Part one of the series zeroes in on Epstein survivor and Alaskan Marijke Chartouni, who has turned her attention to Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), the deciding vote on September 10 to block the release of the Epstein files. Chartouni uncovered Murkowski’s longstanding ties to Ghislaine Maxwell’s husband, Scott Borgerson, and the many occasions Murkowski appeared on stage with Maxwell at ocean-advocacy conferences. They were appearances that, intentionally or not, helped launder Maxwell’s name even as she was publicly linked to Epstein.
Chartouni’s foray into opposition research came after a crushing moment: she was misled by Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) at Reagan National Airport into believing that she had voted for the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, co-sponsored by Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna, which needed only two more votes at the time. Chartouni burst into tears of joy. But it was a lie. Hageman had only backed Speaker Mike Johnson’s countermeasure, which was a move designed to bury the issue in the sham investigation run by the House Oversight Committee.
Chartouni was devastated but she quickly learned the vocabulary of Washington: spin, obfuscate, deceit. She and her fellow survivors refuse to fold. If anything, Hageman’s duplicity made them more determined. “We’re sharing info and lobbying,” Chartouni texted me. They’re now playing D.C. at its own game, using one of its sharpest tools: opposition research.
So when Murkowski cast that fateful vote on the Epstein files, Chartouni took it personally.
“She needs to be shamed!” the usually soft-spoken survivor told me. “I’m from Alaska. It’s personal.”
And she didn’t stop there. She started digging. Why would Murkowski, who has occasionally broken with Trump and previously suggested the files should be released, suddenly reverse course?
What she uncovered was a tangle of connections between Murkowski, Maxwell, her husband Borgerson, and Anchorage Daily News publisher and political donor Alice Rogoff. Through the Arctic Circle conference circuit, Murkowski repeatedly overlapped with Borgerson, and once with Maxwell herself—a well-known convicted sex offender’s right hand and later a convicted trafficker. For Murkowski, the release of those files isn’t just about Epstein. It’s about reminders of who she chose to share a stage with, and what that signified.
What else is Lisa Murkowski hiding? Tight with pedophiles, the question needs to be asked: What else is she hiding?
Epstein and Maxwell got sweet heart deals and were protected by many people. Don't take my word for it, Chump declared that over and over in public. Was Lisa one of the helpers? She's certainly a helper now. Did it go beyond that? I don't know. But if she and or her husband were also clients of Epstein and Maxwell would it be surprising now that we know she lied to the public, she hid her friendship and she voted against the release of the files?
Powerful people protected Epstein and Maawell. Powerful people continue to protect. Lisa Murkowski needs to hold a press conference and answer questions including what their relationship was and why she thought it was appropriate to vote "no" on the release of files that her own name could be in.
Last night on Lawrence O'Donnell's MSNBC show, Lawrence spoke with US House Rep Ro Khanna about the release of these files, how October 7th should see the newly elected Democrat to the House finally seated and how Alan Dershowitz trashed these survivors repeatedly.
BLOOMBERG NEWS has done outstanding work on the issue. That includes last month's "Epstein's Inbox" -- their exclusive report by Jason Leopold, Ava Benny-Morrison, Jeff Kao, Dhruy Mehrotra, Suray Mattu, Harry Wilson and Max Abelson. And here's a video report that they did on that.
Stupidity must run in the Chump family. How else to explain Don Junior's failure to grasp what he witnessed. "They tried to impeach my father two times!" Michael Luciano (MEDIAITE) quotes Junior whining that on one of the lesser known right-wing stations. Congress did not try to impeach him. They impeached him. Two times. Twice your loser father was impeached. He wasn't removed from office. But he was impeached. Twice. What an idiot.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Ahead of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s abrupt, needless, and wasteful speech to much of our nation’s top military leadership tomorrow, September 30, U.S. Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) and Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), members of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), pressed the Secretary on the serious risks that such a gathering poses to security—on top of the monstrous cost to American taxpayers as Republicans march us toward a government shutdown.
Emphasizing the impacts this meeting could have on security, the Senators wrote, “If reports are accurate, this gathering would represent an unprecedented concentration of senior military leadership in one location simply to hear you speak about standards and ethos at significant cost and with potentially serious security implications. This includes both the personal security of all individuals assembling—and creating a rich target for any malign actor—and national security, given that our adversaries will know that many of our most senior commanders from around the world are tied up together with some portion of the highest level of the civilian chain of command.”
In their letter, the senators requested a briefing or detailed written answers to over a dozen questions, including what these additional flights, hotel rooms, and other expenses will cost taxpayers, as well as what impacts this meeting will have on operations around the globe in the absence of senior leadership, and more.
The Senators continued: “For an administration obsessed with rooting out waste, this abrupt, time and resource-intensive meeting of our military’s top commanders, all of whom have earned their positions through superior performance over decades of service, to reportedly hear you, the least qualified Secretary of Defense in living memory, lecture about military standards and warfighting is absurd.”
The full text of the letter is available here and below.
Secretary Hegseth:
Recent reporting that you intend to convene commanders in grade O7 through O10 and their senior enlisted advisors from around the world for an in-person meeting at Marine Corps Base Quantico next week—on short notice, supposedly to hear you make a speech about the “warrior ethos”—raises profound concerns about security, cost and operational impacts. It comes amid a pattern of deeply troubling decisions under your tenure, including continued abuse of the military in American cities for political purposes; the abrupt removal of highly qualified senior leaders without justification, sometimes at the behest of a far-right social media influencer and conspiracy theorist; and your own humiliating mishandling of classified operational information in unclassified, unsecured group chats with your wife, brother and, stunningly, the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic.
If reports are accurate, this gathering would represent an unprecedented concentration of senior military leadership in one location simply to hear you speak about standards and ethos at significant cost and with potentially serious security implications. This includes both the personal security of all individuals assembling—and creating a rich target for any malign actor—and national security, given that our adversaries will know that many of our most senior commanders from around the world are tied up together with some portion of the highest level of the civilian chain of command.
Very few commanders at the specified grades are stationed in the National Capital Region, meaning that this order could potentially require over 1,000 uniformed servicemembers, between commanders, their senior enlisted advisors and support staff, to travel at the taxpayer’s expense, interrupting their planned duties in their areas of responsibility. For an administration obsessed with rooting out waste, this abrupt, time and resource-intensive meeting of our military’s top commanders, all of whom have earned their positions through superior performance over decades of service, to reportedly hear you, the least qualified Secretary of Defense in living memory, lecture about military standards and warfighting is absurd.
To our knowledge, no Secretary of Defense in modern history has convened an in-person gathering of this scale, involving general and flag officer commanders worldwide, without a publicly stated agenda or declared crisis. Even during periods of acute national emergency, such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Gulf War or the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, senior military leaders were summoned only in smaller, mission-specific groups, and always with a clear operational or strategic purpose. Regularly scheduled events such as the Unified Commanders Conference involve far fewer participants, are planned well in advance and are conducted with a defined, operational purpose and full transparency. The reported Quantico meeting departs dramatically from these precedents.
Given the exceedingly costly nature of this meeting and our lack of confidence in your judgement when it comes to operational security on account of your well-publicized failures in this regard, we require detailed responses to the following questions:
- What is the estimated total cost of this gathering, including:
- Estimated number of flight hours required for military aircraft, fixed wing and rotary wing, and the cost per flight hour;
- Estimated number of commercial roundtrip airline tickets required for commanders, senior enlisted advisors and support staff and the estimated total cost of commercial airfare;
- Estimated number of hotel rooms required and estimated total lodging costs for all travelers, including commanders, senior enlisted advisors and support staff;
- Estimated total per diem for all travelers, including commanders, senior enlisted advisors and support staff;
- Estimated total cost of ground transportation, to include rental and contract vehicles, fuel and mileage reimbursements;
- Estimated total cost of extra security measures required at Marine Corps Base Quantico and throughout the wider National Capital Region.
- What accounts are being used to fund these costs?
- If there is a lapse in annual appropriations starting at midnight the night of this meeting, how will it impact meeting participants’ ability to return to their duty stations?
- Was a cost-benefit analysis conducted prior to deciding on an in-person format?
- Why was a secure virtual alternative not considered sufficient?
- Is public reporting that the purpose of this meeting is to deliver a speech accurate? Are there any other objectives planned for this meeting?
- What force protection measures are being implemented at Marine Corps Base Quantico during the meeting?
- Has the Department conducted a risk assessment of concentrating much of the operational chain of command in one location?
- What contingency plans are in place in the event of a security breach during the meeting?
- Has the Department coordinated with the intelligence community to assess risks to the senior leadership gathering or broader national security?
- What is the impact on command and control in each combatant command during the absence of its senior leadership?
- Are there any ongoing or anticipated operations that could be affected by this absence?
- What are the anticipated impacts to personnel and operations at Marine Corps Base Quantico in preparation for this meeting, on the day of this meeting and following the conclusion of the meeting?
- What installation resources are being used in support of this meeting?
- How many installation personnel are being detailed to support this meeting?
- How many personnel are being directed to not report to their duty station on the day of the meeting?
- What restrictions are being placed on families or individuals living on base and how are base services impacted?
- What are the anticipated impacts to personnel and operations at other installations in the National Capital Region in preparation for this meeting, on the day of this meeting and following the conclusion of the meeting? For each impacted installation, detail:
- What installation resources are being used in support of this meeting?
- How many installation personnel are being detailed to support this meeting?
- Has this gathering disrupted any other scheduled operations, training or interagency coordination?
- Why has the Department not publicly disclosed the purpose of this meeting?
- Has the President directed this gathering? If not, was the President briefed on or otherwise aware of the gathering before it was reported?
- Has any previous Secretary of Defense convened a similar gathering under comparable circumstances?
- How does the Department justify the urgency of this meeting in the absence of a declared crisis?
Secretary Hegseth, we write with particular concern on account of your consistent prioritization of political theater and distraction over warfighting and blatant disregard for operational security. Given the reported scale and sensitivity of this reported gathering, we require a briefing or written response to answer these questions no later than Monday September 29, 2025. If any of the information requested is classified, we are prepared to receive a briefing in an appropriate setting.
Sincerely,
###
Very well said by Rebecca. Don't let the liars rewrite what's going down or why it's going down. Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
Murray: “People are about to get completely priced out of their coverage and Republicans are sitting on their hands. Worse than that, they are reveling in this shutdown.”
***ICYMI: New Kaiser Family Foundation analysis finds premiums on the ACA marketplaces will, on average, more than double next year if Republicans refuse to act***
***WATCH AND DOWNLOAD: Senator Murray’s remarks after Senate rejects funding bills***
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, spoke alongside Senate Democratic leadership after two votes failed on: Republicans’ partisan continuing resolution and Democrats’ bill to fund the government, address the health care crisis, and protect Congress’ power of the purse.
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:
“We have been calling for Republicans to work with us to keep the government funded, to address the health care crisis they created, and to stop people’s premiums from skyrocketing. Republicans haven’t just stuck their heads in the sand, they’ve outright refused to get serious about a solution.
“Well, health care rates for next year are being finalized right now. Rate hikes will be in the mail any day. Open enrollment is weeks away.
“And still, Republicans have refused to lift a finger to prevent millions of families from being hit with massive costs.
“Well, Republicans may be forcing the government to shut down before they so much as talk about health care, but they will not shut down the debate. And they will not shut out the voices of families who want action before their monthly health care payments more than double.
“One family in Washington state is about to see their monthly premium jump from $278 a month, to $1,800 dollars a month, because of Republicans’ inaction. That is what’s at stake. That is the problem Republicans refuse to solve. And that is what they have to answer for.
“This has been a problem for months. Why hasn’t Republican Leadership joined us at the table? We’ve been here all year!
“Why do Republicans prefer to shut down the government over talking about how we save families from astronomical health care price hikes?
“I mean, do Republicans care about farmers? They tell us they do! Because a quarter of our farmers are enrolled in those health care exchanges.
“Republicans say they care about small business owners and employees. Do they care about people who are self-employed? Because nearly half of them get their health care on the exchanges.
“Do Republicans care if their constituents lose their health care? Because some of the areas that most rely on the health care tax credits to afford coverage are represented by Republicans.
“Don’t tell us to wait. Don’t tell us to wait—families have already been waiting, and we’ve been at the table ready to solve this for months. Don’t tell us you want to fix this later—later is too late. The health care clock has all but run out.
“If Republicans refuse to act, families are going to pay the price. It will cost millions of people hundreds—if not thousands—of dollars a month. In some cases, it will cost them their health care insurance entirely. People are about to get completely priced out of their coverage and Republicans are sitting on their hands.
“And worse than that, they are reveling in this shutdown.
“Trump just said, ‘a lot of good can come down from shutdowns.’ He said ‘you can get rid of a lot of things we didn’t want. They’d be Democrat things.’
“Trump doesn’t want to lift a finger to stop health care premiums from more than doubling, but he is raring to go when it comes to firing whoever he wants to, or slashing whatever he wants to, or prosecuting whoever he wants to, or telling his military his opponents are ‘enemies within,’ and tweeting AI nonsense and lying about whatever he wants to.
“Trump doesn’t care about how this shutdown is going to hurt real, average Americans across this country. He doesn’t care about the Republican health care crisis. He clearly thinks this is all a game.
“Democrats know better. The stakes for American families are real.
“When people get priced out of their health care, they put off their basic care, they skimp on their prescriptions, they miss out on lifesaving treatments.
“We are not going to let Republicans dodge this subject. And we’re not going to let them delay this action on an empty promise or a pig in a poke.
“We’re going to keep calling on them to sit down, work with us to keep the government open, and solve this health care crisis.”
###
-
-
-
Bulging Biceps Don’t Win Modern Wars1 hour ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Slow Cooker 7 Can Soup in the Kitchen6 hours ago
-
-
-
-
