Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Jes Staley And The Transcripts From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 17) (9/8/26)

Transcript

Jes Staley And The Transcripts From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 17) (9/8/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're picking up where we
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: left off with the Jeff Staley transcript from his trip
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: to Congress. Question, if you're looking at the bottom of
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: each page, on page six, there's an updated date, January 27th, 2011,
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: that says, quote, a few news stories during 2010 connect
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein to human. Sullivan jumps in, the lawyer. I
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: want to make sure we know what we're reading, sorry. Redacted.
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: If you look at the numbers at the bottom of
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: the page, flip to page 6, a little further down
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: than halfway down the page. Sullivan, okay, thank you. Summary
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: of findings? Question. It says, quote, A few news stories
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: during 2010 connected Jeffrey Epstein to human trafficking. The coverage team,
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: along with Catherine Keating and William Langford, all met to
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: discuss the situation and agreed to enhance monitoring and document
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: discussion with the client. Jess Staley discussed the topic with
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein, who replied that there was no truth to
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: the allegations, no evidence, and was not expecting any problems.
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: We'll continue to monitor the accounts and usage closely going forward. Answer,
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: is that the same date where I said he was shaken? Answer, no,
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: this is 11. Question, so the outcome of the meeting
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: with Ms. Keating and Ms. Langford, which I understood, that
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: you do not recall, but that they are clearly, at
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: least Mr. Langford, is emailing about. The outcome of this
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: meeting appears to be that you would simply talk to Mr. Epstein.
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: Do you remember whose idea that was? Answer, no. Question,
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: do you remember why the idea was for you to
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: talk to Mr. Epstein and not someone in risk or
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: compliance or legal or even someone at the private bank?
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: Answer again, by this time, I think the decision was
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: ultimately in the hands of Steve Cutler. And you know
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: the bank, you know, Langford and Catherine and whatnot are
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: doing their reviews. and I was in another part of
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: the bank, so... Question if the decision was in the hands. So,
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: he gets cut off now by Mr. Sullivan. Please let
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: him finish, I'm sorry. Redacted, excuse me, Mr. Sullivan? Mr. Sullivan,
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: please let him finish. Staley, so confusing, the issue of
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: me talking with Epstein about the accusations against him is
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: not the same thing as a decision by the bank
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: to keep him as a banking client only. I think
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: you're pushing the two together. question, I don't think I am.
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: The document says Jeff Staley discussed the topic with Jeffrey Epstein,
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: so whatever role you say Mr. Cutler had isn't relevant
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: to what I'm asking right now. I'm asking why the
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: idea was for you to talk to Mr. Epstein, as
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: it says you did, instead of someone even put Mr.
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: Cutler aside, but instead of someone in risk or compliance
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: or at the private bank, because as you've pointed out
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: multiple times, Staley interrupts him, they may have, The person
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: asking the questions, please don't interrupt me. As you've pointed
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: out multiple times, you are CEO of the investment banking division.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: So why are you asking Mr. Epstein about these allegations? Answer,
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: because I knew Epstein and I was asking about the allegations.
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: But that's separate issue from the activities of the private
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: bank and what they should do with Epstein. Question, so
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: as they're reviewing his accounts, they're pulling you in because
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: of your friendship with Mr. Epstein and asking you to
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: talk to Mr. Epstein about the allegations against them Answer again.
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: And also in the document, we've talked about Steve Cutler
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: basically controlling the decision of whether we keep Mr. Epstein
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: as a client. He also had talked, also talked about,
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: that Epstein had, you know, relations with other employees of J.P. Morgan,
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: not just me. Question, I understand that. I'm not sure
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: it answers my question. Setting aside who has the authority
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: to terminate a client relationship with Mr. Epstein, is it
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: your testimony today that the reason... that you're talking to Mr.
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: Epstein about the allegations against him, and the context is,
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: because he was your friend. And so your colleagues at J.P. Morgan,
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: who are tracking the issues with his accounts, are going
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: to you and saying, please talk to him about these
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: allegations against him. I'm trying to understand why it's you
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: who's talking to him, instead of people in other relevant
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: divisions at J.P. Morgan. Answer, I think he was talking
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: to other people at J.P. Morgan. Question maybe, but that's
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: not what the document says. The document says Jess Staley
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: discussed the topic with Jeffrey Epstein. Answer, you are saying,
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: why is it you as opposed to other people at Morgan?
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: And I'm saying, I don't think it's as opposed to
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: other people at Morgan. I think other people at Morgan
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: had direct contact with him as well. Question, do you
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: remember that? Other people at JP Morgan going to Mr.
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: Epstein and asking him about the allegations? Answer, yes. Question, who? Answer,
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: Mary Erdos. Question, anyone else? Answer, I believe Justin Nelson,
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: and then Steve Cutler, I think, had conversations with Epstein's lawyers.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure whether the other lawyers were involved. Question,
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: if these other people were talking to Mr. Epstein about
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: the allegations against him, why do you think they are
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: not mentioned in documents with the frequency that you are?
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Answer again, I didn't write the documents. Question, do you
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: remember talking to Mr. Epstein about the allegations against him?
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: The conversations that's referenced here? Answer. I remember the one
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: conversation I had with him when I said he was
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: very shaken, and I think that was before this, but
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: I don't know how the dates line up. Question. Well,
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: this update is from January of 2011, so presumably it
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: would have been in that month or close to it. Answer.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: And the date on my saying he was shaken was what? Question.
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: I believe it was 2006. Answer. So long before. Okay. Question.
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: So you have no recollection of the conversation that this
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: document indicates you had with Mr. Epstein in 2011 about
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: the allegations against him? Answer. No, I don't. Question. And
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: you have no recollection of whose idea it was to
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: have you have this conversation with Mr. Epstein? Answer again.
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: I was in a completely different part of the bank.
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: I don't. Question. Do you think that it made sense
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: to ask a potential sex trafficker if he was engaging
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: in sex trafficking? Answer. Ask the question again. Question. Do
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: you think that it made sense to ask a potential
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: sex trafficker if he was engaging in sex trafficking as
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: a form of due diligence? Answer, it makes sense. Question,
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: you testified that in 2010 you knew that Mr. Epstein
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: had lied to you. Answer, yes. Question, so if you
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: knew that he lied to you in 2010, why would
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: it make sense to go to him in 2011 and
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: ask him if he was engaging in sex trafficking? Answer again,
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: the issue was 2006. We learned what he did. He
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: pled guilty. He went to jail. He served his time.
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: It was inconceivable to me that he would continue his
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: sex trafficking after spending a year in jail. You're on
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: work release. You know, it didn't make sense to me. Question,
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: so even though you knew that he lied to you
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: in 2006, you learned in 2010 that he lied to
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: you in 2006. Even then, you thought it was inconceivable
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: that he might lie to you again. And so having
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: him go to him and ask him if he's engaging
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: in sex trafficking is an adequate form of due diligence? Answer,
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: an adequate form of due diligence would be the private
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: bank engaging with them and doing its due diligence. That's
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: the proper form of diligence. Question, I would like to
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: introduce as Minority Exhibit W, an email exchange between you
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: and Mr. Epstein dated March 20th, 2011. The Bates number
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: is EFTA 00906898. In the first email, Mr. Epstein writes, quote,
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: I'm working on getting Steve Cutler the comfort he needs.
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: To which he would respond, quote, agree. Was Mr. Cutler
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: concerned about something related to Mr. Epstein? Answer, I think
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: Steve Cutler had the ultimate decision as to whether we
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: keep Epstein as a client. Also, I think around this time,
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: Epstein hired a legal team, and I think the legal
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: team was being set up to meet with Cutler. Question,
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: is that what Mr. Epstein was doing to get Mr.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: Cutler the, quote, comfort he needs? Answer, I think so. Question,
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: I would like to introduce as Minority Exhibit X an
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: email chain With you, Mr. Cutler, Ms. Erdos, James Condren,
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: and Nina Schenker. Dated July 19th, 2011. A few months
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: after Mr. Epstein told you that he was working to
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: get Mr. Cutler the comfort he needed. Question. In the
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: most recent email, so at the top of the page, Mr.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: Cutler writes of Mr. Epstein, quote, This is not an
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: honorable person in any way. He should not be a client.
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: So you have said multiple times today that Mr. Cutler
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: had the authority to terminate a client relationship, correct? Answer, yes. Question,
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: if Mr. Cutler had that authority, why didn't he use it? Answer,
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: I don't know. Question, did you ever exert influence over Mr.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: Cutler to keep Mr. Epstein as a client? Answer, no. Question,
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: you left J.P. Morgan in early 2013, correct? Answer, correct. Question,
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: and then J.P. Morgan terminated its relationship with Mr. Epstein
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: in the summer and fall of that year, correct? Answer. Yes. Question.
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: Why do you think JP Morgan only removed Mr. Epstein
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: as a client once you left the bank? Answer. I
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: don't know. Question. Do you think those two things are connected? Answer. No. Question.
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: Would you agree that Mr. Epstein had a vast network
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: of people that was connected to an industries, including finance, politics, entertainment,
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: and academia? Answer. Yes. Question. Would you agree? that Mr.
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: Epstein frequently leveraged those connections to broker meetings, share business intelligence,
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: and trade favors? Answer. I'm not sure. I'd say trade favors. Question. Sure.
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: Would you agree that Mr. Epstein frequently leveraged these connections
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: to broker meetings and share business, share business intelligence? Answer.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: I think he brokered meetings with his network because of
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: what he knew and his influence. Question. And he shared
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: business intelligence. Would you agree with that? Answer. I'm not
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: quite sure what you mean, business intelligence, but you know,
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: views about business or whatnot, yes. But if the implication
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: is that he was using it to pass on non-public information, no. Question,
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: you don't think he passed on non-public information? Answer, not
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: that I'm aware of. Question, would you agree that Mr.
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: Epstein used his vast network of people and the connections
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: that he had to stay not just relevant but powerful
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: despite being, excuse me, despite being a convicted sex offender? Answer,
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: I think he kept a network that gave him a
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: certain aura. I'm not sure I'd characterize it as power.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: I don't think he had power over anybody. Question, your
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: attorney argued before the Financial Conduct Authority that, quote, Mr.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: Epstein traded and influenced and relied on his network for legitimacy.
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: Would you agree with that statement? Answer, yes. Question, did
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: you ever share confidential information about J.P. Morgan with Jeffrey Epstein? Answer, yes. Question,
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: did you ever share other confidential information with Epstein, so
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: not necessarily related to J.P. Morgan? Answer, no. Question, and
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: you previously, you are not aware of Mr. Epstein sharing
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: your trading on information generally? Answer, that's correct. Question, so presumably,
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: you're not aware of Mr. Epstein sharing your trading on
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: on information that you gave them? Answer, correct. All right, folks,
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up right here. And in the
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: next episode, dealing with the topic we're going to pick
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: up with, question I would like to introduce as Minority
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: Exhibit Y in email exchange. All the information that goes
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.