Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Calls For Howard Lutnick To Resign Grow Louder After His Congressional Testimony (5/18/26)

Transcript

Calls For Howard Lutnick To Resign Grow Louder After His Congressional Testimony (5/18/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Epstein Chronicles. Listen. There are a few things in life
• 0:07
  that are a sure thing death taxes and Trump administration
• 0:12
  officials lying about their relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. And last
• 0:17
  week we heard from Howard Lutnik about his so called
• 0:20
  relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and how every single meeting between
• 0:24
  the two of them was inconsequential and now it had
• 0:28
  no meaning whatsoever. But he doesn't recall what they talked about,
• 0:32
  but he knows for a fact that it was inconsequential
• 0:35
  and meaningless. And you know what, if you would have
• 0:37
  just been honest from the very beginning about your relationship
• 0:40
  with the dude, my guess is things would have went
• 0:43
  a lot easier for you. But instead you had to lie.
• 0:47
  You had to make pretend that you had no relationship
• 0:49
  with a guy whatsoever, when everybody in the world knows different.
• 0:52
  And you know what else is wild that this dude
• 0:55
  didn't even go under oath before he gave his statement
• 0:58
  to Congress. I mean not that I blame. Would you
• 1:00
  want to be under oath if you were telling falsehoods
• 1:03
  about your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Probably not, But I
• 1:08
  have a hard time believing that Howard Lutnik was being truthful.
• 1:12
  I mean, look at the way he reacted about the mask.
• 1:17
  What do you mean, I don't have a goateee, I
• 1:18
  have a couple of pieces of hair that can't be me.
• 1:21
  I mean that was literally his excuse. And look, I'm
• 1:24
  not saying that the mask is Howard Lutnick, but I'm
• 1:27
  saying that it's a question that's valid considering everything we
• 1:30
  know about Jeffrey Epstein, about Jeffrey Epstein's friends, and about
• 1:35
  how Howard Lutnik has lied. So today we have an
• 1:39
  article from CNBC and the headline DEM's demand Lutnick resigned
• 1:44
  over Epstein interview. You lied. This article was authored by
• 1:48
  Kevin Bruneger. House Democrats on Thursday demanded Commerce Secretary Howard
• 1:53
  Utnik's resignation, alleging he publicly lied about his relationship with
• 1:58
  notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and refuse to come clean
• 2:02
  during a subsequent closed door interview. Well, I think that
• 2:06
  that's true. I think that Howard Lutnik has done nothing
• 2:10
  but sell us a bunch of bs. And of course
• 2:14
  the question becomes why, what are you hiding? What are
• 2:17
  you so worried about being exposed? I would think at
• 2:21
  this point that people would understand that come and clean
• 2:23
  and being honest is the right way to go about this,
• 2:28
  because the more you double down, the more you lie,
• 2:31
  the more people are going to think you have something
• 2:33
  to hide. The facts are clear. You lie to the
• 2:37
  American people and attempted to conceal your relationship with Jeffrey
• 2:41
  Epstein in your public statements. The House Committee on Oversight
• 2:45
  and Government Reform, Democratic minority said in a letter to Lutnik,
• 2:49
  your lack of candor demonstrates that you're unfit to perform
• 2:52
  the duties required of you as Secretary of Commerce, and
• 2:56
  you must step down immediately. Read the letter, signed by
• 3:00
  all twenty one of the panel's Democratic members, and listen.
• 3:03
  There sure is a lot of politics at play. Anyone
• 3:06
  denying that is lying, but that doesn't mean the Democrats
• 3:10
  are wrong here to demand this. Howard Lutnick's a liar,
• 3:15
  and I don't believe a word he says. Lundnik claimed
• 3:18
  in the interview last year following a visit to Epstein's
• 3:21
  Manhattan mansion shortly after he moved next door to him
• 3:24
  in two thousand and five, he decided that I'll never
• 3:27
  be in the room with that disgusting person ever again
• 3:31
  until he was so, I was never in the room
• 3:34
  with him socially, for business or even philanthropy, Lutnick said
• 3:37
  in that interview. If that guy was there, I wasn't
• 3:41
  going because he's gross. That all turned out to be
• 3:45
  a lie. So why were you lying, Howie Lutnick? What
• 3:51
  were you hoping to gain from your lies? Oh? That's right,
• 3:54
  some distance, and make no mistake. There is a reason
• 3:57
  that Marjorie Taylor Green is no longer in politics. There's
• 4:01
  a reason that more money has been raised against Thomas
• 4:04
  Massey than anybody ever. And there's also a reason that
• 4:09
  Donald Trump just turned on Lauren Bobert. I'll let you
• 4:12
  figure out what that reason is. And anybody that still
• 4:15
  supports Donald Trump, I don't even know what to say
• 4:18
  at this point. Honestly, this goes so much further than
• 4:21
  owning the Libs or whatever it is you're thinking you're doing.
• 4:26
  This is just beyond the pill. And no president, no politician,
• 4:32
  should ever demand complete an utter loyalty from anyone. But
• 4:37
  that's what Donald Trump does, and all these people out
• 4:40
  here there are more than willing to go along with it,
• 4:43
  and these people think they're the patriots. That's the craziest
• 4:46
  part of all of it. Breaking news. If you think
• 4:49
  Gulayne Maxwell should be pardoned and you think Jeffrey Epstein's
• 4:52
  a hoax, you are not a patriot. But after the
• 4:58
  Department of Justice release of the EPSO related files showed
• 5:01
  continued ties between the two men years later, Lutnik admitted
• 5:05
  in a Senate hearing that he and his family had
• 5:07
  lunch on the Disgrace Financiers private island in twenty twelve.
• 5:12
  It was just an hour. It was inconsequential. Who goes
• 5:16
  to a private island and has lunch for an hour,
• 5:21
  brings his nannies, brings some friends, brings his wife, brings
• 5:24
  his kids. But I had no idea what Jeffrey Epstein was.
• 5:29
  And that's a whole less other conversation. Right, You mean
• 5:32
  to tell me the city of New York didn't let
• 5:34
  people know that there was a registered sex offender living
• 5:36
  next to them, and didn't Jeffrey Epstein live next to
• 5:39
  a school, Like, what's even going on in New York?
• 5:42
  That's another question that needs to be asked because remember,
• 5:46
  the prosecutors in New York argue that Jeffrey Epstein should
• 5:50
  be labeled a lower level sex offender. So this is
• 5:54
  something that's been happening in New York for quite some time.
• 5:56
  And that's why I just don't believe what Lutnik has
• 5:58
  to say about Jeffrey Epstein and not knowing what Epstein was.
• 6:03
  Everybody knew, at the very least, everybody knew that he
• 6:07
  went to prison or jail back in two thousand and eight.
• 6:10
  Everybody knew that. But Lutni's gonna get up here and
• 6:13
  act like nobody knew, like it was some big state secret.
• 6:17
  I'm sorry, but that just proves he's lying. Epstein pleaded
• 6:25
  guilty in two thousand and eight to state level charge
• 6:27
  of solicitation of a minor for a prostitution, which required
• 6:31
  him to register as a sex offender. He died in
• 6:34
  New York City jail in twenty nineteen while facing federal
• 6:37
  sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide. I
• 6:42
  like how the author here says it was ruled the suicide,
• 6:45
  because that's what it was ruled the suicide. We don't
• 6:48
  know definitively one way or the other. Democrats wrote in
• 6:52
  Thursday's letter that lutnex claim in the twenty twenty five
• 6:56
  interview was demonstrably false. During your transcribed interview, you are
• 7:00
  presented with clear evidence that you corresponded and physically met
• 7:04
  with Epstein on multiple occasions prior to his arrest in
• 7:07
  twenty nineteen, including the private island lunch. They wrote, and look,
• 7:14
  why would you lie even about the most basic thing?
• 7:17
  And that's what really gets me with all these people, like,
• 7:21
  stop lying about everything, if you just be honest about it,
• 7:26
  come forward and be like, hey, I knew the dude.
• 7:29
  I had no idea that he was up to what
• 7:31
  he was up to. But even though I don't think
• 7:33
  I know anything, I'd love to talk to the FBI
• 7:35
  or whoever's investigating and tell them what I know. I
• 7:38
  might have seen something. None of these people have done that. Instead,
• 7:43
  they've all wished it to go away. But obviously that's
• 7:46
  not going to happen, no matter how many stupid little
• 7:49
  shiny objects they dangle in front of us. It's not
• 7:52
  going away. Now. We might talk about other things, we might,
• 7:56
  you know, look at other stories or whatever, but this
• 8:00
  is always going to be burning right in the background.
• 8:02
  And until there's justice, until there's real transparency and or
• 8:05
  real investigation, nobody's moving on, at least nobody that understands
• 8:10
  the score and understands the true scope of what's happening here.
• 8:15
  Given the opportunity to come clean during the interview, you
• 8:18
  instead offered implausible distinctions and semantic games, the lawmakers wrote.
• 8:24
  A Commerce Department spokesperson, in a statement to see NBC
• 8:27
  called the letter another failing attempt by Congressional Democrats to
• 8:31
  distract from Secretary Lutnik's historic work at the Commerce Department.
• 8:36
  What does that even mean? What historic work? The tariffs
• 8:40
  being you know, rolled back, and we have to pay
• 8:43
  taxes on those two. Where is all this historic work
• 8:45
  I keep hearing about? In a voluntary appearance before the
• 8:50
  House Oversight Committee, Secretary Lutnik answered nearly four hundred questions
• 8:54
  from members and staff, ending only when members said they
• 8:57
  had nothing more to ask. The spokesperson said, well, that's cool,
• 9:01
  and it's true, but his problem is that he lied.
• 9:04
  That's the big issue here, and of course that all
• 9:07
  falls right into the cover up. He explained repeatedly that
• 9:10
  three encounters did not constitute a relationship, and the committee
• 9:13
  adjourned without identifying any evidence to the contrary. Calls for
• 9:17
  his resignation are baseless and politically motivated. Yo, straight up,
• 9:21
  fuck your politics. Okay, I don't care. He should resign
• 9:25
  because that's the moral right thing to do. That's why
• 9:28
  he should resign. The White House said in February that
• 9:33
  President Trump, who was also faced scrutiney over his past
• 9:36
  friendship with Epstein, continues to stand behind Ludnik. Oh, I'm
• 9:40
  sure he does. Birds of a feather and all right.
• 9:43
  Lutnik testified before the House Oversight Committee behind closed doors
• 9:47
  on May sixth. He told the committee that he was
• 9:49
  participating voluntarily, though he had agreed to appear after Representative
• 9:54
  Nancy Mace said she would issue a bipartisan subpoena to
• 9:57
  compel his testimony. Now Mace is the last woman standing,
• 10:01
  and you know Trump's going to go after her too.
• 10:04
  Every single person that helped get this Transparency Act passed
• 10:08
  has been attacked by Donald Trump. And it's not a coincidence, folks.
• 10:14
  A transcription of the interview shows Lutnik saying he could
• 10:17
  recall meeting with Epstein three times, including two thousand and
• 10:20
  five and twenty twelve interactions. In twenty eleven, Lutnick set
• 10:25
  Epstein's staff reached out, suggesting he had a reason to
• 10:28
  get in touch with me. It was arranged that Lutnick,
• 10:31
  while walking his wife and his dog on a Sunday afternoon,
• 10:34
  would ring Epstein's doorbell to hear what he had to say.
• 10:37
  The secretary said, why, I thought he was disgusting. I
• 10:40
  thought he was reprehensible, and you'd never be in a
• 10:43
  room with him again until you were. My best recollection
• 10:46
  is I rang the bell, sat in the foyer with
• 10:49
  my dog, waited for him to come down, heard what
• 10:51
  he had to say, and left. As far as I recall,
• 10:54
  it was about scaffolding. It was meaningless and inconsequential, he
• 10:58
  told the committee. Under questioning, Lutnik denied that he had
• 11:02
  been misleading about his relationship with Epstein, insisting that he
• 11:06
  used the word I versus we was a crucial distinction.
• 11:11
  I mean, wow, talk about word salad and thinking we're stupid,
• 11:16
  because it was all of that, I was accurate. I
• 11:21
  think I described it accurately. I don't want it to
• 11:23
  be modified in any way I was. I would not
• 11:26
  be in the room with them socially which I was not,
• 11:29
  for business, which I was not, or philanthropic, which I
• 11:32
  was not. So I believe that what I said was accurate.
• 11:36
  I believe what I said was accurate when I said it,
• 11:38
  and I believe it now. So I didn't say we
• 11:40
  would never. I said I would never, he said. A
• 11:44
  questioner replied, we all understand that you were in the
• 11:47
  room with them in a social setting, but you have
• 11:49
  insisted that this sentence is accurate. So I just that
• 11:53
  does not make sense on its face. Lutnik later said,
• 11:57
  I was never with them, meaning I was never in
• 11:59
  a situation with them. I was with my wife, and
• 12:02
  they were meaningless and inconsequential. Give me a break with
• 12:05
  that shit. Tell me that wasn't rehearsed with a lawyer,
• 12:09
  but contextually so people would understand I was never with
• 12:12
  them in any other manner, I, Howard Lutnik, one person
• 12:16
  was never in a situation, so you couldn't take it
• 12:18
  out of context. I was never with them, the Democrats
• 12:22
  wrote Thursday, no reasonable person would accept this account. A
• 12:26
  cabinet secretary, most basic obligation to Congress is candor. Your
• 12:30
  statements have a bearing on the lives of all Americans.
• 12:34
  You used your congressional interview not for the not to
• 12:36
  correct the record, but to perpetuate a false public narrative,
• 12:39
  they wrote, and of course that should be punished. If
• 12:43
  it can be proven, that should be punished. You contradicted
• 12:47
  prior statements and stonewalled on basic questions. A secretary who
• 12:51
  will parse the meaning of plain English to avoid acknowledging
• 12:54
  his own words, claim no recollection of a documented visit
• 12:58
  to a convicted sex offenders private eye land, and refused
• 13:01
  to answer basic questions about his conversation with the president.
• 13:05
  Cannot be trusted to serve as a leader in the
• 13:07
  federal government. We therefore call on you to resign immediately
• 13:11
  as Secretary of Commerce, they wrote, are they wrong? Well,
• 13:17
  like usual, I'll leave it up to you. All the
• 13:20
  information that goes with this episode can be found in
• 13:23
  the description box.