Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Mega Edition: Bill Barr And The Epstein Related Deposition Given To Congress (Part 12-14) (8/8/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: Bill Barr And The Epstein Related Deposition Given To Congress (Part 12-14) (8/8/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're picking up where we
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: left off with the Bill Barr deposition that he gave
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: to Congress. Question I appreciate that. I want to talk
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: about again the colloquial Epstein files and what that means.
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: Obviously it's kind of taken a life of its own
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: of what that could possibly mean. Along with the client list.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: I think your description of the client list is how
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: I will if I say client list, is how I
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: will use client list, whether or not there is a
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: list of people that Epstein facilitated prostitution or underage prostitution
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: to individuals. As an overarching question, what kind of documents
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: make up a criminal investigative file? Answer whatever documents or
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: potential evidence in the case questions So, witness interviews answer yes,
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: question evidence gathered during a search warrant answer. Records of activities,
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: whether it be comings and goings on planes, or whether
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: or someone was in the same place as an allegation. So,
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: for example, on you know Prince Andrew, they spent at
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: least I think I've seen reports that say this was
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: not reported to me by the Southern District that Virginia's
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: allegations of you know, something happened in London, something happened
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: here corresponded to where people were. So those kinds of
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: things are the kinds of records, hotel records, things like that,
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: and witness interviews and things like that. Question and you
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: mentioned a little bit earlier about protecting grand jury secrecy
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: and federal Rule six e. Would everything that's in a
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: case file be presented to a grand jury? Answer? No question?
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: And then would it be common And I think this
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: is what has come out of the Department's efforts to
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: unseal some grand jury transcripts in the case that the
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: kind of underlying investigative review, you know, between the FBI
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: agents and the witness. For purposes of the grand jury,
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: the FBI agent would testify as to what the witness said.
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: Is that common answer, yes, question in your experience with
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: the underlying interview transcript be prevented from disclosure or just
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: what was presented to the grand jury answer? The transcript
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: of the testimony would be protected. Question the underlying testimony answer,
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: what do you mean underlying testimony question? So the FBI
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: interview is a witness, The FBI agent then testifies to
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: the grand jury. Answer, the material presented to the grand
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: jury would be protected. Question, but not necessarily cut off
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: by bar. It's not the medium that it's not limited
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: to the medium. Question Okay, answer, that's my understanding. Question.
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: Do you know if those underlying interviews are recorded or
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: just transcribed? Answer? I don't know. Question Could a case
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: file also include FBI three h two's answer yes, question
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: and ten twenty threes answer. Any document that reflects evidence
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: that is potentially irrelevant could be in the case file.
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: So the word case file is a little ambiguous. Question Yes,
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: as in Epstein files as a whole answer right, question,
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: We've talked a lot and you saw it. The list
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: of what the FBI seesed in the case is seized
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: evidence kept after a case concludes. So mister Epstein died
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: his case concluded, would seize evidence still exist? Answer? I'm
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: not sure of the answer of that. I think people
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: who claim to have an interest in the property have
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: to sort to seek it back, and the government has
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: to make its case as to why it has to
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: be kept. That's my understanding of the process, but I'm
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: not sure. Question. A separate ongoing criminal case would possibly
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: be a good reason to keep the evidence. Answer yeah,
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: including whether there are appeals pending. Question Yeah, and obviously
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: some of the real property at least is gone, like
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: I think the island was purchased by someone else. Answer,
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: I don't know. Question the subpoena process for the USA
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: attorneys and this is my own lack of knowledge, so
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: excuse me. But does the US attorney issue the subpoena
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: or does the grand jury issue the subpoena? Answer? Well,
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: the grand jury does, but in practice, the prosecutor determines,
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: you know, basically determines what is going to be produced
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: on behalf of the grand jury. Question and so the
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: grand jury would say, would recommend the subpoena for a
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: testimony to X and then to US attorney would draft?
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: Answer No, I think the US attorney would say, we're
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: going to interview this person. Question all right, answer and
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: bring that person before the grand jury. Question and those
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: subpoenas can be for documents and testimony. Answer yes, question
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: why issue a document subpoena versus execute a search warrant? Answer?
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: Because you know, many subpoenas are third party subpoenas, like
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: for bank records and so forth, and don't go into
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: a bank and search them. You impose the obligation on
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: the bank to produce them, and they will question, and
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: the can be cut off by bar And even for
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: a subject you know, you would still frequently give that
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: person the chance to comply. You don't go searching unless
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: there's some reason you're concerned about the destruction of evidence. Question,
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: and those can be executed against more than just the
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: subject of the investigation. Right answer anybody? Question you mentioned banks?
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: Answer anybody that you know you believe could have relevant evidence.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Question So other witnesses or companies, businesses, telecom providers answer
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: sure question all yes, answer all yes. Question What about
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: company data repositories? Google? Microsoft? Answer yes. Question you mentioned
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: banks and financial institutions. What about state governments like camera
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: footage off of the state courthouse or anything like that?
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: Could they do that as well? Answer government stuff question? Yeah,
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: answer yes. Question. So in the Epstein case and without
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: I think you said that you didn't review the quote
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: unquote Epstein files in their fulsomeness, but it would be
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: likely that the case would include information like I just
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: laid out three O two's ten twenty threes returns from subpoenas,
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: returns from search warrants, other witness interviews, all of that
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: would be included potentially in a case file. Is that
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: fairer answer? Potentially yes. Question, and this could potentially include
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: information that for whatever reason should not be released, victims
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: personal identity and child sexual abuse material being two prominent
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: examples in this one. Answer, Those are examples, but there
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: are multiple reasons why you wouldn't want to release the
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: raw files. Question what are some others? Answer? Because it's
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: sometimes unfair to the individual who the government does not
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: has not included based on the evidence that they've done
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: anything wrong. Question, So, like a hypothetical would be FBI
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: conducts a witness interview, produces a three to two, The
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: interview names four people. After further investmentation, it's determined that
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: those four people that the interview is not credible, and
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: those four people likely didn't commit any crimes. Is that fair? Answer? So,
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: I mean you could take the examples from this case.
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: You know, some of the victims made public allegations anyway
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: that were fabrications. Question Uh huh. Answer, I'm not saying
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: this is true of all the victims, but there are
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: some that Then Withdrew so it's possible that there's material
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: in there that the government has come to the conclusion
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: is not credible or is you know, conclusively refuted by
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: other evidence. Question Uh huh answer. You know, in the
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: case of Bill Clinton, as far as I was aware,
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: there was no evidence that he visited the island. You know,
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: the government did not obtain any such evidence because you
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: didn't look stupid, asked mister Scully. Ask the people that
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: worked on the island, Ask some of the other girls
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: who traveled to the island. Question, Uh huh answer, And
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: he denied it. But there is somebody who asserts he did.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: I'm just using that as an egg question. Uh huh answer,
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: And it's fair to put that if the government has
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: come to the conclusion that he didn't visit the island,
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: and the police has evidence to show that, why would
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: you put that raw stuff out there to permit all
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: the you know, the Internet to get heated up about
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: this and assault the person for what you know is
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: not accurate. Question? And then you said earlier, and I
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: want to ask you again using the language the descriptor
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: of the client list, and we all kind of agreed
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: on you know, you never saw a document or anything
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: resembling a client list. Answer, I have never seen a
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: document resembling a client list. Question what about any evidence
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: or anything suggesting mister Epstein was bribing individuals with salacious material.
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: Answer you mean bribing them giving them something? Question extorting them?
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: Answer No, I don't recall ever seeing such evidence. And
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: it seems highly improbable to me that you would extort
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: somebody by engaging in an act yourself. That's a crime.
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: You don't get much leverage if you go to jail too. Yeah. Well,
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: what's Fergy talking about? Then? Didn't he a lawyer just
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: say that Epstein threatened to ruin the family of York. Well,
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: what do you think he was talking about? Think he
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: was just making idle threats or do you think that
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: he had compromount Look, this whole entire thing stinks, and
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: Barr has been part of the cover up from the
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: very beginning. And furthermore, he lied directly to Congress here
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: when he said he never met with anybody that was
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: in the shoe with Epstein. He met with Stone Rays,
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: didn't he He had a personal meeting with Stone Reyes,
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: who then died a few you know, months later or whatever.
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: But he straight up said in this deposition, in these
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: documents that he never met with anybody. Question yeah, same
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: kind of same question with the Maxwell case, all of
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: the potential evidence and documents that we just discussed about
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: potentially being a case file. Is it possible all that
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: exists for miss Maxwell as well? Answer the same kind
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: of stuff question? Uh huh? Answer possibly question did you
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: ever review any of the substantative evidence in her case? Answer?
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: I think I said no. Question okay. And then you
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: discussed in a little bit in relation to communication between
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: DOJ and the White House regarding cases, that it would
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: be rare, but you had two conversations with President Trump
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: regarding the Epstein case. Answer I recall two conversations with
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: Trump relating to the Epstein case. Question is it common
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: to have communications regarding cases within the Department of Justice?
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: Answer within the department? Question? Uh huh? Answer for who
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: to have to talk to whom? Question Well, I mean
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: for SDNY to notify you, would they pick up the
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: phone or was it an email or was it a memo?
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: How would that? If SDNY needed to get in contact
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: with you, how would they do it? Answer? Well, it's
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: rare for SDNY to want to get in contact with
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: main Justice, but if they wanted to, it could be
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: anything from a communication to a division, to the deputy's office,
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: or to the AG which was is pretty rare. Question okay,
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: and then I'm going to phrase these two answer. But
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: you know, look, every case is different. So for example,
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: on the Maduro indictments, I was very involved in those
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: because we were trying to coordinate an indictment, I mean
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: a case in Florida, a case in the Southern District,
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: and national security interests and so forth. Question uh huh.
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: Answer something like that, you would have more interaction with
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: the office, but on something like this you won't generally
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: have that much interaction. All right, folks, we're gonna wrap
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: up right here, and in the next episode dealing with
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off.
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: All of the information that goes with this episode can
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: be found in the description box. What's up, everyone, and
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode,
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: we're picking up where we left off with Bill Barr
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: and his deposition to Congress. Question all right, and then
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: maybe the last three questions, which were already similar questions
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: answer okay, that were asked before, but I'm going to
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: rephrase them a little bit. You were asked these a
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: little bit earlier. But are you aware of any information
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: or evidence that suggests that Jeffrey Epstein was an employee
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: of any foreign intelligent service? Answer? No question. What about
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: mister Epstein being an asset or an informant for any
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: foreign intelligent service? Answer as opposed to an employee question
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: uh huh. Answer The question is did I see such evidence? Question?
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: Are you aware of any evidence of that? Answer? No question.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: Similar question for the US, and I believe you answered
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: them aware of any information or evidence? Answer? Oh, evidence
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: meaning stuff that the Southern District has and says, this
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: is evidence of that, as opposed to speculation. Question yes,
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: answer allegations that you see floating around the press. Question yes,
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: answer no, I've never seen SDNY evidence. No question, And
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: I'm going to be obnoxious and ask it any other
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: official channel evidence that suggests that he was a foreign
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: intelligence asked? Answer no question? And then you said earlier
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: and I'll summarize it and you can please correct me
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: if it's an improper summary. Answer. I believe that if
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: he was an American asset as opposed to some businessman
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: who shared some stuff with the government. I would have
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: heard about it from the intelligence agency. Question. That was
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: going to be my short summary here. You testified earlier
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: not aware of any evidence of mister Epstein being employed
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: by US intelligence services. And then your assumption is that
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: much like other people with large foreign ties, it would
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: be not uncommon for him to have discussions with the
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: intelligence community. Answer yeah, to share some information. I mean,
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: it's not uncommon at all for businessmen who are being
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: investigated to tell the prosecutors. G you know, I work
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: all the time with US intelligence. That's not at all unusual.
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: And the answer is Okay, a lot of people do.
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: But you know, you're still capable of going to jail
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: for committing a crime. Question Yeah, and you just touched
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: on this, but were you ever informed by the National
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: Security DEVI of any potential impact to intelligence gathering or
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: national security regarding the Maxwell or Epstein prosecutions? Answer no,
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: especially not related to Epstein, you know, being prosecuted or
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: a Maxwell. Question Okay, they go off the record here
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: and then they're back on question. Mister Barr, I'd like
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: to return to the topic of Jeffrey Epstein's prison death.
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: You mentioned at the outset this morning. If I understood
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: correctly that you were informed by your chief of staff
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: that mister Epstein was dead, Is that correct? Answer? Yes? Question,
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: And that the chief of staff told you in his
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: words that it was an apparent suicide? Is that right answer?
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: I think so? Question? Okay? Answer apparently words to that effect.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: Question did you have an understanding as to how your
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: chief came to that conclusion on the morning of his death? Answer? No,
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: this was somewhat on the fly call to alert me
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: to this. And also it was clear that the circumstances
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: was such that it called for an investigation. And I think,
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: as the term may have been used, it was a
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: shit show and they would have to be looked at.
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: But it was an apparent suicide. Question and so what
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: to your understanding interrupts her or him bar or presented
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: itself in a suicide that way? Question to your understanding?
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: What led them to that conclusion? Answer? Common sense question?
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: Could you elaborate? Answer? Well, you know, think at first blush, Well,
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: a lot went wrong. He was found by himself in
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: his cell, apparently hanging himself and using the same modus
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: operandi he did in his previous attempt. See why that
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: previous attempt is so important, and why the Tartaglioni factor
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: has been left out for the most part. Question with
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: respect to OIG's investigation, do you recall the names of
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: the personnel in the OIG's office who were involved? Answer
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: in what question in the OIG investigation? Answer no, I
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: called Horowitz directly. Question do you know the names of
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: any other staff who were involved? Answer or no? Question
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: that are working on it? Answer like, not off the
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: top of my head, And I don't think I knew.
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: Maybe knew at the time, but I certainly don't know now.
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: There was somebody I think up in New York that
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: was close at hand whose name was used so at
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: the time they had he did identify some people who
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: would be involved, but I don't know them. Question you
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: were asked earlier about the FBI's investigation in connection with
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: the death, and just to make sure that we're all
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: on the same page as to the scope of the investigation,
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: it's my understanding that a principal focus for the FBI
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: was whether mister Epstein's death was caused by homicide? Is
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: that fair answer? I think? To figure out this was
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: real suicide or was you know some kind of was
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: this a murder? Basically? Question. You were asked earlier whether
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: you had spoken with any inmates at MCC and you
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: said you hadn't. Just revisiting this because there was some
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: public reporting or a suggestion that you spoke with Efrin
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: Stone reis following mister Epstein's dea. Is that name familiar
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: to you? Answer? No? Question okay? Answer, I mean who
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: did he say he was? And what did I talk
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: to him about? Question? As I understand. Answer, I mean,
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: this stuff happened six years ago, and it's conceivable, but
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: I don't recall talking to an inmate. It was a
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: former inmate or an inmate, as I understand, an inmate
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: of Shoe contemporaneously with mister Epstein. Answer no, I didn't
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: go up to the shoe. Question. This is my understanding
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: from the public reporting at the time. This is August
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. You pointed to some delays in the investigation
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: because certain witnesses were not cooperative. Do you recall answer
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: when question? Do you recall that this is August of
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. Answer yeah, question and specifically a number of them,
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: as you described, required having union representatives and lawyers before
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: you were able to schedule interviews. Answer, before the Southern
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: District was able to schedule interviews. Question you recall that
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: answer yes, question okay. Was a lack of cooperation that
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: you encountered solely the insistence on union representation or were
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: there other factors? Answer? There may have been other factors.
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: I don't know. My recollection is that the Southern District
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: was explaining to me that it was taking time. It
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: was important to get the facts out as quickly as
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: we could given all the conspiracy theories. Question. According to
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: the IG report, mister Epstein was taken by ambulance to
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: the MCC to New York Presbyterian Lower Manhattan Hospital. To
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: your knowledge were EMT and medical personnel questions Answer, I
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: don't know. I mean I don't know now I may
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: have known at the time. Question to your knowledge where
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: DNA tests conducted on the bedsheets in mister Epstein's cell.
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: Answer I couldn't tell you. Question we spoke earlier about
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: video footage in the shoe. Answer, By the way, I
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: would just say that again, this is six years later.
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: I'm not saying I never knew whether DNA was run.
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: Just sitting here, I can't remember whether that was an
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: aspect that I knew about, I did know or was
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: told that very good FBI agents were on this and
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: we're doing a very thorough job. Oh yeah, the FBI. Huh,
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: we can all trust that question. Turning back to the
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: video footage, I just want to make sure that we're
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: all on the same page as to what you looked at.
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: There is the footage that the FBI made publicly available
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: in July this year. Is that the same footage that
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: you personally reviewed? Answer? I said that I cannot say
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: whether that was the same because I don't have what
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: I viewed. But what I viewed showed the common area.
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: Question are you aware of being more than one version
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: of that footage? Answer of that footage? Answer question yes,
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: answer from the same camera question yes, answer no, I
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: don't know. I think at some point I was told
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: that they were working on enhancing it. Question enhancing the version?
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: Answer they were I was interested in seeing the video,
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: and they were working on enhancing the video. And the
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: primary video I viewed was one showing the common area
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: and the guards and a portion of the stairway. Question
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: did you have any understanding as to what the enhancement involved? Exactly. Answer, No,
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: I don't even know whether it was enhanced. I'm just
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: saying I was told that they were working on enhancing it. Question.
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: I'd like to mark Exhibit S a CBS article. It's
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: entitled CBS News investigation of Jeffrey Epstein' jail video reveals
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: new discrepancies. It's dated July twenty ninth, twenty twenty five.
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: Mister Barr, I'm going to ask you a couple of
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: aspects of this article, but please take all the time
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: you need to review it. Answer, well, just tell me
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: what the aspects are. Question. Sure. So I'm looking seven
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: pages in and I apologize this document is not pageanated.
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: There's a subheading that reads experts question investigators interpretation of
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: orange shape moving up the stairs? Answer, uh huh? Question
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: do you see that? Answer? Yeah? Question? And then the
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: paragraph below it reads just before ten forty pm in
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: orange shape is scene moving up the stairs leading to
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: Epstein's tier. Do you recall there being an orange shape
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: in the video along the lines of that description. Answer?
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: I don't recall focusing on an orange shape going up.
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: Well wait, I'd have to see the clip. Question okay,
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: answer to see what it refers. To question. According to
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: this piece and again i'll read it into the record.
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: The report says, through review and analysis of the shoe
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: video footage, witness statements, and BOP records, the OIG determined
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: that approximately at ten forty PM, a corrections officer believed
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: to be Noel carried linen or inmate clothing up to
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: El Tier, which was the last time any CEO approached
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: the only entrance to the shoe tier in which Epstein
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: was housed. I mean only entrance we know about. What
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: about through the venting system? Is there another way to
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: get in? Look, I'm not trying to be conspiratorial here,
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: but these are questions that have to be asked. Question.
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: I recall when I watched the video that I watched
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: what I believed the CEO went up the stairs but
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: did not go into the tier. Question CB based on
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: its analysis and again I'll read the next paragraph here.
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: Video forensic experts who review that footage at the request
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: of CBS News were skeptical about that interpretation, and suggested
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: that the shape could be a person dressed in an
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: orange prison jumpsuit climbing the stairs. Connor McCourt, a retired
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: NYPD sergeant, and forensic video expert told CBS News, based
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: on the limited video, it's more likely it's a person
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: in an orange uniform. Would you agree with that observation? Answer?
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: No question and why not answer? Because when I watched it,
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: I concluded it was the CEO that went up at
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: that time and didn't go in question and then skip
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: ahead one two answer. That was not only my interpretation,
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: it was the OG's interpretation and the Southern District and
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: the FBI's interpretation of whatever they watched. Question, I'm skipping
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: four pages ahead in the article answer, uh huh question
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: and the subreading that reads at twelve five forty eight am,
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: an unidentified individual passes through the shoe mister O'Callahan over
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: here here Barr, Yeah, I see it. Questions, So, just
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: for the record, I'll read the paragraph. The Inspector General's
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: report says only two members entered the unit after midnight.
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: One is a corrections officer identified only as COE three.
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: The other is described as the morning Watch Operations lieutenant.
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: The presence of a third unidentified individual seen on the
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: video is not addressed by the Inspector General's report. Were
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: you aware of there being a third unidentified individual? In
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: the footage. Answer. All I can say is that when
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: I watched it in the movements were explained, it correlated
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: to the other evidence, and I saw nothing of some
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: strange unidentified person lingering around. If there was such a person,
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: there was an explanation for it. Question, and would to
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: that they're cut off by bar I haven't. I'd have
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: to see what the Inspector General also says, But there
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: was nothing that raised that question for me. Question and
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: one last question on this article, And I'm skipping ahead
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: a couple of pages. One page, I'm sorry, to the
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: bottom of the following page under the subheading were there
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: other cameras recording? Answer? Yeah, question and again I'll just
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: read the first two paragraphs into the record. In addition
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: to the cameras that failed to record other angles of
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: the shoe common area, the Inspector General's report states that
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: there were two additional cameras recording events in the vicinity
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: of the Epstein unit, one covering an elevator bank used
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: to transport inmates, and another focused on a nearby guard desk.
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: Neither of those videos has been released, but a screen
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: grab from one was included in the report. So were
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: you were aware of those recordings. Answer, I was aware
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: that there were other cameras that were recording in the vicinity,
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: and I believe that when I reviewed video, I saw
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: excerpts from other videos. Question CBS goes on to conclude, answer,
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: that's my best recollection. I have to see a screen grab. Also,
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: I don't know. Question CBS goes on to conclude. While
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: federal officials have dismissed those recordings as unhelpful in documenting
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: what occurred that night, experts told CBS News that those
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: videos could add value to the analysis. They could, for instance,
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: help determine whether the DVR system did in fact reset
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: nightly and consistently lose one minute, as Attorney General Pambondi said,
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: or provide evidence to contradict or claim. Do you have
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: a view on that conclusion? Answer? No. Question in light
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: of CBS's conversation or observation, do you think that those
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: additional answer? I mean we had a number of experts,
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: you know, different sets of experts go over this and
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: look at all the evidence together and correlate it. This
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: is all very interesting, but to me, it doesn't carry weight. Question,
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: in light of CBS's conclusion, do you think that those
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: additional recordings should be publicly released. Answer. I think that's
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: a call for the AG. I think if they concluded
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: ads value, i'd like to see them all released. Question
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: nothing further on this exhibit. All right, folks, we're going
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: to wrap up right here, and in the next episode
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: left off. All of the information that goes with this
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to pick up where we left
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: off with the Bill Barr deposition. Question mister Barr, I
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: apologize for not asking this earlier. What was the name
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: of your chief of staff? Answer Brian Rabbit. Question, thank you?
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: Answer at that time. Question, we spoke earlier about the
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: autopsy performed by the office of the Chief Medical Examiner
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: for the City of New York. Do you recall any
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: specific staff at the Medical Examiner's office who are involved? Answer? No,
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: it's the cities. I think it belongs to the city.
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: Question okay. Answer at the time, I knew the name
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: of the medical examiner, but I could recall that now.
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: Question did you ever see the autopsy report before it
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: was released. Answer no question or I'm sorry, before it
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: was completed rather, answer no question. Do you have an
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: understanding as to why it hasn't been publicly released? Answer no,
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: I don't know what their practice is. Question, So, the
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: medical examiner determined that the death was a suicide, to
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: your knowledge, did the FBI continue to investigate the circumstances
• 27:26
  Speaker 1: surrounding mister Epstein's death after that point? Answer yes, question
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: and did it continue to investigate it as a possible homicide? Answer?
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: I think they were carrying out the investigation that was
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: initiated as to determine why the federal prisoner wound up
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: deadness cell. Question, So, to ask it a different way,
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: did the FBI accept the medical examiner's conclusion? Answer it
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: was a medical examiner's evidence, strong evidence, obviously. Question And
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: so did the FBI rule out the possibility of a
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: homicide at that point? Answer? No, the FBI. My understanding
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: is the FBI continued to rely on its own evidence
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: and conclusions and determinations. It didn't stop just because the
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: medical examiner made that ruling. And that would be true.
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: I think in almost any case, if the FBI is
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: told to go in and conduct an investigation federal investigation
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: for the Department of Justice on something. It'll do it.
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: The fact that a state official makes that ruling won't
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: stop them. Question Okay, I understand that you directed certain
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: changes at BOP following mister Epstein's death. Answer uh huh. Question,
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: including replacing BOP leadership. Answer uh huh. And that included
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: Kathy hawks Sayer answer I brought her in question and
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: Tom Kine answer yes. Question. And is the name Timothy
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: Shay familiar to you? Answer? Yes, question and to his
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: mister Shay answer Shay was on my staff at the time.
• 28:54
  Speaker 1: Question okay? And what was his role? Answer? Among on
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: his portfolio were a BOP matter. Question So, to your knowledge,
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: did mister Shay have any communication with the Medical Examiner's Office? Answer? Not,
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: to my knowledge, I don't recall that question. Is there
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: anyone else at the BP who worked on addressing the
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: operational issues that surrounded mister Epstein's death? Answer I'm sure
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: there were. Question any names that you can recall? Answer
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: not that I can recall. You mean remedying the problems
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: that were found? Is that what you're talking about addressing?
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: Question Well? Generally, yeah, the circumstances surrounding the death and
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: the immedial measures that were undertaken afterwards. Those are two different,
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: two different things, replies Barr. Question yes so globally. Answer,
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: I don't remember the people involved in those efforts. Question Okay.
• 29:45
  Speaker 1: There was discussion earlier regarding Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Donald Trump.
• 29:50
  Speaker 1: Mister Trump has stated that he and Epstein fell out
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: in the early two thousands. Did you ever have an
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: understanding as to the cause of their falling out? Answer?
• 29:59
  Speaker 1: I mean, what's just speculated in the press. All I
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: can recall Trump saying to me is that he had
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: of falling out and pushed him out of or somehow
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: got him out of mar A Lago. That's what I remember. Question,
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: and this came up earlier. It was reported that Attorney
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: General Bondi advised the White House in May of this
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: year that President Trump's name appears in the Epstein files.
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: Do you have an understanding as to why Attorney General
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: Bondi flagged that for the White House? Answer? I think
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: that would normally be what an attorney general would do,
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: you know, is to give the president a heads up
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: if something is going to happen like that the release
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: of documents that have his name in them, and that
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: will be you know, there would be a lot of
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: speculation about it. Question why is that? Answer? I mean,
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: it's completely normal to tell the chief executive that his
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: name is about to be released. There's nothing inherently wrong
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: with that. Question. A few questions for you, mister Barr,
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: concerning Glene Maxwell. Understanding that you were no longer at
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: the DOJ when charges were brought against Miss Maxwell. Answer, no,
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: I was at the DOJ when the charge. He's cut
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: off by the person asking the questions. Question, you were
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: at the DOJ. I'm sorry, right, you were still at
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: the department. Were the charges that were brought against her
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: supported by the evidence in your view? Answer? I was
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: assured they I mean, I think I was made aware
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: of that evidence, what they intended to prove, and that
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: it would support the charge, So at the time I
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: felt that they were. I don't have a different view today.
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: Question And as we spoke about earlier, Miss Maxwell's conviction
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: made her a sex offender for purposes of federal law.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: Correct answer, uh huh. Question. She was sentenced following trial
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: to two hundred and forty months imprisonment to be followed
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: by five years the supervised release. The court imposed a
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars fine. Do you view
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: that as an appropriate sentence? Answer? Yes. Question do you
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: believe miss Maxwell to be a credible witness? Answer depends
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: on what she's testifying about. Reporter, Can you repeat that answer?
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: It would depend on what she's testifying about. Question and
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: the fact that she was charged with perjury with two
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: accounts of perjury influence your answer at all? Answer of course.
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: Question you're aware that in July of this year, Miss
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: Maxwell was interviewed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Baby Billy
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: Blanche Answer yes, question okay, answer from public reports. Question
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: it's my understanding that at no point during the DJ's
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: investigation or during her prosecution did Miss Maxwell meet with
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: the government to offer information relevant to Epstein's investigation. Is
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: that an accurate understanding? Answer, I'd have to go back
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: and see. Nothing springs to mind about her doing that question.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: Do you have an understanding as to why the Deputy
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: Attorney General met with Miss Maxwell? Answer? No. Question is
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: it unusual in your view for the second highest law
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: enforcement official at DOJ to interview a potential cooperating witness. Answer,
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: it doesn't happen every day. Question Can I take that
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: as a yes? Answer? Yeah, of course, it's unusual. Question
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: And would you agree with me that it's typically the
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: line prosecutors handling the case that do the interviews with
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: potential cooperators. Answer typically, that's in a normal case. This
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: case has features that most cases don't have. Question even
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: in an abnormal case, would it be your experience or
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: expectation that in an interview like this the Deputy Attorney
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: General would be accompanied by line prosecutors who handled the case. Answer?
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: As I say, it's hard to say there's a particular
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: practice since this doesn't normally happen. Question DOJ. Hold on,
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: let's back up for a second. It's also my understanding
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: that in a typical case, it's customary for an FBI
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: agent to present for these interviews as well for the
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: purpose of note taking. Is that consistent with your understanding? Answer?
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: Usually in the investigation of a case. Yes, I'm not
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: sure what stage this was in and what it was
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: related to. Question DOJ does not share details of who
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: from DJ was president in the room. If anyone with
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: mister Blanche and miss Maxwell, is that unusual in your view,
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: Answer no, because usually the Justice Department does not share
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: information like that question, even in a case like this
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: that's pretty closely in the public eye. Answer well, I'll
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: say this, that's why this is an unusual case. So
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: to say, does this usually happen? Does this usually happen?
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: The answer is usually no question. Until recently, Miss Maxwell
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: had been serving her sentence at a federal prison facility
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: in Tallahassee, Florida. Following her interview with mister Blanche, she
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: was transferred to a federal prison camp in Brian, Texas.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: Are you familiar with the federal prison camp? Answer no. Question.
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: Do you have an understanding as to why BOP move
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: Miss Maxwell to a federal prison camp? Answer no. Question.
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: Do you have a view as to whether that decision
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: was appropriate? Answer no, because I think the initial regime
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: that used when someone is sent to corrections facility does
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: not necessarily dictate the way they're going to be treated
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: all the way through, and it's not uncommon for there
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: to be lesser and lesser security involved. Once the BOP
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: has experienced with people as a prisoner and they see
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: they don't pose a threat, and you know, I forgot
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: what the word is used. But they're not disruptive prisoners
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: or anything like that. They're relatively easy to manage. There's
• 35:25
  Speaker 1: a process whereby they go to less secure facilities, So
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: you know, it doesn't strike me as odd she was
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: put in that facility. You also have to remember her
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: initial confinement was quite severe because she was watched twenty
• 35:36
  Speaker 1: four to seven question. I'd like to ask the court
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: reporter to mark this as exhibit D. A Washington Post article.
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: It's titled Klan Maxwell's move to country club prison smacks
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: a special treatment experts A and I'm focusing on the
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: fifth paragraph down at the bottom of the first page.
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: It refers to a long standing policy from the Federal
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: Bureau of Prisons which, according to the articles, inmates with
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: certain elevated security classifications known as public safety factors from
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: serving in federal prison camps. Sex offenses are among the
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: most severe. Is that consistent with your understanding answer? Obviously,
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: one of the public safety factors is the severity of
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: the crime. You also look at someone's role and whether
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: they constitute the extent to which they constitute an ongoing
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: threat to the public. Frequently, you know, it may be
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: the fact that it's a sex offense, reflects a perversion,
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: a compulsion, and so forth will frequently be determinative of that,
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: but not in all cases. Question. The article goes on
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: to note in the next sentence, and this is the
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: top of the second page, inmates serving sentences of ten
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: years or more generally aren't eligible for transfer to minimum
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: security facilities. This too would have been applied to Maxwell,
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: who is not due for release until twenty thirty seven.
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: Is that consistent with your understanding? Answer? That is what
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: question that inmates serving sentences of ten years or more
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: generally aren't eligible for transfer to federal prison camps? Answer again,
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: general you know to me, doesn't you know? I do
• 37:10
  Speaker 1: not think that frequently. The only way you can get
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: a prisoner in a facility for a long period of
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: time to cooperate is to offer something that you can deliver,
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: And I don't think it's unusual put someone in a
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: less severe condition of confinement in return for cooperation. Usually
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: that's the only way you can get someone who's in
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: for a long term to cooperate. Question, just one more
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: statement in this article, I'd like to direct your attention
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: to if I could, and it's in the following paragraph.
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: The sentence reads, While it's not uncommon for prison officials
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: to allow inmates to cooperate with investigations to move to
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: lower security facilities, it's rare for sex offenders to receive
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: such benefits, and they almost never get moved into prison camps.
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: Like Brian experts said, do you agree with that statement? Answer?
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: I'd have to see what the situation is. You know,
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: it may be that sex offenders rarely cooperate and frequently
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: the whole picture of the person reflects an ongoing threat
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: to the public, And I don't know what the analysis
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: was here by the Bureau of Prisons. Question. Miss Maxwell's
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: current attorney has stated publicly that he hopes his client
• 38:13
  Speaker 1: receives clemency from President Trump. In your view, to circumstances
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: exist that would justify a pardon or any other form
• 38:20
  Speaker 1: of clemency for Miss Maxwell. Answer, that's an issue for
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: the president to address. Question Chairman Comer stated, I'm sorry.
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: Miss Maxwell's attorney stated in July twenty ninth, twenty twenty
• 38:32
  Speaker 1: five letter Chairman Comer that his client quote did not
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: receive a fair trial. Do you agree with that assertion? Answer?
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: I haven't seen his basis for saying that, So I
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: can't agree with it. Question. In the same letter, her
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: attorney also describes miss Maxwell as quote a convenient scapegoat
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: unquote following mister Epstein's death. Do you agree with that characterization? Answer?
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: Not to the extent that it just dismisses the idea
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: that she herself was guilty of a serious crime. You know,
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, it may be that a lot of public
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: outrage at the events then became solely focused on her,
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: but that doesn't excuse or make her less responsible for
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: that conduct. Question. I'm getting close to the end. Just
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: a few more questions, am My next questions pertained to
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: an investigation that this committee undertok in twenty nineteen in
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: connection with the Florida plea deal, and that was during
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: your tenure. Do you recall that investigation? Answer? I'm sorry,
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: I thought you were talking about the Florida plea deal
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: back in the early two thousands. Question. Yes, So this committee,
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: the Oversight Committee, in twenty nineteen, undertook an investigation into
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: the circumstances surrounding the two thousand and seven plea deal
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: in Florida. Do you recall that? Answer? I actually don't
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: recall that question? Okay. Answer, I'm sure it happened, but
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: I don't recall it. Question. I'm just going to mark exhibits.
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: I think we're up to E, so this will be
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: E and F. Yes, these two letters from twenty nineteen
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: from the committee in connection with this investigation. So I'll
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: turn to exhibit E first. That's the July letter to
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: Corey Aminson of OPR. Have you ever seen this letter before? Answer?
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: It's possible I have. I'm frequently briefed. I was frequently
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: briefed by the Legislative Affairs person as to any developments
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: on the Hill. I don't remember it, though. Question So,
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: the letter requested a briefing from OPR on issues relating
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: to the two thousand and seven Plea deal. I can
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: represent to you that OPR sent the committee a response
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: confirming that it was conducting an investigation, but declined to
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: provide the requested briefing. Do you have an understanding as
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: to why it declined. Answer? I don't recall, as I say,
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: I may very well have been briefed on this letter,
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: because I regularly was briefed on developments, including letters like
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: this that we're going to be rejected you know, declined,
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: So I can't specifically say that it was explained. I
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: can remember explanation, but it doesn't surprise me that they
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: would decline it. I think it would be normal question,
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: and why is that answer? Because it was an ongoing investigation,
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: the department is going to put that stuff out. Question,
• 41:02
  Speaker 1: and then I'll turn to Exhibit F and generally that
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: stuff around the plea agreement bar answers wouldn't be normally
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: put out, So it doesn't surprise me that they rejected it. O'Callahan,
• 41:13
  Speaker 1: do you have a copy of the department's response to
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: the July tenth letter. It's referenced in the December twentieth letter.
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: It's an August fifth, twenty nineteen letter from Assistant Attorney
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: General Stephen Boyd in response to Chairman Cummings letter. Yeah,
• 41:28
  Speaker 1: I was planning to introduce it radacted, says O'Callahan. It
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: would just be if you're showing the attorney the former
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: Attorney general the sequence of letters. Witness, you asked me
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: why it was declined. O callahan, Yeah, Witness, it would
• 41:41
  Speaker 1: be good to see the letter, but that's okay. Question.
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: Turning to the December twentieth letter, which is the exhibit
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: f Do you recall seeing or receiving that letter? Answer?
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: No question? Okay, answer but for the same thing. I mean,
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: letters are coming during the Trump administration. Question Sure, we
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: got a lot of letters coming in like this understood
• 42:01
  Speaker 1: to your knowledge to DOJ ever provide documents that the
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: committee requested in this letter? Answer? I don't know. Is
• 42:07
  Speaker 1: it the same documents? Oh? Callahan? The document request is witness. Yeah,
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: that would normally be I mean, I think any Department
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: of Justice would at least initially really decline. Question and
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: why is that? Barr? The reasons I stated question, and
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: I'll represent that DOJ did not in fact provide documents
• 42:26
  Speaker 1: pursuing to this letter. Just a few more questions and
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: then I'm done. Mister Barr. We've talked about a lot
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: of names throughout the course of the day. Is there
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: anyone else, in your opinion who may have firsthand knowledge
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: relating to the Epstein investigation or the Maxwell investigation that
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: this committee should speak with? Answer? Well, I mean I
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: think the people conducting the investigation. I mean, main Justice
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: did not conduct the investigation, and as I've said, the
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: information was limited, partly because that would be appropriate and
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: partly because it all depended on what the Southern District
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: wish to share. So I was you know, you're if
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: you're interested in finding out whether the investigation ever developed
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: information that would establish misconduct by someone other than the
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: two who were charged. I think the starting point would
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: be the people who were involved in or who supervised
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: the investigation and the people who conducted it. Question so
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: specifically the line attorneys, a SDNY and the FBI agents
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: Answer what I mean? The US attorney Jeff Berman question yeah,
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: answer he supervised the investigation. Question anyone else answer well,
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: I mean usually the Department doesn't like line attorneys hauled
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: up before Congress. On the other hand, some of them
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: have appeared to leave. Question I asked you earlier about
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: any communication that you had during your first tenure of
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: the Trump administration with the White House. Just to complete
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: the picture, have you discussed the Epstein investigation with anyone
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: in the current Trump administration? Answer? No, not that I recall.
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: I may have expressed surprise that the thing had taken
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: on the character that it has. Question and who would
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: you have expressed that to answer? I don't know? Some friend?
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: Question and have you gets cut off? Bar answers, no
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: one in the Department of Justice that I can think of.
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: Question and then the last question. So I would put
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: this in the category of conspiracy theory. But there has
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: been a theory to the effect that Democratic politicians, including
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: President Obama, President Biden, Hillary Clinton, so forth, have tried
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: to or planted President Trump's name in the Epstein files
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: or otherwise tried to connect them to Epstein's investigation. Do
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: you have any knowledge to support that theory? Answer? I
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: don't know the extent to which his name appears. I mean,
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: I know it's been on flight records that's been public,
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: but I personally have no knowledge of, you know, any
• 44:38
  Speaker 1: false information being fabricated on him or anyone else. Question okay, answer, well,
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: except for witnesses that have fabricated stories. Question apart from
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: the individuals who I just named, the individuals you're referring
• 44:51
  Speaker 1: to are not the individuals that I just named in
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: my question, the Democratic politicians who I just named. Answer right, Okay,
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: question no further questions, Thank you very much. Off the record.
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: All right, folks, Well, that's gonna do it for the
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: Billbard deposition, and of course, once we get the Alexandra
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: Acosta deposition. We'll get that bad Boy added to the
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: catalog as well as for this one, well that's gonna
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: do it. All of the information that goes with this
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box.