Speaker 1: You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcastle make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. So is the Epstein case
Speaker 1: case closed? The DJ says yes. A lot of people say, sorry,
Speaker 1: that's not going to cut it. There's still more that
Speaker 1: there has to be answered for. There are more questions
Speaker 1: that are out there, and I know we've spent a
Speaker 1: couple of days now in the news talking about this issue.
Speaker 1: It's because the DJ released this memo, and the memo
Speaker 1: was not helpful. If you think the purpose of it
Speaker 1: was to restore faith in the DOJ's willingness to be
Speaker 1: transparent about this. Saying you're transparent is not the same
Speaker 1: thing as being transparent. Now, I want to break this
Speaker 1: down and be very clear about this, because their passions
Speaker 1: run very high on this issue. I understand that I
Speaker 1: have thought that there was a lot and still think
Speaker 1: that there's a lot that we don't know about the
Speaker 1: Epstein case, in terms of connections, in terms of co conspirators,
Speaker 1: in terms of perhaps external influences or forces on all
Speaker 1: of this. And let me break down what I mean
Speaker 1: by that. I see this at a few levels there's
Speaker 1: the memo and the management of this as it pertains
Speaker 1: to public expectations. Okay, So let's break this down this way.
Speaker 1: I'm even going to make a note of this as
Speaker 1: I'm talking about it, so I don't skip past this.
Speaker 1: There's the memo and the management. Okay, there's the DOJ
Speaker 1: Justice faith good faith issue, and then there's the questions
Speaker 1: I still want answers for. Okay, Now let's start with
Speaker 1: this because it's the easiest one. The handling of this
Speaker 1: has not been good by the Attorney General. Pan body. Now,
Speaker 1: I understand she has said she misspoke on that Fox
Speaker 1: News show, or rather it was misinterpreted what she meant
Speaker 1: when she said I have it on my desk, she
Speaker 1: meant all the Epstein stuff is on her desk. I
Speaker 1: also want to be clear that President Trump today was
Speaker 1: asked about this, and he's just sick of hearing about
Speaker 1: this at all. He doesn't want to hear about it,
Speaker 1: and he really tried to shut the whole thing down
Speaker 1: during his lengthy cabinet meeting.
Speaker 2: Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy's been
Speaker 2: talked about for years. You're asking, we have Texas, we
Speaker 2: have this, We have all of the things right, and
Speaker 2: are people still talking about this guy, this creep that
Speaker 2: is unbelievable. Do you want to waste the time? And
Speaker 2: do you feel like answering?
Speaker 3: I don't mind answering.
Speaker 4: I mean, I can't believe you're asking a question on
Speaker 4: at epstin at a time like this where we're having
Speaker 4: some of the greatest success and also gragedy with what
Speaker 4: happened in Texas. It just seems like a desecration.
Speaker 1: But okay, so we've got Trump saying why are you
Speaker 1: even talking about this? And you could tell a lost
Speaker 1: patience with the whole thing. Pambondi has put herself in
Speaker 1: a tough spot with this one because we had people
Speaker 1: that were brought to influencers, who were brought to the
Speaker 1: White House given binders, and there was a whole Epstein
Speaker 1: transparency thing. There was nothing new in those binders, as
Speaker 1: we knew, as we found out, and I knew all along,
Speaker 1: and I didn't think there would be any big revelations
Speaker 1: from the Epstein files this whole time. I've always thought
Speaker 1: that there was. Now I want to get into why,
Speaker 1: I think that I'll get to that in a moment.
Speaker 1: But still the way that this was handled by the DOJ,
Speaker 1: has not been tactful, has not been helpful to answering
Speaker 1: the public's questions and making people think that this is
Speaker 1: truly case closed. I don't think that's beyond dispute at
Speaker 1: this point, because you still have You've got the White
Speaker 1: House saying basically, shut up, we've told you everything. I
Speaker 1: don't want to hear it anymore. And a lot of
Speaker 1: people out there are saying, we'll hold on a second.
Speaker 1: I still I'm not buying it doesn't add up to
Speaker 1: me here, I'm not buying it. So that's that's the
Speaker 1: first part of it. The memo and the management of expectations.
Speaker 1: It's been a mess. They should and you could say,
Speaker 1: oh buck, what should they have done differently? It should
Speaker 1: have been announced that there would be a a presentation
Speaker 1: a press conference by the Attorney General Pambondi. It should
Speaker 1: have been a statement that was more fulsome than one
Speaker 1: was put out that little memo. It should have addressed
Speaker 1: the outlying questions, and it should have been open to
Speaker 1: the press to ask questions. Then and there this little
Speaker 1: memo that they dropped which felt very perfunctory, you know,
Speaker 1: just just the bare minimum and like they didn't feel
Speaker 1: like they really had to deal with very much that
Speaker 1: was not good, that was not helpful. Now we can
Speaker 1: get into the DOJ side of this of the case,
Speaker 1: the Epstein case. I'm going to get to unanswered questions
Speaker 1: in a second, the Epstein case. But first up, our
Speaker 1: sponsor here is Birch Gold. And as you know, the
Speaker 1: big beautiful bill passed. There's a lot of good stuff
Speaker 1: coming in the Trump economy. Trump economy is already really cooking,
Speaker 1: and I think it's going to get even better. But
Speaker 1: he's only in office for four years and the thirty
Speaker 1: seven trillion in debt we have is not going away.
Speaker 1: Purchasing power has been going down for years and years
Speaker 1: now because of the excessive spending, and you need to
Speaker 1: find ways to protect your wealth and to diversify. That's
Speaker 1: where gold comes in. It's time for you to get
Speaker 1: some gold to hedge against inflation, economic instability, and the
Speaker 1: long term challenges we have to the dollar. And Birch
Speaker 1: Gold is who I trust to do this for you.
Speaker 1: They've helped tens of thousands convert an existing IRA or
Speaker 1: four oh one k into an IRA in physical gold. Okay,
Speaker 1: Birch Gold Group text my name buck to ninety eight
Speaker 1: ninety eight ninety eight Birch Gold to help you with
Speaker 1: a free no obligation infoKit. Text my name Buck to
Speaker 1: ninety eight ninety eight ninety eight today Birch Gold Group.
Speaker 1: They are the best in the business at this all
Speaker 1: right now, my friends, Now we are going to look
Speaker 1: at the DOJ side of this. Now. Here's here's the thing.
Speaker 1: The handling of this by the DOJ up to this
Speaker 1: point in time has been abominable. Right now, I mean
Speaker 1: a pre Trump era. I'm saying, the way that this
Speaker 1: was handled, the inability to me in Epstein. They're telling
Speaker 1: us now how to thousand victims, a thousand victims and
Speaker 1: got away with this for what almost twenty years at
Speaker 1: least one thousand victims. No one could prosecute this guy.
Speaker 1: No one wanted to prosecute this guy, except an absolute
Speaker 1: sweetheart deal by the Florida Attorney General of Florida US
Speaker 1: attorney at the time federal and so much so that
Speaker 1: he had to step down from the Trump administration later
Speaker 1: when it came out that he had given Epstein this
Speaker 1: sweetheart deal. This, my friends, is just crazy, that this
Speaker 1: is how it went. They didn't really get after Epstein
Speaker 1: until twenty nineteen and raiding the homes and the Bahamas
Speaker 1: and New York and Pompeach the Justice Department. If what
Speaker 1: they're saying right now is true, If what they're saying
Speaker 1: is true, and I know a lot of you, and
Speaker 1: we'll get to the unanswered questions here in a second.
Speaker 1: If what they're saying is true, it means that one
Speaker 1: of the most egregious serial pedophile monsters of our lifetime
Speaker 1: was able to act with relative impunity for decades and
Speaker 1: rub shoulders, so to speak, with some of the wealthiest,
Speaker 1: most powerful people on the planet over many of those years.
Speaker 1: And it was only when there was a public outcry
Speaker 1: that you know, because of the Miami Herald expose. Basically
Speaker 1: in twenty nineteen and twenty nineteen, things get rolling again
Speaker 1: and they decide they had to do something. How could
Speaker 1: this guy have gotten away with it for so long?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 1: This is he again put aside any conspiracy or outside
Speaker 1: act or anything else. I'm gonna get to that in
Speaker 1: a second. That he was able to do this, What
Speaker 1: does it say about our justice system? And think about
Speaker 1: the the single minded ferocity with which the federal law
Speaker 1: enforcement agencies went after nonviolent J six protesters. I understand
Speaker 1: very different, right. One is, you know, one of guy's
Speaker 1: a sex criminal something, and this is very these are
Speaker 1: different cases. Yeah, But my point is the focus of
Speaker 1: resources they had something like what was a thirty percent
Speaker 1: of the FBI agents were at least involved in some
Speaker 1: way in January six cases. People that walked into the
Speaker 1: building took photos themselves. They have resources in time for that,
Speaker 1: but for years and years and years, no resources to
Speaker 1: go after Jeffrey Epstein. What does this say about our
Speaker 1: justice system? Again? I mean this in the most the
Speaker 1: most macro general level.
Speaker 3: We do.
Speaker 1: We have a justice system. They're supposed to prevent things
Speaker 1: like this. The most important things justice system can really
Speaker 1: do protect our physical being from from assault, from murder,
Speaker 1: from rape, from sexual assault, from someone who's preying upon
Speaker 1: children it's sexually. This is the most important stuff the
Speaker 1: state can do. And they failed this badly for this long.
Speaker 1: You know, this is I think a big part of
Speaker 1: why people are so rightly so outraged, so angry about
Speaker 1: all this. And now we're just told, yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: and he killed himself in the Manhattan Correctional Center of
Speaker 1: the mcc the only person who was ever able to
Speaker 1: do that, the person who should have been on the
Speaker 1: highest level of suicide watch of probably any inmate they've
Speaker 1: ever had in that facility. And they've had some, they've
Speaker 1: had lots of really bad ones, I know. But in
Speaker 1: terms of the sense that if this guy gets off
Speaker 1: in custody Epstein, there are gonna be a lot of
Speaker 1: people that don't accept that this just and they let
Speaker 1: it happen, just unthinkable that they could be And I
Speaker 1: know the guy fell asleep in the camera. And now
Speaker 1: they're saying, and they said this today, sixty second hole,
Speaker 1: sixty second hole in the surveillance footage. But it's a
Speaker 1: hole that's there every night. Well, a lot can happen
Speaker 1: in sixty seconds. So what the heck is that all about?
Speaker 1: And why didn't they tell us that in the memo beforehand?
Speaker 1: No people had to find it again, mismanagement, mismanagement, DOJ failure. Okay,
Speaker 1: so this's mismanagement. There's DOJ failure. And now we get
Speaker 1: to well unanswered questions coming up next. A sponsor here
Speaker 1: is Paradigm Press. There's something under American soil that has
Speaker 1: a value to it in the trillions of dollars one
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty trillion to be more precise, It's been
Speaker 1: there forever. This is not new. This endowment is so
Speaker 1: large it could pay off our national debt four times over. Now,
Speaker 1: thanks to a Supreme Court decision that Trump administration could
Speaker 1: soon release that endowment to the public. Jim Rickards, former
Speaker 1: advisor to the White House and Federal Reserve, says, if
Speaker 1: you're over fifty, this could be your best chance to
Speaker 1: build lasting wealth from a once in a century event.
Speaker 1: It's a big statement. To hear more of what Jim
Speaker 1: has to say, go online to birthright twenty twenty five
Speaker 1: dot com. That's birthright twenty twenty five dot com to
Speaker 1: get the details free of charge, paid for by Paradigm Press.
Speaker 1: Now the questions that I have that are on answered,
Speaker 1: the biggest one Pambondi was asked today. She was asked about,
Speaker 1: or rather she spoke to the issue of was there
Speaker 1: any foreign intelligence connection for Epstein. They said they don't
Speaker 1: know of.
Speaker 3: One February, I did an interview on Fox and it's
Speaker 3: been getting a lot of attention because I said I
Speaker 3: was asking a question about the client list, and my
Speaker 3: response was it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed,
Speaker 3: meaning the file along with the JFK MLK files as well.
Speaker 3: That's what I meant by that. Also, to the tens
Speaker 3: of thousands of video they turned out to be child
Speaker 3: porn downloaded by that disgusting Jeffrey Epstein. Child porn is
Speaker 3: what they were never going to be released, never going
Speaker 3: to see the lighted day to him being an agent.
Speaker 3: I have no knowledge about that. We can get back
Speaker 3: to you on that. And the minute missing from the video.
Speaker 3: We released the video showing definitively the video was not conclusive,
Speaker 3: but the evidence prior to it was showing he committed suicide.
Speaker 3: And what was on that there was a minute that
Speaker 3: was off the counter. And what we learned from euro
Speaker 3: of Prisons was every year, every night they redo that
Speaker 3: video as old from like nineteen ninety nine, So every
Speaker 3: night the video is reset and every night should have
Speaker 3: the same minute missing. So we're looking for that video
Speaker 3: to release that as well, showing that a minute is
Speaker 3: missing every night. And that's it on Epstein.
Speaker 1: Okay, now you may disregard, or rather you may completely
Speaker 1: disagree and say that's bull crap. He's running a blackmail operation.
Speaker 1: Clearly had that had been what I had thought this
Speaker 1: whole time, and I am not convinced otherwise. Now, that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that the people who have come forward on
Speaker 1: this are lying. They may not know Pambondi said, not
Speaker 1: that we have no evidence to that effect. Is it
Speaker 1: possible that this guy Epstein, who had so much money
Speaker 1: and so much access to very powerful people, could fly
Speaker 1: all over the world in his private shed? Is Is
Speaker 1: it possible? Is it even likely that he had some
Speaker 1: contact with intelligence services? Yeah, yeah, it's very possible. For sure.
Speaker 1: We can arg we can debate whether or not it
Speaker 1: would be likely or just possible. It's definitely possible, so
Speaker 1: much so that they cannot rule it out. So there's
Speaker 1: what they know and there's what they don't know. And
Speaker 1: they're saying they don't know of any intelligence intelligence nexus
Speaker 1: with Epstein. I am I find that hard to believe,
Speaker 1: Rather that he didn't have one. They may not know.
Speaker 1: Now you might think that's a huge cover up, and
Speaker 1: I understand that, but think about who you're implying then
Speaker 1: as part of the cover up. That's that's really uh,
Speaker 1: that's heavy. Just say it that way. That's heavy, And
Speaker 1: I don't I know some of the people who are involved.
Speaker 1: I know some of them personally at the top level
Speaker 1: of the dog in the FBI, and I think these
Speaker 1: are very good people and their patriots and I would
Speaker 1: never allow anyone in my presence to disparage the patriotism
Speaker 1: or the ethics of Director Patel or deputy Director Bongino.
Speaker 1: I don't know Pam Bondi, but she has a very
Speaker 1: good reputation, So you know, I think that people should
Speaker 1: be careful before they cast any aspersions here about who
Speaker 1: would be involved in this stuff. I'm just going to
Speaker 1: say that. But now for unanswered questions, right, so I
Speaker 1: dealt with the Intel component of this, or the Intel
Speaker 1: agency connection might be there. Where did the money come from? Again,
Speaker 1: he was handling money for people financial advisor. You don't
Speaker 1: make six hundred million dollars like that. Sorry, that's just
Speaker 1: not no. And trading the market. Please, it's preposterous. And
Speaker 1: I've heard people say, oh, no, they've explained where the
Speaker 1: money came from, not in a way that makes any sense,
Speaker 1: not in a way that's credible or believable. So I
Speaker 1: still still has not been explaining to me how this
Speaker 1: guy also was given I think a sixteen million dollars,
Speaker 1: depends on how you want to value it. But you
Speaker 1: know it's given a mansion in New York City. Given
Speaker 1: a mansion, do you know anybody else? You ever heard
Speaker 1: of anyone else given a mansion by a non family
Speaker 1: member or not a you know, a husband or a
Speaker 1: wife situation given a mansion. Okay, so that's very strange.
Speaker 1: I also have a problem with the belief that is
Speaker 1: being put forward now that the only person, remember Epstein
Speaker 1: is accused, was accused of trafficking a young girl who
Speaker 1: came at she's now passed away as a as an adult,
Speaker 1: but she accused a member of the English British royal
Speaker 1: family rather of sleeping with her while she was being
Speaker 1: trafted by Epstein, and where to believe he was the
Speaker 1: only one, he was the only guy, of all the
Speaker 1: people Epstein was affiliating with, the only person who engaged
Speaker 1: in uh, sexually criminal conduct. I find that very very
Speaker 1: hard to believe. So why are we being told that
Speaker 1: that is also a part of this I think is unanswered.
Speaker 1: And also why did the US attorney A. Costa say
Speaker 1: he belongs to intelligence. We know that's a matter of record.
Speaker 1: Why did he give Epstein a plea deal that included
Speaker 1: unnamed co conspirators. Not a thing that happens in federal
Speaker 1: law and federal plea bargains any other time I've ever
Speaker 1: heard of. And I've asked federal prosecutors who have been
Speaker 1: doing it for decades, they say, no, that's not something
Speaker 1: you do. Why was Acosta quoted as saying that Epstein
Speaker 1: should be quote left alone because he again, he belongs
Speaker 1: to intelligence. No one's ever seemed to answer this, So yeah,
Speaker 1: there are I have unanswered questions, and I'm not satisfied
Speaker 1: with where this investigation has been left off. So we'll
Speaker 1: continue to look, continue to ask those questions. Thanks for
Speaker 1: being here with me, Shield time.