Massie Names 20 Epstein Clients — 67 Seconds Later, Patel’s ‘No Names’ LIE Destroyed Career
The September 17, 2025, House Judiciary Committee hearing will be remembered as the moment the bureaucratic mask of the FBI was finally ripped away, not by a political rival, but by the sheer weight of its own documented negligence. Congressman Thomas Massie’s 67-second demolition of Director Kash Patel was a clinical exposure of institutional rot. It proved that the nation’s top law enforcement official was more interested in the performative theater of hosting TikTok influencers at the White House than in the basic duty of reading victim testimonies within his own databases.
The hypocrisy of the current FBI leadership is as deep as it is devastating. For years, we have been told that “no credible evidence” existed of Jeffrey Epstein’s client list. Yet, as Massie revealed, the FBI has been sitting on FD-302 documents—the very summaries of victim interviews—that name at least 20 prominent men. To hear Patel admit, under oath, that he had “personally not reviewed all of them” while previously claiming no such information existed, is a betrayal of every survivor who risked their safety to cooperate with federal agents.
The Anatomy of the List
The specificity of Massie’s list turned what the media often labels “conspiracy” into a terrifying reality. These weren’t just names; they were categories of systemic power that have remained untouched for over a decade.
The categories revealed by Massie include:
The Royal Connection: A prince whose name has become synonymous with the Epstein archive.
The Global Elite: Six billionaires, including one from Canada, and a prominent banker.
The Entertainment Industry: A Hollywood producer, a rockstar, and a magician.
The Intelligence Nexus: Former prime ministers and military intelligence heads with dozens of documented meetings.
Institutional Failure or Intelligence Protection?
The most sickening revelation wasn’t the names themselves, but the admission that federal agencies have been actively warned to stay away. Former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta’s recorded claim that he was told “Epstein belonged to intelligence” and to “leave it alone” is the smoking gun. It suggests that the FBI isn’t failing due to incompetence, but is operating as a protection racket for a network of “connected” assets.
Patel’s Freudian slip—starting to call the victim information “incredible” before correcting to “not credible”—reveals the true internal culture of the DOJ. They view the suffering of these women as a nuisance to be managed rather than a crime to be prosecuted. While the Director was too busy for the victims, he was perfectly available for a publicity stunt with social media influencers, proving that in 2025, the FBI cares more about its “brand” than about justice.
The 67-Second Fallout
The fallout from this interrogation has been immediate. With 67 million views in 24 hours, the public has seen the reality that neither party wanted to discuss. The admission that the FBI Director made definitive statements about evidence he never examined is institutional negligence of the highest order. It spans three administrations, each of which had access to these 20 names and each of which chose to keep the manila folders closed.
Thomas Massie’s interrogation has set a new standard for oversight. It proves that when you have the documents, the bureaucratic defenses collapse. The “intelligence” shield is no longer enough to hide the names of the 20 men who were protected for far too long.
