FBI Director Kash Patel was back on Capitol Hill today, this time over on the House side, to be grilled by the relevant committees as to things going on in the FBI. Patel has not handled the questioning well, as seen from yesterday’s responses to Sen. Adam Schiff, among others. Today, the ever-earnest Rep. Eric Swalwell, a man absolutely despised by the Right, asked Patel one of the most obvious and easily answered questions that could be proposed in such a situation. Swalwell asked, “Did you tell A.G. Pamela Bondi that Donald Trump was in the Epstein files?” A rather straightforward question, one that is very easily answered with a “No” if that were the case. Of course, saying “Yes” is absolutely devastating to Trump (And thus, also to Patel in many ways). Pinned into a corner, one in which he did not want to expressly lie to Congress, Patel instead chose to simply attack in such a way as to leave everyone certain as to the answer:
Rep Eric Swalwell (D-CA) asks Kash Patel if Patel told Attorney General Pam Bondi that Trump's name was in the Epstein files
This was what happened next =====> pic.twitter.com/U5LV3zoSoH
— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) September 17, 2025
That was particularly bad. “Why don’t you spell it out?… Use the alphabet… ABC… ” and then the snide comment about serving his constituents. Patel lashed out in rage about various things, but noticeably missing was any “yes” or “no” about the actual premise. Indeed – Patel didn’t even stay on the topic. As a result, Swalwell calmly noted that one could take the non-answer as “consciousness of guilt” – which is a legal inference that a jury is allowed to make when a witness refuses to answer a simple question.
But let’s pull back from the fireworks and simply look at it more philosophically. Given that it would be easy to simply say “No” – meaning that he did not tell A.G. Bondi that Trump was in the Epstein files- the fact that Patel refused to even address the facts clearly means that he would be lying if he said “No.” Lying puts Patel in real jeopardy because he knows that Bondi will likely also be asked to testify at some point, and neither of them has any motivation to cover for the other. Patel could be prosecuted for lying, and thus, he couldn’t simply say “No.”
Staying on the philosophical angle momentarily, any rational observer walks away knowing that the answer is “yes,” Patel did, indeed, tell Bondi that Trump’s name was in the Epstein files. This creates a huge problem for them because this is a criminal investigation, and it may well be that the files contain incriminating evidence against Donald Trump and others. It smacks of a cover-up. In enlightened countries, presidents and officials go to prison for covering up crimes.
So now there are two scandals brewing. We have the original sin in that Donald Trump more than likely did assault teen girls with Jeffrey Epstein (See the birthday message and “secrets” with a best “pal.”) He should be put in prison if he did so, never mind the White House. But now there might also be a concurrent felony: hiding the evidence. The entire “investigation” itself may have turned into a crime itself, and Patel knows it, which is likely why he refused to even address the topic at hand, choosing instead to mock Swalwell.
This isn’t a court of law. The non-answer isn’t officially evidence of “consciousness of guilt,” but it certainly could become real evidence if the matter ever spills out into the open and Patel has to answer why he dodged the Committee’s questions. In a criminal investigation into the cover-up, someone absolutely will bring up the fact that Patel refused to testify to Congress that he did indeed tell Bondi that Trump was in the Epstein files.
And if Patel passed on the information, it sure looks like the two of them are actively covering up for the boss. It is nearly impossible to take any other conclusion away. No wonder he was so upset.
**** Please follow me now on Bluesky
God Bless: I can be reached at [email protected] and also on X at @JasonMiciak.
Zoomers, we are always in need of donations. We work hard to get you analysis that you will not find in the mainstream media, but all media have been hit hard since the big companies have gobbled up and monopolized commentary. Anything you can spare will be immensely appreciated. And thank you to all who have donated generously already. Ursula
Go insane? Short trip.
FYI “… You can’t fact check someone out of a cult (like MAGA). Politics (for MAGA) is not about truth, it’s about identity. Simply showing (a MAGA) the facts one would think they would wake up. No. Doing so is not challenging their opinion, it’s threatening who they think they believe they are, being their identity.
When confronted by the truth they (the MAGA) does not update and learn, they get defensive and double down even when the truth is undeniable and the lie is obvious. Believing the lie allows them to feel safe, and belonging always beats being factually right.
You are not fighting ignorance and stupidity. You are fighting fear. The more logical you sound the tighter they (the MAGA) will grip and hold onto their delusion. Don’t expect them (the MAGA) to change their mind when presented with logic and fact. The only thing that will change their (the MAGA) mind is when the cost of the lie becomes heavier than the comfort it brings, and the pain of leaving (the MAGA cult) is less than the pain of staying (a MAGA cult member)…”
Truth