Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: Bill Barr And The Epstein Related Deposition Given To Congress (Part 13-14) (5/23/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: Bill Barr And The Epstein Related Deposition Given To Congress (Part 13-14) (5/23/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

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