Speaker 1: Hey, they folks did. It's Thursday, June eleventh, and another
Speaker 1: high profile, famous, powerful man has been hauled in to
Speaker 1: give testimony before Congress having to do with his relationship
Speaker 1: with Jeffrey Epstein. And what did he testify to I
Speaker 1: don't know nothing, I ain't see nothing, I ain't do nothing.
Speaker 1: And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and
Speaker 1: TJ ropes. Not necessarily forbad him. I think Bill Gates
Speaker 1: might have been a little more eloquent in he's how
Speaker 1: he said it, but that's what he said.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And this is, as you pointed out, one of
Speaker 2: the most powerful men, billionaires in the world, who was
Speaker 2: essentially being blackmailed by one of the most prolific pedophiles
Speaker 2: in the world.
Speaker 1: He might have been one of the most prolific blackmailers.
Speaker 1: This follows a pattern. This is what people want. You
Speaker 1: want leverage over people in some way. And this part
Speaker 1: was interesting, really.
Speaker 2: And that is where so many of the conspiracy theories
Speaker 2: continue to have legs, because yes, it is true, it
Speaker 2: has been proven. And we heard directly from Bill Gates
Speaker 2: that yes, he was among the men who Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 2: had goods on and threatened to use them to try
Speaker 2: and continual relationship with or at least continue to use
Speaker 2: Bill Gates's good name at the time to benefit him.
Speaker 2: And that is part of what the Congressional the House
Speaker 2: Oversight Committee is trying to come to terms with, to
Speaker 2: try to figure out how Epstein rose to power, investigate
Speaker 2: the investigation, and just try to give some more information
Speaker 2: to a very curious American public.
Speaker 1: I guess we're getting a little more insight, a little
Speaker 1: more detail. There's some curiosity here. I'm not sure, rogue,
Speaker 1: do we got anything that overwhelmingly changes the narrative, but
Speaker 1: it just I think it just adds to it a
Speaker 1: little more understanding. But yeah, this is further evidence in
Speaker 1: that camp man. What did he have on everybody exactly?
Speaker 2: And so this was a closed door deposition, and Bill
Speaker 2: Gates himself actually released his opening statement to the committee,
Speaker 2: much like we saw from Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton
Speaker 2: when they were compelled to testify back in February. Bill Gates, however,
Speaker 2: made it very clear he came voluntarily. And as he
Speaker 2: was walking into the Capitol, of course, you know, you
Speaker 2: had all those reporters throwing Mike's at him, and he
Speaker 2: said he was there hoping that he could help lawmakers
Speaker 2: quote fine justice for the victims.
Speaker 3: As he went into testify, I was.
Speaker 1: Very surprised to see him stop and make a statement
Speaker 1: of any kind. He didn't take questions, but he did.
Speaker 1: He stood there and looked calm and confident. He looks
Speaker 1: throwing in.
Speaker 2: He looked a little different, He looks thin. He did, right,
Speaker 2: And that stood out to me. I don't know if
Speaker 2: you noticed that too.
Speaker 1: I guess we don't see him that often. He's not
Speaker 1: as prominent as far as up to date pictures, right,
Speaker 1: we don't see him that often. But yeah, I thought
Speaker 1: you looked pretty good.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean when I said that, like, he looked healthy.
Speaker 2: He didn't look sickly, he looked healthy. But yeah, he's
Speaker 2: just the latest powerful person linked to Jeffrey Epsty to testify.
Speaker 2: And I think you all probably remember that his name
Speaker 2: did appear fairly prominently in some.
Speaker 1: Emails, prominently and frequently and.
Speaker 3: Embarrassingly in those files.
Speaker 2: In some of these emails, in fact, that Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 2: emailed himself almost as if he were making notes to
Speaker 2: remember what was happening, or maybe there were drafts. I
Speaker 2: think it was suggested if emails he was going to
Speaker 2: send to Bill Gates in that big DOJ Epstein dumping
Speaker 2: those emails. The contents of them were frankly very embarrassing
Speaker 2: to Bill Gates. It was the very material that Jeffrey
Speaker 2: Epstein was holding over his head to blackmail him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and as a reminder, I mean some of the
Speaker 1: style least still draft email it suggested or said that
Speaker 1: Bill Gates was surreptitiously trying to give his wife drugs
Speaker 1: to treat an STD that he had given her that
Speaker 1: he gotten from having extramarital affairs. I mean, that's pretty
Speaker 1: tough stuff.
Speaker 3: Correct in this file? Correct?
Speaker 2: Actually have in one of the emails, Epstein wrote to
Speaker 2: add insult to the injury. You then subsequently, with tears
Speaker 2: in your eyes, implore me to please delete the emails
Speaker 2: regarding your STD, your request that I provide you antibiotics
Speaker 2: that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda, and description of
Speaker 2: your penis. So, yes, this was an email in the
Speaker 2: DOJ dump.
Speaker 1: And yes, and it didn't make sense why Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 1: would write that draft to himself. Does this mean he
Speaker 1: was I don't know, was he making this up and
Speaker 1: getting prepared to put that out or was this all true?
Speaker 1: So Bill Gates at the time came out and made
Speaker 1: a statement and said all this stuff was untrue.
Speaker 2: Yes, And there was another email just to see where
Speaker 2: we're going with and what he's referencing when we read
Speaker 2: you as opening statements. There was another email from a
Speaker 2: former Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation chief advisor who talked
Speaker 2: about in this email about things he had been asked
Speaker 2: to do that he felt were morally inappropriate or even
Speaker 2: ethically unsound.
Speaker 3: And he said from.
Speaker 2: Helping Bill to get drugs in order to deal with
Speaker 2: consequences of sex with Russian girls, to facilitating his illicit
Speaker 2: trysts with married women, to being asked to provide adderall
Speaker 2: for bridge tournaments as I am a medical doctor but
Speaker 2: have no prescriptions writing ability.
Speaker 3: So all of this was back and forth.
Speaker 2: With Epstein, and it just was it was a very
Speaker 2: tough PR day for Bill Gates to say the least.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and he, from what I remember ropes, he responded
Speaker 1: pretty immediately to this and pretty extensively. He kind of
Speaker 1: said a lot. I can't remember if he was on camera,
Speaker 1: but oh, didn't he have to After this he spoke
Speaker 1: to the foundation, didn't he have a meeting. In the
Speaker 1: notes of that meeting got out he had to talk
Speaker 1: to them.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So yes, he has been out there and admitting and
Speaker 1: saying I had aim miss this was a mistake to
Speaker 1: have this relationship. So he gets hauled in robes. It
Speaker 1: seems like, based on the Epstein files and things that
Speaker 1: we are aware of, maybe he does know something. Maybe
Speaker 1: he did see something, Maybe he was aware of something,
Speaker 1: maybe he was around something. Maybe he can help us
Speaker 1: move this investigation along.
Speaker 2: Okay, well we have his opening statement, and in addition
Speaker 2: to just thanking the committee and actually calling it an
Speaker 2: opportunity to appear before them, he actually said he was
Speaker 2: looking forward to answering their.
Speaker 1: Question, saying all the right stuff.
Speaker 2: Doesn't seem that's how the Clintons opened, But okay, Bill
Speaker 2: Gates maybe started out a little friendly.
Speaker 1: What was Clinton's wonderful line at the Annie's fire away?
Speaker 1: Something great?
Speaker 2: They didn't act as if they were excited about it.
Speaker 2: Ask her questions. But he begins with at the outset,
Speaker 2: I want to stay very clearly, I never witnessed, nor
Speaker 2: had any indication that Epstein was engaged in ongoing criminal conduct.
Speaker 2: I never went to his island, his ranch or his
Speaker 2: Florida home. I've never victimized anyone. While he may have
Speaker 2: sought to foster a personal relationship, I was never interested
Speaker 2: in that and never reciprocated.
Speaker 1: So, like I said, didn't know nothing, didn't do nothing,
Speaker 1: didn't see nothing.
Speaker 3: Yes, that was the verbatim of your synopsis.
Speaker 1: Okay, he might as well just say that and say, okay,
Speaker 1: give me questions. Okay, Well get it. I don't know
Speaker 1: anything this guy that I knew. I am in here
Speaker 1: in Congress to testify about my relationship. Let me start
Speaker 1: with this. I know nothing.
Speaker 3: And by the way, it was a five year relationship. Well,
Speaker 3: uh okay.
Speaker 2: So he goes on to kind of give some details.
Speaker 2: He said, I was introduced to Epstein in twenty eleven
Speaker 2: through people I trusted in my professional and philanthropic work.
Speaker 3: Epstein claimed he could raise billions.
Speaker 2: Of dollars for global health from people for whom he
Speaker 2: provided tax and estate services. I recall being aware that
Speaker 2: Epstein had faced prior legal issues, but I did not
Speaker 2: fully understand the extent of the crimes he committed. I
Speaker 2: accepted the introduction without applying the scrutiny I should have.
Speaker 1: That's for a guy who's become one of the most
Speaker 1: influential men in business the world has ever known, one
Speaker 1: of the most I mean, one of the richest men
Speaker 1: the world has ever known. I didn't do my homework
Speaker 1: on this new guy that was just handed to me.
Speaker 3: It does seem a bit bizarre.
Speaker 2: And when you find out he's acknowledging he knew he
Speaker 2: was a convicted criminal. Did he not want to know
Speaker 2: what he did? And when you heard predator, child sex offender, possible, well,
Speaker 2: not possible, convicted pedophile, would you not? I mean, do
Speaker 2: you gloss it over by thinking as she was probably sixteen?
Speaker 1: So what's the line there about what he was aware of?
Speaker 3: He was aware that Epstein had faced prior legal issues.
Speaker 3: That's how he phrased it. That's where you lose me.
Speaker 1: He okay, come on, okay. I didn't realize he lost
Speaker 1: us so early in his statement it sweetheart deal.
Speaker 2: Epstein' sweetheart deal was in two thousand and seven. This
Speaker 2: is four years after the fact. There was information online
Speaker 2: everywhere about him.
Speaker 3: At that point. It would have only required a Google.
Speaker 1: Sech we even when you meet somebody and before you
Speaker 1: go on the first date, you can google him and
Speaker 1: find this out to say he didn't do enough research.
Speaker 1: Sounds a little odd, but to this sounds legal. It
Speaker 1: sounds lawyer. It's the way he put it. Be aware
Speaker 1: of he had some prior legal issues. Well, that's vague. Okay,
Speaker 1: I want to take him at his word here, but
Speaker 1: that's uh, that's vague and it's tough to believe.
Speaker 2: Agreed, So yes, Then he describes having like three meetings
Speaker 2: with Epstein in twenty eleven, a couple in twenty twelve,
Speaker 2: and then he claims there were more extensive conversations in
Speaker 2: twenty thirteen and twenty fourteen, and so then he goes
Speaker 2: specifically in twenty fourteen. So this is five years after
Speaker 2: meeting him. After Epstein brought together a group he described
Speaker 2: as potential donors, I realized that our prior discussions would
Speaker 2: should have translated into meaningful, filling throat topic support were
Speaker 2: a dead end. It was clear that no one in
Speaker 2: the group was interested enough to move forward. At that point,
Speaker 2: I concluded Epstein would never deliver on his promises. I
Speaker 2: told him we would go no further and stopped communicating
Speaker 2: or meeting with him. No vehicle for charitable giving was
Speaker 2: ever created, and no funds were raised. So he claims
Speaker 2: all of his interactions with Epstein ended in December of
Speaker 2: twenty fourteen, and he made the point to say that
Speaker 2: was four years before new reports in the press shed
Speaker 2: light on the extent of his crimes. Look, I was
Speaker 2: doing investigative reporting on him in twenty sixteen, so maybe
Speaker 2: he could say it was a few years away from
Speaker 2: a renewed interest in what Epstein was doing.
Speaker 3: But this was in the height of his criminal activity.
Speaker 1: Help me with the convictions in Florida were twenty seven
Speaker 1: Oh my god. Okay, So he fires it up with
Speaker 1: his guy in twenty eleven, yes, twenty fourteen, correct, fifteen?
Speaker 3: Correct?
Speaker 1: Okay, all right.
Speaker 2: So he claims then that he has an employee engaged
Speaker 2: to engage Epstein into negotiating the separation, that they were
Speaker 2: going to formally not be doing business together. But then
Speaker 2: he says it was after this that I learned Epstein
Speaker 2: had become aware of sensitive information about my personal life,
Speaker 2: including the fact that I have been unfaithful in my marriage.
Speaker 2: These affairs had nothing to do with my interactions with Epstein,
Speaker 2: but they were painful for my family. As the public
Speaker 2: can now see based on what has been released in
Speaker 2: the files, Epstein was working to use information about my infidelities,
Speaker 2: in addition to many lies that he layered on top
Speaker 2: to pressure me to re engage with him.
Speaker 3: He was unsuccessful in.
Speaker 2: This effort, but it shows some of the ways he
Speaker 2: tried to leverage his interactions with me to further his agenda. Look,
Speaker 2: if he had no personal connection, no personal relationship with him,
Speaker 2: if this were just a few business meetings that went nowhere,
Speaker 2: how did Epstein have all this information about women and
Speaker 2: drugs and STDs and all of these other things.
Speaker 1: You know what, I wouldn't be surprised if Epstein had
Speaker 1: his ways. Now, that's one thing I can I would
Speaker 1: believe based on what we know about this guy. He
Speaker 1: just knew stuff, and he knew how to get information.
Speaker 1: He knew how to get into a room, he knew
Speaker 1: how to get people together. He just seemed like a
Speaker 1: guy who would have a file on everybody he does
Speaker 1: work with.
Speaker 2: Right, But it's just interesting if you know that Jeffrey
Speaker 2: Epstein was known to gather women from around the world
Speaker 2: to be around these powerful men with money, it just
Speaker 2: seems strange that that was independent of Epstein, that he
Speaker 2: apparently had affairs with Russian girls.
Speaker 1: You were saying he would have been rolling with Epstein
Speaker 1: for some of his gig.
Speaker 2: That is the implicator, and that is what you would think.
Speaker 2: It'd be strange that those two things weren't connected in
Speaker 2: a same way.
Speaker 1: And I had them disconnect because of the underage nature
Speaker 1: of a lot of what Epstein was doing. And we
Speaker 1: should say, if we haven't yet, Bill Gates has not
Speaker 1: been accused in any way of any criminals, not as.
Speaker 2: Consenting adults, consenting adults as who he has admitted to
Speaker 2: having affairs.
Speaker 1: And those folks he was involved with are not connected
Speaker 1: to Jeffrey Epstein. Now, Rhodes, I haven't done with you.
Speaker 1: Maybe a lot of people are doing what you're doing.
Speaker 1: I didn't do that. I didn't put the two things together.
Speaker 2: And they might not go together, but it's hard to
Speaker 2: imagine that there isn't a space where they could. So
Speaker 2: I think that's where he's trying to distance himself, obviously
Speaker 2: from those two things being connected, but they're in the
Speaker 2: same vein the age obviously significant and certainly the women
Speaker 2: who have been named, and there have been names, have
Speaker 2: acknowledged a relationship that was consensual, So there's no criminal
Speaker 2: implication for Bill Gates, but he went on to say,
Speaker 2: I should never have met with Epstein in the first place,
Speaker 2: based on what I know now, I understand that even
Speaker 2: if he had delivered the new donors he promised, it
Speaker 2: would not have justified associating with him. And he goes
Speaker 2: on to acknowledge that just by being associated with Bill Gates,
Speaker 2: by allowing him into his life, he legitimized a criminal,
Speaker 2: He legitimized the pedophile, at least by his association with him.
Speaker 1: So he is acknowledging that because now he has even
Speaker 1: more clout because he's rolling.
Speaker 3: With Bill Gates exactly exactly.
Speaker 2: And so this was the big thing that Gates testified
Speaker 2: to that made headlines. He went on to say, meeting
Speaker 2: with Epstein was a grave error in judgment and put
Speaker 2: this work at risk, meaning his philanthropic work.
Speaker 3: His behavior was.
Speaker 2: Antithetical to all my efforts to contribute to a world
Speaker 2: where everyone has a chance to live a healthy and
Speaker 2: productive life. If the time I spent with Epstein lent
Speaker 2: him any credibility, I am deeply sorry, learned a significant
Speaker 2: lesson and am now far more careful about who I
Speaker 2: engage with, even in a limited capacity. That seems so
Speaker 2: strange for the billionaire who founded Microsoft to have to say, now,
Speaker 2: upon reflection.
Speaker 1: I have to be careful about who I let it in.
Speaker 3: My way, I've learned the lesson now what really fine.
Speaker 1: But again, it's kind of one of those things. If
Speaker 1: somebody you respect that much walks in here and introduces
Speaker 1: you to a guy, you would just say, fine, this
Speaker 1: person has to be legit. There are plenty of people
Speaker 1: in our lives. Well, I don't know why straight hand
Speaker 1: comes the mind. If somebody like that, a friend, somebody
Speaker 1: you're close to, somebody you know is good in business,
Speaker 1: introduces you to somebody, they are immediately legitimate in your eyes?
Speaker 1: Are they not?
Speaker 2: It does lend them credibility, But it's still when you're
Speaker 2: the person who Bill Gates was even at that time,
Speaker 2: you still have to do your own due diligence.
Speaker 1: Don't get me wrong. We google it makes everybody all right.
Speaker 2: When we come back, we're gonna tell you what the
Speaker 2: lawmakers who were grilling Gates for those six hours, by
Speaker 2: the way, what they had to say about his testimony,
Speaker 2: and who the next very powerful man this committee wants
Speaker 2: to bring in to ask some questions about welcome back
Speaker 2: everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ.
Speaker 3: We are talking about.
Speaker 2: A pretty stunning scene on Capitol Hill. One of the
Speaker 2: most powerful men in the world, billionaire Bill Gates, Microsoft
Speaker 2: fonder under oath, testifying before a House committee about his
Speaker 2: relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. And we did get his opening statement.
Speaker 2: He released it actually on the Gates Foundation website.
Speaker 3: But what we didn't get to see.
Speaker 2: And we do usually get these transcripts at some point
Speaker 2: in time, was the grilling that he underwent for six hours,
Speaker 2: with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle asking him
Speaker 2: detailed questions, and when they came out during breaks, they
Speaker 2: were offering different assessments about how he was doing or
Speaker 2: what what was happening inside and it depended on who
Speaker 2: you asked what their reaction was.
Speaker 3: Shocking, I know, but it was odd.
Speaker 1: It wasn't simply split along party lines, that was it.
Speaker 3: No, I don't think so. So we had geopay GOP
Speaker 3: representative Tim.
Speaker 2: And I ended on a preposition when I tossed a
Speaker 2: break and the wrong preposition. But let's just say some
Speaker 2: of us only got two and a half hours of
Speaker 2: sleep last night. Thank you next, but thank you next seriously,
Speaker 2: thank you next, yes.
Speaker 3: Okay, all right.
Speaker 2: Uh. Congressman Burchett described the questioning as intense. Republican there
Speaker 2: a Democrat came out and said Gates was combative and
Speaker 2: not terribly forthcoming or candid, so that wasn't exactly a
Speaker 2: glowing account of what happened. The top ranking Democrat, Congressman Garcia,
Speaker 2: described gates act as a horrific judgment call and said
Speaker 2: that Gates did push back on some of the questioning,
Speaker 2: but he did say he is answering the questions. So look,
Speaker 2: either it sounds like he was combative in moments, some
Speaker 2: people felt like he wasn't being transparent or forthcoming, and
Speaker 2: to hear that it was intense. So I'm interested in
Speaker 2: the transcript. I have no idea. I think he testified
Speaker 2: one other time Gates did many many years ago, and
Speaker 2: it was also described as intense.
Speaker 1: Isn't this How have they been in their turnarounds for
Speaker 1: the transcripts?
Speaker 2: We use again a few bits a couple of days,
Speaker 2: a couple of days we get to see how exactly
Speaker 2: it went.
Speaker 3: But look, this is a continuing process for this House
Speaker 3: Oversight Committee.
Speaker 2: James Comer has been very vocal about who he'd like
Speaker 2: to have sitting there facing members of Congress. He wants
Speaker 2: Alan Dershowitz next. And look, Alan Dershowitz has been a
Speaker 2: cent figure in the Jeffrey Epstein saga. Look my interview
Speaker 2: with Virginia's Euphrey all those years ago that never aired.
Speaker 2: She talked specifically about Dershowitz, and he has been very
Speaker 2: vocal in his denials about having anything to do with
Speaker 2: any of the young women who were abused. But some
Speaker 2: of these young women, women, especially Virginia, said otherwise. So, yeah,
Speaker 2: it would be very interesting to hear what prominent former
Speaker 2: Harvard lawyer Alan Dershowitz would have to say. He would
Speaker 2: definitely have to be compelled to testify. He is not
Speaker 2: coming voluntarily. I feel very certain about.
Speaker 1: That, and I feel like he would have a very
Speaker 1: good legal argument for why you can't compel him to
Speaker 1: come testify. Oh my, how that showdown. There's no talk
Speaker 1: of subpoena and sending a subpoena to him just at this.
Speaker 2: Not yet, I think the wording was Committee Chair James
Speaker 2: Comer said he is planning to ask attorney Alan.
Speaker 3: Dershowitz to appear. That sounds very luck with that very
Speaker 3: black comber.
Speaker 2: He said he's also been in communication with the DOJ
Speaker 2: because they would also like Attorney General Todd Blanche to
Speaker 2: come in for questioning as well. And of course Blanche,
Speaker 2: I think everyone can remember, very famously sat down with
Speaker 2: Gallaine Maxwell and shortly after that big sit down interview,
Speaker 2: she was transferred to a minimum security camp fed a
Speaker 2: hotel in Texas that has, you know, just a few locks.
Speaker 1: You can't leave, but it's just a hotel.
Speaker 3: It's like the Hotel California.
Speaker 1: Well, Todd Blanche, isn't he the one didn't Pam BONDI
Speaker 1: just throw him under the bus recently?
Speaker 2: Yes, okay, yes, but she's out of a job and
Speaker 2: he's now the new Attorney general nominee and the acting
Speaker 2: Attorney General.
Speaker 3: So look, this is far from over. This has been fascinating.
Speaker 2: Not sure that there have been any massive new revelations
Speaker 2: in all of this, but at least you are seeing
Speaker 2: people held accountable to the point that they're being asked
Speaker 2: formal questions. And eventually we will get to see the
Speaker 2: full transcript of what Bill Gates had to say answering
Speaker 2: question confirming Robes.
Speaker 1: Yes, he is still on the list. The nineteenth richest
Speaker 1: person in the world. Bill Gates valued it over one
Speaker 1: hundred and three billion dollars. So he is still as
Speaker 1: he's giving all of his money away, he still remain
Speaker 1: one of the richest. In my adult life, I think
Speaker 1: he has been on the list of richest folks. He
Speaker 1: just lives there on that list.
Speaker 2: But ain't It's so interesting how the thought of getting
Speaker 2: more money for his charity, for his foundation blinded him
Speaker 2: from what was right there. Easily Google old bull Google Google.
Speaker 3: Okay, I need to stop talking.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately I'm a podcaster now, so that's gonna be tough
Speaker 2: for the rest of the day.
Speaker 1: So bear with me. Everybody can't just sit here and
Speaker 1: look pretty anyway.
Speaker 3: Maybe we could just have some fun. What's Amy going
Speaker 3: to say next?
Speaker 2: All right, So stay tuned for the feed for what
Speaker 2: could possibly come. But we always appreciate you listening to us.
Speaker 3: Everyone. I'm Amy Roeboch alongside T. J. Holmes. We will
Speaker 3: talk to you soon.