Exposed: Trump’s Alleged Bday Card for Jeffrey Epstein

0:00Emily Bazelon:Watch Disclosure Day at home now with exclusive bonus features. If you found out we weren't alone, if someone showed you, proved it to you, would that frighten you? Well, now the truth belongs to 7 billion people in an original event film directed by Steven Spielberg from a screenplay by David Koepp starring Emily Blunt, Josh O 'Connor, Colin Firth, Eve Hewson, and Coleman Domingo. Find Disclosure Day on major digital platforms now with no subscription required. also in theaters.

0:31Jason Johnson:I'm pretty confident talking into a mic. Hey, I'm doing it right now. But home projects? I second guess everything. Is that noise normal? Is that water damage? Who do I even call? That's where Thumbtack comes in. Just upload a photo or voice note and it uses AI-powered search to match you with the right top-rated local pro. So instead of guessing, you get clarity and can hire with confidence. For your next home project, try Thumbtack. Hire the right pro today. Welcome to The Beat, everyone. I'm Ari Melber. We have two new developments today regarding Jeffrey Epstein. Both involve evidence and facts, not just some of the conspiracy theories that have trailed what is now a long-running saga.

1:12First, under subpoena, we have new material from Epstein's estate, and you're looking at it. This came because of a House subpoena. This is a birthday card or message that Trump allegedly sent to Epstein. There's also a New York Times investigation. You see here how one of the biggest banks in the country, JP Morgan, enabled and at times may have even been tied to many of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. I have both these stories for you tonight. If it feels like this is building and is a problem for Trump, that's because it clearly is. We begin with the House Oversight Committee and this image. And our point here is not to get mired in what might be the salacious aspects of this, but rather to leave this up for you to remember, if nothing else, Donald Trump and his allies repeatedly publicly denied that what you see with your own eyes here exists.

2:06This was from the Epstein estate. It is allegedly from and signed by Donald Trump, dating back to 2003. the body content the word many have used on about it the obvious representation of a woman here the references to youth young women or even underage women are all contained here now i should note this is as released from the epstein estate to congress the white house has previously previously and continues to deny that this is legitimate that donald trump drew that signed it and sent it over to Epstein. So there you have the updated statement. Trump did not draw the picture and he did not sign it.

2:47But this is under subpoena. Epstein is dead. The documents under control of the estate are overseen now by lawyers and other independent officials. So there's every incentive for them to basically comply with a subpoena and almost no reason or conspiracy theory that could explain why they would risk, for example, breaking the law to concoct evidence to predate and bother Donald Trump. And remember, it's not just this evidence alone, although this is a big deal because it's the first time tonight we've ever had the underlying image of the material. But it dates back to reporting done by Fox News sister outlet, the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal, which reported about this back in July, which drew a very strong rebuttal, reaction, and denial from Trump and his allies.

3:39Emily Bazelon:I don't do drawings. I'm not a drawing person. I don't do drawings. I'm not a drawing person. I don't do drawings of women, that I can tell you. They say there's a drawing of a woman, and I don't do drawings of women. President Trump has filed what he calls a powerhouse lawsuit over the Wall Street Journal's

3:58Jason Johnson:Jeffrey Epstein report. Well, that includes alleged details of a bawdy birthday note sent to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. I was a very successful business guy. He was very controversial. Who would do a controversial drawing? Who would do a controversial drawing? The denials, the speculation, the lawsuit, all of that in July when, as you might recall, this was a very hot issue. And maybe they just wanted to buy time, try to get out of the news cycle, try to intimidate or scare people with lawsuits. And we've seen some media companies settle lawsuits, regardless of the facts, just to get out from under the pressure from the Trump White House.

4:35What's different today, and I want to put it back up on the screen in a moment here, when you look at this element, this document, this birthday card, whatever you want to call it that came from the Epstein estate, it is the evidence that undercuts everything claimed by Donald Trump. And while I can't tell you what's going to happen in the lawsuit. When you look at this, this is bad news for Trump's lawsuit. I can tell you that today, based on public evidence as opposed to yesterday, it is far more likely that Trump will lose any effort to continue a lawsuit against the journal when the evidence is right here and his claim is he didn't do it.

5:14But the Epstein estate, the chain of custody, has the very document. Epstein abuser's attorney is saying Trump's hypocrisy has been frustrating for the victims, and they say the president should apologize, presumably for many things, but also withdraw the lawsuit. You'll see at the end here from Mr. Edwards with today's release, referring to the image you just saw, the least Trump could do is, quote, withdraw that lawsuit. Top members of Congress want more transparency. And again, what we're learning from this subpoena, even if it seems obvious or like what people may have believed. The journal obviously already did its fact checking, had multiple sources, had its reasons for going forward.

5:53That's why journalism reporting evidence is different than just talking, especially talking done by politicians. But it is a sign that you're going to need to get the evidence and not just take the denials of the government's word on these things. Now, here's one of the Republicans who has been more straightforward about this saying, we need more disclosure. This was out during the weekend. I think it's going to be embarrassing to some of the billionaires, some of the donors who are politically connected to his campaign. I also think Democrats are going to be implicated in this, Democrat donors.

6:27We can't avoid justice just to avoid embarrassment for some very powerful men. That's really putting it straightforward. forward the actual injustices, evidence and information, and then the so-called embarrassment for the people who may feel tied to this. There are a ton of votes to get this done. Now, if you ever follow Congress, you probably know sometimes there's a lot of votes that are like people wanting to say that they're doing something while they don't get all the way there. They say they're now two votes shy of the needed majority to override the Republican leadership, which is where they were late last week, which raises the question of whether Republicans, most of whom are standing by the secrecy, have kind of cut a deal.

7:10And they have some people obviously breaking ranks, but they know or think they know they're not going to lose this vote outright. We will see. This discharge petition is the technical name. We've been following that. Then there's the other bombshell. And this is one with a lot of work that went into it because credit to the New York Times. We talk on the news sometimes about where information comes from. The Times with a team of reporters and a ton of evidence did an exhaustive investigative report that came out today how one of the top banks in the country, J.P. Morgan, is, their word, enabling Epstein's crimes over the years.

7:43And this is a years-long review they did at the lucrative relationships that tied Epstein to this big bank, to specific bankers, and, this is important, to conflicts of interest, which meant that the usual policies that are supposed to at least kind of, somewhat protect people if things get really obvious, if there's tens of thousands of dollars trading hands in cash or anti-money laundering flags being waived, at some point even lucrative clients are supposed to get cut off. This report is important. I'm going to read to you from it because it shows how in the Epstein case that did not happen.

8:17Here's one section at Epstein's behest. The bank sets up accounts into which he transferred huge sums for young women who turned out to be victims of his sex trafficking operations. So this bank, J.P. Morgan, which is tied, by the way, to both parties, a lot of important relationships, we can get into that. J.P. Morgan then wired his funds overseas, also paying him millions of dollars for what were described as his consulting and introduction services of the other powerful people, mostly men that he knew. Top bank executives, according to the report, did not deal with the clear warning signs about Epstein and the illegal behavior.

8:51And remember, that's not just an ethical issue of do you want to be in business with someone like that? A fair question. It's also a legal issue because there are anti-money laundering and know your customer laws on this. And if you find out enough bad things about the customer, separate from whatever ethics you have or don't have, you have your own legal obligation to the bank to deal with that or cut the customer off or you yourself and the bank could get in trouble. And this bank later paid out money, but not to a degree that affected all the money it made off this. Again, reading from the Times account, bank officials anxious about Epstein's prolific wire transfers and cash withdrawals.

9:29Morgan ultimately processed over a billion, they estimate. They, quote, warned senior management and they tabulate at least four times over five years, quote, the bank's leaders overrode those objections, continuing to serve Epstein. At the center of the reporting is one J.P. Morgan banker, Jess Staley, seen here. He was seen as both associate and friend of Epstein, meaning, and this is the way apparently Epstein cultivated things, they both did business together but also did other things. That includes sailing on a yacht to Epstein's notorious island, and according to the Times account, he was Epstein's chief defender who admitted to having sex with an associate of Epstein.

10:10That individual, this woman, who is anonymous under the reporting here, would later allege in a lawsuit, eventually settled that Epstein sexually abused her for more than a dozen years, forcing her and others to engage in commercial sex with certain select friends. What the Times is doing there is piecing together the problem. This is the kind of article that is carefully written, obviously, carefully reported and very lawyered. So that link there is not alleging, for example, an underage crime with this individual or basically saying that they have their own legal exposure. But it's showing a breakdown that goes to all of the elite support that Epstein got.

10:50And there were, according to the Times, multiple instances where Staley shut down the efforts to hold Epstein accountable. And the bank is not the government. They don't have to prove that he's a criminal. They just have to reach the obvious conclusion, according to this reporting, that there was too much exposure, too much illicit cash and other activities, and that this was not someone they should be banking with. The Times reports that the banker I mentioned during Epstein's jail sentence, Morgan continued wiring money from his accounts to banks in Russia and Eastern Europe, where young women were being drawn into his sex trafficking network.

11:23and that's according to sealed court records. Sealed means there was some arrangement under the government and it could be foreign or domestic to not distribute this. Here we are years later with a lot having gone down and this report credited to the Times has effectively gotten some of the key information out of what were sealed records. Indeed, it wasn't until Epstein was arrested in 2019 that J.P. Morgan then, again under what I mentioned to you, their own legal liability flagged all these suspicious transactions to the feds, but it was all in the past, retroactive. The bank also sued that executive, that case settled confidentially.

12:00But according to the Times account on the key instances here, we never saw those executives fired. And it was also reported within the article that the key leader of the bank across those years, Jamie Dimon, was not informed, was not in the loop about what had been a swelling set of questions about what was a clearly prominent client. Diamond is in that top job to this day. This is the stuff that comes out slowly over time. When we look at the financial pressure, at the political alliances, at the birthday card level relationship between President Trump and the now deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, there's a lot of reasons why this stuff doesn't come out.

12:41And yet in a time where people say maybe nothing matters anymore, or is this all just politics, quote unquote, there is something important happening along the way with real lawyers for real victims who we saw speak out recently, with an investigative piece like this, which we can tell you is months in the making. This didn't get uncorked last week. With a lot of other people who still are involved in truth seeking, even in this cynical age, to get what Donald Trump and his cabinet have clearly denied, which is justice and transparency for the victims. We have two special guests on this important story.

13:16We're back together in 90 seconds.

13:21Emily Bazelon:Watch Disclosure Day at home now with exclusive bonus features. If you found out we weren't alone, if someone showed you, proved it to you, would that frighten you? Well, now the truth belongs to 7 billion people in an original event film directed by Steven Spielberg from a screenplay by David Koepp starring Emily Blunt, Josh O 'Connor, Colin Firth, Eve Hewson, and Coleman Domingo. Find Disclosure Day on major digital platforms now with no subscription required. Also in theaters.

13:52Jason Johnson:I'm pretty confident talking into a mic. Hey, I'm doing it right now. But home projects? I second-guess everything. Is that noise normal? Is that water damage? Who do I even call? That's where Thumbtack comes in. Just upload a photo or voice note and it uses AI-powered search to match you with the right top-rated local pro. So instead of guessing, you get clarity and can hire with confidence. For your next home project, try Thumbtack. Hire the right pro today.

14:21Emily Bazelon:She loves it freezing. She loves it hot. The pod by 8sleep ends the argument for good with independent temperature zones that keep both of you sleeping deeper. Try it at 8sleep.com.

14:40We're back with the New York Times Magazine's Emily Bazelon, a legal writer, and Julie K. Brown, investigative journalist with the Miami Herald, part of a series of reporting that has busted open this case wide open. She's considered an expert on Epstein long before this became such a national matter of political intrigue. She's the author of her version of justice, the Jeffrey Epstein story. Welcome to both of you. Julie, as I mentioned, and I think viewers are aware, there's all of the energy around this topic, some of which involves politics and conspiracy theories. And then there's the actual people involved in the evidence.

15:19What does this release today tell you about some of the evidence? The fact that the state didn't really take every measure they could to fight it, they handed some stuff over. And on this core evidence question, not the wider crimes, it would suggest that the president and his allies were not being truthful about the existence of this card. Well, I think what this shows in the Times' excellent investigative piece today shows that this is just the tip of the iceberg with his financial. His financial dealings were a complex web of companies. He had shell companies in the U.S. Virgin Islands. He was able to obtain massive tax breaks in the USVI.

16:03And all the things that we need to know about Epstein are contained in his financial records. And as has been talked about before, Senator Ron Wyden has been trying to get from the Treasury Department more information, his SARS reports, all the flags that the banks have since called to the government's attention, all the information that the Treasury might have about him. And we need to look at that. And as I understand it, the Treasury Department, the Trump administration, is also blocking Wyden, who is a member of the Senate Finance Committee, from obtaining more of these financial records. And Julie, when you look across the Times reporting, it's clear that Epstein had one or more of these bank executives involved in his dealings.

16:57I'm speaking very precisely because as journalists, we have to be precise when you're talking about possible or alleged criminal conduct. But, for example, there are people in Epstein's circle, I read one of the quotes, who later said they were a victim, and there's a lot of evidence to back that up, who had relations with the banker. How do you view that in terms of Epstein's M.O.? And does it suggest a conflict or worse, being subject to potential blackmail for a banker at one of the top banks in the country? I think that Epstein manipulated a lot of people. And obviously, this story today shows that the bankers were among them.

17:40I mean, he had a very highly placed individual at J.P. Morgan, Jess Staley, who advocated for him time and time again, even after his conviction or rather his plea deal that he made in 2008, which basically let him have immunity for some very serious sex crimes. against children. So even after that, he was able to rebuild his reputation and also his finances, by the way, they enabled him to get very wealthy again so that he was able to resume doing some of the sex trafficking that he had been conducting even before he went to jail the first time. So this is this is something that the bank, you know, they conspicuously had no comment to this story that the Times did today.

18:29And I think that the bank needs to be more forthcoming about why they did this and what steps have they taken since this happened. Emily, your thoughts on this, and we are familiar with follow the money in politics and government. Obviously, it's going to apply to these kind of banks. Is it important to also ask, and I mentioned some of these banks, Most of these banks, but J.P. Morgan in particular, they have ties to top Republicans and Democrats. This is how the system has worked. Even if you want to be very precise and say the article doesn't tell you whether this information got to the top then, is one of the questions here, what did Jamie Dimon know and when did he know it?

19:12And do both the customers of that bank and the public, the American people, have a right to know if we care, as we're told so many people claim to care, about getting to the bottom of all this and stopping it next time.

19:24Emily Bazelon:Yeah, I agree with Julie that J.B. Morgan has a lot of questions left to answer, and not commenting today should not be the last time anyone asks those questions. This should be the beginning or the middle of that kind of set of demands to find out more about what's happening. I also think it's interesting that the birthday card came out through a congressional subpoena, So we see Congress demanding information itself and in some ways standing up to the president, which is very unusual in this administration. But the Trump administration did not want this card to come out, denied its existence.

20:01Emily Bazelon:The banking information is coming from my colleagues at The New York Times in this amazing amount of time and energy and resources they put into reporting the story. Clearly, there was information to be gleaned. And if Congress wanted to get to the bottom of this, they're the ones with subpoena power, not the journalists like Julie and my colleagues at The Times who have done so much labor-intensive, difficult work to find out almost everything that we know up until now about the Epstein story. And Emily, how do you view Donald Trump's very loud denials and summer lawsuit stacked up against this material?

20:43Anyone familiar with cases and chain of custody understands this is bombshell damning evidence against Trump's lawsuit because it's sitting there in the Epstein estate's materials and now has been handed over. So it's very probative to the journal article. We could have a full case. I mean, they could go to trial and we could find out what else people say. I can't tell you how the case will end. I could just tell you this is really good for the journal and really bad for Trump. And that lawsuit is still out there right now.

21:16Emily Bazelon:Right. The lawsuit, you know, seems now even more like a kind of bluster where in the short term, you know, you deny the allegations. You hope that people some people believe you and then you kind of wait for the other shoe to drop. Now here's this evidence suggesting that, yes, the journal had its facts right. I agree with what you said earlier that, of course, they vetted this story very carefully because they knew that the president is prone to bringing these kinds of lawsuits and denying allegations. So maybe it was a short term strategy that now is going to kind of fail as a result of the appearance of this evidence.

21:54Emily Bazelon:And maybe there's more that Congress is going to be able to obtain through subpoenas that will contradict things that Trump has been saying. Julie, I want to also read more from the article you both credited. J.B. Morgan paid$290 million to settle a lawsuit brought by 200 of Epstein's victims. They paid an additional$75 million for related cases from the U.S. Virgin Islands where Epstein's crimes took place. The payments, though, were a rounding error for a company that raked in more than$50 billion in profits that year alone. Your thoughts on that aspect of this, Julie? Well, like Emily said earlier, I mean, we have to continue to follow the money trail here.

22:38And there is an awful lot of money exchanging hands here. And what it basically is doing, I reported about this settlement that they had with the U.S. Virgin Islands last year. What it's basically doing is making all this information secret, because what happens when these settlements happen is that all the information goes away and goes into the court file, never to be seen again. We need to find out what the settlement was with the U.S. Virgin Islands, for example, and more information about what happened with the settlement with the banks. The banks also paid millions of dollars as a result of what happened.

23:16But we don't have all the underlying materials about exactly what the banks found out, exactly what was found out by the USVI's attorney general who had criminal information about him and his estate. And his executors, who, by the way, worked for him for a very long time, helping him with all his companies. And as we know, those companies were a friend for sex trafficking. Yeah, I think that's you just landed on that key point. The companies, a lot of the so-called high end relationships, lifestyle, pseudo business dealings were a front for sex trafficking. And that's different from the conspiracy theories about, you know, hostages in basements in D.C.

24:06But it's a very serious and still underreported and underprosecuted issue if some of the biggest banks in the in the country were at least looking the other way, if not at times involved with some of the questionable activities. And so that's where there's a lot more to be done. You mentioned Senator Ron Wyden. he has been a leader on this in terms of trying to get some information early on. We actually invited him on last week, and that invite remains out there if he wants to tell us about how else they're trying to get these documents. It's important stuff. Julie K. Brown and Emily Bazelon, thanks to both of you.