their respective positions – of which, Bovino has now been relieved.
Famously, there was another group of law enforcement officers who were quote, “just following orders,” and that didn’t pan out so well for them.
So with ex-ICE whistleblowers pointing fingers at weak training standards, volatile agents with seemingly few legal limits and Republican leadership that won’t make the appropriate changes, it seems like there are definitely legal questions to consider here.
And while the president himself may have skirted the law so far, we’ve seen realtime examples over the last few years that he’s going to look out for number one, so that luck may not go for everyone else.
But even outside of issues related to ICE, there are more federal workers who seem to be battling a dwindling morale as this administration begins to weigh on them.
Even military professionals are starting to question things.
Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal reported on the increasing strain on US sailors as tensions with Iran rise.
According to the Journal, as Trump extended the US’s largest warship’s deployment for the second time, one sailor missed the death of his great-grandfather. Another is thinking about leaving the Navy after almost a year away from her toddler daughter and two more said the ship had sewage problems. []
The Journal obtained the letter the ship’s commanding officer sent to the crew’s family after the second extension was announced.
He wrote, “I’ve spoken to many of your Sailors who are coming to terms with missing Disney World plans, weddings they already RSVP’d to attend, and spring break trips to Busch Gardens,” and you may think there’s something heartwarming coming after that.
But you’d be mistaken. He simply says, “When our country calls, we answer.” []
This response is somewhat reminiscent of a growing sentiment across federal workers on various levels, where pressures from the job itself and seemingly blind and numb leadership is plummeting their motivation to work for the country.
And with tensions growing amongst federal workers and corners being cut in legally questionable ways, it seems like, once again, we have to wonder about the decisions this “America first” president is making.
Go to: Fabric and apply today, risk-free.
-
But then, in other news we should quickly touch on, we should talk about Candace Owens vs. Erika Kirk.
Because Candace just released a trailer for a new series she is releasing that could further divide the MAGA base.
Right, it is called “The Bride of Charlie,” and based on what she shared, it is incredibly critical of Erika’s response to Charlie’s death.
And even suggests she may have had some level of involvement in his murder.
Right, the trailer includes clips of Erika alongside commentary questioning her, saying things like:
“Erika Kirk has been named the new CEO of TPUSA…My husband is dead, like I’m not trying to be morbid but he’s dead…it’s weird to say excited…she describes her husband’s funeral as the event of the century. Merch! Hats…we have 50,000+ hat orders…nobody knows why she is out there in a glittering pantsuit in a recreated tent that her husband was tragically murdered in.” (0:31-0:57)
And this has pissed a ton of people off, especially conservatives.
With people saying things like:
“There is something deeply broken in someone who would attack a grieving widow for profit….We are called to defend the widows. Scripture is clear on that. And Charlie would have stood for it.”[]
You also had Meghan McCain calling Candace:
“Pure, unadulterated, fucking evil. Who in God's name would put a woman whose husband was brutally assassinated in front of the entire world through this?”[]
Ben Shapiro even putting out a video going after this series, saying:
“This is the stuff that Candace Owens has been doing. Because CO is a true vampire when it comes to conservatism and the conservative movement. She finds people and she grifts off of them, and then she does more grifting off of them, and then she grifts them until she is done grifting them and then she goes onto the next thing she can grift off of.” (5:01-5:20)
“And yes, Erika Kirk should absolutely sue the living hell out of CO for this sort of stuff.” (5:47-5:51)
“She is making money off the murder of CK by literally implicating his widow and everyone else at TPUSA in that murder.” (8:24-8:32)
Now, of course, Candace is an incredibly popular podcaster, and she has been discussing Charlie’s murder and positing conspiracies about it for months.
And these theories have caused major rifts, and are one of the many divisions at the center of the so-called MAGA civil wars.
But the people who have been following Candace along, who land on her side of these right-wing media battles, they are pumped for this series. [][]
But you have tons of people pushing back against any excitement, with conservative podcaster Alex Clark, who has ties to TPUSA, writing:
“I’ve never been more certain of anything in my life than this: anyone refusing to call out Candace while claiming to be close with Charlie is one of the biggest frauds in the movement and probably has the most dirt to hide. They let Erika suffer to protect themselves. God will deal with all of them.”[]
As for what comes next, the series debuts tomorrow, so we will have to see what kind of traction it gets, and how much backlash it gets from the Turning Point faction of the right.
-
Despite what Donald Trump may want you to think, AI has a huge popularity problem — and it could become a major voting issue in the midterm elections.
Right, polling has consistently shown that large chunks of Americans are wary about AI and its broader implications.
Just last week, YouGov published a poll that found that nearly 6 in 10 Americans say they don’t trust AI much or at all.
And, VERY notably here, this is actually a bipartisan issue.
Right, while Republicans were slightly more trusting than Democrats and Independents, a slim majority of those surveyed still said they distrusted these products.
And that was also backed up in a Pew Research poll from last year, where 50% Republicans and 51% Democrats said they are more concerned than excited about the increased use of AI in daily life.[]
And there are a number of different specific concerns here.
Another recent YouGov poll found that nearly 8 in 10 Americans were concerned that AI could pose a threat to humanity.
Numerous surveys have also shown that jobs are one of the biggest concerns when it comes to AI, with sizeable majorities saying they think AI will steal jobs — including nearly two-thirds of all respondents in one YouGov poll.
And when it comes to the economy overall, there are more Americans who think AI’s impact will be negative than those who believe it will be positive.
Beyond that, there are also increasing concerns about energy, land-use, and the environmental impact of the resource-intensive data centers that are necessary to power AI.
In one joint AP survey from last year, 7 in 10 Americans said they were at least somewhat concerned about the environmental effects of AI, and 4 in 10 said they were very concerned.
And that opposition has actually had a real, tangible impact: according to Data Center Watch, $162 billion in data center projects have been blocked or delayed since 2023.
Additionally, the impact AI has on children has also become a top concern among voters.
For example, one firm looked at data from women 50 and older — a high-turnout voter group that will play a key role in midterms — and it found that 90% are concerned about the lack of national AI standards to protect kids.
But the kids themselves? That’s a different matter.
Right, numerous polls have found major generational gaps for AI support and trust, with younger Americans much more likely to use and support these products or have more optimistic outlooks about how they will impact the future.
In fact, a Pew study released just today showed that more than half of all U.S. teens use AI chatbots, including nearly a third who use them daily.
Now, of course, those findings are very notable on their own, but that’s a whole other conversation — right, today we’re focusing on the views of people who can vote, and how AI might play a role in how they cast ballots this year.
And even when you look at younger adults, polls still clearly show concerns over trust in AI and whether it will pose a threat to humanity.[]
Right, a Fox News poll found that 6 in 10 voters think AI is moving too fast, and according to a joint Gallup survey, a whopping 80% of U.S. adults across the board believe the government should have rules for AI safety and data security, even if it means slowing the development of AI.[][]
And again, this is actually a surprisingly bipartisan issue — 88% of Democrats favor those policies, but so do 79% of Republicans and Independents.[]
And at the state level, it seems like politicians are listening.
Right, numerous states have proposed or enacted a variety of different laws attempting to regulate various aspects of AI.
And according to an Axios reporter who attended the Governors Association's recent annual meeting, leaders across the political spectrum say that their voters are very worried about AI.
But despite widespread bipartisan concerns, the Trump administration has absolutely balls-to-the-walls all-in on AI.
Right, Trump has repeatedly touted the technology and made enormous investments in these products.
And despite the fact that polling clearly shows that Americans want AI development to slow down and the government to impose more rules, Trump has done the exact opposite — taking numerous steps to speed up development, while also pushing mass deregulation and reversing the limited checks the Biden administration put in place.
And meanwhile, tech companies are pouring millions and millions of dollars into lobbying efforts to undermine and silence the voice of the people in the upcoming election.
Right, companies in the AI ecosystem dramatically increased lobbying in 2025.[]
With Bloomberg reporting that the top tech and AI companies spent a record-breaking $109 million to influence government policy last year, marking the first time ever they broke nine figures.
And that’s just lobbying, not political contributions — right, we’re already seeing enormous amounts of pro-AI money being poured into the midterms as tech companies try to boost AI-friendly politicians.
I mean, just last week, The New York Times reported that Meta ALONE is launching a $65 Million election push to boost candidates who support AI and will undermine the regulations that their voters clearly want.
So whether or not you personally are thinking about AI when you cast your ballot in elections this year, the money being funneled into our political system assures that AI will be a major voting issue in what are already monumentally consequential midterms.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(740x316:742x318)/erika-kirk-120925-3c587a4964c34bb9878656b42cc6b1c0.jpg){kind=link}
