Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: A Look Back At The Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (Part 3) (7/11/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: A Look Back At The Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (Part 3) (7/11/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
0:04
Today mark day number eight of the Gallaine Maxwell trial,
0:08
and we saw several witnesses take the stand. Now today
0:12
there were no accusers who took the stand, basically just
0:16
foundational testimony from employees of Epstein, one who was a
0:21
part time housekeeper, and then the other David Rodgers, who
0:27
was Epstein's original pilot. He also gave testimony. And we
0:32
also heard from Carolyn, the accuser who we heard from
0:37
yesterday from her boyfriend Sean. So that's how it lined
0:41
up this morning inside of the courtroom. Another thing that
0:46
came out of the courtroom that shocked some people, not us, however,
0:51
but some folks was the timeline, meaning that Jeffrey Epstein
0:56
and Glaine Maxwell knew each other for a lot long
1:00
longer than the official timeline originally stated. And when I
1:04
say the official timeline, I don't mean the timeline that
1:08
you know we've dug into. I'm talking about what the
1:11
unsullied talk about. You know, all of the blue check marks,
1:15
all of the so called journalists who have just shown
1:17
up and all of a sudden think they have a
1:20
full grip on this case. To them. They were all shocked,
1:25
I mean shocked that Epstein and Maxwell knew each other
1:28
longer than the official narrative has it. But in reality,
1:33
when you look at this in the big picture, and
1:36
you look at all of the players on the stage,
1:38
and you look at all of the different timelines, it's
1:44
rather obvious that Maxwell and Epstein knew each other previously
1:48
to them hooking up in New York for their oh,
1:51
I don't know, three and a half four decade run
1:56
of you know, human trafficking for Jeffrey Epstein for sure,
2:00
and allegedly for Glenn Maxwell. But the whole entire premise
2:07
of Epstein and Maxwell meeting just because Maxwell needed a
2:11
rich man after her father died has always been ridiculous.
2:15
All you have to do is listen to the survivors
2:17
themselves and they'll tell you. But I guess that's a
2:20
little too much for the legacy media to do. They're
2:24
way too busy, right, way too busy with their Steve
2:28
Bannon talk or talk about AOC. I mean, really, who
2:34
cares about any of that nonsense. You would think that
2:37
this would be wall to wall this case, but it's not,
2:41
and people will conflate that comment right, and say, oh,
2:43
well it is being covered. Hey, look it's being covered
2:45
in my local newspaper. All right, Well, my question is this,
2:49
why is it not being given the same kind of
2:52
tread that say, Gabby Patito's case did, or say, for
2:57
another example of a trial, what a Rittenhouse. Now. I'm
3:01
not saying that it should be broadcast live from the courtroom.
3:04
We know that can happen due to federal regulations. But
3:09
where are the panels on Rachel Maddow? Where are Sean
3:12
Hannity and the rest of them bringing in all of
3:14
specialists and all of the experts on the case. Where's
3:17
a panel of all of the survivors being brought in
3:20
to talk about what occurred here? But you have every Tom, Dick,
3:24
Harry and John who has an opinion about something like
3:27
the Writtenhouse child getting all kinds of spin, getting all
3:32
kinds of air time. And you know why right, because
3:35
it can be used to move the political needle. They
3:40
want us focused on hating each other. They don't want
3:43
us focused on things like this where we all look
3:45
at each other and say, holy shit, both sides are
3:48
in on it, both sides are corrupt. They'd much rather
3:52
have us fighting with each other at each other's throats
3:55
and pumping out all sorts of rage porn, and it's
4:01
not even disputable. You know, there'll be some journalists or
4:08
people who consider themselselves journalists who are offended by those
4:11
kinds of statements. But it's the truth. Where's all the
4:17
people camped out, where's all of the gigantic, gigantic push
4:22
by these big networks, And it goes for all of them, right,
4:26
not just one or the other, all of them. And
4:29
what it really comes down to is they don't want
4:32
to embarrass their friends. And it's unfortunate, It's really unfortunate.
4:39
You can just take a look at the different figures
4:41
in the media throughout the history of Jeffrey Epstein that
4:45
we're hobnobbing with them, from George Stepanopolis to Katie Kirk
4:50
to Mike Wallace. It's just you know, a who's who,
4:55
Charlie Rose, and how many that we don't know about.
5:00
We know that the Cuomos were connected via one of
5:04
the books. So again, look all of these people, the
5:08
so called elite, they run cover for each other. And
5:11
when this whole thing first broke, Nancy Pelosi's daughter came
5:15
out and said, well, some of our faves are going
5:18
to be caught up in this, And for me, I
5:22
don't look at any politician as my fave. I'm not
5:25
into hero worshiping, especially when we're talking about grifters and
5:29
psychos like the people running the world. So there'll be
5:33
no hero worshiping for me. And all of these people
5:37
were sent to do a job, and I feel like
5:39
all of them have failed completely and miserably. And it's
5:43
not just now, it's throughout years. You have to think
5:46
think about how many presidencies we have had that Jeffrey
5:50
Epstein has been running around and active, him and Galay
5:53
Maxwell all away from Clinton right all the way through.
5:58
Nobody stopped them, Nobody did a thing. In fact, he
6:02
was helped along his merry way. And it's disgusting, honestly.
6:10
It's really one of the most egregious miscarriages of justice
6:14
I have ever seen ever in my life. And you
6:18
know for a fact that if this was politicians' children
6:21
who were being abused in this gigantic ring, that they
6:25
certainly would have had a few more conferences and probably
6:29
would have had a few more meetings up there on
6:31
Capitol Hill about what occurred but if it's the Franklin
6:35
situation or these girls, eh, we'll get to it, you know,
6:40
someday when the public pressure is enough to push us
6:42
in that direction. So the legacy media has done nothing
6:48
but cover the whole entire time as well. Now, don't
6:51
get me wrong when I say the legacy media, I
6:53
don't mean the whole media. There's a lot of good
6:55
journalists who have done a lot of good work. Here,
6:58
I'm talking about the major play in news, the people
7:01
who are making the decisions. Those are the people that
7:05
are scum, the absolute scum. And all you have to
7:10
do is take a look at how ABC quashed the
7:13
story about Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts so they didn't
7:16
lose their access to Prince Andrew. And how many stories
7:20
like that occur that we don't know about that there
7:24
isn't a whistleblower telling us about. You have to think
7:28
a bunch, right, So that was the only time it's
7:30
ever happened. So that's why it's laughable to me when
7:35
these journalists, who frankly I have never even heard of before,
7:41
all of a sudden position themselves as experts in the
7:44
Jeffrey Epstein case, Meanwhile, they can't even keep the basic
7:48
timeline down right, the real timeline. So anyway, with that said,
7:54
let's jump into some of the proceedings today and let's
7:58
take a look at what went on in the courtroom.
8:07
All right, So the proceedings got off to a bit
8:09
of a slow start this morning due to one of
8:11
the jurors having an issue getting there. Now, for those
8:15
of you who are familiar with New York, you know
8:17
that there's some issues with the subways. I've been caught
8:20
up many times in subway nightmares, either coming down from
8:25
Westchester on the Metro North or heading back up to
8:29
Westchester via the subway. And I can't tell you how
8:33
many times I have been stuck and caught, you know,
8:36
an issue with the subway, the car, whatever it may be.
8:41
So I feel for this jur no doubt about it.
8:44
There's nothing worse when you are, you know, using public
8:47
transportation and you're stuck, right, nothing you can do about it.
8:51
So it took about forty five minutes for the jury
8:55
to get there, and once the jur got there, they
8:58
got underway. The first witness in the box was a
9:02
lady named Janine gil Vales, and she worked for mar
9:06
A Lago where Virginia Roberts was working or I was
9:10
at when she met Maxwell prosecution. They were asking her
9:15
how long she had worked at the property, and she
9:18
says that she's been there for fifteen years. Now. The
9:21
main reason that they were calling her up there is
9:25
they had a redacted exhibit that they wanted to show
9:28
her and it had to do with the hiring of
9:31
Virginia Roberts dad Sky Roberts at mar A Lago in
9:35
two thousand. Now, what they're trying to do is continue
9:38
to build that foundation we've been talking about, right, all right,
9:41
So we said that Robert's dad worked here, Well, now
9:44
here's the documentation to prove it, and here is an
9:47
employee from the company who can tell you that this
9:52
is actual paperwork confirming that he did work here. So
9:58
it was very short for the prosecution basically just to
10:01
set that up and to add that into evidence to
10:04
continue to build that foundation. So they turned him over
10:08
to Bobby Sternham Sternheim, who is who was handling the
10:12
cross for this section of it. They asked some questions
10:15
regarding the hiring of Sky Roberts and if she knew
10:20
meaning the witness if she knew personally of the hiring.
10:25
She says that she did not have any personal knowledge
10:28
of that hiring. And what I'm guessing the defense is
10:31
doing here is to try and show the jury that
10:34
while that paperwork is in, it could have been from anybody, again,
10:38
trying to, you know, sow some seeds of doubt. Now,
10:44
after this line of questioning, they're done with the witness
10:50
as well, So very short, right, and the next person
10:53
that they bring up is Sean. Now, Sean we heard
10:57
about yesterday when Carolyn was giving her testimony. She was
11:01
discussing Shawn had being her boyfriend, etcetera, etc. So today
11:07
Shawn is on the stand and he did a pretty
11:09
good job, in my opinion, of corroborating Carolyn's story. When
11:14
you look back at what we heard from Carolyn yesterday,
11:17
gut wrenching account, right, I mean, how can you not
11:19
feel for somebody went through abuse themselves from their own family,
11:24
then the abuse of Epstein, drug addiction, the whole gamut, right,
11:28
And that's the whole A lot of these girls fall into,
11:31
not just girls, men too. Anybody who comes from this
11:34
kind of lifestyle where they're abused and the abuse is continuous.
11:40
This is the sort of tale that a lot of
11:41
them tell, unfortunately, and these people aren't to be just
11:48
disregarded thrown into the trash. These are human beings, right
11:54
and just because someone has a drug problem or had
11:56
a drug problem doesn't make them a bad person. So
12:01
prosecution starts by asking some questions about who Sean is,
12:05
such as what his age is and what he did
12:08
for work, you know, setting up the profile. He says
12:11
that he's thirty eight years old and that he is
12:14
a salesman. He also tells the court that he has
12:17
attended a little bit of college. Then the questions turned
12:21
to Carolyn, who gave her testimony yesterday, and the questions
12:25
range from how old she was when they dated. He
12:28
says that she was fourteen and he was seventeen, And
12:31
they also asked other questions about how Carolyn met Jeffrey Epstein.
12:36
To this, he said that she met Jeffrey Epstein through
12:39
Virginia Roberts. And again it makes me question, with as
12:44
much as Virginia's name is being brought up, you would
12:47
think that they would have her testify here. You would
12:49
think that they would bring her in to tell her story.
12:52
Why haven't they why isn't Maria Farmer brought in as
12:56
a witness or insert any of these girls that got
13:00
caught up in Epstein's abuse, Why aren't they being brought in.
13:04
I know I sound like a broken record at this point,
13:07
but you would think that, you know, we would be
13:11
seeing some serious testimony by now, but for some reason,
13:17
we have not seen that yet. And again, look, I'm
13:20
not some a trial specialist. This isn't something that I
13:23
do in my free time follow trials like this and
13:26
what goes on in courtrooms, So, you know, this kind
13:30
of thing where it might seem completely weird to me.
13:33
Maybe prosecution has something up their sleeve that I just
13:36
can't see. But I just don't have confidence in the
13:41
federal government at this point to you know, really see
13:44
it all the way through. So I would think that
13:51
you would want somebody like Virginia Roberts to come and
13:54
give her testimony. Considering she is the most high profile
13:59
of the Epstein survivors as far as being in the
14:03
media and stuff, I would think that her testimony would
14:06
go a long way here. The prosecution then starts to
14:11
ask Sean what the differences are between the part of
14:14
town he was from West Palm Beach and where Jeffrey
14:17
Epstein was from Palm Beach. Now it might as well
14:22
be the Moon and Earth, Okay, when you're talking about
14:26
the discrepancy and wealth besides the you know, between these
14:29
two places, it is massive, massive, And people like Sean,
14:35
people like Carolyn, people like Jane, they come from quote
14:39
unquote the other side of the tracks, right, They don't
14:42
have the opportunities. They don't have family members showering them
14:46
with money. Hell, they don't even have family members giving
14:48
them love. So when they talk about the other side
14:52
of the tracks and you talk about West Palm Beach
14:54
and Palm Beach, that's what you're talking about. And Shawn
14:58
answers that way, you know, he says, like anyone, like
15:01
anyone would, it was about money. But of course he
15:04
is cut off by Maxwell's lawyer, and Judge Nathan sustains
15:08
the objection. He's not wrong though, it's the truth. Literally
15:12
the other side of the tracks. Prosecution is looking to
15:16
establish more of a pattern in the mo of Epstein
15:19
and Maxwell here, right. They want to show you that
15:22
Maxwell and Epstein went after the most vulnerable people, the
15:26
poorest amongst us, the least likely to report them to
15:30
the authorities. The prosecution goes on to ask Sean how
15:35
often he visited Palm Beach, and Sean says to the
15:38
court that he wasn't even able to afford things at
15:40
the gas station in Palm Beach, so he didn't go
15:44
there very often. Now, this line, this questioning, it touches
15:48
on many different things, such as how the sessions were
15:51
set up. And Sean tells the court that a lady
15:55
with a foreign accent and Sarah would call his phone. Now,
15:58
obviously Sarah is Sarah Kellen Vickers, and it makes us
16:03
wonder why in the hell is Sarah Kellen Vickers not
16:07
indicted yet? Is there a sealed indictment we don't know about.
16:12
Is the government gonna bring her out as a witness
16:14
here against Maxwell AT's who knows right? But how in
16:17
the world is she not at this trial under oath
16:21
at the very least, she has been able to slide
16:24
through all of this. Ever since being named in the
16:27
non prosecution agreement down in Florida, she has been able
16:31
to avoid all of this. And it is unimaginable to me.
16:36
You look at r. Kelly and all of his assistants
16:39
caught up. You look at Keith Rainiery, all his assistants
16:42
caught up. But here in this case, these people, they're
16:45
gonna slide free, the unindicted co conspirators. I mean, it's
16:52
just crazy. It's honestly crazy to me. And the fact
16:56
that the government doesn't have them lined up one after
17:01
the other here it just shows you that they're not
17:05
willing to go all the way at least it seems
17:08
that way. Seawan was also asked about the time frame
17:17
of the stays at Epstein's, and he said that they
17:20
were usually well, that they were there when he was
17:22
there for an hour or an hour and five minutes
17:25
or so. When asked if he went to Epstein's with
17:28
anyone else, he responded that he did with Amanda and
17:33
Melissa Laslow, And when he was asked the age of
17:37
these girls, he responded that Amanda was fifteen and Melissa
17:41
was sixteen at the time, and according to his testimony,
17:45
when Melissa left Epstein's house after their journey, she had
17:48
one hundred dollars bills. Now this once again hammers home
17:52
the fact that Epstein was paying minors for massages and
17:57
Maxwell was there for every step of the way. It
18:00
looks to me that the prosecution is having a better
18:03
day to day. It looks to me as if the
18:05
prosecution is doing a better job hammering home their points. Now,
18:11
before Sean is turned over to Pagliuca for a cross,
18:17
he is asked by prosecution about his past criminal record,
18:20
once again as a preemptive strike, right to beat, prose
18:24
to beat the defense to the punch here and when
18:27
they asked him what he got popped for, he responds
18:29
that he was nailed for possession of meth and being
18:32
a felon in possession of a firearm. Again, these people
18:37
who have lived these kinds of lives inevitably end up
18:43
having it rough, end up with a drug addiction. Drug
18:47
addiction leads to other crimes, other felonies, and before you
18:51
know it, you have a rap sheet and you're looked
18:54
at as a felon. So again, people like Carolyn, people
19:01
like Jane, these are the people that Epstein's of the
19:07
world prey upon. And it's not even debatable. Now. The
19:14
high priced Harvard squad takes over the cross and they
19:18
begin to set the table how they see it. They
19:22
ask him about his trip to Epstein's in two thousand
19:24
and two, and then they slyly throw in that it
19:27
was Sarah who called him once again, trying to put
19:30
some insulation between their client and the truth. And you
19:34
notice that throughout this trial they've been throwing out these names,
19:37
Sarah Kellen Vickers. They've thrown out you know, Clinton, They've
19:42
thrown out Trump's name, you know, multiple multiple high profile people,
19:48
trying to get the spotlight off of their client, basically
19:51
telling the jury and the court, hey, well what about
19:55
these people? And while I agree that those people should
20:01
be looked at as well, I don't think that their
20:04
tactic here is going to work. I think that the
20:06
jury is going to be able to discern what's going
20:10
on here, and I think that the jury will be
20:12
able to see through this tactic. It must be said
20:18
once again, however, that Sarah Kellen Vickers should be under
20:21
the microscope here, and that the non prosecution agreement that
20:25
the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals declined to squash once
20:29
again is rearing its ugly head and gumming things up. Now,
20:33
if they would have gotten rid of that non profit
20:36
prosecution agreement, things would be a lot different in not
20:40
only this Maxwell trial, but in this whole entire thing
20:44
overall with that nonprofit prosecution agreement, it really provides the
20:50
co conspirators who are named in it, and those who
20:53
are not named, by the way, a lot of protection.
21:03
Pagliuca continues to pepper him with questions about various things
21:07
such as when he met the when he met with
21:10
the government, and when he had this meeting, how he
21:13
had said that the accent was French. Well, he says
21:17
that he said that it was foreign, not French. So
21:21
after this exchange, Pagliuca is finished with Sean and we
21:26
get ready for the next witness to take the stand.
21:29
Who is Nicole Hess And she's a former employee at
21:34
Epstein's pom Beach House on Elbrio Way in two thousand
21:37
and three is when she was employed there. Now this
21:41
is a pretty short one as well, so prosecution asked
21:46
her basic questions such as what her job duties entailed,
21:49
what her responsibilities were, to which she responds that she
21:53
was tasked with taking care of the home and then
21:56
when asked who hired her, she says it was Glenne Maxwell.
21:59
She was also tasked with, you know, writing down messages,
22:02
et cetera, et cetera. If phone calls came in. What
22:06
this does is, once again it continues to build the
22:09
case that Maxwell was not a victim here but in
22:12
fact an able and willing part of all of this.
22:16
She was also shown, meaning Nicole, She was also shown
22:20
some sealed evidence about a phone call made by Carolyn
22:23
to Epstein, and when shown this evidence, she said that
22:27
that it was a message that she took. And what
22:31
it does is again corroborates Carolyn's earlier testimony. So I
22:37
thought that that was a pretty interesting slide in there
22:42
by the prosecution just a little quick one, right to
22:44
continue to try and build those foundational blocks. And finally
22:49
today on the stand, after they were done with Nicole
22:53
Hess it's David Rodgers. Now I have an episode about
22:59
David Rodgers, and he was Epstein's main pilot. He was
23:02
the one who hired Larry Vasoski, right, and both of
23:07
these guys have their connections to Columbus. We also know
23:09
who has connections to Columbus, the crypt keeper himself, Les Wexner.
23:15
So prosecution they asked mister Rogers questions such as where
23:19
the flights were going, where they were arriving, and he
23:23
goes on to tell the court about Epstein's planes and
23:26
how they started off in a golf stream and then
23:28
they had a Cessna before moving up to the seven
23:32
twenty seven, the plane where you know the horribleness took
23:36
place the flying House of Haras. When asked about privacy
23:40
issues on the golf stream, he said that there was
23:43
a door that was always closed, So when he was
23:46
on the golf stream, the door was always closed. Right,
23:49
He wasn't going back, There wasn't hanging out with Epstein,
23:52
none of that jazz, according to his testimony. Prosecution also
23:57
asked about the log books and if he has a
24:00
pilot kept one, and he responded that he did. They
24:04
offer up this log book and they offer it as sealed.
24:07
I know you guys are shocked about that. And according
24:10
to reports from the courtroom, an entire column of this
24:13
lob book was blacked out. Why in the hell would
24:17
this be blacked out? We don't have a right to
24:19
see who is on these planes at this point, what
24:22
are we gonna embarrass them? I mean, really, if you're
24:25
flying around with Jeffrey Epstein, I think that should be
24:27
public knowledge. The questioning moves along and he has asked
24:34
about some of the names of passengers and how he
24:37
found out who was aboard his plane. He says that
24:40
he didn't always know who was aboard his plane, and
24:42
he tells the court that he wouldn't always, you know,
24:46
have a full accounting. Now, look, I'm not an aviation guy,
24:51
but isn't that a little weird, Like, especially if people
24:55
are being transported across state lines for the purposes of
24:58
being trafficked. Isn't that what the Man Act was created for?
25:02
I mean, the pilots here, Vasaski and Rogers, both I
25:07
have been not a fan of. From Jump Street. Tell me,
25:12
you guys have been ferrying around Epstein and all of
25:14
these young girls for all of these years, and you
25:16
saw nothing, huh, you knew nothing. Huh. It just is
25:22
one step too far for me to go. I just
25:24
can't believe that. It is ludicrous, honestly. And then we heard,
25:30
you know, Larry Vassoski describing a fourteen year old talking
25:33
about how she you know, her breasts and how she's
25:35
an adult. So really, these guys are absolute knuckleheads, first
25:43
of all. Second of all, anyone who's working for Epstein
25:46
all of this time, especially after the first arrest, should
25:50
have their heads examined. So right around this time when
25:56
they were talking about the names of passengers and you
26:01
know the logs, Nathan calls lunch. So after the lunch
26:06
break they come back and uh prosecution refers to a
26:12
sealed exhibit and asks Rogers about a name that it contains.
26:18
He has asked not to say the name in open court,
26:20
but to confirm if that if that passenger was ever
26:24
on his plane. He says that they were. When asked
26:27
about this flight or this flight or that, he responds
26:31
that this one from Palm Beach, this one was from
26:35
Palm Beach to New Jersey. He says that Jane was
26:38
on that flight according to reports. No other context was
26:42
given here, and nobody else who was present on the
26:44
flight was discussed. Then prosecution goes on to ask him
26:49
about a specific flight from Van Nuys to Santa Fe
26:53
and that was flight eight one eight. Now, when I
26:56
went to Santa Fe to talk to people who were
26:58
hip to Epstein's by one of those people was an
27:01
airport employee who had seen the young girls with their
27:06
own eyes, had seen these gaggles of girls and the
27:09
transportation of them from the airport, et cetera, et cetera.
27:13
They said that it was an open secret, and the
27:15
whole city of Santa Fe knew. In fact, the lady
27:18
who checked me into my hotel room said as much.
27:21
You know, when you go to a hotel room and
27:23
you're talking to the front desk person about what you're
27:25
doing in the city, blah blah blah blah. It came
27:27
up while I was there. I started talking about Epstein
27:30
and she was like, Oh, yeah, that's one of those
27:33
open secret type things. I mean, wow. And then you
27:38
have the Attorney General in New Mexico who sat on
27:42
their hands the whole entire time, and it's just one
27:46
gigantic shit show. Unfortunately, when it comes to Zoro Ranch,
27:54
when Rogers is asked about Virginia Roberts and how many
27:57
times that she was on his plane, he replies with
27:59
a staggering number of thirty two times. Once again, how
28:04
is it that Virginia keeps being brought up but she
28:07
is not being called on to give testimony? When asked
28:11
if there was one other person on the flight at
28:13
the time with Virginia Virginia Roberts, Rogers affirms this. Other
28:20
flights are discussed Europe, North Africa, etc. And on these trips.
28:26
According to Rogers, Maxwell was present during his questioning. He
28:31
was also asked about Maxwell and Epstein and the romantic involvement,
28:35
to which he responded that they were involved at first,
28:38
but not later on. Look, I have my doubts that
28:43
they were ever really romantically involved. Okay, I think it
28:48
was a cover from Jump Street. I think that Glen
28:50
Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, they're not capable of being in
28:54
a relationship like you or I would be able to
28:57
be in. These people are different and there's just no
29:02
way in my opinion, that they were ever romantically inclined.
29:05
Did she might have a crush on him? Maybe Epstein
29:09
not with her? There were a means to an end.
29:15
Rogers also says that Maxwell was Epstein's number two in general.
29:20
He wasn't referring to the human trafficking crimes, but it's
29:22
very obvious what the government was angling for here getting
29:25
him to, you know, him admitting that he was the
29:29
number two of Glan Mack, that Glean Maxwell was Epstein's
29:32
number two in general. It really shows you, right, if
29:37
you're that much of his confidant, that you're in charge
29:39
of his household, you're in charge of all of this stuff.
29:41
It would lead people to believe that you're also involved
29:45
here when other people are pointing that out, when other
29:49
people are putting you at the scene of the crime
29:51
and these girls are also saying that you abuse them.
29:57
Prosecution finishes up after this with Rogers, and now it's
30:03
time for mister Harvard Christian Everdell to take over and
30:08
cross examine the witness. Uh. Just like with Vasaski, they
30:12
asked him about the cockpit door and if it was
30:14
always closed. He says that it was not always closed,
30:17
meaning on the bigger plane. The questioning stays in the
30:20
zip code as Everdell asks about any sort of refuse
30:23
that might have been found in the cabin after Epstein
30:26
got off the plane, such as condoms or an unaccounted
30:29
for dildo or something like that. Once again, the defense
30:33
is trying to make it seem like Rogers or Vasaski
30:36
didn't see anything. Oh, I have my doubts about that, honestly,
30:39
that it couldn't have happened. Right, since those guys didn't
30:42
see it, then how did any of this stuff happen?
30:46
So what about when those doors were closed? What what
30:50
about when Vasaski or Rogers were flying the plane, you know,
30:53
across the country. Nothing was going on in the in
30:57
the cabin, they don't know, one way or the other.
31:03
Before they go to another break, they touched on the
31:08
topic of the ownership of Jeffrey Epstein's planes and how
31:11
they are registered. Now, according to Rogers, it's common for
31:17
these planes to be registered, you know, one at a time, separately,
31:22
so they aren't, you know, for liability purposes. And I
31:28
don't really even understand, honestly, what all of that was about.
31:31
That whole entire exchange a little silly if you're asking me,
31:35
I'm guessing that what they were trying to establish was
31:38
this is just a normalized process for rich people who
31:41
own planes, that they register them separately as their own
31:45
entity for liability purposes. But you know, I'm lucky I
31:48
can afford a car, never mind a plane. After the break,
31:53
the question in the questioning picks back up with Everdell
31:57
asking questions about Jane and if Roger Noser another setup
32:01
for the scummy tactics they've been using the whole time,
32:04
by the way, because Everdell states that Jane has the
32:07
same real name as one of Epstein's assistants. Nice little
32:11
back door docksing they have going on here, huh, And
32:15
they just continue to do it over and over again.
32:17
They don't get admonished, nothing happens to them. Brilliant. Everdell
32:23
then moves on to discussing some of the other big
32:25
names who were close to Epstein and on some of
32:27
these flights, such as Eva Dubin, a former model and
32:31
an ex of Jeffrey Epstein, who remained close to even
32:34
after marrying her husband hedge fund hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin.
32:39
And they were so close, in fact, that Jeffrey Epstein
32:41
was the godson to her daughter and they called them
32:44
Uncle Jeffy. That's a whole different ball of yarn to untangle,
32:50
and I obviously have an episode about that as well.
32:53
I'll upload that later. He also brings up Les Wexner
32:58
and the trips to Ohio, discussing those trips to Ohio.
33:02
I mean, are they really trying to use Wexner and
33:09
the Dubans as character witnesses for Glenn Maxwell here? I mean, really,
33:18
you're talking about Glen Dubin and Less Wexner, right, Both
33:21
of these men are credibly accused by Virginia Roberts of
33:24
sexually assaulting her. I mean, what's next, They're going to
33:27
call in the Green River Killer as a character witness,
33:31
so before the uh, before they even get to all
33:37
of that, you know, with the Glen Duben stuff, I mean,
33:40
this is a guy that was very, very close to
33:44
Jeffrey Epstein. We've heard about the fifteen year old in
33:48
Glen Dubin's kitchen crying their eyes out. So there's a
33:51
whole sordid story and a whole tale to be told
33:54
about Glenn Dubin. There's no doubt about that. And I'll
33:59
definitely upload some more episodes offering some more context on
34:03
Glenn Dubin. Now, right before the proceedings wrap up, Rogers
34:08
is asked if he ever saw Annie Farmer on his plane.
34:11
He says that he did not. Now, Annie is going
34:16
to give some testimony here as well, and I think
34:20
that it's going to be pretty powerful testimony. The situation
34:26
with Annie and what she went through, gut wrenching stuff, folks,
34:30
just like all of this stuff and all of the
34:32
testimony from these survivors, and I don't anticipate it getting
34:40
any easier when Annie gets onto the stand the story
34:44
she's going to tell. It's a gut wrenching one and
34:50
it's sad. There's really no other words to describe the
34:56
whole entire ordeal, right, It's just super sad, all of it,
35:00
the pain, the suffering, and the years of unaccountability not
35:05
only by the people who were involved here, but by
35:09
the people who were supposed to protect these girls. Now,
35:15
four decades later, the battle for justice continues, and hopefully
35:22
things spin the right way, Hopefully Glenn Maxwell gets convicted here.
35:27
But we have a few more days at the very
35:29
least to see what's going on, to see what pops up,
35:34
and whenever the prosecution decides to rest their case, which
35:38
we hear might be tomorrow, then of course the defense
35:40
will get a chance to you know, go through things themselves,
35:44
so we'll see where everything lands. Will continue to be
35:47
here at least two times a day covering what's going on,
35:51
and we'll continue to swim through the muck together, folks
35:54
as we search for some clarity. If you'd like to
35:59
contact me, you can do that at Bobby Kapuci at
36:01
ProtonMail dot com. That's bo bb Y c ap you
36:06
Cci at ProtonMail dot com. You can also find me
36:10
on Twitter at Bobby Underscore c ap U c CI.
36:16
All right, everybody, I will be back tomorrow morning. I
36:19
hope that all of you have a great night. What's
36:25
up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Today,
36:30
proceedings inside of the courtroom were cut short after one
36:34
of the prosecutors came down with some kind of illness. Now,
36:38
Judge Nathan says that the illness was not COVID related
36:42
and that they will resume with proceedings tomorrow. So what
36:49
I thought we would do today is go back to
36:52
the vault and pull out an article that talks about
36:56
how the media, the legacy media, whitewashed this whole entire
37:01
story until Julie Brown came around. And I saw a
37:06
lot of media types today being indignant talking about how, oh,
37:13
there is so much coverage of this galleyan Maxwell trial.
37:17
And I've heard people parrot that same stuff. But you're
37:20
not going to gaslight me. I know what I see
37:23
in front of my face. I know what's on the TV. Look.
37:26
For instance, I very rarely watch the cable news stations,
37:31
very rarely, and if I ever do, it just happens
37:33
to be I'm in passing, and I might stop on
37:35
one to see what kind of nonsense is being spit
37:38
out of their mouths. But today I went there on purpose,
37:42
right after I saw all the indignant journalist types complaining
37:47
that people were saying that there wasn't as much wall
37:50
the Wall coverage of this trial as there were four
37:54
cases such as Written House or even when Gabby Patito
37:58
was missing. So when I went to CNN today, MSNBC,
38:03
and Fox, they were all playing the same exact thing,
38:06
Bob Dole lying in stay at the Capitol. And now,
38:10
no disrespect to mister Bob Dole, but do we really
38:13
need all three major news stations broadcasting the same exact
38:19
thing some guy playing the bagpipes or whatever. I don't
38:24
think people are understanding what wall the Wall coverage is.
38:29
Wall the wall coverage means, wall the wall coverage, all
38:33
of these talk shows on TV panels, experts coming in
38:38
and out discussing things, prosecutors, ex prosecutors, FBI agents, you know,
38:43
like they do for all of these other cases that
38:46
move the political needle. Now, on the flip side of that,
38:51
I won't sit here and act like nobody's covering this
38:53
or like there's no journalists on the ground covering it.
38:56
That's not the case. There certainly is, and there's a
38:59
lot of people doing really good work. But to act
39:03
like this is getting wallda wall coverage, that's disinformation. We
39:09
all know what wall the Wall coverage is. And if
39:13
that was the case, and this was wall the wall coverage,
39:16
it would be on every single station, there would be
39:19
fifteen twenty minute segments on all of these talk shows
39:22
about it. Well, you don't see that. So now when
39:29
we talk about the print media, the print media has
39:32
covered this case, there's no doubt about that, but it
39:35
hasn't been the big outlets. It hasn't been the so
39:39
called legacy media. In fact, like we're going to hear
39:42
in this article, the legacy media was busy whitewashing the
39:46
whole entire Jeffrey Epstein escapade for years and years and
39:51
years and years. So now that the trial is here,
39:55
they're going to show up and start patting themselves on
39:57
the back like they've been the vanguard. Just ask the
40:02
survivors themselves what they feel about the legacy media. And again,
40:09
don't get it twisted. I'm not talking about the actual reporters.
40:12
For the most part, who are trying to put these
40:15
stories together and bring the news. I'm talking about the
40:18
decisions that are being made in editorial rooms and by
40:22
these absolute morons who are in control of these news stations.
40:29
Is it not obvious what they try to do, what
40:31
they're attempting to do every single time they have one
40:34
of these big stories that they latch onto. But yet
40:40
when there's a story like this Epstein, Maxwell, there's no
40:45
interest in them digging deep. And then you have people
40:51
like the jurors or some of you who are just
40:53
stumbling upon this story just recently. Don't you feel like
40:58
the legacy media failed you. Isn't it their job to
41:01
provide information about what's going on in the world that's
41:05
impactful to you. You would think that that's what they
41:07
should be doing, right, But that's not the case a
41:10
lot of times. And as we all know, the narrative
41:15
basically is controlled by a handful of people, and for
41:20
these people, it's all about what kind of clicks they
41:24
can get, and the best thing for them is divisiveness.
41:28
Keep pumping out that rage porn, and meanwhile they're neglecting
41:34
to educate people on very important stories such as this.
41:39
So since we don't have anything to really go over
41:42
as far as transcripts, or there's not even any really
41:47
news to get to as far as updates of things
41:49
that we might have missed. So I thought that we
41:52
would jump into this article instead. And this article is
41:56
from two thousand and nineteen and it's from The Guardian.
42:05
The author is Ed Pilkington. Headline Jeffrey Epstein, how the
42:11
US media, with one star exception, whitewashed the story. When
42:18
Julie K. Brown of The Miami Herald approached a former
42:21
police chief of Palm Beach, Florida, in twenty seventeen, hoping
42:26
to get him to open up about his investigation of
42:28
the child sex crimes for which the wealthy financier pedophile
42:33
Jeffrey Epstein had been fleetingly jailed a decade earlier. She
42:37
was surprised by how unresponsive he was. Well, when you
42:41
have dealt with the nonsense that Michael Ryder dealt with,
42:47
when you have dealt with a legacy media that doesn't
42:51
have the courage to go after somebody like Epstein, of
42:54
course you're going to be a bit hesitant to deal
42:58
with somebody coming to you from the legacy media. Michael
43:03
Rider told Brown he had been down this road many
43:05
times and was sick of it. As Brown recalled in
43:08
a WNYC interview last month, writer said he had talked
43:12
to many reporters and told them precisely where to find
43:15
damning evidence against Epstein, but nothing ever came of it.
43:21
He was convinced that a lot of media had squashed
43:23
the story, and he was fed up. She said, so again, Look,
43:27
this is not me telling you this, right, and that's
43:30
why I use these articles when we have these discussions,
43:33
so you know I'm not just sitting here making up
43:35
some wild nonsense. The fact of the matter is the
43:38
people who were involved in this, people like Michael Ryder
43:42
have said this over and over again that the legacy
43:45
media had zero interest in diving in here. And that's
43:51
a tragedy, isn't it, Because if they would have done
43:54
their job right, if they would have listened, the voices
43:58
were there, the story, the stories were there, but they
44:01
didn't have the willpower. And a lot of that, again
44:06
has to do with the scumbags who are running these
44:09
editorial rooms, the people who are making these decisions at
44:12
the top, and who do you think that they're palaing
44:15
around with at the country club. They're paling around with
44:18
people like Jeffrey Epstein, So why would they want stories
44:23
or why would they want to run stories about their friends?
44:30
Writer Warren Brown that what would happen were she to
44:34
continue digging, somebody is going to call your publisher and
44:38
the next thing you know, you are going to be
44:40
assigned to the obituaries department. And that's was the mo right,
44:45
That's what these guys were up to. Anytime there was
44:48
any digging into Jeffrey Epstein or his behavior, he would
44:53
respond by hiring security to go after you. In fact,
44:57
he had security, private private investigators going through the trash
45:02
of the police. Even so, when we talk about this
45:06
runs deep, this isn't you know, that's not hyperbole, right,
45:11
This is a guy who really had no boundaries when
45:17
it came to keeping his activities out of the public eye,
45:21
and he was never, ever, ever above trying to intimidate
45:29
and threaten people. Brown did not heed his warning. She
45:35
flung herself at the investigation and eventually persuaded Ryder to
45:39
go on record. Her resulting award winning three part series
45:43
last November exposed a vast operation in which eighty potential
45:48
victims survivors were identified, some as young as thirteen and
45:52
fourteen at the time of the alleged abuse. She persuaded
45:56
eight to tell their stories. Now think about that eighty
46:01
just eighty from this one expose that Julie K. Brown did.
46:06
One lady right, one fantastic reporter who you know, dug
46:10
deep here and got this story out there for people
46:13
to see. But one person. You mean to tell me
46:15
that The New York Times, the Washington Post, et cetera,
46:19
et cetera couldn't have ponied up resources to dig deeper here.
46:24
This has everything that they usually love, sealaciousness, politicians, celebrities,
46:30
you name it. The story has it. So again, I
46:35
have to ask myself, and I'll ask you, why wasn't
46:39
the big dogs in the legacy media willing to go hard.
46:45
Brown also exposed a government cover up in which Epstein
46:49
got away with an exceptionally light sentence that saw him
46:52
serve only thirteen months in jail. She discovered that a
46:56
non prosecution agreement had been negotiated secretly in two thousand
47:00
and eight the then by the then top federal prosecutor
47:05
in Miami, Alexander Acosta, that gave Epstein and his co conspirators
47:09
immunity from federal prosecutor from federal prosecution. And to add
47:15
a little more context there, Sure it was Acosta who
47:18
was the man on the ground, right, he was the
47:20
quote unquote point man. But do you really think that
47:25
some attorney, federal attorney prosecutor from Florida, from Miami, has
47:31
the ability to push this kind of prosecution on his own,
47:37
this kind of indictment when you have somebody who has
47:40
the ties that Epstein had and obviously the friends that
47:43
Epstein had, of course not so Alexander Acosta, spineless worm
47:49
that he is, was certainly the fall guy here when
47:53
in reality, why weren't all eyes moved to Mukeesi who
47:57
was the acting Attorney General at the time, his office
47:59
at to sign off on this. And then when you
48:02
go look at the paperwork, it shows you exactly who
48:05
signed off on it. So it wasn't just a costa
48:07
in a vacuum making this decision, right, But there's no
48:13
doubt that he was a spineless worm. And if you
48:17
had this kind of information in front of you, and
48:19
your bosses from DC were pressuring you to not go
48:23
after them federally and instead punk the ball to the state,
48:28
which never happens in cases like this for the most part,
48:32
wouldn't you say to your bosses, screw you, I'm going
48:34
to become a whistleblower. At this point, we're not you know,
48:37
we're talking about the most heinous of crimes, thirteen and
48:39
fourteen year old kids. And then this guy gets this
48:44
kind of immunity deal. And then it comes out later
48:48
on that during this time where the negotiation between Acosta
48:52
and Epstein's lawyers is going on about this immunity deal,
48:56
well a year's worth of those emails just happened to disappear,
49:01
just added to the coincidence box, just like the evidence
49:04
from the first alleged suicide attempt of Epstein, just like
49:07
the videos. Just coincidences, right, That's all it is. In
49:16
twenty seventeen, Acosta was appointed by Donald Trump as Labor Secretary,
49:21
a post that ironically is responsible for combating sex trafficking.
49:25
So again, Acosta, worm spineless, should have never been in
49:29
that position because he obviously showed that he was a
49:32
coward when he didn't stand up to Mukasey and the
49:35
Department of Justice when they try to make him punt
49:38
this ball away. And serve it up to Krisher instead.
49:43
So he is another coward, right, and he shouldn't be
49:49
in a position that deals with human trafficking. The media
49:55
is handling or mishandling of the Epstein affair is a
49:59
story of extra It is a heartwarming success story of
50:03
how one intrepid reporter pierced the veil of secrecy and
50:07
found the truth. Brown's coverage has had consequences. Epstein was arrested,
50:13
remember this is from twenty nineteen, last Saturday, and indicted
50:16
on new sex trafficking charges by New York prosecutors who
50:20
praised her work. In the fallout, Acosta was forced to resign.
50:24
And now we know all of the other people who
50:26
have fallen in the wake of this, at least professionally
50:29
speaking for some of them, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner, Leon Black,
50:34
Prince Andrew. We know that obviously Glenn Maxwell's on trial.
50:38
Jean Luke Brunel is rotting away in a jail in
50:41
Paris as we speak. So there definitely has been some
50:44
fallout here. But don't you question how it took Julie
50:49
Brown to do this. The investigators in New York, they
50:53
had a meeting in twenty sixteen with some of the
50:56
survivors and the lawyers. They declined to pursue charges then,
51:00
But all of a sudden, Julie K. Brown has this story,
51:04
breaks this story, and now they're interested. Now the prosecutors
51:08
are praising her work. You guys have had a mountain
51:11
of evidence as high as Mount Everest that at least
51:15
started when Maria Farmer called you clowns and told you
51:18
what was going on, and none of you wanted to listen.
51:23
So again, great job by Julie K. Brown. One of
51:28
those you know jobs that I was talking about earlier,
51:30
one of those people who actually was on the ground
51:33
doing journalist work. Right now, the rest of these clowns
51:37
in the legacy media, they had access to all of this,
51:40
especially the ones in New York. The ones in New
51:43
York are they cracked me up the most. They're supposed
51:46
to be at the epicenter of information, the epicenter of
51:49
the world of information, and they want us to believe
51:51
that they had just overlooked what was going on with Epstein.
51:54
They just missed all of this. You know what, lies
51:57
of a mission are still lies. But there is also
52:04
a less cheerful narrative. Why did the police chiefs appeals
52:07
to the media fall on deaf ears? Why would so
52:11
many years pass before the shocking extent of Epstein's crimes
52:15
and the Costa sweetheart deal Muchesi and Acosta sweetheart deal
52:19
were revealed by a local newspaper with severely limited resources.
52:23
And again I ask you, where was the New York Times,
52:26
Where was the Washington Post, Where was the Ala Times,
52:29
the Chicago Times, any of these outlets with a tremendous
52:33
amount of resources, None of them were around. In fact,
52:39
the two extremes of the story are directly linked. Brown
52:42
told w NYC one of the reasons she began looking
52:47
into Epstein was that she was puzzled about the public
52:50
silence surrounding him. There really was nobody pursuing this at all,
52:54
She said. That was one of the things that intrigued
52:56
me about this case. Why isn't anyone standing up in
53:00
screaming facts. And it's one of the main reasons that
53:05
I got interested in it as well. When you look
53:07
at it, not only is it the absolute depravity that
53:13
was showed by Epstein and his friends towards the treatment
53:16
of these girls, but the way the government conducted themselves,
53:21
and the way the FBI conducted themselves. For me, that's
53:24
what got me interested in this case originally was the
53:27
government malfeasance that was obviously taking place. That silence stretches
53:35
all the way back to two thousand and three, when
53:37
Vicky Ward wrote a profile of Epstein for Vanity Fair.
53:41
During her reporting, she was introduced to a mother and
53:44
her two daughters from Phoenix, Arizona, who alleged Epstein assaulted
53:48
the girls, one of whom was sixteen at the time.
53:51
Ward told The Guardian she spent a lot of time
53:53
with the family discussing whether they should go public. They
53:56
were frightened, she said. The mother told me that every
53:59
night when she walked the dog, she looked over the shoulder,
54:02
over her shoulder. Eventually the women agreed to go on record,
54:06
Ward said, and when Epstein was told about their accounts,
54:10
he went berserk. Epstein had already threatened to get a
54:13
witch doctor to put a curse on wards on unborn children. Again,
54:17
this isn't fantasy land. This is the kind of shit
54:21
Jeffrey Epstein was into. It's a very weird dude, folks,
54:25
a very weird dude. She was pregnant at the time
54:28
with twins, and now we can't paign to stop Vanity
54:32
Fair publishing the allegations, even turning up unannounced at the
54:36
office of the then editor, Graydon Carter, publication was delayed.
54:41
Then Ward was told paragraphs of the abuse of the
54:44
women had to be deleted. And again, right there, that
54:48
should stop you in your tracks. What sort of journalist
54:51
does that? Oh, you're gonna lose your job? Who cares?
54:57
I mean, really, you go find another job. You bring
55:02
your story to another editor and I'm sure they'll run it,
55:06
but instead decides to go along, get along, to go along,
55:10
so you can continue to climb that ladder of success,
55:14
right of personal and professional success. Doesn't matter that girls
55:18
were being abused, doesn't matter that the people that they're
55:23
talking about here were living in fear of their lives,
55:27
as long as you still got a job. Right. I
55:32
was extraordinarily upset, she said. I asked the woman what
55:36
they were doing, what they were going to do, and
55:38
they said they would lick their wounds and retreat, as
55:41
this was exactly what they feared would happen. Should that
55:46
ever be the case, ask yourselves that should we have
55:49
a legacy media where a guy like Jeffrey Epstein is
55:52
moving the dial like that, and if you think he's
55:55
the only one, you are sorely mistaken. It is absurd
56:03
that this story wasn't told for this long. Ward believes
56:13
Carter caved under Epstein's pressure. She recalls confronting the editor
56:17
about the excised paragraphs and said she has a note
56:21
in her archives that has Carter saying, I believe him.
56:24
I'm Canadian, So it comes down to he said, she said, right,
56:27
And I'm sure what Vicky would say is, well, he
56:30
was the editor and that's fine, and I dig that.
56:33
I can okay, perfect, But are you working there as
56:38
an indentured servant. You can't bring your story elsewhere? And
56:43
that's really the rub for me. You know, there's always
56:47
a choice, right, and sometimes it's a shit choice. Sometimes
56:50
it's a choice that might come with a lot of
56:52
personal sacrifice or professional steps back. But at what point
56:58
do you say to yourself, not only do I have
57:02
to respect my craft as a journalist, but I have
57:05
to respect these girls who are abused, and as a reporter,
57:09
the onus is on me to report this. And I
57:15
think way too many of these folks have forgotten that
57:18
way too many of these folks that are in the
57:19
legacy media. They want to be the story. And I
57:22
guess that comes with that hefty, hefty salary that all
57:26
of them are getting to sit around and read off teleprompters.
57:32
Carter remembers events very differently. In his account, there were
57:36
legal issues around the women's stories that prevented publication, most
57:40
significantly significantly that the women themselves were unwilling to go
57:45
on the record. Yees, since that that really matters? Now? Huh.
57:48
How many nameless sources have we seen in the past
57:51
five six years? And I'm talking huge blockbuster stories. Whole
57:55
entire narratives have been framed around anonymous sources. But bitch
58:00
asz Graydon Carter too scared to go go for the
58:05
kill here, too scared to run this story. We all
58:08
know why they were running in the same circles. They
58:10
had the same homies. One quick phone call, Hey, you
58:14
know what, We'll make sure this goes away, Old Jeffy,
58:17
old boy, don't worry. Make sure I can come to
58:20
your next edge dinner. In a statement to the Guardian,
58:26
Carter said I respected the work Vicky Ward did at
58:29
Vanity Fair, but Unfortunately, her recounting of the facts around
58:32
the Epstein article is inaccurate. There were not three sources
58:36
on the record, and therefore this aspect of the story
58:39
did not meet our legal and editorial standards. Oh that's
58:43
such bullshit. Wow. We could go through literally one hundred
58:50
and fifty stories at this point of gigantic international and
58:54
national narratives that have been crafted by people who wouldn't
58:58
go on the record. But now what it has to
59:02
do with Jeffrey Epstein and a story of sexual abuse.
59:05
Now it's you know, we can't go off the record here.
59:10
It's legitimately laughable, and they wonder why nobody trusts them.
59:16
Wart says she had documentary evidence that shows the women
59:22
were emphatically prepared to go public, including fact checkers and
59:25
legal emails to Epstein from Vanity Fair asking for his
59:29
response to the allegations made by both sisters. The Guardian
59:33
spoke to the mother of the girls, Janie Farmer. She
59:36
said that all three did speak to Ward in two
59:39
thousand and three and told her on the record what
59:41
Epstein had done, including allegations he had invited her youngest daughter,
59:45
then sixteen, to his new Mexico ranch and molested her.
59:49
And now we're obviously talking about Maria Farmer and Annie Farmer.
59:53
We're gonna hear from Annie Farmer tomorrow. She's going to
59:56
give testimony. But Julie, I mean, Vicky Ward really did
1:00:02
the Farmer sisters wrong and dirty, and to be honest
1:00:06
with you, it's straight trash. So I mean, she could
1:00:13
say whatever she wants, but this is a matter of
1:00:15
public record, right, this is something that happened. She had
1:00:20
the story. Let's look at the facts. Okay, you had
1:00:22
the story, Vicky Ward, you and your company, you decided
1:00:25
not to run it. Those are the facts. All of
1:00:28
the other stuff, well, words are wind. Okay. I was
1:00:36
hesitant to go public because I worried about the safety
1:00:38
of my daughters. By that point, I didn't trust Jeffrey
1:00:41
at all, Farmer said, But I did want him to
1:00:43
be exposed. She said. She recalls vividly agreeing with Ward
1:00:47
along with her daughters, for their stories to be told
1:00:49
in her Vanity Fair profile. She also said she recalls
1:00:53
vividly her reaction when she learned that part of the
1:00:56
piece was not to be published. I felt angry, she said,
1:00:59
I felt like Jeffrey's money power connections whatever had been
1:01:03
put into play. Eh, no, shit, that's exactly what happens.
1:01:08
That's what they do, and over and over and over again,
1:01:13
the men of always continue to have their foot on
1:01:17
the throat of the children of never. There is another
1:01:22
complicating element to the story. In twenty and eleven, after
1:01:25
Epstein had gone to jail, Ward wrote a blog post
1:01:28
for Vanity Fair. In it, she used language that was
1:01:31
strikingly uncritical of Epstein, referring to him as not without
1:01:35
humor and praising him for being highly knowledgeable. She referenced
1:01:40
Epstein's sex crimes as sexual peccadillos and referred to her
1:01:44
two thousand and three Vanity Fair profile of him, saying
1:01:47
it had alluded to his sexual relationships with young women,
1:01:51
but didn't really go there, focusing on instead on how
1:01:54
Jeffrey made his money breaking news. You did a shitty
1:01:57
job at that too. Nobody knows how Epstein really made
1:02:00
his money, And you clowns in the legacy media. You
1:02:03
ain't doing anyone any favors unearthing anything. So Vicky Ward's
1:02:09
whole shtick is bs folks, all right, that's just the
1:02:12
way it goes. Just the facts, you know, and all
1:02:15
I do is read what she says her own words.
1:02:17
Epstein's crimes were sexual peccadillos. That's what you call assaulting
1:02:23
young girls and saying it was prostitution. Those are sexual
1:02:27
peccadillos to you. Huh boy. We certainly live in way
1:02:31
two different worlds. The piece went on, this is not
1:02:37
to say I didn't hear stories about the girls. I did,
1:02:40
but not knowing quite whom to believe, I concentrated on
1:02:43
the intriguing financial mystery instead, so basically saying that she
1:02:47
didn't believe the Farmers. And the evidence for that is
1:02:51
the story wasn't run. So let's just get down to it, right,
1:02:55
Let's trim the fat. We don't need all the bs.
1:02:58
The facts are the facts, and that's what they are.
1:03:00
And Vicky Word decided not to run, not to run
1:03:04
the story her and Graydon Carter. And then when you know,
1:03:08
it came out that Epstein was a sick bastard that
1:03:10
they obviously knew. Oh well, it wasn't my fault. Well
1:03:14
it wasn't my fault. It's nobody's fault, folks. Just the
1:03:17
way it goes, nobody's ever going to be held responsible here,
1:03:24
The Guardian put this blog post toward, and she said
1:03:28
she regretted writing it. At that point. She said the
1:03:31
victims she had interviewed were not willing to talk, but
1:03:34
nonetheless this blog did not need to be written. Here,
1:03:37
I am towing the Vanity Fair party line and again
1:03:40
not taking responsibility. Oh it's the Vanity Fair party line. Well,
1:03:45
you're the one towing it. You're the one's been towing
1:03:48
it for years. They've been paying your bills, haven't they.
1:03:53
But you know, I guess when it comes to stuff
1:03:56
like this, it's more important to make sure you're locked
1:03:58
and loaded and got your ya a safe at Vanity Fair.
1:04:05
My journalism benefited from hashtag me too. Fast forward to
1:04:09
two thousand and seven, when Acosta reached his bizarrely lenient
1:04:13
plea deal with Epstein. Let's say, when the Department of
1:04:16
Justice did. Okay, let's let's be honest. By then, the
1:04:19
investigators had identified thirty five potential victims who said they
1:04:23
had been lured into Epstein's Palm Beach mansion and sexually assaulted.
1:04:28
Yet records obtained by the Miami Herald showed prosecutors, led
1:04:31
by Acosta actively worked with Epstein's attorneys to minimize media coverage,
1:04:37
and they were good at it. Right. Look, Jay Lefkowitz,
1:04:42
Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, several other people, and we're talking
1:04:49
about some of the most high profile lawyers in the world.
1:04:52
Jay Lefkowitz is very good at what he does. One
1:04:58
of Acosta's prosecutors. One of Acosta's prosecutors wrote in an
1:05:01
email to Jay Lefkowitz and Epstein lawyer on and avoid
1:05:05
the press. Note, I can file the charge in district
1:05:08
court in Miami, which will hopefully cut the press coverage significantly.
1:05:11
Do you want to check that out? That's what the
1:05:14
prosecutor for Acosta wrote to left Kowitz, Epstein's lawyer running
1:05:18
it by him. You want to check that out? Like
1:05:20
he has an option? Do you think me or you
1:05:22
would have an option if we were being prosecuted. Yeah. No,
1:05:27
there's no malfeasance here, man. The government was right online.
1:05:30
Anybody questioning the institutions in this country is crazy. You
1:05:34
conspiracy theorist. Anyone who's saying that. Anyone who's saying, well,
1:05:39
I don't know how people question the institutions. I don't
1:05:42
trust anything they have to say. They were probably the
1:05:45
same people that are still trying to peddle that there
1:05:47
were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That Acosta felt
1:05:55
that he had to resign on Friday was an indication
1:05:58
that the collective failure of you media to grapple with
1:06:01
the story of serial sex trafficking and abuse that had
1:06:04
been hiding in plain sight for years no longer holds true.
1:06:09
In the wake of Brown's exemplary reporting, the rest of
1:06:12
the American media has fallen in line, and the costa
1:06:15
paid the price. Look, no, I guess what he paid
1:06:18
the price for his own actions. Now he is somebody
1:06:23
who is a small part of this, right, a small player.
1:06:26
They focused on him because the media at that time
1:06:29
it was politically expedient, But they didn't go any deeper. Right,
1:06:34
did they tell you about Mukeesy? Did they tell you
1:06:38
about the Department of Justice and their meddling as far
1:06:42
as this prosecution goes. Nah, they didn't tell you any
1:06:46
of that, did they. That may be in part thanks
1:06:51
to the me too movement that had not erupted when
1:06:53
Brown began her investigation, but did draw attention to her
1:06:57
work when it was published. As she told MSNB after
1:07:00
Epstein's arrest last weekend. My journalism benefited from me too
1:07:05
as we started giving these case is much more scrutiny.
1:07:10
Mary Angela Bach, Associate professor in the University of Texas
1:07:13
at Austin School of Journalism, said hashtag me too had
1:07:17
dented the prevailing patriarchy that had existed in newsrooms for
1:07:21
decades and that had led to sexual crimes being overlooked
1:07:25
as merely the way of the world. Me too has
1:07:29
led to greater awareness among journalists that this is not okay.
1:07:32
She said, This is not boys being boys. This is
1:07:35
rape and sexual exploitation of children. So we're gonna give
1:07:39
them a pass right because they they were just ignorant
1:07:42
up to that point. Sorry, not gonna do it. They
1:07:45
all knew what was going on. George Stepanopolis, Katie Kirk,
1:07:49
Mike Wallace, Charlie Rose, and that's just a few of them,
1:07:54
all going over to Epstein's for a little bit of chow,
1:07:57
little party, to hang out with the prince. Meanwhile, you
1:08:02
got outlets like Vanity Fair who buried this story, other
1:08:06
outlets that had no desire in covering it, and now
1:08:11
some of these very same outlets are showing up like
1:08:14
they're the ones who are you know, the saviors of
1:08:17
the story. Meanwhile, I'm just sitting back taking it all
1:08:22
in and shaking my head as these knuckleheads continue to
1:08:26
expose themselves. All Right, folks, that's gonna do it for
1:08:32
this episode. So tomorrow morning, we'll be right back at it,
1:08:37
you know, getting ready for the day, discussing what might
1:08:39
be coming next, taking a look at some of the
1:08:41
headlines that might have cracked off overnight, and we will
1:08:46
buckle our seat belts and see where the prosecution goes
1:08:51
in what looks like their final days. If you'd like
1:08:55
to contact me, you can do that at Bobby Kapuci
1:08:58
at protonmeil dot com. It's b O B B Y
1:09:01
c A p U C c I at protonmeil dot com.
1:09:05
You can also find me on Twitter at b O
1:09:08
B B Y underscore C A p U C c I.
1:09:13
All Right, everybody, the link that we discussed will be
1:09:15
in the description box. As for me, I'll be back
1:09:18
later on. Hope that all of you have a great day.