Bill Gates 'voluntarily' explains his Epstein ties to Congress



Bill Gates knew Jeffrey Epstein was a convicted sex offender. He met with him anyway — for years. On Wednesday, he had to explain that to Congress.

The 70-year-old Microsoft co-founder appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for a closed-door, transcribed interview. The session lasted nearly six hours.

'I guess if you're a big deal, you can do more than the rest of us.'

On his way in, Gates told reporters he was "glad to be here voluntarily." He retained Jake Greenberg, who until December was the Oversight Committee's chief investigations counsel. Mid-session, Greenberg reportedly said Gates would not answer questions about his affairs unless directly tied to Epstein.

The paper trail complicates the "voluntary" part.

In February, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) formally asked Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) to subpoena Gates and compel him to testify under oath.

Comer sent Gates a formal written request in March stating the committee believed he had "information that will assist in its investigation." Before the session on Wednesday, Comer told reporters, "No one's accusing Bill Gates of any wrongdoing."

RELATED: Nancy Mace crashes and burns in South Carolina governor primary

Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg/Getty Images

In his prepared opening statement, Gates expressed regret but denied having extensive knowledge about Epstein's criminal behavior.

"I recall being aware that Epstein had faced prior legal issues, but I did not fully understand the extent of the crimes he committed,” he admitted. “I accepted the introduction without applying the scrutiny I should have."

He also denied ever visiting Epstein's island, ranch, or Florida home.

Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting prostitution from a minor and served jail time as a registered sex offender. Gates claimed he began meeting with Epstein in 2011 over a pitch to unlock billions in global health donations.

By December 2014, Gates said he had cut off contact, concluding Epstein "would never deliver on his promises."

Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) said she directly asked Gates why he continued to associate with a registered sex offender. Gates told her that "getting billions of dollars for global health was worth it,” she said.

After Gates allegedly cut ties in 2014, a departing employee engaged Epstein to negotiate the "separation" — Epstein, Gates claimed, used that channel to learn of his infidelities and pressure him to re-engage.

RELATED: Thomas Massie’s viral Epstein poll reveals stunning top belief: He lives

Kent NISHIMURA/AFP/Getty Images

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) called the questioning "intense" but said Gates was "well coached" and that he didn't expect much new information to surface.

Burchett also broke with GOP leadership over the closed-door format: "I'm big about transparency. ... Let it be wide open." He added, "I guess if you're a big deal, you can do more than the rest of us."

Gates closed his opening statement to Congress with a conditional apology: "If the time I spent with Epstein lent him any credibility, I am deeply sorry."

He left without answering a single question from reporters.

Democrats have repeatedly called for Trump to testify — a push Republicans have so far blocked. But the White House may not be able to stay out of it much longer.

Per Stansbury, Republicans have agreed to call acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — Trump's former lawyer — to testify about White House Epstein strategy sessions.

Comer also announced plans for a transcribed interview with Alan Dershowitz, who negotiated Epstein's 2008 plea deal.

A full transcript is expected in the coming days.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Alan Dershowitz Gets Called Before House Oversight Epstein Probe

'You expressed your willingness to appear to testify.'

'I've decided to bite the bullet': Alan Dershowitz switches parties for this one reason



Famed civil liberties attorney Alan Dershowitz says he has abandoned the Democratic Party.

Dershowitz wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that Democrats have become far too anti-Israel for him to continue voting for the party. As a result, he has switched his party registration.

'I will ... urge pro-Israel Americans to change party affiliation or at least vote against Democrats.'

"I am a lifelong Democrat. I started campaigning for the party's local candidates as a teenager in Brooklyn, N.Y., have been a registered Democrat for 67 years, made speeches for John F. Kennedy as a college student, and can count on one hand the number of Republicans I've ever supported for any office," he wrote. "Yet I've decided to bite the bullet and register as a Republican."

The Harvard Law School professor emeritus said he opposes Republicans on policies of abortion, taxes, immigration, and health care, but he will throw his support to them because of Israel.

"I intend to work hard to prevent the Democrats from gaining control of the House and Senate," he continued.

"I will contribute money to Republican candidates, campaign for them, make speeches at Republican events, and urge pro-Israel Americans to change party affiliation or at least vote against Democrats," he added. "Until something changes, I will vote Republican for representative, senator, and president."

Dershowitz left the Democrats and became an independent in 2024, but it appears he has gone further after the party became "the most anti-Israel party in U.S. history."

RELATED: Judge allows Alan Dershowitz's $300 million lawsuit against CNN to proceed: 'CNN is quaking in its boots!'

Dershowitz represented Jeffrey Epstein and was part of the team that obtained a controversial plea deal in 2008 for the convicted pedophile. He admitted to receiving a massage at Epstein's home but vehemently denied that it was a part of the pedophile's trafficking of young women.

He also taught at Harvard University, represented President Donald Trump in his first impeachment, and was on the team representing Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump 2019 impeachment exposed: Gabbard provides damning insights into deep-state stitch-up



The House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump in December 2019 over a phone call he had months earlier with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

While the U.S. Senate ultimately acquitted Trump by a vote of 57-43 in early 2020, the stitch-up had by that stage sufficiently muddied the waters and buoyed Democrats' false narrative in an especially heated election year.

'It is always worse than we thought.'

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released documents on Monday revealing that hearsay and erroneous claims from a few politicized bad actors who lacked any firsthand knowledge of the phone call were used as the basis to impeach Trump and that elements of the intelligence community were not only aware but happy to advance the false narrative.

The documents — investigative materials used by former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who got the ball rolling on impeachment, and transcripts of his testimony released as the result of a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence vote last month — show that Atkinson skirted standard IG procedures and, embracing a kind of strategic myopia, leaned entirely on what the ODNI described as "politicized, manufactured narratives" without ever once bothering to access the transcript of Trump's call.

A self-declared "Democrat" whistleblower who worked for the CIA filed a complaint in August 2019 alleging Trump was "using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. elections. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country — Ukraine — to investigate one of the President's main domestic political rivals, former Vice President Biden."

On the call, Trump reportedly made reference to how Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine unless the prosecutor investigating the corrupt and now-defunct Ukrainian company Burisma, where Hunter Biden was appointed director in 2014, was fired.

The ODNI noted on the basis of the newly released documents that Atkinson — who spun the complaint as "credible" and rushed it to the congressional intelligence committees — had bothered to interview only four individuals whose credibility and political motives were clearly suspect.

RELATED: Democrat says he's filed articles of impeachment against Trump over social media post

House Judiciary Committee hearing on Dec. 12, 2019. Alex Edelman/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Besides the whistleblower — credibly identified as Eric Ciaramella, the Obama holdover and CIA analyst who reportedly partook in Obama White House discussions regarding Hunter Biden and Burisma — Atkinson interviewed the whistleblower's friend, "who was a co-author of the January 2017 Russia Hoax Intelligence Community Assessment and close colleague of former FBI Agent Peter Strzok," and two character references.

Not only did Atkinson rely upon the testimonies of politicized actors, he determined that the complaint must be reported to Congress despite the Justice Department determining there was "no urgent concern" and the whistleblower confirming he had no "direct knowledge of private comments or communications by the President."

It appears the hearsay-dependent allegations were buttressed by wild speculation.

One of the "witnesses" had admitted after reading a transcript of the call that they "would not have been able to get from 'point A to Z' the way the Whistleblower did" and that they had to "read between the lines" in order to conclude Trump was discussing quid pro quo.

The ODNI noted that the newly released "witness" interviews demonstrate that Atkinson's public assertion that "other information obtained during [his] preliminary review ... supports the complainant's allegation" was false and obfuscated the fact that there was no firsthand evidence of what was being alleged.

The newly declassified documents confirm not only that the whistleblower lied to Atkinson about leaking to congressional Democrats prior to submitting his allegations to the inspector general but that he was, contrary to Atkinson's characterization, politically biased.

Atkinson testified to Congress that he "never considered the whistleblower to be politically biased."

He drew this conclusion despite the whistleblower stating in his interviews that he is a "registered Democrat"; had "worked closely with Vice President Biden" and had traveled with Biden to Ukraine; and was the "target of right-wing bloggers ... and conspiracy theorists."

"Deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that was used by Congress to usurp the will of the American people and impeach the duly-elected President of the United States," stated Gabbard.

"Inspector General Atkinson failed to uphold his responsibility to the American people, putting political motivations over the truth. And this, along with the politicization of the whistleblower process by a former CIA employee who was working hand in glove with Democrats in Congress, are egregious examples of the deep state playbook on how to weaponize the Intelligence Community," continued Gabbard.

In 2019, Gabbard was a Democratic congresswoman representing Hawaii and cast the only "present" vote on both articles of impeachment.

"It was a sham from the start," tweeted Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). "The only thing we got wrong is that it is always worse than we thought."

Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, who worked to defend Trump at his impeachment trial, told Just the News that Trump could have grounds to expunge his impeachment in the House in light of the new revelations.

"It's never been done. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done," said Dershowitz.

"These government officials will probably have to pay a political price, if not a legal price, for violating the Constitution, because that's what they've done. They violated the Constitution," said Dershowitz, adding that the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to confront witnesses.

In terms of seeking remedy, Dershowitz suggested Trump could always bring a civil lawsuit.

Trump evidently liked Dershowitz's suggestions and said on Truth Social, "Alan, one of the greats, should do it!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Epstein’s lawyer makes SHOCKING claim about client list



On top of being one of the most renown lawyers in the world, the youngest professor in Harvard Law School history, and the author of several best-sellers, Alan Dershowitz, says Glenn Beck, is also “the man with the most knowledge on the topic that every person in America is dying to learn about ... Jeffrey Epstein.”

On a recent episode of “The Glenn Beck Podcast,” Dershowitz, who was Epstein’s attorney during the 2008 criminal case in Florida, made a shocking claim about the client list.

“I was told by Kash Patel, ‘I've seen the book. I know the book. I've seen the names.’ ... That was before he was in office,” says Glenn, contrasting Patel’s affirmation of Epstein’s black book in their 2023 interview to the FBI and the DOJ’s joint memo declaring the black book doesn’t exist.

“How do you read this?” he asks.

“Jeffrey Epstein was not a pedophile. That term has a specific meaning. It means people who are sexually attracted to prepubescent girls or boys — that is 11, 12 years old. That's the definition of all psychiatrists and of the law. Epstein was interested in 16-year-olds, 17-year-olds, 18-year-olds,” says Dershowitz, acknowledging that Epstein was nonetheless “a bad person, [who] did terrible, terrible things.”

“Number two: He was not a trafficker. Traffickers make money by selling and enslaving girls. What he did is he was a selfish guy who was having sex [or] sexual contact ... with all these 16-, 17-year-olds and maybe, maybe lending them to people like Prince Andrew. We don't know for sure,” he adds. “But he was not a trafficker in the true sense of the word. That's why there's no client list. There were no clients.”

As for the claim that Epstein was working undercover for the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, Dershowitz says it’s impossible. “He didn't work for the Mossad. I know that because I debriefed him when I was trying to make a deal for him back in 2007, and he would have told me ... if he was working for the government because it would have helped him get a clear, better deal.”

“He was furious at the deal, the sweetheart deal. He had to serve 18 months and get registered as a sex offender. When I helped him get that deal, he fired me, refused to pay my legal fees, and said I was the worst lawyer he ever had because he didn't think that was a particularly good deal,” he tells Glenn.

In his opinion, everything should be released – including the names of Epstein’s accusers. Given people make up false narratives to further their personal agendas, it’s only fair, in his opinion, to include their names and their potential “credibility issues” in the information release as well.

“Unless you also reveal the credibility issues of the accusers, it would be unfair just to list the people who are accused without knowing that the accusers are people with long histories of lying. So that's why I'm in favor of everything being released,” he says. “From day one, I wanted everything released. I've waived all my privacy rights, my legal lawyer, client rights. I want everything out there.”

To hear more of the conversation, watch the full interview above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.