The Senate has officially passed the Epstein Transparency Act to compel the Department of Justice to release the Epstein files.
The Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent as soon as it is transmitted from the House at the request of Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Schumer thinks this will help the Democrats, but we are expecting some high-profile Democrats to be named in the files.
No Senators objected to his request.
As EU lawmakers push ahead with Chat Control 2.0, a proposal that would compel messaging platforms to scan private conversations, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is once again being called out for sidestepping the very transparency rules meant to keep officials accountable.
The contrast is hard to ignore: while European citizens face the prospect of mass surveillance, von der Leyen continues to ignore the laws and conduct her own communications away from public view.
The latest case involves a message sent by French President Emmanuel Macron in early 2024, during a politically sensitive phase of trade negotiations with Mercosur.
Macron’s message, sent via Signal, reportedly voiced serious reservations about the deal.
When a journalist requested access under EU transparency laws, the Commission first ignored the request for over a year. It then claimed the message could not be retrieved, citing Signal’s disappearing messages setting, which automatically deletes texts after a set time.
This justification has prompted the European Ombudswoman, Teresa Anjinho, to launch a formal inquiry. Her office has requested documentation outlining the Commission’s policies on mobile messaging and message retention, and plans to meet with officials to clarify how the request was handled.
This isn’t the first time von der Leyen’s messaging habits have raised concerns. In the case known as “Pfizergate,” she was criticized for failing to preserve texts exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during Covid vaccine negotiations.
The Commission refused to release the messages, and it later emerged they had been deleted. The New York Times took the matter to court and won, with the European General Court ruling that the Commission had wrongly withheld information of public interest.
Despite these past controversies, little appears to have changed. The Commission claims that messages like Macron’s had no administrative or legal impact and therefore didn’t need to be archived.
Officials have also pointed to concerns over phone storage and security as reasons for using auto-deleting features. These arguments seem increasingly weak in 2025, especially when applied to discussions between heads of state.
The journalist behind the Macron request argues that such deletion practices make it nearly impossible to monitor how decisions are made at the highest level.
Unlike other states, Utah doesn’t have county coroners. Instead, a state Office of the Medical Examiner performs required autopsies and issues those reports.
But autopsy reports are not public documents under Utah state law and may not be released to the public: They can only be released to the following: next-of-kin, law enforcement, a legal representative and a physician who attended the deceased person.
When asked by Crossroads Report today, the Utah Office of the Medical Examiner said they could not even confirm whether an autopsy was being performed on Charlie Kirk.
“We are not able to make any comment about any cases that have been worked on, past or present,” said Danielle Conlon, a spokesperson for the office.
Several former and current U.S. military officials described sightings of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) to Congress on Sept. 9 and called on the Pentagon to be more transparent about its disclosures on the phenomenon.
During a House Oversight subcommittee hearing on Tuesday, titled “Restoring Public Trust Through UAP Transparency and Whistleblower Protection,” several past and present Department of Defense officials testified that they had witnessed UFOs—which the Pentagon now refers to as unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP)—while serving in the military.
The hearing also featured a new, never-before-seen video of an alleged UFO recorded near the coast of Yemen in October 2024.
Air Force veteran Dylan Borland told lawmakers that he encountered “sustained reprisals” and retaliation from the Pentagon after whistleblowing about an alleged UFO he saw while working at a military base in 2012.
“I saw an approximately 100-foot equilateral triangle take off from near the NASA hangar on the base. The craft interferes with my telephone, did not have any sound, and the material it was made of appeared fluid or dynamic,” Borland said.
“I was under the triangular craft for a few minutes, and then it rapidly ascended to commercial jet level in seconds, displaying zero kinetic disturbance, sound, or wind displacement.”
A new Indiana law requiring public university professors to post their syllabi online “threatens academic freedom,” according to an Indiana University Bloomington professor who is involved in government transparency efforts.
The law, included in a budget passed in May, “almost certainly will have a chilling effect on professors,” according to Professor Gerry Lanosga.
Beginning this school year, professors must post their syllabi online for not just students to see, but the entire public, which includes the taxpayers who actually fund the operations of the university.
Yet for Professor Lanosga (pictured), this amounts to “surveillance,” according to comments he gave the student newspaper. He also joked “Maybe the impact on posting them to the public is that students may read it more.”
The media studies professor said he has nothing to hide, even though he opposes the law.
“It isn’t inherently bad — faculty don’t have anything to hide in their syllabi and people will comply with the law,” Lanosga said. “But what is the rationale? What are the motives? It hasn’t been made clear,” he told the Indiana Daily Student.
The rationale is that public university professors are supposed to serve, well, the public. They are paid by taxpayers to teach classes and conduct research. The secondary principle is that the work of public employees should be generally available to the public.
Lanosga should know this since he specifically lists “freedom of information” as an interest on his faculty bio, he won the “Investigative Reporters and Editors’ Freedom of Information Medal,” and serves on the board of the Indiana Coalition for Open Government.
Instructors have some flexibility to reveal certain information just to enrolled students, according to the student newspaper. A good law leaves some room for exceptions.
But in general, the work of public professors should be free and open to the taxpayers. There are other benefits as well – perhaps prospective high school students want to know what they will learn in a political science, chemistry, or economics class if they attend IU.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) must be too busy flying first class to worry about following financial transparency rules.
AOC skipped filing her mandatory 2024 financial disclosure documents and instead requested a 90-day extension past the May due date.
Despite being given extra time, the far-left Congresswoman missed the second date as well and, according to an exclusive from The New York Post, finally filed the documents a week late.
Absent from her disclosure, however, was any sign of her partner of more than a decade, fiancé Riley Roberts.
Although AOC calls Roberts her “spouse” for perks, she has excluded him from disclosures.
Ocasio-Cortez, 35, came under fire from the House Ethics Committee last month for calling Roberts, 37, her “spouse” on some ethics forms to receive perks such as travel and gala access, but leaving him off financial disclosures so she doesn’t have to disclose his assets.
“There is a reason Congress requires financial disclosures to include the spouses of members of Congress,” Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, interim vp of policy and government affairs at the Project On Government Oversight, told The Post.
“If spousal disclosures were not required, it would be all-too easy to exploit that loophole and simply transfer any conflicted or problematic assets or financial activity into the spouse’s name.
“If her fiancée is going to avail himself of some of the perks and privileges of being the spouse of a member of Congress, he should surely have to likewise comply with the less convenient parts,” he said.
The CIA’s coverup about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy is unraveling. Despite the agency denying that it knew anything about assassin Lee Harvey Oswald before the murder, newly declassified documents shed light on the links between Oswald, a Cuban guerrilla group known as the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE), and CIA case officer George Joannides.
Several months before the assassination, Oswald had offered to work for the DRE, a CIA proxy overseen by Joannides. Years later, Joannides—operating under a fake name—became the CIA’s liaison to Congress during a congressional investigation into the assassination. The documents add to a pile of evidence that the CIA had been following Oswald for years and deliberately covered it up afterward.
Oswald “really wasn’t alone, he had the CIA looking over his shoulder for four years,” said Jefferson Morley, a historian who has long pushed for opening the Joannides files, in an interview with The Washington Post.
Decades of dogged investigative work have poked plenty of holes in the official story around Kennedy’s assassination. But they haven’t produced a smoking gun, a single document that demonstrates what the CIA wanted out of Oswald or what knowledge it had about his fatal plans. And that smoking gun may never turn up; Morley and others speculated to the Post that Joannides was running an “off-the-books” operation through the DRE.
The same is likely to be true about another case that’s in the news this week: that of the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. After he died in custody in 2019, calls have grown for the government to release the “Epstein client list.” As I argued several months ago, such a list likely doesn’t exist. What does exist is a scattered patchwork of evidence about the people Epstein associated with and leads waiting to be followed up on.
To be clear, the official story on Epstein has some troubling inconsistencies. Last week, the Department of Justice and FBI released a memo stating that they found “no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.” But it has been publicly reported that Epstein attempted to extort tech tycoon Bill Gates over Gates’ (legal) extramarital affair.
The Trump administration has not exactly inspired confidence in its transparency or diligence. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in February that bombshell information was “sitting on my desk,” then released a heavily redacted set of documents labeled “Epstein Files: Phase 1,” most of which were already public. Last week, the Department of Justice claimed it would release “raw” surveillance footage from Epstein’s prison wing on the night he died, then published a sloppily compiled video clip with a minute of footage missing.
President Donald Trump himself told his followers on Saturday not to “waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about.” (It was a change in tune from last year, when Republican politicians attacked the Democratic administration for not pursuing the Epstein case enough.)
Government coverups rarely involve compiling one document that lays out all the wrongdoing in detail—such as the CIA’s “family jewels” in the 1960s—and hiding it from the public. It makes far more sense for officials to keep the wrongdoing from being put to paper in the first place. Conspirators make informal plans off the record. Internal investigators turn a blind eye to evidence that they think might lead to inconvenient places.
Epstein was only arrested in 2019, after all, because reporting by Julie Brown in the Miami Herald and a lawsuit by victim Virginia Giuffre forced the federal government to reopen the case. Authorities had originally struck a plea deal with Epstein in 2007 that gave him a short prison term along with immunity for any co-conspirators who might come to light.
As this Substack has been exposing for many years, geoengineering is an all too real weather warfare program, with the government owning the following patents (just like they own patents for the Modified nRMA slow kill bioweapon C19 “vaccines”):
And if weather warfare geoengineering were such a crazy conspiracy theory, then why was NOAA tasked with monitoring weather manipulation projects under the Weather Modification Reporting Act of 1972?
And if weather warfare geoengineering were such a crazy conspiracy theory, then why did the U.S. sign on to the international treaty known as the Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD) in 1977, which prohibits the military or any hostile force from deploying environmental modification methods, not limited to weather manipulation, in warfare?
The ENMOD Convention includes the following:
Of course, ENMOD also leverages the whole “climate change” scam back when it was called Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), except that now there is no warming on average, but we digress.
In 2016, RAND analysts Christopher Paul and Miriam Matthews coined the term ‘firehose of falsehood’ for Russia’s modern propaganda style: bombard every channel with a torrent of messages – some true, many half-true, others outright fiction – until audiences stop trying to separate fact from noise.
Paul and Matthews found that Russia’s method has four tell-tale features:
Nearly a decade on, that very playbook appears to be running again, not in Moscow’s backyard but in America’s escalating fight over Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) transparency.
Russian propaganda ranks among the world’s most formidable, especially within the murky battlespace of disinformation and psychological operations.
Russia’s truth-plus-fiction approach was evident after Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine in July 2014.
Russian outlets began with genuine uncertainties – conflicting radar tracks, chaotic eyewitness accounts, and an admitted lack of hard data in the first hours, which primed audiences to accept a flood of speculative narratives.
Within days, Russian-connected sources offered mutually exclusive theories: a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet, a CIA plot, a missile fired at President Putin’s aircraft, even pre-loaded corpses on board the Boeing 777.
By anchoring each false claim to the genuine early chaos, Russia made every theory sound plausible – and drowned the facts in noise.
Put simply, a single verifiable fact can clear the path for multiple Trojan horses of disinformation.
In a small step toward ensuring transparency and protecting U.S. economic stability, legislation to fully audit U.S. gold reserves was introduced in Congress last week.
H.R. 3795, titled the Gold Reserve Transparency Act of 2025, is sponsored by U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and co-sponsored by Representatives Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), Addison McDowell (R-N.C.), and Troy Nehls (R-Texas). According to a press release by Massie’s congressional office, the bill would require “the Comptroller General to conduct and publicly release a full audit of gold reserves held by the United States. The Comptroller General’s audit will include gold held in ‘deep storage’ locations such as Fort Knox, Kentucky.”
The press release continues:
The Gold Reserve Transparency Act of 2025 further requires the Comptroller General to conduct subsequent audits of the nation’s gold reserves every five years. In addition, the Comptroller General is instructed to report on the sufficiency of measures currently in place to ensure the physical safety of the gold reserves, to provide a full accounting of encumbrances against the gold reserves, and to document any sales, purchases, disbursements, or receipts over the past 50 years that have affected the gold reserves.
In a post on X, Massie stated:
In February, President Trump said he wanted to go to Fort Knox to “make sure the gold is there.” This bill provides the full disclosure President Trump seeks.
A full audit of U.S. gold reserves — as well as of the Federal Reserve — is long overdue. In a 2015 article titled “Has the Federal Reserve Sold the Gold at Fort Knox?” The New American reported on indications that the U.S. mint could not account for U.S. gold reserves and that the Federal Reserve secretly misused them, amid calls at the time to conduct an audit. The article reported:
There are many who claim that the Federal Reserve doesn’t want a proper audit because the gold is not there, at least not all of it. Some groups believe that as part of its effort to manipulate the economy, the Federal Reserve has sold the gold.
Not until 10 years later did this issue gain widespread attention, after Elon Musk and U.S. Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) highlighted the lack of transparency at Fort Knox.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.