Speaker 1: Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. Have an amazing
Speaker 3: show for everbody today where we have Crystal.
Speaker 4: Indeed we do so.
Speaker 2: Apparently the government drafted an announcement of Epstein's death dated
Speaker 2: the day before he died. I am not kidding, like
Speaker 2: this is the down the rabbit hole through the looking
Speaker 2: glass moment if we weren't already there. So we'll break
Speaker 2: that down for as long as as well as some
Speaker 2: other revelations powerful people that were involved. There's some important
Speaker 2: reporting that's going on here. Beaving Nan Yahoo coming back
Speaker 2: to wat she didn't yet again and once again to
Speaker 2: beg for war with Ron.
Speaker 4: So we will take a look at that.
Speaker 2: Even Republicans have been uncomfortable with the stunningly racist video
Speaker 2: that President Trump posted, Just like the White House walked
Speaker 2: it back, he doubled down. What does it say about
Speaker 2: him about our politics, et cetera. We're going to take
Speaker 2: a look at the Super Bowl through the lens of
Speaker 2: a sports betting just how much was wagered where there
Speaker 2: was there insider trading and we'll never guess what the
Speaker 2: answer to that one is. Olympians are speaking out and
Speaker 2: getting backlash from the right, and we're going to be
Speaker 2: joined in studio by Dan Osborne. He is an independent
Speaker 2: candate for candidate for Senate in Nebraska. He ran previously,
Speaker 2: came quite close, and he is giving it another shot.
Speaker 2: There's some very significant commerce and monopoly issues in Nebraska
Speaker 2: that are grand zero for that. So we are excited
Speaker 2: to meet him in person and get to speak with him.
Speaker 2: And we're going to be doing the AMA today. So
Speaker 2: if you want to be part of those live amas,
Speaker 2: make sure you sign up at Breakingpoints dot com.
Speaker 4: Sager.
Speaker 1: That's right. Thank you to everybody who has been supporting
Speaker 1: the show.
Speaker 3: We are starting off with Epstein with some very very
Speaker 3: wild stuff, almost certain that eventually will get hit with
Speaker 3: a demonetization. That's why we rely on our premium subscribers.
Speaker 3: All of this Epstein coverage. We understand, you know, it
Speaker 3: makes advertisers and all those other people uncomfortable.
Speaker 1: Luckily we don't rely on that. We rely on all
Speaker 1: of you, so support us.
Speaker 3: If you are able to break youpoints dot com. If
Speaker 3: you're just watching this on YouTube, no worries, please just
Speaker 3: hit subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you're listening to
Speaker 3: this on a podcast, please share an episode with a friend,
Speaker 3: and Radius five stars really helps other people find the show.
Speaker 3: All right, let's go ahead and start here with Epstein.
Speaker 3: There was a ad actually released by many of the
Speaker 3: Epstein survivors. We're going to go and put it up
Speaker 3: here on the screen just so you can see some
Speaker 3: of this in the background, many of them appearing on camera.
Speaker 3: They're saying on November nineteenth, twenty twenty five, the Epstein
Speaker 3: Files Act was signed. They cross out the line transparency.
Speaker 3: They three say three million files have still not yet
Speaker 3: been released. They have black you know, marks over their mouths.
Speaker 3: They're talking there about one of the largest sex trafficking
Speaker 3: conspiracies which has now been unveiled for everybody and calling
Speaker 3: for more of the release of the holding up pictures
Speaker 3: of themselves. It highlights, of course, you know, some of
Speaker 3: the central, most important people in all of this story.
Speaker 3: But most importantly, I think for all of our purposes,
Speaker 3: and they're asking their stand with us, it's time for
Speaker 3: Attorney General Pambondi to tell the truth. Let's do though,
Speaker 3: you know, continue now down the rabbit hole. As Christal said,
Speaker 3: genuinely unbelievable stuff. Let's go and put this up here
Speaker 3: on the screen. One of the most stunning documents yet
Speaker 3: that was uncovered. Great find for whoever was able to
Speaker 3: see this, because I would not have. I would not
Speaker 3: have been able to. They say, you know, couldn't believe
Speaker 3: this was real, so I double checked the dog website.
Speaker 3: The US Attorney Berman announced Epstein's death with letterhead dated
Speaker 3: the day before that he was found dead. Bill Barr
Speaker 3: announced Berman's resignation. Then less than a year later, Berman
Speaker 3: denied he was resigning and was then removed by Bar.
Speaker 3: On June twentieth, twenty twenty, Trump denied any involvement, but
Speaker 3: it was confirmed later in the reporting that in fact, Trump,
Speaker 3: who had Berman removed the rabbit hole is endless. This
Speaker 3: is from Clint Russell, one of the people who flagged this,
Speaker 3: and I mean, I think I do think it is
Speaker 3: genuinely unbelievable for immediate release Friday, August ninth, twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: Now you could potentially ask for innocent explanations, but the
Speaker 3: Department of Justice has not released anything as of yet.
Speaker 3: This information has been public now for forty eight hours
Speaker 3: or so. And you do have to just be like, Okay,
Speaker 3: I mean, you know, look, I feel like I try
Speaker 3: to keep on my words very carefully. I'm always like
Speaker 3: I always say Epstein died. I don't say he was killed.
Speaker 3: I don't say he's kid suicide. It's just one of
Speaker 3: those like open questions. We don't really know what the
Speaker 3: answer is. We have the video which was released of
Speaker 3: showing another person going towards the se I mean you
Speaker 3: have you know, the guards were asleep, the cameras weren't working.
Speaker 3: There's actually a routine way with the camera resets every
Speaker 3: single night for some reason, according to the Attorney General.
Speaker 3: You've got the cell made, you know, questions, you've got
Speaker 3: the former guy who was in the MCC who's been
Speaker 3: on our show and is like, sorry, there's no.
Speaker 1: Way any of that happened.
Speaker 3: And so you know, you would actually be, in my opinion,
Speaker 3: the most responsible to be like, yeah, he probably was killed.
Speaker 3: I don't say it because I don't know definitively to
Speaker 3: be true. Then you see something.
Speaker 1: Like this, you're like, all right, yeah, yeah, yeah, what
Speaker 1: else do.
Speaker 2: You say if it was the only thing and you
Speaker 2: didn't even I mean, you didn't go through even the
Speaker 2: whole list, because we'd be here all day. Here's the
Speaker 2: fact that, oh, we never found the noose that was used.
Speaker 2: What do you mean he was in a tiny jail cell.
Speaker 2: What do you mean we never found the noose that
Speaker 2: was he was, you know, allegedly himself with Oh, there
Speaker 2: happens to have been this orange, blurry figure that we
Speaker 2: all pretended that the Attorney General and the spectation that
Speaker 2: they all pretended didn't exist when they did their report
Speaker 2: on this.
Speaker 4: Oh that's interesting, what's going on with that? And then
Speaker 4: you have this, I mean, if.
Speaker 1: It was the only thing, yeah right, exactly, if it was.
Speaker 2: The only thing you could go maybe they just got
Speaker 2: the tate wrong. Maybe they just were being a little
Speaker 2: bit sloppy and they got the tate wrong. But when
Speaker 2: you look at this and you look at everything else,
Speaker 2: and then ah lo and behold this guy. The US
Speaker 2: attorney Berman was fired under very strange and contentious circumstances
Speaker 2: less than a year. You just got to look at
Speaker 2: this and go, like I mean, it becomes very very
Speaker 2: very hard to believe the official narrative. And of course
Speaker 2: a million people had plenty of motive to take this
Speaker 2: guy out.
Speaker 4: The other thing that.
Speaker 2: We learned that we talked about before is that his
Speaker 2: team was co They were looking at, hey, maybe we
Speaker 2: can cooperate, maybe we can name some names, maybe we
Speaker 2: can do a deal here. So quite to the contrary
Speaker 2: of Epstein feeling like I have no way out and
Speaker 2: this is it for me. I'm going to spend the
Speaker 2: rest of my life, which I'm very used to these
Speaker 2: coddal circumstances, I'm gonna spend the rest of my life
Speaker 2: behind bars. He was still exploring avenues and trying to
Speaker 2: work it and see what kind of a deal he
Speaker 2: could make. So I don't know, guys, it's this is
Speaker 2: just absolutely wild. The one thing, so this is identical
Speaker 2: to the official announcement that did ultimately go out from
Speaker 2: the government, with two exceptions.
Speaker 4: Number one, the day got updated to the day that
Speaker 4: he died.
Speaker 2: Number two, which at this point I'm like, maybe the
Speaker 2: conspiracies about him still being alive, maybe that's a possibility.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's so wild that I literally cannot rule
Speaker 2: anything out.
Speaker 4: At this point.
Speaker 2: So the day gets updated, and then the other thing
Speaker 2: that was added is that he was dead by a
Speaker 2: parent suicide. Those words got added in. Otherwise, it's identical
Speaker 2: to what ultimately went out, right.
Speaker 3: So okay, and remember this, I mean it's very possible.
Speaker 3: I mean, there's some potential about planning. But the thing
Speaker 3: is is that you look at some of the timing
Speaker 3: for all of this. The last guard check was on
Speaker 3: ten fifty PM on that Friday night. There was no
Speaker 3: check until six am. This is according to the official narrative.
Speaker 3: So official narrative should be that nobody knew he was
Speaker 3: dead until some six am. So it's not even some
Speaker 3: time zone thing that you could argue, like if you
Speaker 3: go back and you check the timeline again. According to
Speaker 3: the official timeline, nobody was supposed to know until about
Speaker 3: six So if that's the case, then there's no way
Speaker 3: that you could have drafted it in the like you said. Also,
Speaker 3: they added the term of parent suicide. We didn't even
Speaker 3: mention Michael Biden in the autopsy. That's actually one of
Speaker 3: the most That was one of the first things that
Speaker 3: convinced me where I was like, oh, man, I mean,
Speaker 3: this is Michael Bodden, right.
Speaker 1: He came out.
Speaker 3: Yes, I know he's hired by the family, but look,
Speaker 3: he released his own findings talking about the hig O
Speaker 3: bone in the way that it would look if it
Speaker 3: was a strangulation versus a hanging.
Speaker 1: Also, we can't.
Speaker 3: Put these photos up there to just do graphic, but
Speaker 3: you can actually see the photos of the care that
Speaker 3: was for him after he had been found dead, and
Speaker 3: you can see the mark on his neck. And you know,
Speaker 3: one of the speculations was it a sheet. I'm telling you,
Speaker 3: I saw the mark.
Speaker 1: It's not a sheet.
Speaker 3: Like, there's no way that that would have left a
Speaker 3: mark like that. And that's just you know, my maybe
Speaker 3: I'm wrong. You could send me different ones, you know,
Speaker 3: if you find something else, But it's just one of
Speaker 3: those where I think it is just absolutely absolutely crazy.
Speaker 1: Let's go to the next one.
Speaker 3: We're going to continue in the You know, this is
Speaker 3: the things are getting more unhinged as we go. The
Speaker 3: government put boxes covered in a sheet inside of a
Speaker 3: vehicle to trick the media. P was Epstein's body, it says,
Speaker 3: due to the large news media presence outside the MCC,
Speaker 3: a male OCMI official called and said he would be
Speaker 3: arriving at the loading dock with a black vehicle in
Speaker 3: order to thwart the media and use boxes and sheets
Speaker 3: to create what appeared to be a human body, which
Speaker 3: was then put into the white vehicle, which the press followed,
Speaker 3: allowing the black vehicle to depart unnoticed with Epstein's body.
Speaker 4: So yeah, that's where Why the cloak and dagger?
Speaker 5: Right?
Speaker 2: Why why is this such a problem brought to I thought,
Speaker 2: the body? Why is that such an issue you've got?
Speaker 2: Is this typical procedure exactly in high profile cases that
Speaker 2: you have?
Speaker 1: He's dead? Why do you care about traffic?
Speaker 3: I mean, I know this sounds well, it's true, Like
Speaker 3: this actually is true. You can go and check the
Speaker 3: file names for yourself if you want to. And you know,
Speaker 3: we double checked on some of this, all right, so
Speaker 3: this isn't this is another totally crazy one. Let's put
Speaker 3: it up here so as they flag on this same
Speaker 3: day that they opened a child sex trafficking case against Epstein.
Speaker 3: In twenty eighteen, he ordered half a dozen fifty five
Speaker 3: gallon containers full of sulfuric acid to his private island.
Speaker 1: So what's up with that?
Speaker 3: And look again, I'm reading the wire transfer form for
Speaker 3: st you know, to Saint Thomas lsj E LLC. Purpose
Speaker 3: and description times six fifty five gal drums sulfuric acid
Speaker 3: with fuel and insurance charge for transport materials for conductivity probes,
Speaker 3: replacement pH and cable dashro plant.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I mean, maybe there's an exploit. You have private jets
Speaker 3: all around. I don't know a whole lot about acid
Speaker 3: and all this other stuff. I have read a decent
Speaker 3: number of the plans around the island. I know they
Speaker 3: waste water. You know, again, I'm not an expert. I'm
Speaker 3: just saying like, that's one of those where you put
Speaker 3: it together and you're.
Speaker 1: Like, yeah, it's pretty creepy.
Speaker 3: It's pretty weird, especially when you have massage rooms with masks,
Speaker 3: you know, all over the island.
Speaker 1: You have trapdoors, as one does.
Speaker 3: So this is apparently a photo that surfaced where it
Speaker 3: was some trapdoor that was there on the which apparently
Speaker 3: opens directly into the ocean. So again, I mean, what
Speaker 3: are the innocent explanation here? Uh, this is where they're
Speaker 3: dumping waste. This is where they're dumping something. You know,
Speaker 3: I don't know, some maintenance maintenance. If you also own
Speaker 3: a private island, please email me and tell me about
Speaker 3: what I'm not familiar about.
Speaker 2: What tell us about your sulfuric acid and ocean trapdoor
Speaker 2: needs on your private island.
Speaker 4: We're very curious.
Speaker 1: Among this doesn't have ocean trap doors in our house.
Speaker 3: I've stayed at some hotels and the beach not that great,
Speaker 3: but they don't usually have trap door.
Speaker 1: Again, maybe maybe I'm wrong.
Speaker 3: Maybe every five star resort in the nation on a
Speaker 3: beach has trap doors into the sea. Maybe it's certainly possible.
Speaker 3: Maybe it's a scuba diving thing. Maybe it's a way
Speaker 3: to access your septic tank, although I guess that wouldn't
Speaker 3: even make a lot of sense. I'm purely spiped. I'm
Speaker 3: just telling you that these are the facts, and this
Speaker 3: is what apparently shows up there. So yeah, you know,
Speaker 3: this is presented without comment because I don't have I
Speaker 3: don't have a comment.
Speaker 1: I don't know why else. I don't know why you
Speaker 1: would need one.
Speaker 2: I mean, you said in our pitch that advertisers get
Speaker 2: uncomfortable with this look in fairness to them, I get
Speaker 2: uncomfortable just too, because it's like, what was like, what
Speaker 2: am I supposed to make of this? What is a
Speaker 2: sane and rational, non hysterical person supposed to make of this?
Speaker 2: Becomes it becomes increasingly difficult to not look at all
Speaker 2: these emails, the way they talk to each other, all
Speaker 2: of these weird things surrounding his death, the you know
Speaker 2: emails where they say, oh did you did you torture?
Speaker 2: I love the torture videos, etc. All the code words,
Speaker 2: and not think that the even that it is even
Speaker 2: darker and even more elaborate, and that he was even
Speaker 2: more powerful than I ever could have imagined. To your
Speaker 2: point about you know, putting all the all the different
Speaker 2: things together that you're like, well, that's weird, weird, Well
Speaker 2: that's weird. Well that's weird. Well we're going to put
Speaker 2: it all together. It's really freaking weird. Another piece of
Speaker 2: that is the way that the government has behaved. Recall, Okay,
Speaker 2: so now we're supposed we supposedly we've gotten all the
Speaker 2: Epstein files.
Speaker 4: We're going to get right according to the government.
Speaker 2: Now, Thomas Massey, Rocanna and others are continuing to push
Speaker 2: Massy's being very aggressible. Talk a little bit more about
Speaker 2: that in a moment, But just remember.
Speaker 4: What cash Betel told you.
Speaker 2: He told you that he looked at the files and
Speaker 2: he is convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that
Speaker 2: Epstein killed himself, and that this was proven definitively by
Speaker 2: the files that cash Bettel looked at.
Speaker 4: Have we seen those files?
Speaker 2: What was it that you were looking at that was
Speaker 2: so persuasive to you that you went on in public
Speaker 2: and said nothing to see here.
Speaker 4: We're moving on.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and remind ourselves exactly what he said.
Speaker 4: This is a six let's play that.
Speaker 1: You told me when we last talked.
Speaker 3: This is eight months ago when we did an interview
Speaker 3: at the FBI in Quantico, that you were convinced that
Speaker 3: Epstein killed himself in jail.
Speaker 1: Today, eight months after that, are you still convinced.
Speaker 6: Yes, yes, sir, there is no credible information none. If
Speaker 6: there were, I would bring the case yesterday that he
Speaker 6: trafficked to other individuals and the information we have again
Speaker 6: is limited.
Speaker 1: So the answer is no one for.
Speaker 6: The information that we have in the files in the
Speaker 6: case file.
Speaker 2: So he absolutely killed himself, Soger, and he didn't traffic anyone,
Speaker 2: any girl to anyone.
Speaker 3: There is nothing that has been released where you can
Speaker 3: definitively say he killed himself, which is what Cash Betel said.
Speaker 3: Cash Betel said, he definitively if anything like we saw
Speaker 3: with the video, we got this thing. We had all
Speaker 3: of the preponderance of evidence. Prior you had all of
Speaker 3: the holes in the investigation. You had the I mean
Speaker 3: the do even the DOJ initial report around the sleeping
Speaker 3: guards and all this. None of that shit made any
Speaker 3: sense period.
Speaker 1: But don't listen to me. Listen to Cash in twenty twenty.
Speaker 3: He's the one who said all of this, and he
Speaker 3: had his hands on all of his information and this
Speaker 3: is all. Eventually it came up with on the second
Speaker 3: part about involving others. I mean, there's nothing that has
Speaker 3: been a definitive smoking gun, and we should all be
Speaker 3: honest about that. There are some like look, what are
Speaker 3: the you know, threads that we would all tug on. Oh,
Speaker 3: I don't know all these wire transfers to Russia. I
Speaker 3: don't know all of these, you know, photos of creepy
Speaker 3: old dudes with their uh with their collars open, smoking
Speaker 3: cigarettes on the couch with a bunch of women chasing
Speaker 3: girls around the kitchen. Oh, let's continue, Prince Andrew. I
Speaker 3: don't can you even say hovering, like trapping this girl
Speaker 3: like underneath him? Were they really there under their own volition?
Speaker 1: Maybe? But you know I was.
Speaker 3: I was talking to Scott Horton about this, and I
Speaker 3: was like, look, I know libertarians think that it's not
Speaker 3: a crime, and apparently the current justification is like, well,
Speaker 3: they wanted to be there and they were getting paid.
Speaker 3: I'm like, you know, it is actually a crime though,
Speaker 3: to like send a wire transfer to a foreign country
Speaker 3: and fly women in the express purpose, Like that's actually
Speaker 3: literally stays trafficking, like guards, especially right garlest Way. Yeah,
Speaker 3: and you know, in Russia, as you may all learn,
Speaker 3: or Ukraine, it's not like all these girls are willing
Speaker 3: in the in the sense that they want, you know that,
Speaker 3: like liberal sex worker types always try to put them
Speaker 3: like sometimes they get kidnapped, sometimes their family or whatever
Speaker 3: is threatened, Like it's not a willing enterprise.
Speaker 1: So just just putting that out there.
Speaker 2: Or they're told they're going to be models, right, That's
Speaker 2: what I'm saying. And they get to come to the
Speaker 2: US on this special visa and they're you know, they're
Speaker 2: going to be in high fashion and then next thing,
Speaker 2: you know, I mean, this is known, like, this is
Speaker 2: reported out the way that modeling agencies were used as
Speaker 2: pipelines for trafficking girls. And you know, and these guys were,
Speaker 2: like Epstein and Trump by the way, deeply enmeshed in
Speaker 2: these modeling agencies and clearly using that as a path
Speaker 2: to gain access to girls and women.
Speaker 3: Yeah, oh wait, Wow, this just just broke from the
Speaker 3: UK Press news story on Prince Andrew Sorry, the former
Speaker 3: former prince known as Andrew. Now police are assessing if
Speaker 3: Andrew Baton Windsor shared confidential reports from his role as
Speaker 3: the UK's trade envoy with Jeffrey Epstein. US Department of
Speaker 3: Justice appears to show Andrew sharing reports in twenty twin
Speaker 3: with Epstein of his official visits to Hong Kong, Vietnam
Speaker 3: and Singapore.
Speaker 2: Wow, and this comes on the heels of Lord Mandelssohn
Speaker 2: and being revealed and he's under investigation now for providing
Speaker 2: inside information from inside the UK government directly to Epstein,
Speaker 2: tradable information that he was providing directly to Epstein in
Speaker 2: the midst of the two thousand and eight financial christ
Speaker 2: crisis and plotting with him and you know, to try
Speaker 2: to see what, you know, how they could loop Jamie
Speaker 2: Diamond in to put pressure on the government to make
Speaker 2: sure this like banker bonus limit thing didn't go through.
Speaker 4: So yeah, I mean that would be.
Speaker 2: It shows you too, like all the questions about how
Speaker 2: he made his money clearly, clearly insider trading was some
Speaker 2: significant component of that. And then you can see what
Speaker 2: the bill gates, you know, email he sent to himself
Speaker 2: the way that he would get something over like not
Speaker 2: over on someone, but he would gather some sort of
Speaker 2: compromising information on them, and then if they tried to
Speaker 2: back away from the financial relationship, it was like, oh no, no, no,
Speaker 2: let me just, you know, subtly and not so subtly,
Speaker 2: remind you of the various things I know about you
Speaker 2: and the way that I can destroy your life, your brand,
Speaker 2: your marriage, your family, whatever.
Speaker 1: Let's continue, shall we?
Speaker 3: By the way again to cash his whole point about
Speaker 3: how nobody else was found to be implicated. Let's put
Speaker 3: a eight please up there on the screen. You can
Speaker 3: see inside of this document, this is a great flag
Speaker 3: by this journalist, they say. Buried in the footnote of
Speaker 3: the Gallaine Maxwell's court filing, she makes the bombshell claim
Speaker 3: that there were twenty five accomplices of Jeffrey Epstein entered
Speaker 3: into secret settlements, and that there are four unnamed employee.
Speaker 1: Co conspiras that's almost certainly as secretaries.
Speaker 3: The fact is Maxwell is no longer content with conditions
Speaker 3: of a confinement. She has tasted this glimpse of freedom
Speaker 3: and appears determined to push for more. After losing her
Speaker 3: appeal in the Supreme Court, she has filed habeas corpus.
Speaker 3: This is the legal equivalent of a last resort. It
Speaker 3: asks the court to overturn the conviction on the grounds
Speaker 3: that it is so fundamently unfair on costitutionally can't stand.
Speaker 3: So just to show that she has a lot of
Speaker 3: other stuff that she can point to, and in that
Speaker 3: petition that twenty five accomplices. She also asserts that the
Speaker 3: four Epstein employees were co conspirators and never charged like herself.
Speaker 1: If you will all.
Speaker 3: Remember this is tracing back to the non prosecution agreement.
Speaker 3: But if you combine this with some of the other reporting,
Speaker 3: let's put a seven up there on the screen, just
Speaker 3: to give you an example. The FBI at one point
Speaker 3: had actually posted a twenty one page presentation of all
Speaker 3: the evidence they had gathered in the case, including a
Speaker 3: summary of allegations against eleven men. The list was then
Speaker 3: taken down after this was flagged by Julie K.
Speaker 1: Brown over at the Miami Herald.
Speaker 3: So just to show you again, like the idea that
Speaker 3: the FBI didn't have information, maybe they didn't have prosecutable information.
Speaker 3: I'm just telling you though, that at this moment, the
Speaker 3: idea that they did not have information or potential leads
Speaker 3: and all of that on various relative this is just
Speaker 3: completely not true.
Speaker 1: Yeah, completely not true.
Speaker 2: You won't be surprised that a number of the names
Speaker 2: in here, and one of the names identified by the
Speaker 2: FBI as a prominent man for whom significant allegations had
Speaker 2: been leveled against was President Trump. So look to your point,
Speaker 2: does any of this, like, is this meet the evidentiary
Speaker 2: standard that would have to hold up in court. No,
Speaker 2: it doesn't appear based on what we have publicly were
Speaker 2: these things investigated. You know what happened with all these tips?
Speaker 2: Were they investigated? Where's that information? Were you able to
Speaker 2: dispel all of you know, these allegations against all of
Speaker 2: these various powerful men. And then I think the Gallaine
Speaker 2: Maxwell thing is worth dwelling on, because again, where does
Speaker 2: she sit right now? She sits in a club fed
Speaker 2: minimum security prison that's supposed to be for white collar criminals.
Speaker 2: She is not supposed to be there at all as
Speaker 2: a sex offender.
Speaker 4: Number one, number two.
Speaker 2: Even within that, she's getting all kinds of special cushy
Speaker 2: treatment with her puppy and her access to you know,
Speaker 2: electronic communications and her private ability to wander the grounds
Speaker 2: by herself and get visitors in the ward and saying
Speaker 2: that he's sick of be in her bitch. Okay, So
Speaker 2: she is playing some sort of a game here, And
Speaker 2: now this to me reads like a shot across the bow.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 4: Who are these.
Speaker 2: Twenty five men that apparently Struck deals according according to her,
Speaker 2: in this legal filing, that apparently Struck deals with the
Speaker 2: with our government to be able to, you know, make
Speaker 2: this whole thing go away.
Speaker 4: Who are they? And why did.
Speaker 2: Our government have an interest in striking those deals with
Speaker 2: those individuals. If if what she is alleging here is true,
Speaker 2: that would be a significant thing to know. Thomas Massey,
Speaker 2: I believe today, says that he is going to be
Speaker 2: reviewing a number of the unredacted files. He's supposed to
Speaker 2: have access to the entire cash of unredacted files, and
Speaker 2: he was asking people, Okay, what should I look for
Speaker 2: in this?
Speaker 4: You know, limited time that I have to go in.
Speaker 2: So he's continuing to push forward, and you know, let's
Speaker 2: go ahead and take a listen to the aggressive posture
Speaker 2: he is taking. He's saying he will use the nuclear
Speaker 2: option if the DOJ refuses to unredact the names of
Speaker 2: the powerful men that are associated with this.
Speaker 4: Because remember, in this.
Speaker 2: Release, according to the law that Massey and Conna pushed
Speaker 2: through and were able to get passed and signed into
Speaker 2: law by President Trump, there are very limited reasons that
Speaker 2: you are allowed, legally permitted to redact.
Speaker 4: Okay, they have.
Speaker 2: Clearly gone far beyond that while screwing up and leaving
Speaker 2: unredacted a number of the victims' names and likenesses. So
Speaker 2: let's go ahead and take a listen to Thomas Massey
Speaker 2: in the way he's continuing to try to fight here.
Speaker 7: I'm ready to do that if the victims want me to.
Speaker 7: They believe that the best way to get justice is
Speaker 7: to force the DOJ to release these names. I've already
Speaker 7: read one name in a committee with the FBI director there.
Speaker 1: That's just Staiway. And again, he may or may not.
Speaker 7: Be guilty, but he's been accused by these victims that
Speaker 7: the lawyer tells me. And there are other names. I
Speaker 7: don't have them in my possession, but if the victims
Speaker 7: want to give them to me, I've expressed it. I'm
Speaker 7: willing to do that. But again, the best way is
Speaker 7: to force the DOJ to release those names on those
Speaker 7: three or two forms.
Speaker 2: And I just can't give enough credit to both Rocnam
Speaker 2: but Thomas Massey. I mean, he is taking so much
Speaker 2: incoming from President from Apak over his unwillingness to sign
Speaker 2: on to these like ZENA speech codes. He was I
Speaker 2: don't know if he saw this video floating around. He
Speaker 2: was back in Kentucky at an Olden County which is
Speaker 2: like a suburb of Louisville Republican Party event, and he
Speaker 2: was speaking and he was saying, you know some just
Speaker 2: very basic things about how he doesn't serve you know,
Speaker 2: at any one party, he serves the people of the
Speaker 2: country and may bold his mic from him. So you know,
Speaker 2: clearly he has really touched a nerve and the fact
Speaker 2: that he's a Republican and he has a large following too,
Speaker 2: and like a lot of you know, credibility, and I
Speaker 2: think people like myself who don't agree with him on
Speaker 2: any number of his it was like we're night and
Speaker 2: day when it comes to economics, for example. You have
Speaker 2: to respect this man and his integrity because he is
Speaker 2: truly risk you, risking it all here to push for
Speaker 2: the truth and to push for more transparency.
Speaker 1: Very rare breed.
Speaker 3: Yeah, rare breed in Washington, and yeah, I mean I've
Speaker 3: come you have disagreed with him plenty plenty times in
Speaker 3: the past, but on this it's just it's unbelievable to
Speaker 3: see somebody's stand and you know, really, this is what
Speaker 3: the house is for. You need an ilhan Omar, you
Speaker 3: need a Thomas Massey. That's what the house is designed for,
Speaker 3: is to you know, have the actual full spectrum, and
Speaker 3: they end up sometimes being our best members.
Speaker 1: So there you go.
Speaker 3: All right, let's get to the next part here, this
Speaker 3: is about Glaine Maxwell and her relationship with the Clintons.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up here on the screen. Epstein files
Speaker 3: reveal scope of Glaine Maxwell's role in the Clinton circle
Speaker 3: and specifically raising some one million dollars for the Clinton
Speaker 3: Global Initiative, and they specifically say that she took part
Speaker 3: in the budget discussions related to the first CGI conference,
Speaker 3: talked through challenges with both Clinton Aids, the company that
Speaker 3: produced the inaugural event, and arranged to wire a million
Speaker 3: dollars quote for the work on the Clinton project. The
Speaker 3: source of the money is unclear, including whether mister Epstein
Speaker 3: provided the funds. However, the email show that he was
Speaker 3: aware of the payment. Epstein at one point wrote to
Speaker 3: her quote ask him to tell you why I million
Speaker 3: now and where it will be going? So maybe it
Speaker 3: was his money, wasn't it. All of this is took
Speaker 3: involvement took place in two thousand and four before the
Speaker 3: six indictment, but it shows how deeply and I mean,
Speaker 3: remember this is a woman invited literally to the Clinton
Speaker 3: wedding in that infamous photo, and how deeply she was
Speaker 3: enmessed with the Clinton family, who after you know, they
Speaker 3: lose the White House, or after they lose in two
Speaker 3: thousand or I get sorry, not lose, but.
Speaker 1: They leave the White House.
Speaker 3: They're obsessed with one thing, how do I become generationally
Speaker 3: wealthy as quickly as humanly possible and whitewash my image
Speaker 3: from the Lewinsky scandal.
Speaker 1: So what do they do?
Speaker 3: Hillary runs for Senate, She becomes the carpetbager and chief
Speaker 3: from New York. And Bill, who moves to New York,
Speaker 3: is like, I'm gonna double down on all this humanitarian
Speaker 3: work with my Clinton Global Initiative. Except the Clinton Global
Speaker 3: Initiative I covered so much of this during the Clinton
Speaker 3: campaign becomes a slush fund basically for the Hillary administration
Speaker 3: and waiting wiring tens of millions of dollars from across
Speaker 3: the globe. In many cases, you know, different governments are
Speaker 3: sending them money expressly to set up meetings with Hillary
Speaker 3: because she was the former secretary of State. She's going
Speaker 3: to become, you know, potentially the next president, which is
Speaker 3: what everybody thought back in twenty sixteen. And Clinton himself
Speaker 3: also used it as a reputational machine which he can
Speaker 3: fly across the world private, you know, in jets for
Speaker 3: the rest of his life basically for humanitarian work. Glenn
Speaker 3: Maxwell Epstein very critical nodes in all of that, sourcing
Speaker 3: sketchy money, that's what they do. So this just proves
Speaker 3: already the depth of the relationship, which of course we
Speaker 3: did know that, but it's pretty amazing to see Epstein
Speaker 3: there being like, yeah, ask him, you know, tell them,
Speaker 3: ask him to tell you why I'm sending you a
Speaker 3: million dollars, Like that's crazy, crazy stuff.
Speaker 4: It's interesting in all of this.
Speaker 2: I mean, clearly Glaine was really on the inside with
Speaker 2: the Clintons, yes, and Epstein recognized obviously that this is
Speaker 2: another powerful, you know, note of power that he wants
Speaker 2: to be in with and so, you know, the CGI
Speaker 2: money and fostering this relationship appears to have been a
Speaker 2: strategic play from him, unsurprisingly. And you know, the other
Speaker 2: thing that's interesting in this reporting is that and again
Speaker 2: this is not surprising, but it's interesting to see it
Speaker 2: lay down. Bill Clinton saw Davos in how much influence
Speaker 2: it had and how powerful it was and what a
Speaker 2: brand builder it was, and he was like, ah, that's
Speaker 2: what I want to do. I want to do my
Speaker 2: own version of Davos with like you know, liberal more
Speaker 2: overtly liberal humanitarian bent rather than Davos is focused around
Speaker 2: like business elites exclusively.
Speaker 4: Is like, let me do that.
Speaker 2: I'll have the business elites, but I'll also have like
Speaker 2: the global humanitarian class as well. And so that's really
Speaker 2: the birth of the Clinton Global Initiative. So not only
Speaker 2: do they want to amass money, but they also wanted
Speaker 2: to amass power and be the central node in this
Speaker 2: sort of like global influence network that.
Speaker 4: Was that was the whole thing.
Speaker 2: So of course Jeffrey Epstein's going to want to get
Speaker 2: involved with that, right, He's like, this is my this
Speaker 2: is my whole bag, this is what I do. Let
Speaker 2: me see how I can get myself involved here.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 2: The other thing to keep in mind is like Soccer
Speaker 2: was saying, you know Galane being there at Chelsea's wedding,
Speaker 2: and weren't Hillary and Bill at Trump and Milania's wedding
Speaker 2: as well. Yeah, Like in Avanka and Chelsea were friends.
Speaker 2: You know, we think of them as these bitter rivals.
Speaker 2: They were in the same social circles. They were going
Speaker 2: to each other's events, supporting each other's thing, going to
Speaker 2: each other's weddings.
Speaker 4: Et cetera.
Speaker 2: They are all part of the same class, the Epstein class,
Speaker 2: and Ryan.
Speaker 4: Ryan was saying, like, in some.
Speaker 2: Ways, the class solidarity of the of the billionaires and
Speaker 2: the global elites, it's rather inspiring.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: They really, they really are there for each other. They
Speaker 2: really have this Titanit network. And I think that's important
Speaker 2: for all of us to keep in mind. And that
Speaker 2: came out very clearly in this recent Trump comment where
Speaker 2: he gets asked about Bill Clinton. Now, the backstory here
Speaker 2: is Clinton has been subpoena to come testify before Congress.
Speaker 2: Initially he was saying, no, I'm not going to do it,
Speaker 2: and you know, I guess was willing to risk jail
Speaker 2: time the way Steve Bannon went to prison for, you know,
Speaker 2: refusing to appear in spite of being subpoena. He has
Speaker 2: now changed his mind, and we can put this up
Speaker 2: on the screen and say, okay, fine, I will testify.
Speaker 4: And he says, here, I have called for the full
Speaker 4: release of.
Speaker 2: Abstein Vias, I've provided a sworn statement of what I
Speaker 2: know just this week. I've agreed to appear in person
Speaker 2: before the committee. Still not enough for Republicans on the
Speaker 2: House Oversight Committee. He goes on to say now Chairman
Speaker 2: Comer says he wants cameras, but only behind closed doors.
Speaker 2: Who benefits from this arrangement. It's not Epstein's victims who
Speaker 2: deserve justice, not the public who deserve the truth. Serves
Speaker 2: only parties and interests. This is not fact finding. It's
Speaker 2: pure politics. I will not said idly as they use
Speaker 2: me as a pro in a closed door kangaroo court
Speaker 2: by Republican party running scared if they want answers, Let's
Speaker 2: stop the games and do this the right way, in
Speaker 2: a public hearing where the American people can see for
Speaker 2: themselves what this is really about.
Speaker 4: So Bill Clinton is.
Speaker 2: Set to testify, you know, after having been subpoenut and
Speaker 2: again Clinton Trump, same circles, you know, same contacts, et
Speaker 2: CETERA big question what Bill might be able to say
Speaker 2: about Trump and his associates and what exactly is going
Speaker 2: on with this whole Epstein situation.
Speaker 4: And so now when Trump gets asked about Bill Clinton,
Speaker 4: about Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 2: Suddenly you know they're good people, actually, actually really really
Speaker 2: kind of like these guys.
Speaker 4: Le's take a little bit of that.
Speaker 8: It bothers me that somebody's going after Bill Clinton. See,
Speaker 8: I like Bill Clinton. I still like, Bill, What do
Speaker 8: you like about him? I like, well, I liked his
Speaker 8: behavior toward me. I thought he got me, he understood me.
Speaker 4: I like Bill Clinton.
Speaker 2: He understood me. He says Hillary, He's just a very
Speaker 2: accomplished woman. Ultimately, you know, very different. When he got
Speaker 2: asked about Gallaide Maxwell in the first administration, he said,
Speaker 2: you know what, I wish her well.
Speaker 3: Well, first of all, I do want to say I
Speaker 3: support Bill Clinton for public publicly testifying.
Speaker 1: I support that one hundred percent.
Speaker 3: Let's let's do it with the camera, and there's nothing
Speaker 3: better to see Bill.
Speaker 1: Look, he's smart.
Speaker 3: You know, he's a wiley, wiley Fox. He had plenty
Speaker 3: of Lewinsky dodging and White.
Speaker 1: What was that scandal? White?
Speaker 3: Is it?
Speaker 1: Whitewater Man? It's a throwback. It's been the Rose Law firm.
Speaker 3: Google it just if you want to go and relive
Speaker 3: some of the nineteen nineties. But the whole point with
Speaker 3: the Clintons, obviously is that I'm glad that they're going
Speaker 3: to testify publicly, and ultimately it's nice that they are
Speaker 3: being forced to actually actually have to come and answer
Speaker 3: some questions. But you know, the bigger point is it
Speaker 3: reminds me that George Carlin quote like it's a big
Speaker 3: club and you're not in it, and that's really what
Speaker 3: it is actually all about. And it's right that famous
Speaker 3: photo of George W. Bush in that selfie with Michelle Obama,
Speaker 3: and they're like kindness. I'm like, no, there's nothing cool
Speaker 3: about that. Yeah, like sorry, no, actually like Bush, no,
Speaker 3: there's we don't. We don't do that with people like
Speaker 3: George Ry Bush or And this is why the whole
Speaker 3: Dick Cheney thing bothered me. I'm like, they're like, oh,
Speaker 3: he died a hero. I'm like, oh, because he stood
Speaker 3: up to Trump. I'm like, oh, he's to die a hero. Really,
Speaker 3: I guess it's been long enough. I could speak ill
Speaker 3: of the dead if you remember whatever we had to
Speaker 3: react to his death. We're like, well, you know, yeah,
Speaker 3: he's dead. Okay, but yeah, And that's how I feel
Speaker 3: about Dick Cheney. That's how I feel about Fauci. They're like,
Speaker 3: there's like a small list of people who I'm like, no,
Speaker 3: fuck you till the day he died, Like I literally
Speaker 3: don't care about you at all. Well you shouldn't, you know,
Speaker 3: be resuscitating your image or any of them.
Speaker 4: No, George W. Bush absolutely not, absolutely not.
Speaker 2: And again to you know George, the Bushes and the
Speaker 2: Trump supposedly this bitter rivalries. I mean remember Bill Barr,
Speaker 2: who is Attorney General at the time that Epstein dies.
Speaker 2: He also served in the H. W. Bush administration, Like
Speaker 2: that's where he comes from. And his dad, of course,
Speaker 2: famously is the one who hires Jeffrey Epstein at the
Speaker 2: Dalton School in spite of the fact that Epstein had
Speaker 2: no qualifications to be put in, you know, in that
Speaker 2: position at this very prestigious school. Donald Barrows, so I
Speaker 2: wrote a very strange oh I know, try sci fi
Speaker 2: book about you know, some like sex slave, enterprise, etc.
Speaker 2: As You can go look that one up too, if
Speaker 2: you really want to go super down the rabbit hole.
Speaker 2: But in any case, so much more connectivity and so
Speaker 2: much more shared interests between all of these people than
Speaker 2: the enmity that they like to portray publicly, very very true.
Speaker 1: All right, let's continue. This one is so wild.
Speaker 3: So I had known and we Ryan did a story
Speaker 3: about the Rothschild relationship with Epstein, obviously significantly important just
Speaker 3: because it was one of the most powerful banking houses
Speaker 3: in all of Europe. Long of course, you know, been
Speaker 3: connected to the rise and fall so many of the
Speaker 3: power brokers on the continent, but with their relationship with
Speaker 3: Epstein was not only deeper, but directly tied to our
Speaker 3: own country in our government. Let's put this up here
Speaker 3: on the screen. I had no idea about this. It
Speaker 3: says how the House of Rothschild became entangled with Epstein.
Speaker 3: What they specifically point to is that back in twenty fifteen,
Speaker 3: in December, months of turmoil, the Swiss private bank owned
Speaker 3: by the Rothschild dynasty was closing in on a multi
Speaker 3: million dollar settlement with the US Department of Justice for
Speaker 3: its part in helping rich Americans hide their assets. Behind
Speaker 3: the scenes, the group's French chief, Ariandi Rothschild had tasked
Speaker 3: Jeffrey Epstein and the lawyer he had introduced her to,
Speaker 3: Kathy Rummler, who you will all remember former Obama Whitehouse
Speaker 3: official Deputy White House Chief Council, with closing the deal.
Speaker 3: Here's how the exchange went. Forty five mio. Question mark,
Speaker 3: as we casually throw around these numbers, Rothschild asked Epstein
Speaker 3: in December twenty fifteen. He replied, counting a ten million
Speaker 3: dollar fee for the lawyers and twenty five million for
Speaker 3: him a quote, I think you will find all less
Speaker 3: than eighty pretty good, she responds, deep thanks for your help.
Speaker 3: Days later this gets announced. The Department of Justice literally
Speaker 3: just days later, puts out this announcement saying Justice Department
Speaker 3: announces joint resolution with two banks under the Swiss Bank Program.
Speaker 3: The Department of Justice announced today that Edmond de Rothschild
Speaker 3: and Edmond de Rothschild SA have joint reached a joint
Speaker 3: resolution under the Department's Swiss Bank Program. Eder Switzerland will
Speaker 3: pay a penalty of more than forty five million, make
Speaker 3: a complete disclosure of the cross border activities, et cetera.
Speaker 3: There is no public reporting at the time to indicate
Speaker 3: Epstein's role, but you will remember here we now have
Speaker 3: a deal broker by a private Swiss bank, the Roschald
Speaker 3: I mean literally one of the richest families in the
Speaker 3: history of Europe, who is working with Jeffrey Epstein days
Speaker 3: before and pays him twenty five million dollars potentially for
Speaker 3: what reason, not just Kathy Rumler, but maybe for the
Speaker 3: connection finder's fee, some sort of influence where he is
Speaker 3: able to negotiate this deal on behalf of this bank
Speaker 3: and the US Department of Justice to the point where
Speaker 3: you can all see it and go back and read
Speaker 3: there's no mention of him.
Speaker 1: What role did he play? Who did he call?
Speaker 3: I mean that if anything shows the extent of influence
Speaker 3: that is that, right, there is true influence a private
Speaker 3: Swiss bank, the richest, some of the richest people in
Speaker 3: Europe who call you and they're like, hey, man, twenty
Speaker 3: five twenty five million for what? For a forty five
Speaker 3: million dollars settlement there's announced, but you got to be
Speaker 3: pulling some serious strings to merit more than half of
Speaker 3: what the overall settlement is going to be, on top
Speaker 3: of the legal fees which are already factoring for this.
Speaker 3: What were they paying for? Nobody knows, Yeah, nobody knows.
Speaker 3: But it was announced just like they said, cool, forty
Speaker 3: five mil. Exactly what he was saying, forty five mil.
Speaker 3: This is how it's going to go. I can make
Speaker 3: make sure this all happened. I'm assuming you don't just
Speaker 3: get paid somebody twenty five million dollars for nothing. So
Speaker 3: that is a very very significant one shows his level
Speaker 3: of influence. Seriously, like what who did he call and
Speaker 3: what was he able to do to secure something like this,
Speaker 3: because they'll pay anything to make something like that call.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And you know, you look at these emails, you
Speaker 2: see elaborate communication with Arianna de Rothschild. You know, they
Speaker 2: clearly have a very friendly relationship or she's downplaying, the
Speaker 2: bank is downplaying at this point et Saturday.
Speaker 4: You can read their statements, but were really chumming.
Speaker 2: You know, she was asking for advice on all kinds
Speaker 2: of personal messy matters that were going on within the family,
Speaker 2: and he's there as the like sounding board and you know,
Speaker 2: reliable friend for her to you know, bounce ideas off of,
Speaker 2: et cetera, and then is involved in this very direct,
Speaker 2: extremely significant, important way. I just saw this one that
Speaker 2: just Murtaza Hussein just pulled up that it looks like
Speaker 2: Epstein may have met with MBS three days before Jamal
Speaker 2: Kashogi was murdered.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: And then we also had those other emails where he
Speaker 2: was talking about it and he was oh, I think
Speaker 2: those were were those with Bannon. I think where he
Speaker 2: was texting back and forth in that particular exchange where
Speaker 2: he's talking about his theories about what happened there, you know,
Speaker 2: And that's another question that you have inside knowledge on
Speaker 2: that one as well. But you just can see all
Speaker 2: of these connections with the most powerful people in the
Speaker 2: entire world. And you can also see from his communications
Speaker 2: for example, with you know, with Peter Teel and with others,
Speaker 2: and how they sort of view the world as just
Speaker 2: their play thing to exploit, you know, with Libya, like, oh,
Speaker 2: let's you know, I think there's all kinds of money
Speaker 2: that can be had there, and talking about how the
Speaker 2: most financially profitable thing for them is global collapse and
Speaker 2: chaos and war and that that's you know, what they're
Speaker 2: what they actively hope for and wish for. I mean,
Speaker 2: you just see the way that they view things and
Speaker 2: how he ends up somehow ends up in connection with
Speaker 2: all of these really powerful people at all these extraordinary
Speaker 2: moments in history. And you know, with this one with
Speaker 2: the Rothschilds, why it's so significant is because he directly
Speaker 2: appears to have had a hand in exactly what this
Speaker 2: settlement looked like down to the dollar amount, so it
Speaker 2: is completely wild. One more here, let's put a fifteen
Speaker 2: up on the screen. You guys will recall because we
Speaker 2: played it for you before. Howard Latnik Oh my god.
Speaker 2: I met my wife and I met Epstein, our next
Speaker 2: door neighbor in New York City one time, and we
Speaker 2: were so disgusted that we said we will never have
Speaker 2: anything to do with him whatsoever.
Speaker 4: He lied.
Speaker 2: I mean, there's just blatant, blatant lie. Now, I guess
Speaker 2: the best. Your baby forgot all of these interactions that
Speaker 2: he had with Epstein over the years. But let me
Speaker 2: go ahead and read this from the New York Times.
Speaker 2: How we are latink. President Trump's billionaire commerce secretary interacted with
Speaker 2: the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein regularly over.
Speaker 4: At least thirteen years while they lived.
Speaker 2: Next door to one another on Manhattan's Upper East Side.
Speaker 2: They invested in the same privately held company together. Okay,
Speaker 2: so they were not just casual. They happened to mean
Speaker 2: the same social circles. No, I mean there was that too,
Speaker 2: but they literally were business partners. You think that escaped
Speaker 2: his memory. He just forgot about that little detail with
Speaker 2: regards to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Then it goes
Speaker 2: on to say they dealt with one another on neighborhood
Speaker 2: and philanthropic issues and appear to have socialized in New
Speaker 2: York and in the Caribbean. The record show mister Epstein
Speaker 2: at one point even sought to meet with mister Lutnix Nanny.
Speaker 2: The records directly contradict mister lutnix assertion on a podcast
Speaker 2: last year he had been so disgusted by mister Epstein
Speaker 2: during a two thousand and five visit to his townhouse
Speaker 2: that mister Lutnick had never set foot in a room
Speaker 2: with mister Epstein again. Quote So, I was never in
Speaker 2: the room with him socially, for business or even philanthropy,
Speaker 2: mister Lutnick said in an interview on the podcast pod
Speaker 2: Force one reached Bristly by phone last week, mister Lutnix said,
Speaker 2: I spent zero time with him. In any functioning society,
Speaker 2: this man would be fired. He would resign in disgrace,
Speaker 2: caught brazenly in a lie around this criminal pedophile, sex trafficker,
Speaker 2: and he would never be heard from again in public life.
Speaker 2: That's what a functioning society would look like. Instead, we
Speaker 2: know he will bear no price for this, There will
Speaker 2: be no problem. If anything, his associations with Epstein helped
Speaker 2: him get the gig. If anything, right, So, the fact
Speaker 2: that we now know dead to rights. This man was
Speaker 2: lying to our face in the most shameless way. We'll
Speaker 2: have zero, zero consequence for him and his future true actor.
Speaker 3: Yes that is I mean not only do I agree,
Speaker 3: but look again at the UK government and how they're
Speaker 3: I mean, Kirre Starmer, a labor leader this morning, is
Speaker 3: calling for him to resign over the Epstein scandal. The
Speaker 3: Mandlsit thing has blown up their government. I saw that
Speaker 3: a Norwegian senior official was removed because of her links
Speaker 3: to EPs.
Speaker 1: I mean, these way less.
Speaker 3: Than what we're talking about here with Lutnik, right, because
Speaker 3: these people are just embarrassed by what happened. They didn't
Speaker 3: come out and say, oh I never saw him again,
Speaker 3: and then you have all of these negotiations behind the
Speaker 3: scenes of the fact that he is a neighbor, which
Speaker 3: it already had raised questions. I had found an email
Speaker 3: where Epstein wanted to hire Lutnix Butler or something like
Speaker 3: that from back in the day, and I was like, oh, well,
Speaker 3: you know, okay, can't you couldn't prove whether any of
Speaker 3: that happened. We know you put it all together, and
Speaker 3: you're like, of course they knew each other. They knew
Speaker 3: each other very very well, which just goes to the
Speaker 3: point about how it's a big club. None of us
Speaker 3: are in it. We can now just tiny glimpse into
Speaker 3: how power and all of that operates.
Speaker 1: If you have enough.
Speaker 3: Money, people will look the other way, or they'll actively participate,
Speaker 3: or they'll have knowledge and just you know, kind of
Speaker 3: be quiet about it as it's all an internal protection club.
Speaker 3: You can be a genius when in fact, all you're
Speaker 3: really doing is insider trading. You know, that's one thing
Speaker 3: for the Epstein defenders. Prove to me how he made
Speaker 3: his money. Proved to me how he made his money?
Speaker 3: Was he really really good at what he did? Find
Speaker 3: me a great financial Find me like, who's the guy
Speaker 3: who we cover renaissance whom I can't Jim Simon right,
Speaker 3: a Jim Simon figure or Ray Dalio to sit down
Speaker 3: and be like, here's why he was a master trader.
Speaker 1: Nobody said any of that. Nothing. He was just a criminal.
Speaker 3: That's it, period blackmail and then put you know, insider
Speaker 3: trading and social connections, that's it. That's all it took
Speaker 3: to make all these billions. And then you know, the
Speaker 3: bigger question is like where did all the money go?
Speaker 3: Who is a wired to And remember there's literally over
Speaker 3: a billion dollars in suspicious activity reports sitting in the
Speaker 3: US Department of Treasury right now, which is yet to
Speaker 3: be released. Ye, that's where the real stuff is.
Speaker 2: And that insider trading nexus seems like the easiest place
Speaker 2: actually where you could get cutions.
Speaker 4: And I think that's going right in the UK for sure.
Speaker 2: And the last thing I want to say is we
Speaker 2: don't talk as much about the Epstein ranch in New Mexico,
Speaker 2: and it appears they never rated it, they never investigated there,
Speaker 2: even though we know from you know, significant reporting and
Speaker 2: more details added through this latest release that he wanted
Speaker 2: to use that ranch as this sort of like you know,
Speaker 2: as has spread his seed eugenics breeding ground project.
Speaker 4: That was what he wanted to do.
Speaker 2: Now did he accomplish that, and who was involved and
Speaker 2: was it, you know, Bika, was it consensual or was
Speaker 2: any of this against their will, et cetera.
Speaker 4: We're never going to probably know.
Speaker 2: And the other thing is he had connections in the
Speaker 2: same way that he you know, paid off a bunch
Speaker 2: of Virgin Island politicians to be able to do whatever
Speaker 2: he wanted on his private island. He also was deeply
Speaker 2: enmeshed with a number of New Mexico politicians, including the
Speaker 2: former governor. So you know, I think that angle has
Speaker 2: been wildly you know, invisibilized and unexplored as well. So
Speaker 2: it's just, I mean, it's sick. What else can you say?
Speaker 2: And you see the way that it operated as there
Speaker 2: was this sort of like mutually assured destruction among all
Speaker 2: these powerful people, and that's how they sort of built
Speaker 2: these I mean, it's sick, but that's how they built
Speaker 2: these relationships of trust. Is like I know, you can't leave,
Speaker 2: you can't blow the whistle because I know you know
Speaker 2: what I did and I know what you did, and
Speaker 2: you know. And Epstein seems to have been a master
Speaker 2: at manipulation. You know, in so many of these communications,
Speaker 2: whether it's with business partners or world leaders or with
Speaker 2: you know, girls or women that he's exploiting. The emotional
Speaker 2: blackmail and manipulation is very clear in his communications. So
Speaker 2: he seems to have been a master of manipulating this
Speaker 2: you know, elite power circle that he was one one
Speaker 2: note of.
Speaker 3: All right, let's get to Iran. Speaking of elite power circles.
Speaker 3: Turning now to the stitchuation, with Iran. Things fast moving
Speaker 3: here in Washington, some potential signs of a deal, though
Speaker 3: Trump really all over the place. He was asked about
Speaker 3: it aboard Air Force one. Here's the latest about talks,
Speaker 3: as Benjamin that and Yahoo is heading to the White House.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: We likewise had very good talks on Iran. Iran looks
Speaker 5: like it wants to make a deal very badly. We
Speaker 5: have to see what that deal is. But I think
Speaker 5: Iran looks like they want to make a deal very badly,
Speaker 5: as they should. Last time they decided maybe not to
Speaker 5: do it, but I think they probably feel different they
Speaker 5: We'll see what the deal is. It it'd be different
Speaker 5: than the last time. And we have a big armada.
Speaker 5: We have a big fleet heading in that direction, would
Speaker 5: be there pretty soon, So we'll see how that works
Speaker 5: out with Iran.
Speaker 7: Is there a deal that early covers nuclea that would
Speaker 7: be acceptable to you, because they don't. They just want
Speaker 7: to have nucula.
Speaker 5: They don't want to have anything else like it would
Speaker 5: be acceptable, but the one thing, and right up front,
Speaker 5: no nuclear weapons. If we could have made that deal
Speaker 5: years ago, we would have made that deal, but they
Speaker 5: weren't willing to do that. Now they are willing to
Speaker 5: do it. So they're willing to do much more than
Speaker 5: they would have a year and a half ago, or
Speaker 5: even a year ago.
Speaker 2: We don't forget.
Speaker 5: We've only been doing this or exactly one year, and
Speaker 5: we started with them a few months after the beginning
Speaker 5: of the sturb has been amazing, but the results could
Speaker 5: surprise people. If they would have offered this deal originally
Speaker 5: when we first started, they would have been accepted immediately.
Speaker 5: We'll see what happens then.
Speaker 3: So somewhat positive signs there from the President about talks
Speaker 3: with Iran, very good talks. They want to make a
Speaker 3: deal if they present whatever they basically did present this,
Speaker 3: but we can move past that if it means that
Speaker 3: there is some deal that won't be had. However, we
Speaker 3: will know from the Iranian side that the talks in
Speaker 3: Oman were quote, exclusively nuclear. The Iranians are trying to
Speaker 3: make it clear we will talk nuclear all day long.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Leader has his fatua.
Speaker 3: However, we're not talking ballistic missiles period, and the reason
Speaker 3: why is because that's our regional security turrent against the
Speaker 3: State of Israel. Well, who happens to hear this and
Speaker 3: immediately calls to President and says I need to come
Speaker 3: and see you immediately.
Speaker 1: Benjamin net Yahoo. Let's put this.
Speaker 3: Up here on the screen from the Times of Israel.
Speaker 3: Netson Yahoo to meet Trump in Washington Wednesday, says US
Speaker 3: Iran talks must deal with the Iran's missiles and proxy.
Speaker 3: President Benjamin Netan Yahoo will fly to Washington this week
Speaker 3: to meet with President Trump on Iran. The meeting will
Speaker 3: take place on Wednesday.
Speaker 1: Quote.
Speaker 3: The Prime Minister believes that any negotiations must include restrictions
Speaker 3: on ballistic missiles and an end to support for the
Speaker 3: Iranian axis, indicating concerns about the progress of the US
Speaker 3: Iran talks thus far. The US and Iran talks that
Speaker 3: happened last week were immediately met with great alarm in
Speaker 3: Tel Aviv because they want are in Jerusalem, sorry, which
Speaker 3: they're What they want, of course, is for the talks
Speaker 3: not to happen at all and for the US to
Speaker 3: progress to war. Now here's what's really stunning about these
Speaker 3: Netson Yaho is a dirigionally already supposed to be here
Speaker 3: nine days from now next week for the APAC Summit,
Speaker 3: which is happening here in Washington. But the meeting was
Speaker 3: then moved a week earlier at the Premier's request, specifically
Speaker 3: to try and to derail this deal and to say
Speaker 3: any meeting has got to involve these ballistic missiles. Put
Speaker 3: B three up here on the screen confirming more of
Speaker 3: this from Barackravid. And what he talks about here is
Speaker 3: that the announcement of the urgent visit comes after the
Speaker 3: Trump Steve wick Coffin Jared Kushner negotiations NOMAN and specifically
Speaker 3: that they're very concerned about anything that might actually deal
Speaker 3: with a new clear element that does not address at
Speaker 3: all any of these regional security measures. So you can
Speaker 3: see very very clearly here to the extent that America
Speaker 3: has any problems with Iran, it is regional in terms
Speaker 3: of its threat to our bases, which seems manageable if
Speaker 3: you don't attack them too.
Speaker 1: But okay, so there's that.
Speaker 3: And then second is a nuclear weapon which would be
Speaker 3: capable of hitting the continental United States, like something that
Speaker 3: Northreea has developed. The theory the regional ballistic missile threat
Speaker 3: is a serious and existential threat only to one country, Israel,
Speaker 3: And so they're saying any deal you do must take
Speaker 3: our existential security threats as seriously as you take your
Speaker 3: existential security threats, and they're basically it's the most classic
Speaker 3: tail wagging the dog situation in terms of power disparity,
Speaker 3: in terms of I mean, in terms of everything that
Speaker 3: could possibly exist. And yet it has a very very
Speaker 3: high chance of succeeding because he has succeeded at every
Speaker 3: term in twisting and turning Trump to whatever direction that
Speaker 3: he wants to go.
Speaker 2: Not only that, but you also have people inside of
Speaker 2: the administration who are putching in the same direction. And
Speaker 2: then you have Trump who's kind of like put his
Speaker 2: ego on the line, as he did as well with Venezuela.
Speaker 2: And the problem with the deal that's only nuclear, I
Speaker 2: mean he you know, for all of the talk about
Speaker 2: the Iranians are so hard line and they would never
Speaker 2: give up this with that like we literally had a
Speaker 2: deal under the Obama administration, they're clearly willing to negotiate
Speaker 2: a deal that they stayed in after we got out.
Speaker 2: So the problem with that for Trump is, you know,
Speaker 2: people like nat Yaho and others innistration that want a
Speaker 2: that want a war and want some sort of regime
Speaker 2: change or regime collapse and say, oh, you're going to
Speaker 2: just do the go back and do the Obama deal.
Speaker 2: It has to They'll push for it to be somehow
Speaker 2: significantly different. And of course the ballistic missiles are an
Speaker 2: absolute red line for the Iranians. I mean, which I
Speaker 2: completely understand, Like you're going to leave yourself completely defenseless
Speaker 2: when you have these absolute psychos who are bent on
Speaker 2: your destruction in the region like you would be, you
Speaker 2: would be crazy to agree to that. There's another Times
Speaker 2: of visual piece this morning. We don't have an element
Speaker 2: for this, but they say Iran agan rules out giving
Speaker 2: up Uranian enrichment, suggests us not taking talks seriously. This
Speaker 2: is the Iranian Foreign Minister A bass Agrocci on Sunday
Speaker 2: rule out Tehran ever giving up Uranian and richment and
Speaker 2: its negotiates this with Washington. Insisting will not be intimidated
Speaker 2: by the threat of war. He told a forum in Tehran,
Speaker 2: Why do we insist so much on your enrichment and
Speaker 2: refuse to give it up even if war is imposed
Speaker 2: on us? Because no one has the right to dictate
Speaker 2: our behavior, he goes on. Their military employment in the
Speaker 2: region does not scare us. He referred to the build
Speaker 2: up of US forces. And then they go on to
Speaker 2: talk about some of the background here, and he says
Speaker 2: they fear our atomic bomb will we are not looking
Speaker 2: for one. Our atomic bomb is the power to say
Speaker 2: no to the great powers. So, I mean that's all
Speaker 2: very rational calculus on their part. For all the talk
Speaker 2: of how they're so you know, crazy and irrational and
Speaker 2: out of control, the approach has been very rational given
Speaker 2: the landscape that we and Israel have created for them.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, let's put B four up there on the screen.
Speaker 3: And this is some of the danger here about reverting
Speaker 3: to diplomacy. But the road is narrow, and what treats
Speaker 3: a Parsi flagged for all of us in this article.
Speaker 3: But also, you know, more importantly, like really, whenever you
Speaker 3: dig into a lot of this is that there are
Speaker 3: some serious problems whenever it comes to the path that
Speaker 3: he has now had. So like what they say is
Speaker 3: that the quote, there's a strong view on the Iranian
Speaker 3: side that Trump has an excessive and exaggerated view of iranikness.
Speaker 3: If diplomacy is to work, many Iranians believe a short,
Speaker 3: intense war may be necessary to correct a Trump's perception
Speaker 3: and compel him to adopt more realistic demands even if
Speaker 3: they take large losses. So will the Americans and the
Speaker 3: Israelis and quote Trump has less tolerance for losses or
Speaker 3: for a protracted war. So that part of I mean
Speaker 3: vindicating for their current strategy. So for example, per what
Speaker 3: he was telling us is that there was apparently a back.
Speaker 1: Channel from Washington after the protests.
Speaker 3: And they're like, hey, we need to do another strike,
Speaker 3: token strike, you token strike back, and the Iranians were like, nope.
Speaker 1: If you strike, it's on. And what happened, Oh, the
Speaker 1: carrier all of.
Speaker 3: A sudden has to be brought from the South China
Speaker 3: see ce seventeen's all the way across the Middle East,
Speaker 3: bases on high alert. And for a second there we're like,
Speaker 3: oh my god, this is this could be a real problem.
Speaker 1: And what did he do?
Speaker 3: He backed off and we ended up having talks. They
Speaker 3: cancel the talks, they put him back on off. It
Speaker 3: all happened in a three day period. You can watch
Speaker 3: our show from last week if you're interested. But the
Speaker 3: point remains that we're actually kind of afraid of a
Speaker 3: full blown conflict because what we win. Yeah, obviously, but
Speaker 3: that's not. I mean, what does winning mean? Did we
Speaker 3: win the war in Vietnam? We killed more of them,
Speaker 3: That doesn't mean we won. We've killed more Taliban than
Speaker 3: they ever killed of us, doesn't mean that we won.
Speaker 1: Same in Iraq. Right, So the point remains.
Speaker 2: We win the war with the Hoho thiast even theoretically, yeah, right, Yeah,
Speaker 2: we killed a lot of them.
Speaker 1: Right, Does that mean that we want no?
Speaker 3: Right, because there's a difference between strategic and tactical victory. Well,
Speaker 3: here you go, the exact same situation playing out with
Speaker 3: the Iranians that they know. They're like, look, yes, we
Speaker 3: will lose, for sure, many of our people will die.
Speaker 1: It's a diabolical strategy.
Speaker 3: However, we can destroy the price of oil with the
Speaker 3: straits of horn moves, and we could probably kill a
Speaker 3: decent number of you, and we could definitely kill a
Speaker 3: decent number of Israelis. So if that's what you want
Speaker 3: to do, then let's go and both. You know, maybe
Speaker 3: the Israelis will sign up for that bargain, maybe as
Speaker 3: long as big Brother America is there to support all
Speaker 3: of them. Do really any of us have a tolerance
Speaker 3: for a single loss of American life in a theoretical
Speaker 3: problem for israel security. I don't I guys to zero
Speaker 3: tolerance for yeah, and I'm thinking that there are a
Speaker 3: lot of other people out there.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, there has been very little effort to build up
Speaker 2: any sort of or manufacture any sort of consent around
Speaker 2: this theoretical war.
Speaker 4: I mean, they just haven't really bothered.
Speaker 2: They just don't see it as necessary to get buy
Speaker 2: and really from the American public, We've had all sorts
Speaker 2: of shifting explanations for why we should be so concerned
Speaker 2: about Iran, most of them built on a pack of lies.
Speaker 4: Let's go and put B five up on the screen.
Speaker 2: Treat as actual quote that was there in the New
Speaker 2: York Times article, he says. I told the New York
Speaker 2: Times there is a strong view on the Iranian side
Speaker 2: that Trump has an excessive and exaggerated view of Iranian weakness.
Speaker 2: If diplomacy is to work, these Iranians believe a short,
Speaker 2: intense war may be necessary to correct Trump's perception and
Speaker 2: compel them to adopt more realistic demands. Even if Iran
Speaker 2: takes large losses in such a war, so with so
Speaker 2: will the Americans and Israelis. And Trump has less tolerance
Speaker 2: for losses or a protracted war. I mean that seems
Speaker 2: entirely logical to me in terms of the you know,
Speaker 2: what the Iranians are likely thinking and the calculation that
Speaker 2: they have made, because in the past, the calculus calculation
Speaker 2: they made is basically like, yeah, we'll do this choreography
Speaker 2: with you. We'll do the stance, right. Okay, you want
Speaker 2: to strike our nuclear facilities, you do that, and we're
Speaker 2: going to we have to retaliate, but we're going to
Speaker 2: do it in a more limited and coordinated fashion that
Speaker 2: you can manage and that you know that allows you
Speaker 2: to get your defenses in place. And what happened that
Speaker 2: it did not deter us at all. What Trump learned
Speaker 2: from that is, oh, when I need a quick ego boast,
Speaker 2: I can go and mess with the your audience, right
Speaker 2: and get another get another win on the board at
Speaker 2: a time when you know, his approval ratings, seer tanking,
Speaker 2: economy shit and all kinds of you know, everybody's revolting
Speaker 2: against the ice assaults and all of that. Right, So
Speaker 2: that's what he took from that, and so they realized like, okay,
Speaker 2: well that was apparently not the way to get them
Speaker 2: to leave us alone.
Speaker 4: So we're going to have to take a harder line.
Speaker 2: So when Trump, you know, when they threw this back
Speaker 2: channel reach out and like, hey, let's do a little
Speaker 2: bit like of a fake pretend war here so Trump
Speaker 2: can have his ego stroking, They're like, no, we're not
Speaker 2: playing along this time. We have to take a different approach.
Speaker 2: And you know, that's why this is. This is a
Speaker 2: very dangerous situation. And I find it hard to imagine that.
Speaker 2: And again I have no idea what the timing will be.
Speaker 1: I have it.
Speaker 2: I find it very hard to imagine with all of
Speaker 2: the forces within the administration, and with net and Yahoo pushing,
Speaker 2: and with Trump having backed himself once again into a
Speaker 2: bit of a corner here with regard to his own ego,
Speaker 2: that we are just going to sort of put this
Speaker 2: all aside and pretend it never happened and move forward
Speaker 2: without any more kinetic action.
Speaker 3: That's very very true, all right, last thing I wanted
Speaker 3: to put B six. Let's put that up there on
Speaker 3: the screen. Trump's this was very subtle. By the way,
Speaker 3: wick Koff and Kushner visited a US aircraft carrier immediately
Speaker 3: after the talks. Just so everybody knows in terms of
Speaker 3: what they're trying to signal to the Iranians too, about
Speaker 3: what's coming potentially your way, which again I don't think
Speaker 3: that they're all that.
Speaker 1: I think they know.
Speaker 3: I think they know that they will take probably what
Speaker 3: tens of thousands of losses if there was going to
Speaker 3: be any sort of conflict. Fortunately, they just don't seem
Speaker 3: to care, which, you know, it is diabolical and they
Speaker 3: may be right, but that's look, it's tragic, like it's
Speaker 3: one of those things where let's not find out. How
Speaker 3: about we just avoid it, you know, for for all
Speaker 3: of our sakes. But apparently that's not the way that
Speaker 3: people want to think. Okay, let's get to Trump