#2447 - Mike Benz

[MUSIC] >> All right, what a day to have you in here, buddy. >> [LAUGH] >> Kid in the candy shop, we hack the government. We hack the government's files evidently. I mean, this is, we have three and a half million files that it feels like we should not have. It would have been great to have had seven years ago in 2019 when this is being litigated. But it's an incredible moment of transparency for how the world works, how governments interact with the private sector and funds, and it's just really cool to be a part of it. What was the hold up? What was the, because it seemed like there was a lot of people that did not want these files released. >> Yeah, I thought about this a lot. What we have access to now are internal documents from the Justice Department and the FBI that are normally, even though they're not classified, they are part of a criminal investigation. And so they're not normally disclosed to the public. It could be the case that it kind of required a congressional bill to force this out. Like, if there's an internal investigation and it's not a part of a court document that's entered into evidence. You can't just foe the Justice Department to get dirt on your political enemies because you think that they might be involved in something. Now, I don't know if it could have been done through an executive order around Epstein transparency, around the time of the first binders. Certainly, it looked like there was friction between the president and Thomas Massey over this issue. But I don't know the details of what went down there. But the fact is the bill passed 427 to 1 in the house. >> Who's the one? >> My recollection is that it was Randi fine, but I might be wrong on that, so I don't want to smear. >> There was one person playing anything on doing. >> Didn't want it released because they thought it would compromise the victims, right? >> At one point in time, at least. Yeah, I don't know what the rationale is and because I don't recall offhand who the one is. I don't want to lean on that too much, but the fact is there's nobody wanted to be on the other side of this. I can't think of anything that both Republicans and Democrats voted on 427 to 1. And oh, sorry, Clay Higgins, sorry, apologies to Randi fine. >> Yeah, so there was the, I mean, there was obviously friction because this implicates everybody. Republicans and Democrats, Americans and a dozen different foreign countries. Heads of major hedge funds and multinational corporations, donors to all political parties. Major university and science institutions. I mean, almost every major player in world affairs was in some way either involved in or adjacent to this network or the network tried to reach out to them because they were influential. And so there was kind of a mutually assured destruction around the Epstein Hoppetado for a decade now, which is that out of power, the Republicans said, oh, the Democrats don't want to disclose this because of the Clintons. And then the Trump administration gets into power and there's a very slow reaction to the kind of disclosures that culminated in what happened this week. And so you had the Democrats saying, oh, they're not disclosing it because of Trump world and his associates. Meanwhile, they controlled the Justice Department and the FBI for four years and didn't release any. So it took in a moment like this and what's really interesting about it is this bill only compelled the disclosure, this law that passed in Congress, only compelled the disclosure of Justice Department originated files. Justice Department by extension, FBI is the investigative arm of the Justice Department. It does not compel CIA originated files. And one of the coolest moments of transparency we had last year in 2025 was when Tulsi Gabbard has the, you know, ODNI is the head of Director of National Intelligence and charge of the whole intelligence community spearheaded the JFK files release. And we got basically fully unredacted documents. Now I know there's a contest over how complete they are. But the fact is, is it was hundreds of thousands of files that had never been seen before or unredacted versions of documents that had been fully or partially redacted for decades. The only reason that we have JFK files at all is because in 1992, Congress passed a bill to force the CIA to start turning over documents. The law, I believe, was called the JFK Records Collection Act. And it forced by law the CIA to establish this independent presidential assassination review board that would review documents for declassification and compel, you know, on the basis of that independent body. Given all of the intelligence intrigue around Epstein and the fact that it is, in my view, physically impossible over Epstein's 40 year career in intelligence adjacent work that there was that there's not Epstein files that are CIA originated. And we actually, you know, I saw this in the files that were just released. Jeffrey Epstein himself, twice foyer, that's the Freedom of Information Act, which is a law that I think came around in 1966, which allows any U.S. citizen to ask any government agency for all public records that has about anything. There are certain things that get blocked in that. There were a lot of foyer fights about COVID, you know, Fauci famously, there's this exchange where one of the folks in Fauci World says that they learned cool tricks from the foyer lady about how to get around requests. But the fact is you can foyer the CIA for records because that foyer forces the CIA to give you declassified or unclassified records. And if it's classified, it'll issue a gloom aura. We cannot confirm or deny the existence or non-existence of classified information. Before we get any further, JFK stuff, I never heard anything about it. I mean, I know the files came out, but there was no big revelations. Was there anything that came out of that that was significant? I thought it was huge. I learned, I guess people are looking at the JFK files. Most people are looking at it for clues as to who killed JFK. And I know that there are many researchers who specialize in the JFK assassination that have sharpened their theories, I suppose, on the basis of it in a useful way for whatever it's worth. For me, I was never expecting to see a CIA document saying, you know, I, James, Jesus Angleton authorized the assassination of, of course, the United States. But the fact is, is what it revealed were all of these tangential and ancillary documents that showed the structure of intelligence work at a very fine and detailed level. The kind of revelations that really only come around once in a generation. There's a video online by Michael Perante, who's a CIA whistleblower around the time of the Iran contra hearings in the 1980s. And he says pay attention to these hearings. This may be the last time for another 20, 30, 40 years that you ever get an inside look at the detailed minutia of a covert operation. Because all of this was being blasted on a congressional jump-a-tron with hearings and formal congressional investigations and public testimony. And there's, I sort of look at the JFK files release like that. We got a very detailed look at everything that was happening around effectively operation, Mongoose. Because -- Do you refresh my memory? What was the Mongoose again? So we -- So there was Operation Mongoose and Operation Condor, which were related to the -- nominally, what you'll read is that they were related to the attempts by the CIA for Mongoose, for example, to destabilize the government of Cuba in order to induce a regime change. change. But because those efforts proved unsuccessful, they regionalized the conference. conflict to counter communism work effectively throughout all of Latin America, the Caribbean, South America. And Operation Condor was effectively a kind of counterinsurgency strategy to stop the rise of left-wing Marxist groups who were trying to throw off the yoke of American imperialism, so to speak, as they put it. And so you had a massive CIA operation to try to tilt the internal politics of basically every country south of the border. And we got incredibly detailed, I'll give you an example of one declassified document that's really wild. There's one document that is a CIA file with instructions to delete all physical copies of the document at the end that describes how the agency had internally authorized an attempt to assassinate Castro by working through the Meyer-Lansky syndicate and hiring two hitmen that were in Miami and then had but had contacts with the Cuban exile community liaisons within Cuba. And so this was a formal agency file that described how a CIA case officer made contact with people from the mob organized crime with offers of pay-offs with very detailed logistics. You can find this, I did hold video on it on my, like, ex-subscribe, everything. On the top of my social media. But it also describes a really interesting Jeffrey Epstein-like figure. Robert Mayhew was a CIA asset, the JFK files. They describe how they got a sponsor to a movie to simulate, I believe it was the president of Indonesia, having an affair with a blonde woman. They filmed a, basically, like a porno that would create a tape and they had very, they describe how they set up the room to make it look like it was, I think, in the presidential palace or some hotel room that would have been in that country in order to create what's effectively a sexual blackmail tape that could then be leaked to the press in order to discredit the president. And you look at these informal agency files and on the one hand you go, "Okay, that was the 1960s, that was the early 1960s, that was before there was any oversight on the CIA at all." It wasn't until the church committee hearings in 1975, 1976 that we even had congressional oversight of the CIA. There was no Senate Intelligence Committee, there was no House Intelligence Committee at the time and at that point, assassinations had not been outlawed. I mean, the CIA was allowed to assassinate people. There's since been a ban on that. So you go, "Okay, that's 60 years ago." But the fact is they did it. The fact is that is within the array of options that folks and covert operations saw as on the table. Working with the mob. But that goes back a long time. I found it totally unsurprising. It's one of these things, it's just kind of the general theme. It's shocked but not surprised. You know, it's like, holy crap. They put this in writing. What are we doing here, guys? But you're like, "Well, I'm not surprised." They did it because I know they were doing all these other things. The fact is, is the CIA was working with the mob before there was CIA. It was done by the CIA. Work with, for example, the Italian mob was done through the Department of War in the night, really starting in the 1930s, and then especially in the 1940s because they were the Central Intelligence Agency. What the time it was the OSS in the 1940s, but it would become the CIA. One of their main logistical points of contact and allies for the resistance against Mussolini in Italy. Mussolini was cracking down both on the Vatican Church and on the Italian mafia. The Restranged Bedfellows was a great book on this by Paul Williams, I think it was published in 2017. It's called Operation Gladio, the CIA, the Vatican, and the mob. I recommend this book to everyone because it's a really, really detailed, academic deep dive on this nexus between a religious institution, an intelligence agency, an illegal organized crime syndicate that does all manner of black ops, and it especially focuses on the funding relationship. In fact, this just came out and this sort of gets the utility of these documents. There's an incredible document that just was released this week where Larry Summers, who was the head of the US Treasury. Not only was he the head of Harvard University and the head of the American Money System, but he's trying to explain to Jeffrey Epstein the politics of what's happening in the Vatican. What he says to him is that what's actually most important going on right now is what's happening with the Vatican Bank, which is kind of the deep politics of the Vatican. I saw this email and I just laughed and did a little twirly thing in my chair because it's totally unsurprising if you read that book, Operation Gladio, that I mentioned. It traces 80 years of this because the Vatican Bank was the first offshore bank before offshore banking even existed. It was a, there was an alliance with the Vatican Bank during World War II itself with our Department of War and with organized crime outfits, at least according to the evidence that I find persuasive in this book and that appears to be validated by Italian court documents in the 1990s when all of this was litigated. Incidentally, that was when the mob was really prosecuted for the first time. But effectively what happened was you had strange bedfellows. You have the United States who wanted to get Riv Mussolini. You have the Vatican who wanted to get Riv Mussolini and you would organize crime who wanted to get Riv Mussolini. Because organized crime is very deep in the logistics and unions. They control the ports. They control the streets. They control safe houses. If they have allies in a bank, they are able to launder money effectively in order to do black market type trade. If you have, for example, the support of the US government to facilitate that, and there's protection offered to those organized crime groups. What you end up having is effectively state sponsored mafia with an untouchable bank. At the time, Larry Summers explains this to Jeffrey Epstein in very simple terms, which is. Yeah, here you go. The most important change in the Vatican may not be Pope Benedict's unretirement, but change in leadership of the Institute for Works of Religion, the Vatican's Bank. Because of the Vatican's status as a sovereign country, it's exempt from transparency rules of not only Italy, but of the European Union. This status allows its elite clients to evade any scrutiny in their money transfers. Last May, Vatican Bank president was fired after Italian authorities opened an investigation into a far-fetched bribery scheme. He goes through this, but what's important here is the British. When we think of offshore banking now, it's usually associated with. Came in islands. Came in islands, Jersey, man, Panama, but Panama is sort of a different story. It's usually associated with these kind of small island countries that are formally their own territory, their own sort of sovereign territory. You also see this within the United States in Native American reservations with these kind of autonomous zones that can be shielded from certain kinds of public disclosures that a typical finance institution. That's going on with Native American banks? Well, yeah, this was actually part of. Is that connected to the casinos? Because they have a lot of money from the casinos? Yeah. Super Bowl 60 deserves a sportsbook built for the moment. Traff King Sportsbook, an official sports betting partner of Super Bowl 60 puts you right in the center of the biggest game of the year. can happen during the Super Bowl and Draft Kings has your back with Earth early exit. If your player goes down on the first half, you still get paid in cash when your bet settles. No bonus bets, no waiting. While other sportsbooks don't offer injury protection, draft Kings covers the entire first half, even the second quarter. An early exit works on live bets too. Pre-game or in-game draft Kings has got you covered. New to draft Kings, new customers can bet just $5 to get 300 in bonus bets if your bet wins. Download the draft Kings sportsbook app now and use the code Rogan. That's code Rogan to turn $5 into 300 in bonus bets if your bet wins. In partnership with draft Kings, the crown is yours. Gambling problem called 1-800-Gambler. In New York, call 877-8-Hopenwire. Text Hope in Y-467-369. In Connecticut, call 888-8-789-77777. Or visit ccpg.org. On behalf of Boot Hill Casino and Resorting Kansas, pass through of per-wager tax may apply in Illinois. 21 and over, age and eligibility varies by jurisdiction, void an Ontario. Restrictions apply. Bet must win to receive bonus bets which expire in 7 days. Minimum odds required. Four additional terms and responsible gaming resources, cdkng.co/audio. Limited time offer. Yeah. Yeah. In fact, if you watch The Octopus Murders, which I think was HBO or Netflix or one of the best. It's fantastic. It goes through how this was used effectively by the NSA during the promise software scandal and the Iran Contra scandal of the 1980s where you had basically the NSA and then the US government running money laundering effectively through casinos on Native American sovereign territory. But the fact is, in the 1940s, the Vatican Bank was really the only game in town. This traces back at the CIA level to a lawyer named Paul Heluel, who was kind of the architect of money laundering for the CIA. And it didn't even start in world, really started with the attempt to try to stop Mao in the 1930s and 1940s. There were the opium wars in the 1830s where effectively the British Empire and the East India trading company were making ungodly amounts of money by selling opium to China. They would grow the opium on the Golden Crescent, India, and then they would sell it to China with a huge customer base, which would bring in huge amounts of revenues to the British Crown. And then there were two opium wars that were fought in the 1830s and '50s, I believe, around that nerd. And the opium wars were China's attempt to stop the import of opium into China because it had a huge, by that point, opium addiction problem. Opium dens in China were a massive issue within the country. They tried to ban it. And the British Crown pride opened the narcotics market through a military conquest of parts of China. That's how Britain got control of Hong Kong, which remains a major narcotrathicking site connected to Jeffrey Epstein in very weird ways. I'll just sidebar that. But Mao rose to power in the name of his public campaign was about rejecting the century of humiliation between the 1830s and the 1930s to support Shanghai Shack in the Quomantang, the Chinese nationalists against the Chinese Communists. The War Department couldn't get enough congressional allocations, taxpayer money to support that. So they had to find some way to finance the forces that are now effectively Taiwan, because when they ultimately lost, they fled to the island of Formosa, which is now Taiwan. But they financed that initially, the War Department, the Chinese nationalists through the narcotics trade, through basically the narcotics cultivated in the Golden Triangle. And these operations continued in Cambodia and Laos, and were a big part of the JFK expansion of covert operations. To this day in Fort Bragg, the special operations training centers called the JFK. This was a massive expansion of small wars, covert action instead of big military action. So it was mostly spearheaded by CIA rather than DOD or Department of War. But what happened was, is Paul Hellowell, in order to be able to traffic illegal narcotics, created a bunch of these CIA banking structures, one's called Castle Bank and Trust in the Cayman Islands, another one of New Can Hand in Australia. And when you have that friendly bank that's protected, then you can move drugs. This is this overworld underworld alliance between intelligence and organized crime. Because basically every intelligence operation is, I don't want to say every, but at the operational level, it's a crime. It's an act of sabotage. It's an act of subversion. It's an act of obstruction. It's an act of illegal surveillance. So in order to do a illegal crime, you don't want to do it yourself because then your fingerprints are on the gun. But if you know people who do illegal crimes for a living in an organized way and have experience in doing it, that allows you to be a very useful extension. And it gets justified in the name of national security. The illegal narcotics trade set up by Paul Hellowell who would go on to be the main lawyer for Disney and set up Disneyworld in Orlando. You can look all this up. You can pull up Paul Hellowell's Wikipedia or you can look at the history of Disney or you can pull up Castle Bank and Trust. You can put any one of these up on screen. This is all fully declassified. And so they then took that model to South America and Latin America and the Caribbean during Operation Condor, Operation Mongoose. And this is part of what gave rise to the Iran Contra that spawned Jeffrey Epstein, which was the CIA got busted running a the same thing it did in in 1940s China, which was a drugs for cash for guns operation. You cultivate, you can't get enough money in USAID, you know, and then in the 1940s USAID didn't even exist. You can't get enough money from US taxpayer dollars. You can't get enough money from private donors who will draft off of the regime change for their own profit. So how do you get how do you get your resistance rebels enough money? It's that usually comes down to black market trade, whether that's diamonds in Africa, whether that's illegal mining activities in South America or whether that's narcotics. And it's the best things to use for this kind of covert financing are small, fungible, physical materials that can be converted into large sums of cash. You know, for example, like a truck full of cocaine can fund an army, you know, a truck full of copper can't. And so you had this state sanctioned drug trade, this state sanctioned illegal weapons, logistics apparatus, and the state sanctioned money laundering apparatus that started in the 1940s and was utilized throughout the entirety of the Cold War. On the mafia side, in the operation, gladio was this stay behind network is what they said. Basically, these were right wing groups, many or some of which were kind of Nazi adjacent who hated communism. And so even though we fought against the Nazis in Mussolini and Hitler in World War II, there was a utility to preserving a certain homegrown domestic network that really hated communism to assist us on the ground in the war against communism. And what you saw was in Operation Gladio, this was a NATO-wide covert network, alliance of networks, a network of networks that in basically every one of the NATO countries, there was a cell or a number of cluster cells that were set up in order to covertly influence the domestic politics of the country. And if you look at the members of these cluster cells, there's some of the, like Silvio Berlusconi was a part of the so-called P2 lounge that came up in the Operation Gladio files when the Italian government basically put all this on trial in the 1990s. And that structure is still used by intelligence today. If you go to my ex-feed and you look up, for example, Ann Applebaum and the thread that I did on the integrity initiative, if you just put an integrity initiative in, I can show you what these cluster cells look like. And it's fascinating to look at the organizational structure of it. But I guess what I'm getting to here is with the mob and the Vatican. At that time, that was the only game in town. for offshore banking. If you wanted to have a bank that had no oversight whatsoever. When the British lost the Suez Canal in 1957 and basically had to give up their empire, this is during decolonialization, the British Empire transitioned from a physical empire to a financial empire and moved heavily into offshore banking. That's how you got these kind of BVI, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Jersey, man, all these kind of British offshore banking hubs. With London as the capital of international finance, the British Empire was effectively able to maintain a comparable level of imperial vassal state control without having physical troops or physical territorial control. The Vatican Bank has lost a lot of its rank, I would say, in the international finance system since the 1940s because the market's so saturated now with offshore banking hubs. But that explains what's happening in this Larry Summers Jeffrey Epstein exchange. One of the weirder things about these files is there's some stuff in there that you go, okay, one thing that we know happens is when something is true, a bunch of stuff gets attached to it that's both not true and also preposterous that allows you to sort of dismiss all of it together. There's a lot of people thought about that with Pizzigate and there's some stuff that I saw online that was like George W. Bush was like involved in ritual sacrifice or things along those lines, like killing babies and eating people and wild shit. What do you think that stuff is? I don't know. Do you think it really occurs? What I'll say is this is a bad week to be a total Pizzigate denialist. You would feel a lot more comfortable about it a week ago than you would this week. I don't particularly focus or I don't say care. I don't, my knowledge set on it is a lot more limited on it because I don't think it's a central crux of political influence. I don't know if it's kind of almost a inside joke in a certain way. Jeffrey Epstein himself in these emails is unbelievably trolley. He'll say things that are the kind of shitposts you say to a buddy or your brother or something that you don't mean. It's kind of cheek. But if you were a cynical out to get you person who somehow obtained that text message, you'd say, "Oh, look, he said it." There's a lot of that going on. But the fact is, I have seen a lot of images shared around the time period of when Pizzigate was popping off in 2016 that all I'll say is it doesn't look good or easily explainable at the same time. A lot of those screenshots I have not, for most of these, for the things I've posted about or that I'm talking about here, I've gone to the Justice Department file. I've looked at the file number. I've confirmed whether or not the screenshot is actually what it is. For those I have not yet, but I would not, I wouldn't feel totally confident saying there's no there there. But that's about as far as I can go on that. We just say images what are you talking about? Well, there's a lot of, if you look up Pizzigate, for example, it's just as a keyword search. You'll see or cheese or something. In the DOJ database for these new files, you'll see a lot of things of people talking about Pizzigate in a way that it seems like a code. It's kind of impossible to do a Pizz. It's about, you know what I mean. But I don't, to me, there's so much real world provable things in there. Also, so many more real world implications of allegations that are made in the files that kind of, you know, should be explained. Like a common mistake that I see going around social media this week is people, it kind of gets the reason that the FBI and the president was arguing that these files shouldn't be released in the first place, which is that people would take things out of context and wildly, you know, and think things are true that are not because they're baseless allegations made by, you know, some anonymous tipster. But because it's an FBI file, people will think it's true. Now, I don't think that's a reason not to release these. I'm extremely glad these were released. What I'm saying is I've seen that phenomenon, you know, run away. And some of this I know is kind of baseless in terms of the factual evidence because some of the people, one of the confidential human sources, for example, that is cited. You know, the first day of the drop, there's this kind of bombshell claim in the, this is probably the most viral post the first day of the DOJ release, which was a confidential human source, a CHS means of FBI informant, who the FBI internal memo describes how this confidential human source reported that Alan Derschowitz was a Mossad agent and after every meeting, he goes back and tells his FBI is Mossad Handlers, you know, what what they talked about. And you go, oh my god, it's an FBI confidential human source. The FBI wouldn't, you know, pay an informant unless they found them credible for this sort of thing. On the very next page of the files, it says, President Trump, I'm paraphrasing, you can pull this up if you want. You know, President Trump is controlled by the government of Israel and they have, I forget he says they have blackmail or something to this effect. Now, I don't know whether either of those things are true or not. I don't know what, you know, any more than anybody else who's done research on this. Certainly, there's a lot of overlap between Derschowitz and the Israeli government and high level Israeli officials. So in that sense, if that were to be reported, I don't know that it would be the, who knows about whether that's true or not. It's, but it plays into a kind of confirmation bias that a lot of people have. And so when you see that in an FBI file, the first thing your instinct is if you're, you know, if that's your journalism beat is to is to write all about it and get millions of views. And same thing, there's a mega civil war right now that's happening over issues around Israel. It's, you know, you say, oh my god, it's been proven. The FBI knows that, well, Ken Silva, who's a journalist shortly after that published a tweet containing a file that had much less engagement where he said, actually, I actually have a copy of this document. Again, I'm paraphrasing here where it matches that document file number. It's got the same text and it looks like the, that confidential human source is Chuck Johnson. Now, I saw that and I went, oh my god, because one morning, I woke up to a text from that very person saying, this is about two years ago, I'd never met him, never talked to him, don't have his number. So I'm how he got mine. And message me on signal to turn myself in because I'm going to prison. He then proceeded to look up my ex-wife and make allegations that I was a massage agent because she was a, she was a prostitute from a from a foreign country and involved in all these, you know, massage black ops type things. Now, he didn't even get the name right. He found a different person with a similar spelling that, you know, was, I guess, busted for prostitution or something. And then makes these giant claims on social media that, you know, I have been like married to a far-inspired prostitute or something. And then he goes on to message someone he thinks is my donor and threatened them to cut off funds because if he doesn't, then I've made the intelligence community very angry and they have deputized him to tell the person he thought was my donor that the intelligence services of the United States of America will crush the businesses of someone he thought was my donor. If he doesn't cut off the funds, he thought that person was giving to me. Okay. This is that confidential human source or at least according to the reporting of Ken Silva. That the level of things that are untrue about that. combined with the fact that this very person is going around saying that he's not just an FBI informant, but that he actually can direct the intelligence agencies, the United States, to crush someone's private practice if they don't change the discretionary donations to someone. That's the person you're saying that person's comments to an FBI officer or task force prove these claims about durshwits and Trump. That's ridiculous. I know first of the way that they're saying that they're not going to be a threat to the FBI. That's the way they're saying that they're going to be a threat to the FBI. That's the way they're going to be a threat to the FBI. That's the way they're saying that they're going to be a threat to the relationship between government and private business. Jeffrey Epstein is part of a class of what are effectively professional fixers. This is a kind of class of professional who sits not really within a particular government or private sector institution, but in the kind of sticky layer between them that connects them all. I would say that, for example, people like Mark Rich, Bruce Rappaport, and I can go through all these figures and who they are. Robert Mayhew and these types are just good case studies in how the intelligence world, the business community uses, like, let's take an example of Bruce Rappaport. This is a, you can pull up on screen if you want. There's a great article. I think it's called, I think it's from 1988 or 1991. It's called Intrigan High Places, Oil Pipeline, Iraq, and then just Bruce Rappaport. It's R-A-P-P. Yeah, here you go. Pipeline Deal, Intrigan High Places. I'll describe what happens here in a second. In fact, there's a great YouTube video on this as well. If you look up Bruce Rappaport, 1988, there's a great couple-minute summary of all of this. But effectively what happened was, let me start this by Jeffrey Epstein, got to Bear Stearns in 1966. I'm sorry, 1976, and then worked there until 1980. Just because you have on screen, maybe I'll go through this first and then I'll do the Jeffery Epstein Connections. What happened here was, you had the Iranian rock war from 1980 to 1988. Henry Kissinger had a really great quote about this, because he asked, "What is the US government strategy on this?" Because it's very convoluted. Why are we giving weapons to Iran when the Iranian revolution just happened in 1979 that overthrew what was a US government-friendly government that was partially installed by the CIA in 1953? We've now declared international arms embargo on them. We're basically at war with the Itolls. Why are we giving them weapons and helping them defeat Iraq? The issue was that we were also in a war over regional hegemony and oil with Iraq. Henry Kissinger's quote was, "My only wish is that both sides could lose." What happened was, because we didn't want Iraq to take over Iran and become effectively bigger than Saudi Arabia in the region, we were funding and giving weapons to Iran to try to fend off the much bigger Iraqi army. At a certain point in this, we began to back Iraq. We went back and forth supporting Iranian Iraq. Iraq, because of the embargo, wanted to build a pipeline to get its oil out and it was going to pass through Jordan and it was going to a butt against the border of Israel. A major CIA contractor and CIA-connected private business called Bechtel, highly influential company. There's been many, many books written on Bechtel. Bechtel is alive and well today. There was a saga around the Stanford Air Net Observatory around the censorship industrial complex. When I visited the Stanford Air Net Observatory and I went into the courtyard, courtyard is sponsored by Bechtel. It's called the Bechtel Courtyard. But what happened was, Bechtel was promised by Iraq a billion dollar contract in 1980s money for constructing this pipeline. And the Central Intelligence Agency and the White House National Security Council both for geostrategic reasons, one of this pipeline built. The problem was, is they were afraid the Israeli government was going to sabotage the pipeline because Iraq was very hostile to Israel. And there was a lot of tension between the Iraqi government and the Israeli government. And they were afraid that if Bechtel got this contract and built this pipeline, that Israel would, you know, these pipelines are very fragile. And all it, because it passes close to it, it's very possible that that would happen. That would happen. It would destroy both the CIA's goal and the private profiteer Bechtel's goal. So, how do you solve that problem? Well, what, what the CIA did is, what the, what the National Security Council, which is the interagency that the CIA reports do, did is they engaged a private fixer named Bruce Rapaport, who was a Swiss billionaire with close ties to the Israeli government, to back channel with the Israeli government. Some sort of secret agreement that would guarantee that they would not sabotage the pipeline. And because the attorney general of the United States, you know, again, think about this as well. As I'm saying this, think about Jeffrey Epstein and think about the character of Bill Barr, for example, who started his career for seven years at the CIA, was highly involved in the CIA's Iran Contra, and then was attorney general. Both in the 1990s during the Epstein-connected BCCI scandal and the, you know, when Jeffrey Epstein killed himself or whatever happened to him. So, what, what happens is, is Bruce Rapaport does indeed use his contacts with the Israeli government to strike an agreement that then allows the prod would allow the project to be greenlit. But it triggers a special prosecutor's investigation of the attorney general himself, Ed Mies, because he, one of his friends, was alleged to be in on the deal. So, they argued that effectively, that they, that through Bruce Rapaport, the attorney general was striking a secret agreement with Israel to profit himself, a massive conflict of interest. And what, what ended up happening is Bruce Rapaport, Rapaport stepped forward and said, "No, no, no, it wasn't to profit." The, the terms weren't to profit the friend. It was the, the terms we secretly reached with Israel is that they were going to get like a 30% cut on the revenue of the pipeline, and that's what secured the buy-in. But the fact is, is Bruce Rapaport was not, the, now, the other part of this is that the National Security Council told the, basically the overseas development arm of a company. the US government, US government agency to put American taxpayer funds to help subsidize the pipeline, the Bechtel pipeline. And that government agency did not want to put up something like $400 million of taxpayer funds on it because they thought Bruce Rappaport was a very shady, Epstein-like figure who had all sorts of sorted details about his own past. So that government agency queered the CIA for all records about Bruce Rappaport. And the CIA gave them a limited hangout. They said, "Oh, we only have a few documents that are responsive to it and no red flags." As it turned out, what the special prosecutor compelled from the CIA is that they had a whole dirty dossier on Bruce Rappaport. And if they had given that to the US government agency, there couldn't have been support for the pipeline. Now, after all the scandal, the pipeline ended up not being built. But the point is, here you have the same type of person as Jeffrey Epstein, the same regions and countries that are involved in a significant part of the Epstein saga. You have the same structure of the intelligence community, private businesses, and back channel deals with government officials. But because there was no 201 file on Bruce Rappaport, he was not formally a CIA asset. He was what's called a liaison, a contact, a facilitator, a friend of the station. He didn't work for the CIA. He's got his own hedge fund. He's got his own, basically finance. He'll invest in commodities or foreign exchange or private portfolio companies. But sometimes he'll work with the CIA. Sometimes he won't. Depends on whether it's good for him. And in this case, he thought it was good for him to take this, who knows what he himself got on it. But the fact is, here you have the same type of, you have every layer of this from the Justice Department to the CIA, to the private financiers, to the private companies, to real world geopolitical action. And this appears in my view of it to be exactly the model that Jeffrey Epstein himself replicated and was on parallel track with for his whole career. And I can get into that, but does that make sense in terms of like this type of figure exists in basically in every country, in every industry. And they're not all as prominent as Epstein, but I would argue people like Mark Rich and at the time Bruce Rappaport kind of were, they don't all have these child sex trafficking. And that's the thing. Type things. This is the thing is like what he was connected with, it makes me wonder, like if he didn't have that sick thing where he liked underage girls, like if he'd never gotten arrested, which was what, 2008 or something, what, when did he initially get arrested? 2006, but he was, the plea deal was 2008. So if that hadn't happened, like if you just got a guy who's getting of age prostitutes, we probably never hear about this. Yeah. And this episode is brought to you by Squarespace to level up your business. You got to level up your website. And Squarespace does the heavy lifting for you. Even I use it to power my website, jorogen.com is powered by Squarespace. Squarespace gives you everything you need to claim your domain, professionally showcase your offerings, grow your brand and get paid all in one place. Head to squarespace.com/rogan for a free trial. And when you're ready to launch, use the offer code Rogan to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's crazy. And you can imagine very easily why, because Epstein was involved in fraudulent financial activities his entire career. He was under SEC investigation at Bear Stearns in 1980. When he was involved in a deal, I think it was St. Joe's mineral company, which is owned by Seagrums, which is owned by the broth and family. He got in trouble with the SEC at that time. He then, as soon as he got in trouble, he left Bear Stearns and went out on his own, but then worked effectively at Bear Stearns off the book for the next decade, according to his own testimony. He had a continuous relationship with Bear Stearns for, you know, I think he said 31 years. It was basically from the moment, you know, from the 1970s, 1976 until 2007, 2008 when Bear Stearns collapsed while Jeffrey Epstein was in jail. But then Jeffrey Epstein, it appears to me almost impossible that Jeffrey Epstein was not working on BCCI pipeline deals while he was at Bear Stearns. Bear Stearns was one of the three biggest clearinghouses for BCCI transactions. BCCI is the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. Sometimes people call it the Bank of Crooks and Criminals International. It's an incredible saga of CIA banking gone wrong. It's a bank that was started in Pakistan in 1972 and then grew to be the CIA's main way to covertly back the Mujahadin against the Russians during the Cold War. So we backed Osama bin Laden, the CIA, we backed the Islamic Mujahadin, the radicals who became al-Qaeda and ISIS. With billions of dollars of CIA and MI6 and Israeli and Saudi facilitated, you know, co-support and financial funds, in order to do a Cold War operation. It's like we talked about with strange bedfellows, backing right wing organized crime to stop left wing communism. We did the same thing in Afghanistan through, you know, the Pakistan, Afghanistan border to run covertly run guns to the Mujahadin. In fact, you can, there's a great YouTube video that I always like to play so that you can see it for yourself. It's really short. You can look up 1979 as a big new Brzezinski dropping out of a helicopter to tell the Mujahadin that both God and the United States government is on their side. And the reason this clip I always think is so fun to play is because this was the very moment in 1979 that Jeffrey Epstein appears to have been involved in the BCCI financing of this very operation. If you turn the volume up and you start at the beginning. U.S. National Security Advisor Brzezinski flew to Pakistan to set about rallying resistance. He wanted to arm the Mujahadin without revealing America's role. On the Afghan border near the Kaiba Pass, he urged the soldiers of God to redouble their efforts. We know of their deep belief in God that their struggle will succeed. That land over there is yours. You'll go back to it one day because your fight will prevail and you'll have your homes and your mosques back again because your cause is right and God is on your side. Now that is the National Security Advisor of the United States of America. The National Security Advisor is the highest post in the cabinet. It is the person the President talks to every day. All intelligence, military and statecraft goes through the National Security Advisor. That is the Numero Uno. And he personally, in 1979, this didn't come out until years later, but we were covertly doing this. So to do a covert operation, and this is why I focus on the money side of Epstein from the 1970s to present because the money in any covert operation is the most essential part. It's the only thing that is irreplaceable and that if you don't have it, everything goes away. You lose one person, find another one. You lose one logistics hub, can create another one with money. You lose money, you lose everything. You lose your ability to pay your informants. You lose your ability to bribe government officials. You lose your ability to win the support of local institutions. We lost Vietnam, not really so much because we lost, you know, at the kinetic war level, but because we lost the ability to fund it because they got defunded. So we literally couldn't do it anymore. And there's another great clip just to show how sophisticated CI money laundering was even by the 1960s. Sorry, I'll stop doing this after running around Clip to Clip after this or I'll chill on it. But if you go to my ex account, you can also find this on YouTube. There's a great, I believe it was CBS in the 1960s. It's called In the Pay. I think it's called In the Pay of the CI or In the, but if you type in CI money laundering, you'll see this great clip about how sophisticated CI money laundering was already by the 1950s and 60s. And that, because everything the CI does has to be laundered. It's a spy agency. If it writes a check, if it doesn't conceal the origins of the money, gigs up. So everything that is CI has to move through some sort of money laundering mechanism. Well, you know, to kind of, I guess, borrow a phrase from the president, somebody's doing the money laundering. You need a, you need outside contacts who do not work at the agency or necessarily for the agency to facilitate that money laundering. And that was done through, for example, the Pakistanis with the BCCI as well as contacts in London. That is what I believe Jeffrey Epstein was doing his entire career after that from Tower's financial to his tenure with Leslie Wexner to kind of the way I think that he helped model the Clinton Foundation itself with the Clintons in the early 2000s. And his expertise in that, I think, is what made him useful, really, while it's more of the connections of, I guess, donors and billionaires around him that made him the most useful. But the fact is, he specialized when he went out on his own, formally he leaves Bear Stars in 1981 and starts a one-man group called Intercontinental Assets Group out of his New York City apartment. He's not even 30 years old. Right away he gets big-level clients like Adnan Kishogi, who is the, at the time, was alleged to be the world's richest man. He was the Saudi arms dealer and to give an impression of how significant this figure was in the weapons trade. He earned more in commissions from Lockheed Martin Boeing. And I think one of the other big military contractors than every other commissions agent in the entire world combined. That's why the rumors that he was the world's richest man. In fact, we actually had legislation passed because of how influential he was. He was the one who, in 1983, flew to the National Security Council, to the White House to orchestrate the Iran contra, he was the Saudi middleman that was part of this operation where the United States used the Saudi middleman's Adnan Kishogi to run guns to Israeli contacts to smuggle into Iran to fight off the Iraqis. It's a bit of a long sequence, but effectively you can think of it as the United States and Israel's Saudi Arabia in the middle. Now Adnan Kishogi was one of the major clients of the CIA's BCC eye bank. And he was the host of the CIA's offshore operation that was created in 1976 called the Safari Club. And in 1975, 1976, when the CIA started getting handcuffs put on it with the church committee hearings, Jeffrey Epstein starts his career at barasturns in 1976, the very moment of the biggest shakeup of the CIA and CIA history. At that moment, the church committee hearings were ongoing and the public was seeing, you know, Colby and Angleton holding up a heart attack gun, you know, how the CIA can kill someone and make it look like they died organically of a heart attack. Operation chaos had just broke about the CIA funding student groups on American college campuses, Coentell broke, MK Ultra broke. It was one house of ours after another on everybody's TV that only had three news stations. And so Democrats were completely fired up about getting rid of the CIA or putting massive handcuffs on it, which is what they did. They created effectively what's now the Senate and House Intelligence Committee. So there's oversight of the CIA by the people's representatives. The first year Carter was in office in 1977, went through the, what was called the Halloween massacre, fired 30% of all CIA operations personnel. They massively cut funding. And so in response to this, you had a set of stakeholders who wanted that CIA dirty work to still be doable, but they didn't have the legal authorization to run it out of the CIA. So what they did is they took the same group of international partners that they had been, that the CIA had been working with, that includes Saudi Arabia, Israel, the UK, France, at the time Iran, because this was before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. They were all part of this thing called the Safari Club, which got its name from the Mount Safari. It was basically a resort club in Kenya, which was the main hub. Just like Colombia, for example, is kind of the main, was the main US government hub for the logistics. It was kind of a foothold for our ability to do work in Venezuela or Guatemala or Nicaragua or Brazil. In Africa, Kenya was our main stronghold. And so, but Anika Shoggi ran that. This was basically a seven eight country joint covert operations intelligence network. It was informal, wasn't technically the CIA. And it was set up in, you can pull the Wikipedia for this, actually. It just so you don't need to take my word for it. Like literally the sanitized Wikipedia will tell you everything that I'm saying here. And it ended up, that network ended up becoming one of the main, yeah. So if you start at the top, you'll see that there it is on the right, the Safari Club. So it was a covert alliance of intelligence services formed in 1976 that ran clandestine operations in Africa. Now what they're leaving out here is that it was also Asia played a huge role in Pakistan and Afghanistan and the like. But these were all these different countries attempt to offset the restrictions that the Democrats had put on the CIA. And Reagan gets back to power in 1981. You still have these handcuffs on the, on the CIA. You still have the Democrats controlling the House of Representatives. The Democrats did, you know, so there was international arms embargo. First of all, in 1979, the Iranian Revolution happens and it's blamed on the CIA being cut back. The CIA helped install the shop in 1953. They argued that if Jimmy Carter hadn't destroyed the CIA, we would still have Iran as a friendly country. We could have stopped this. We could have nipped it in the bud. We could have had people on the ground. It's Jimmy Carter's fault that he cut the CIA that were in this disaster with the world's third largest reserve of oil and gas and this hugely geostrategic country now being an enemy of America rather than a friend. So in international arms embargo was put on Iran, but then Iraq threatened to invade it and we didn't want Iraq to take it over. So we had to get, we had to do something illegal if we wanted to help Iran. It was against international law to give them weapons, but if we didn't give them weapons, it was perceived massive geostrategic geopolitical earthquake that we'd live with for centuries. So you had to do one illegal action with the gun running and then there was an inner party dispute. The Democrats at that time, the majority did not want to do intervention in Nicaragua. There was an in-party power called the Sandinista government and there was a rebel faction called the Contras and Republican donors and stakeholders had had interests in Nicaragua and wanted to help the Contras overthrow the Sandinista government. But there was a party dispute. Democrat donors didn't profit from that and they at the time had a fairly robust anti-imperialism kind of mindset and were sick of CIA regime change by the early 1980s after everything that was disclosed in just the previous years. The Republicans wanted to overthrow the Nicaraguan governments. Democrats didn't. Democrats had a house majority and they passed something called the Bolin Amendment which forbade any U.S. government funds from going to support the Contras. So this put the Republicans in a pickle. By the way, this is what's happening. happening kind of today around Ukraine, if you flip the parties. 100% of Democrats vote for Ukraine funding. The Republican Party is split about it. This is the inverse of that was happening in the early 1980s. 100% of Republicans wanted to fund the Contras against what they called the Soviet-aligned Sandinistas. And the Democrats were split. But they successfully passed this ball in a moment. So the CIA was in a pickle. How do you run guns to Iran when it's against international law? And how do you fund the Contras when it's illegal to spend US government money to fund them? And so what they came up with is effectively the structure. I think it's the most useful structure for understanding American statecraft and intelligence activity to this day. What they came up with is what they called a structure called the enterprise, which the CIA director Bill Casey referred to as a private self-sustained off the shelf, standalone entity that did not exist within the US government. But it's but was instead it comprised. The money came from outside fixers who would then effectively channeled donor money and black market trade to fund the Contras. So the money didn't come from US taxpayers. It didn't come from USAID. It didn't come from an allocation from the US Department of War or foreign assistance from the Department of State. As it turned out, the money came from cocaine and and a couple of other things. But you know that this was the, you know, the famous fruit, bricky rock, Gary Webb, you know, John Kerry. And this was the soup that Jeffrey Epstein was coming up in. And a funny story related to this is that the main airline used to transport the drugs and guns in the drugs for cash for guns operation was a CIA proprietary airline called Southern Air Transport. Southern Air Transport was was the proprietary CIA airline, meaning it was owned and operated exclusively by the Central Intelligence Agency. And it was the, you know, the airline that all these aircraft went, uh, move through. Iran Contra was basically the early 1980s up until like the mid late 1980s. In 19, it was, it was based in Miami. In 1994 Southern Air Transport, the CIA proprietary airline, which in the intervening time was spun out to not be owned by the CIA, but rather to be owned by someone who had worked for the CIA, uh, at the time it was owned by the CIA. So, you know, pretty thin layer there, but it moved from Miami to Columbus, Ohio, primarily to service the limited. Oh, I know all about this, Joe. I have a, I have a video on this. And in fact, over at Jamie, because he's obsessed. Yeah. And if I'm obsessed with Patel, yeah, probably told you about this five years ago. Yeah. Yeah. Well, there's a great article. I think, uh, spook air and, um, you know, on this, but, uh, how many roads lead back to Ohio? Uh, uh, most, most of them. What is, what is this connection with Ohio? Well, Ohio was, you know, if you remember, kind of the origins of, of organized crime in the United States, really goes back to the prohibition era when you had this Midwestern mafia syndicate around Cincinnati. And then it moved into Dayton and Columbus and adjacent to Chicago and this whole sort of hub around prohibition. And then prohibition was 1920 to 1933 when prohibition ended. All these networks went from black market alcohol to black market drugs, because it was no longer black market. They no longer had a business smuggling alcohol. So they, they moved into the narcotic space. Which one? Which, which narcotics? Well, uh, it was primarily opium in the 1930s. This was part of, oh, yeah. Well, yeah, if you, because in the 1930s was when you had, as, you know, as we discussed, the Department of Wars Alliance with Chang Ha Shek and the, and the Quomantang, the Chinese nationalists, the supply for, you know, uh, the supply for heroin, for example, or, you know, opium, it comes from Asia, comes from the Golden Crescent, the Golden Triangle. And the way this logistics chain moved was our CIA, war department backed rebel groups in Asia, they sat territorially on the Golden Triangle. They would cultivate the opium. They would basically fly it out on military aircraft. It went to Europe for processing in, you know, a france that was one of the main, uh, this is this kind of French connection saga, which again, Jeffrey Epstein is weirdly connected to. And I can tell you about that if you're interested. And then it would go to the basically Italian mafia folks for the trans shipment and you had Italian mafia controlled docs and ports in the United States and New York and New Jersey. And you had, you know, CIA protected Italian mafia groups in Southern Italy, which at the time were a national security protected because they were our allies against the communists. And so you had this, this drug trade to support foreign policy imperatives. And you can do that. You can run that exercise with pretty much every drug on planet Earth at this point. And it makes it very difficult to stop the drug trade because by stopping the drug trade, you are, you're running up against something that your own government considers a perhaps unfortunate, but necessary logistics hub. Do you think that's happening right now with Mexico? Yeah. Whoa. Well, let me think about this fast and furious. Yeah. Wasn't that long ago. The fast and furious story is fucking bananas. Tell it to people that don't know because just the idea that they proposed this and implemented it is so fucking crazy. Yeah. Well, so this was a scandal during the Obama administration. Eric Holder was the attorney, John the United States. He had to step down because he was held in contempt of Congress for jumping on the grenade and not turning over the fast and furious files. Um, Earth to Congress, note to Congress, who wants to be a hero, by the way. Um, you can do the same thing with the Epstein bill with the fast and furious files. Uh, I think everybody in this war on drugs that we, you know, we're so gung-ho about, we just captured the president of Venezuela over drugs. It would be awfully nice if you compelled the Justice Department, an FBI to turn over the Justice Department, an FBI run fast and furious files. But what happened was is, and I believe this had inner agency approval, meaning the White House signed off on it, the Central Intelligence Agency signed off on it, the Department of Defense signed off on it, the State Department signed off on it, the FBI and ATF signed off on it. This was a gun running operation to send guns to the Sinaloa cartel to, uh, to have them be able to successfully win a Narco drug war against the Los Zetas cartel. The Los Zetas cartel was pilfering oil pipelines. Remember Mexico, the oil wealth of the United States is vastly disproportionately concentrated in Texas. In West Texas and Southern Texas, where it shares oil fields with Mexico, effectively, those oil fields go into Mexico is replete with oil. And there are many partnerships between United States oil companies and the Mexican government, uh, Pemex and, and all the different, you know, kind of private, private lines. And this is a big point of geopolitical contention. But the fact is is one of the things that organized crime groups do in order to get money for their own syndicate because they've got effectively military control of a territory is if a pipeline runs through that territory, they can simply cut open the pipeline and steal the oil. This is, for example, what, you know, was happening with our CIA backed, uh, rebel groups in Syria. We're taking the oil. I mean, we would literally, you know, our, our spunky moderate rebels would, you know, literally cut open Syrian pipelines and take the oil. And this was one of the ways to support it. You know, you can support it with drugs. You can support it with black market oil. And by the way, I, while I'm on the topic, uh, if you, if you pull up and I had this on my, my ex, if you type in, uh, institute, uh. institute for peace or it's uh. just type in institute peace drugs the the u_s_ government the u_s_ institute for peace told the taliban not to shut down the drug trade after they took power in twenty twenty two they said it would have a devastating you know negative impact on the con the the local economy if they didn't keep growing was then you know ninety ninety five percent of the well yeah if you will think that the next image uh. wait next image yeah here you up so this is it this is uh. you know we give the u_s_ institute peace the time we gave them fifty five million dollars a year it the u_s_ institute peace was created by active congress and i've been a lot is wild the taliban successful opium ban is bad for afghan's and the world yes right right so now remember about you know uh. the taliban had just taken back power that happened in the you know in the early by administration the taliban if folks recall cut so we the c_i_a_ was help and and the u_s_ military as well as their allies and with regional allies we're cultivating the opium on the golden crescent for a noble cause to win the cold war against the evil soviet to this was a big part of the funding for the moussa had been and this was one of the big scandals that ended up in developing b_c_c_i_ the c_i_s_ bank because it was the way because it was non-compliant with any banking regulations at all moved off sure the drug money the the drug logistic chain that the c_i_ built for the moussa had been then moved through the drugs money laundering chain at the c_i_a_ bank and this apparatus had scaled for twenty years by the by the late nineteen nineties when the taliban like the chinese wanted to shut it down when the taliban took power in the nineteen nineties and they did that they cut the opium down to effectively zero in nineteen ninety nine and this is all open source into and then we invade afghanistan and you know two thousand one two thousand three it becomes a u_s_ military occupied zone in the ghost from zero percent of the world's harrowing to ninety five percent of the world's harrowing all under u_s_ military occupation in fact we installed their dictator who whose brother was uh. was the main drug kingpin of the whole country it's and some of this move through some of this move through the cold war c_i_a_ backed turkish grey wolves outfit and uh. there's a funny quote i think in the michael hastings article on stanley mccristen where stanley mccristen's team refers to uh. i mean carzyze funny little hat that he wore i mean carzye was the c_i_a_ installed uh. you know strongman after we took our afghanistan he referred to his hat as the grey wolves for john i mean the basically saying like this is the you know the drug logistics orifice leaving that side what what i'm getting to is you you have this banking network you have all these logistics chains jeffrey epstein his first ten when his come up is made through this through this whole network it turns out the bear starns you opened a trading desk with to clear bcc i transactions in nineteen seventy nineteen seventy eight jeffrey epstein's mentor the person who actually recruited him to apply to bear starns was a guy named as greenberg as greenberg then was a senior executive at the time and then i think in nineteen seventy eight or nineteen seventy nine he becomes c_e_o_ so the head of bear starns so jeff and he sets jeffrey epstein up with his daughter so jeffrey epstein is a is a young kid wonder how did jeffrey epstein make partner at bear starns so fast there's a couple explanations you know one is the guy who brought him into the firm quickly became c_e_o_ thereafter and jeffrey epstein was dating his daughter the new york times actually reported this about a month and a half ago by getting the insider testimony of a dozen people who worked at the work to bear starns at the time and so you know he's dating the boss's daughter but also the c_e_o_ would have to approve all of these transactions and it looks like was involved in you know these these clearinghouse activities what happened was at bear starns cleared about thirteen billion dollars worth of bcc i transactions and it looks like these transactions were involved in the very same odd non-cashoggi society and douglies who is a british arms dealer and the epsim was flying to london to meet with and working with all those years and they and be and bear starns was doing it through this entity called capcom which was what the the senate report on the bcc i scandal referred to as the bank within the bank of bcc i so kind of the intersactim of now that capcom was was owned by kamaul autumn who was the chief spy for saudi arabia so he was bear starns the deorac times reports based on a dozen of these you know insider you know testimonies they got like three of epsim epsim's bosses on the record to talk about you know what he was doing there amazingly the new york times does not mention a single deal name in the entire twenty thousand word report and might not be news fit to print also they've just i'll i can be charitable and say they might they just might not know they might think that you know i don't think that the new york times has a pinky of the specialization in jeffery epsim cinematic universe knowledge that your random anonymous and they can't on x has so they might not know about bear starns doing bcc i transactions they might not know what you know if you don't know the material you don't necessarily know what to ask that's me being charitable also that you know some of the witnesses may have said that they don't want to talk about specific deal names because that would tarnish that folks involved in that deal for association with jeffery epsim there could be a lot of reasons i'm trying to be charitable here but but the fact is is they all said jeffery epsim moved up so fast because he was dating the boss's daughter and he was put on the biggest and most lucrative deals very quickly within the firm and given the incredible volume that bear starns appears to have been moving through bcc i and bcc i being you know the hottest ticket in in town then in the late nineteen seventies it was literally the main vehicle for the u_s_ government to covertly longer funds capcom according to the senate intelligence report and the justice department investigations was the main vehicle for funding the moussa had been fifty percent of those trades and they they laundry illegally with with which requires at eight brokerage you know clearing house to prove it you know the way this is set up as you have a you have a bank you've you've got a money laundering and you've got a clearing house the bank was the c_i_ bank bcc i the money laundering was the c_i_s literal direct partner in this the sauties capcom was run by the chief saudi spy master and then in nineteen eighty two jeffrey epstein obtained a fake saudi passport uh. sorry it was a fake austrian passport because that was a big loophole passport during the cold war for spies but said his residence was saudi arabia we didn't find this out until twenty nineteen when his safe was rated but the exact time jeffrey epstein has this fake saudi passport and it's it's being done to support the c_i_a_ backed group the moussaid in afghanistan but that requires a clearing house to clear those money laundering trades that are using these mirrored commodities trades which is this you know technique of basically you know selling to yourself to make money look clean so that it looks like you know profit and you know it looks like you one or lost it in a market trade rather than through drug money and then they were then sending that on you know to uh. to the moussaid but the fact is is at the same time that that was happening Anan Kashogi, who had become Jeffrey Epstein's client in the 1980s when he went on his own, was the one facilitating the weapons, you have this drugs for cash for guns. The person, so the bank that's turning the drugs into clean cash, that the head of the Saudi spymaster is running that part of the banking side. And then you've got the Saudi arms dealer who is moving it illegally into Iran, working hand in glove with the CIA and the National Security Council the whole time. You have a, you have a illegal financial enterprise protected at the highest level by the United States government, the US intelligence services, and by proxy the Justice Department itself. Can you imagine the Justice Department prosecuting it while that operation was ongoing? Any defendant, you know, here's, you asked what are the, what are the great reveals in the JFK files? And I'd be remiss if I didn't bring up the case of Orlando Massfer. There's an incredible document in the JFK files that Tulsi Gabbard released last year, which is a CIA document that describes, I think the quote, as massive damage if the Justice Department pursues a criminal case against the guy named Orlando Massfer. If you just type in Orlando Massfer JFK files 2025 release, or like massive damage or something like that, you'll see this. It's an unlippling, credible document. What it documents is that there was a dispute between the CIA and the State Department. The State Department sets foreign policy. The CIA is not, is supposed to serve covertly the, the, the State Department. The, the CIA is the junior seat of the table. Nobody ever goes from being, you know, head of the State Department, head of the CIA. That's a, that's a demotion. The CIA is supposed to be kind of the, the, I use like the, you know, sopranos reference. You know, Silvio comes in and, and, you know, shakes down the hairdresser shop or whatever for the money it owes the family. If you are that hairdresser, it's easy to think that Silvio runs the mafia because he's the one who shows up at your house, breaks your windows, breaks your knuckles and takes your money. But Silvio is not doing that because he runs it. He's doing it because the person setting the policy of the enterprise, Tony, is the boss of it. The way it's supposed to work is the State Department sets policy and the CIA does, or organizes the plausibly diable dirty work to achieve it if that is necessary to achieve that foreign policy. This is why there was a law of debate in 1948 about whether the CIA should even take on this role. This is this great 1948 George Ken and memo that says maybe we should do have a office within the State Department called the, you know, Bureau of Organized Political Warfare. And then two months later they decided the CIA would, you know, would take that. But the fact is is it's basically a State Department function, but the CIA is supposed to defer to State. But what happened was is there was a faction of dispute between State and CIA over Cuba policy. The State Department wanted thought that the CIA backed rebel groups in Miami were being too aggressive. And two provocative, too hotheaded, you know, doing acts of terrorism and sorts of things that look bad to the international community. JFK was trying to rein them in. But the CIA, the careers and folks there, wanted to take a more aggressive posture. And so one of the CIA's key assets and ring leaders had a logistics hub with a massive CIA back Cuban Exile community network at that time in the early 1960s in Miami. Wanted thought that JFK was being too impatient, too cautious. They wanted to invade basically a section of Haiti, departing from Miami to use that as a base to then do Connecticut tax against Cuba. The State Department learned that this CIA back network led by the land of Massacre was going to do this and stopped it. They had a customs and border agent basically who was like manning the docs and caught them as like 300 of them were, you know, departing to try to take over a part of Haiti to do this. And then the State Department directed the Justice Department to pursue criminal charges against Orlando Massacre in steps of the CIA. And you know, if you can find this memo, you know, it's M-A-S for I think it's F-E-R-R-U-R Orlando Massacre. It's a thing. Those things are on. If you, if the title of it is like massive damage that would accrue, you can probably also just find a massive damage. There you go. Estimate of damage which could accrue to CIA Miami through prosecution of the Orlando Massacre Haitian and Bayesian group. Again, we just learned the existence of this document last year. This is from the 1960s. Now, it says the decision by the Justice Department to seek a grand jury indictment against Orlando Massacre and certain of his associates is a potentially explosive matter which could result in extensive damage to CIA activities of Miami. Recent adress publicity on the national scene and in the Miami area have added substantially to the already sizeable embarrassment potential. Can you imagine what these mammals look like for Jeffrey Epstein? Some of the main sectors of danger to CIA equities are described below. Basic national publicity regarding student and foundation topics have already attracted attention of the local press to the CIA in general. Usually any reference to CIA covert activities leads to, leads press to check files for references of any such activities locally. However, before this action could be taken, the story regarding and then he goes over the Pan Am Foundation, the University of Miami, which was what hosted J.M. Wave, the University of Miami, then the CIA's largest station house in the world, it was called J.M. Wave, was hosted in a facility off of the University of Miami campus. Again, the biggest CIA station house in the entire world. The CIA, so it goes on to say that, there have been all these, the top paragraph is saying, we're under a lot of pressure justice department. The public is already losing support for the CIA because of all these other disclosures. And it will be disastrous if you if if you pursue the prosecution of him because Orlando Massacre is going to squeal. So I think if you go down to the next page, he says, as has been the case for the past six years and they says basically the CIA has been working with the head of the president and treasurer of the University of Miami. They're extending the cooperation and all this. So basically all these touch points that Orlando Massacre's network connects to will be exposed and they go over all these what were previously redacted CIA cutouts in the area. And then it goes on the memo says, even if the above circumstances don't exist, we would remain concerned regarding the possible effects of the prosecution of the Massacre group. Although no station agents or persons within the Miami station has contractual arrangements are among the persons arrested or those who will be prosecuted, it will be very easy for the defense to drag CIA Miami into the case. The defense has only to obtain testimony, true or perjured. Can see it will be true. From one of the defendants or some in as defense witnesses, one or more disaffected former agents of the CIA station in order to begin a chain reaction. Surfacing such detail and rumor concerning CIA operations against the Cuban target. Given the size of a reduction of infiltration and a general feeling of frustration and lack of support for Cuban freedom, attributed to passive US policy, it basically saying it would undermine our entire operation against Cuba and the American people support for it. If the Justice Department indites these people who just committed this crime because they can very, the whole network is CIA and they can just call to the stand that their friends and associates had been talking with the CIA about this well before they had done it and that would be a massive scandal. Now that's just one example here and what goes on to happen is there's a negotiation between the State Department's CIA about whether to bring the case, how to bring the case, how to shape. There's a follow-up memo on this which is totally incredible. I think it's more of the logistics on this. The agreement they reach is that the State Department wins nominally. They do bring the prosecution but they bring it in a highly limited and tepid way and they agree to the CIA's demands to limit lines of inquiry to file motions against entering anything into discovery that might basically reveal the CIA networks in this and they agree to have CIA general counsel person on the prosecution team in order to personally make sure that the Justice Department stays in line and if something looks like if the judge grants discovery for something that might reveal the CIS role in it drop that line of prosecution so that it can't be entered into evidence and this this is this is what you see time and again is the is how these networks get protected whether it's drug cases whether it's you know uh. foreign policy scandal cases whether it's money laundering cases i believe in the mark rich case part of the i think is lawyer so uh. cited at one point or maybe it was a in his pardon application the work that he had done for for u_s_ intelligence services part of the reason that he should be granted leniency but the point i'm getting to hear is given jeffrey absin's involvement in the bcc i network given jeffrey's involvement in the nineteen nineties with all the foreign policy activities happening in the middle east at that time given jeffrey abstin's you know involvement through you know the the early two thousand's clinton era and everything given his involvement in everything from israeli to saudi to british to french high level government officials can you jeffrey abstin was investigated by the the s_c_ in the nineteen eighties he was what he was one of the two people uh. who part who ran the biggest ponzi scheme in history at the time at in the united states the towers financial collapse abstin's business partner goes to jail for like thirty years or twenty years or whatever but abstin's gates completely free uh. abstin gets involved in this huge fraud in the u_s_ virgin islands with this you know like billion dollar fraud case in the u_s_ virgin islands never prosecuted for any of it why is that well one is you may have caught we know in the u_s_ virgin islands case he was sponsoring the campaign basically the politicians there the prosecutor's answer to the politicians could be that but it i would be shocked if there in forty years of this wears wall though farest gump he's always in the room in forty years of american foreign policy and intelligence activity you know money sourcing for that uh. for all the crimes that abstin committed the concern was the same one they had with ralando masquerade don't bring the case and if you do bring it in a highly limited way and that's exactly what happened in two thousand six the first time he was indicted everybody was up in arms that it was a sweetheart plea deal it limited you get protection to all can co-conspirators known and unknown and and it was swooped in quickly before you know there was a trial and full so that winds of evidence couldn't be opened about the network it's just crazy that statutory rape is what took it all down because it's it's underaged hand jobs right that's what took it all down yeah i mean i was once it seems to be what took Jeffrey abstin down kind of crazy even that is has a really interesting geopolitical history there was a similar scandal in the early two thousandths with a private military contractor called dine corp which again runs through this odd non-cashoggi kind of middle eastern network uh. dine corp got in trouble uh. for trafficking uh. facilitating that the traffic is a you know major u_s_ military and c_i_ contractor for logistics and that you institutional support military assistance uh. on the ground for the smelter all over the world they got in trouble uh. moving basically trafficking underage kids to middle eastern shakes and i believe the uh. in in the early two thousands and i believe the reason that was alleged by congress that they did that was to juice the deals with them that basically you know these uh. these people who were critical it's quick you know if you're operating on the ground in quayt or you know you pick your middle eastern you know country in order to serve your purpose for the u_s_ government to be this outside plausibly deniable but extensively infrastructure professional support outfit on the ground you need the support of the local government need the support of the local high level officials they need to be happy and there's several currencies for that there's financial payoffs and there's other things they might like like parties and young women uh. you know specially in places where being with the very young female is not illegal and so i would dinecorp i believe got busted doing and you can look at the dinecorp scandal here was was doing this and i believe the argument was will you wanted us to do this thing on the ground you wanted us to help the u_s_ military you know kind of covert support nodes that were that were happening here we had to do it somehow you know this is part of what helped us do that i would not be surprised at the epstein trafficking apparatus started uh. with similar motivations not you know that what's not for necessarily for blackmail but because it makes clients or customers or you know v_i_p_ people happy it makes that it makes them all you something makes them want to get involved in a deal you do even if the deal is not one they would ordinarily do because they just want to stay close to you because you're their supplier of the thing you know of their vice of the thing that they you know want but can't get you know if you're if you're a seventy-year-old billionaire you can't walk into a bar and what we've decided the underage you can't walk into a bar you know in you know meet n'a_t_a_ you're old is going to you know i'm present you know these things facilitated that at private parties it needs to be for a lot of these guys has to be discreet you know they've got wives they've got reputations you know that there's an aspect of this that plays out at every institution i worked at a new york law firm and you know there's you know there's there's ways that you can make partner uh. you know at least this was kind of the vibe that i felt like some people make partner because they're really good technically what they do they're just amazing they're just technical whizzes on the minutia of how to structure a merger acquisition they you know they're just really great at structuring offshore banking transaction or the really they just know absolutely about tax law there's some people who move up because of nepotism you know there the brother and the the sun in law of of a major partner there's some people who make partner because they know one they brought in one client who's just a really big main uh. rainmaker and there's some people who move up because they open doors to partners while their associates they introduce them to someone they host events they've got you know tickets to exclusive things and the partners just like being around that person because they get access to that person uh. in a currency that they can't get on their own and that includes hosting you know cool exotic parties having you know attractive women i i've never been convinced that the central role of the epstein young girl uh. in my view sidebar of of the epstein money laundering story is is that it was for blackmail i and part of this is because the moment yet jeffery epstein formally officially threatened somebody with blackmail and that person tells his wife and that wife tells her friends and that gets out to somebody else that knows jeffery epstein jeffery epstein's access goes away overnight that's the sort of thing that even a rumor of that spreading and nobody else is going to want to do business with them so you think people just assume it's blackmail because that is how you would blackmail someone especially underage girls i think it is very possible that there could have been indirect blackmail meaning epstein passes it on to an intelligent service to uh. you know to a corporate espionage client or something uh. and they use that for their own purposes but even then i mean imagine for example if you know on the bill gates thing like there was an e bill gates gets an email i have a video of you sleeping with this person you know or somebody much lower level the moment they send that to the press if you know in order to do they figure they have nothing to lose i mean there's not been anybody in the seven years that's transpired who said i've been i was personally blackmailed by jeffery epstein because the moment you do that nobody comes to your parties anymore nobody you lose all the access you lose all the deal flow you lose all the good will that you've generated because this rumor People are very risk-averse, especially at that level. Right, but just to have it over their head and never use it, though. Well, I think that what you could have is because he does his own nefarious stuff, he could compile it so that if they ever go out, if they ever threaten him with something, he's now got something on them. And I've seen some correspondence that, you know, in the files that that looks like that might not be an impossible scenario. Do you think that's how Jeffrey Epstein got in that position in the first place that they knew he had this kink? No, not at all. I mean, Anakashoggi had the same thing. Anakashoggi was running around with dozens of young and apparently underage girls the whole time. I think that Jeffrey Epstein probably learned how powerful that can be through that network, seeing that that's what powerful people do that gives them something that gets them a lot of local influence and gets wins them a lot of favor. That's a very specific illicit desire to want underage people. Well, I very, how do you even find out that someone's into that? Well, I don't think that the majority or anything close to it of the women were technically. I mean, I think it was largely very young, barely legal, so to speak. And I know that there were cases of underage. But I think most of it was just most of it was just very, very young, but not like like 20 year old, not like 13 type things. And then yeah, remember, because this is an international enterprise and many of the clients are like in countries that don't necessarily have the same norms about that that we do. You can very easily see someone getting involved in that just because girls juice deals. And so I don't think that Epstein, I've not seen evidence. And in my view, you don't need any of that to understand the core part of the Epstein story that is relevant to your life today in terms of your own government and the workings of power and corporate finance and the like. But I do think that girls juice deals. And the fact that he had the coolest parties on a private island with the honest girls is something that makes a lot of intellectuals stimulating conversation scientists, all these very interesting people. So that was part of the thing, right? That was the draw. Try hosting a cool party as a guy with that with with a bad ratio, so to speak. So with a sausage party. And when you develop a reputation for having attractive women at the parties you host, you become an important person to know in the network. Because basically every male has that has a desire for attractive women, not saying underage, obviously, but that is like a universal biological desire for men to be want to be around attractive women. And what did they do for gay guys? I have no idea. Is that a part of the file or the the lore? I've not seen evidence of it. I or if I have, I can't recall it offhand. But again, the point is he's throwing these very attractive cool parties to get all these people together. But that's what juice is deals. Right. If you take the scenario, Epstein's running a fund. A donor, a colleague, someone that he'd like to do a favor for or an intelligence service says, hey, we're trying to get a pipeline built in the Middle East. We need a facilitator to help arrange private outside funding for it. So this thing can be constructed. And it doesn't look like it's coming from the US government or just, but the US government will provide some sort of loan guarantee or something on it. But we can't raise enough money to do this. It needs to come from the outside, but it would really help American national security. And there's probably something in it for you if you can get this done. Epstein then goes out and says to then puts out basically, tries to make contact with people in his network who might be interested in that deal. And then goes out to five people. Two of them are in the space locally. The deal terms look good. They want to do it 100% no hesitation. And then two people say, well, listen, it's a good idea and concept. But I don't know the risk profile on it looks a little high. This normally is not would not be something that my team would clear. We know it's interesting, but I it's just it's a little rich from my blood in terms of the risk profile. But Jeffrey Epstein asked them to do it. And Jeffrey Epstein, you know, for the past three years of their lives has been the best weekend they've ever had has, you know, has made them feel alive again in their mid 50s or 60s has, you know, has opened all sorts of other deals. For you for them. And this deal might work out. So if I'm afraid that if I say no to Jeffrey Epstein on this deal, I'm not going to get an invite to the next party. I'm not going to be able to get late again with like, you know, a girl that I with you know, women, I find attractive or that, yada yada and Epstein hooks those up. I will do I'll get in on this deal just because I want to be in the good graces of Jeffrey Epstein. Not, you know, because the deal as a stand alone thing, it's because it's juiced by the girls, the parties, the lifestyle that Epstein allows you to have access to. But in the public guy, the narrative is underage girls. And this is the thing that makes it so disgusting. When people talk about it, everyone says, fuck kids on the island. This is the this is the the big conspiracy about it. And this is the reason why people are so outraged about it. My concern with the runaway train on that is that it's a massive man hunt for something that it may be true. To me, it's a it's a it's a needle in the haystack. It might be true. Good luck looking for it. And when I think about it logically with the role that Epstein played between BCCI, Iran, Contra, Latin American politics, African politics, Asian politics, major, you know, world foundations, you don't need it would seem ludicrous to me that Epstein doesn't mean it's impossible. But logistically, if Epstein ever directly threatened someone, proactively, that is if the person tries to blackmail Epstein Epstein could, you know, reactively say, well, I've got I've got shit on you too. But proactively and really, really do someone in like that and word gets around that that happens. Everything everything he built goes at the whole rolladex finds out. And then even if the rumors not even if that rumor isn't even he didn't if that rumor existed, people aren't going to want to go to the parties because now that's not like an unfettered good time, that is like, oh, he did this to this guy I know. And so in the fact that, you know, these sorts of things they have a value that will weigh beyond blackmail. They have they have a value in terms of bringing people in network and keeping clients and customers happy and providing access. And I think I think that the the focus on that, listen, if there were if there were any sort of receipts, whatsoever on that after all these years, if there was like something really good to chew on on that on that thread, I'm very I'm open-minded about it. But my concern is the fixation on this, you think about the sort of pie chart of what the Epstein Cinematic Universe can tell you about the world, even if it's true, it's a very very very small fraction of that. And this gets back to in 1999, I mentioned Jeffrey Epstein foiled the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999 for all records about himself. And then he did it again in 2011. Now Jeffrey Epstein was not a public figure at all in 1999. He didn't come into public awareness public attention until 2001-2002 when he started flying when he flew Bill Clinton around post-presidency Bill Clinton around on his Africa tour around the time of the start of the Clinton Foundation and everyone was wondering whoa who's who's this eccentric billionaire who is personally flying around on his private jet the president of the United States for the past eight years and that's when you know the Jeffrey Epstein celebrity story started but he was a private figure in 1999 when he foiled the central intelligence agency for records and we just learned this in the files this week the the the response we don't actually have the underlying what's in the files is a 2011 foya response to Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer Jeffrey Epstein did this through his lawyer using the privacy act this is a way to basically kind of anonymously foya the the CIA to basically keep communications between the CIA and your lawyer for information you're entitled to under the privacy act about about yourself and we don't have the underlying letter in the files tragically and for whatever reason but we but what we do have because I would expect that to be an enclosure to the CIA response but the fact is is anybody who wants to be a hero right now and I have it up on my on my ex account I have in the thread that I did on this the reference the file reference numbers these are not classified documents foya responses are not classified so anybody right now can foya the central intelligence agency for all records and communications related to the CIA's written communications with Jeffrey Epstein via his lawyer both in 1999-2001 but the 2011 what it says is we have received your request for your client Jeffrey Epstein's you know records search under the Freedom of Information Act we've granted the request to search for all open and acknowledged agency affiliations between Jeffrey Epstein and the CIA we have run that search and the answer is no documents are responsive to the request and that says in the next paragraph with respect to your request that touches on classified classified documents we can neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence of of any such documents so you can consider this a partial denial of your foya request now what's so interesting about that is you may think if you read that that Jeffrey Epstein you know just requested any public facing links between him and the CIA or you know what just a general you know what do you have on me that the public can search just to see first of all the fact they did that alone twice in 1990-2001 says something but the you might think okay well he just wants to know if other people might think that he's CIA you know he's he's moving up in the world in 1999 he's about to be a massive public figure he wants to know if other people foya the CIA for records on him what they will see and but that it turns out that response to a foya partial granting of the foya to look for open and acknowledged agency links and partial glow mar can neither confirm nor deny existence non-existence is a stock CIA foya response whenever you foya the CIA for someone's personnel files which leads to the question because the fact that the CIA says we we are consider this a denial of your request for classified for things that touch on classified matters means that he asked he didn't just ask for all open in in in acknowledged links between the CIA and himself he asked for something and whatever that thing was it touched on something classified there would have been no glow mar if if there would have been nothing to deny about the request if it had only been limited to open and acknowledged links to me this is a bombshell and should prompt rocona and and Thomas massie and the 427 members of the House of Representatives and 100% of the U.S. Senate to pass up at the same bill that the United States Congress did in 1992 for for for the JFK uh you know records collection act when the CIA was forced by law to stand up an independent auditing body to review all classified records relating to the JFK assassination for the first time ever and then declassify them over months and years through the work of that independent board of the existence of of this correspondence we just learned about this week alone should prompt a 427 to 1 and 100% Senate to do the same thing they just did with the OJ files for CIA originated files that's actionable immediately who's going to want to be on the other side of that in congress no the CIA's records about Jeffrey Epstein prolific child sex track wow however you want you know whatever you see in the Rorschach inkblot test of the Epstein universe um I think it'd be very hard to be if that bill gets introduced for a sitting member of congress to be on the other side of it I think it would pass and it would legally compel the CIA to turn over what I think are quite possibly arguably very likely 40 years of CIA documents referencing Epstein the CIA would not be doing its job if it didn't have records about Jeffrey Epstein Jeffrey Epstein was a counterintelligence threat with all the foreign countries that he was dealing with if he if he had been a double agent sort of thing the CIA would not be doing its job if it was not keeping the Epstein's network was a key financial logistics hubs in highly geopolitical sensitive areas of operation of the CIA the economics division of the CIA let alone you know the operations division is going to have to you know uh keep analysts informed about money flows in those countries and when you add and then you add in the fact that he represented Anand Kishoggi's money who was the CIA's main point person for 10 years uh the the literal central linchpin in his money is being had there's no way and you now have a legal mechanism to enforce CID classification if congress forces it now the other part of it is okay why is it the CIA turned this over before you could argue it's a Orlando Mass for a case it would embarrass the agency it would mean in congress their funding is going to get decimated because they're toxic you can argue it's foreign governments that don't want that but part of it's the CIA is not allowed to do this unless the congress forces them these are classified documents I mean it could you know charitably volunteer to odni by conducting you know an internal task force uh that voluntarily you know ask tocy gabbard to declassify these uh I wouldn't hold your breath on that but this is immediately actionable and it would solve the mystery all we need is one brave member of congress to get the ball rolling and stand up that bill and you can just copy paste the 1992 JFK Records Collection Act and just substitute JFK for Jeffrey Epstein what's your take on the circumstances around his death I don't know I it's weird that they took a guy who is one of those high profile defendants ever and you put him in jail with a mass murderer yeah yeah kind of crazy you put him in jail with a cop who'd killed drug dealers a juiced up gigantic cop yeah who was obviously a psychopath and then 18 days before he died he complained that that guy tried to kill him yeah uh I mean it it doesn't look good I it's just crazy that this guy wasn't in protective custody it's crazy that the cameras go down it's crazy that the footage that they released is weird because it's missing it's missing time and it's crazy that it happened under the watch of an attorney general who himself was so deeply impeded in the Epstein network his whole life I mean from the weird kind of coincidence of billbar's father Donald bar and Jeffrey Epstein's Dalton school to the fact that billbar started his career in the CIA during the Iran contra operation that Jeffrey Epstein was appears to have been doing the covert money laundering for I mean Jeffrey Bill Barr was like seven years he went to night law school trained to be a lawyer while he was at the CIA and then his you know main job was being the CIA's blocker and tackler to obstruct he was the he was the CIA's point of contact to Congress during the Iran contra scandal that's Jeffrey Epstein was so deeply involved in and was blamed in the press at the time for being the person at CIA blocking Congress from seeing the CIA scant documents that were so central to the scandal. Then he becomes the attorney general of the United States and he writes the pardons of the BCCI officials who was co-leading that investigation Robert Mueller at the time. This is the early 1990s, the first time Bill Barr. You have the BCCI bear sturns, multi-billion dollar operation that appears to me that Jeffrey Epstein was working on and then got, took the clients from that deal as his own personal clients when he went private on his own. And Bill Barr is who lets the people from the crooked CIA bank off the hook. And then it becomes attorney general again. And in 2019 he's the one in charge of the FBI, the FBI answers to the justice department. The FBI is the same relationship with justice that the CIA has with state. They're the investigative arm of the justice department. So I think it's hard to trust anyone on this. And I don't know what kind of file set the Trump FBI inherited after all this time. It's hard to make heads or tails of it. To me, I think getting answers on the things that are immediately actionable, getting the CIA's direct correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein, you know, that I mentioned, a congressional bill that forces that because if it comes out that there are effectively an entire avalanche of classified Epstein files dating back 40 years. And then you've got the CIA attorney, it puts these things in a very different light depending on weather. The thing that is generated so much smoke this whole time, the allegation of protection by US government intelligence and however many others. To know that on physical paper, like we know that the CIA interfered in the Orlando Mass Vert trial, like we know that the CIA contracted out to mafia hitman and attempt to kill a foreign present. Like we know that MKL Tro actually was real. These things, you can't scale, you know, I think if things like a like a jenga tower, if a foundational piece is not solid, you can scale a whole architecture of BS on top of it. And if that assumption falls away, this majestic looking, you know, tapestry of just years and years of effort collapses because the thing you assume to be true because it looked like there was so much smoke to know it to be true. But that is a solid piece that you can put the next piece on top of, you know, it's, there's that quote, 99% is a bitch, 100% is a breeze. What does that mean? It means when you're only 99% sure of something, you always have to agonize. Well, what if it's not true and it, and I think it is. And I build all this stuff on top of it. The 1% chance that that's not true means it would be a real bitch for this, me to spend years of effort on this thing for me to spend 1000, you know, millions of dollars, you know, on this thing when it's based on assumption that it was only 99% likely to be true. But 1% it may have been structured some way different. There might be something I missed in this. Whereas 100% is a breeze. Okay. It's automatic. This is why document drops like this are so vital. Not even necessarily because they have some single smoking gun that tells you who killed JFK or, you know, what client Jeffrey Epstein trafficked women to, but because it allows you to put down real jenga pieces about what actually happened. And that process itself allows you to ask the questions that might get you to those answers. That makes a lot of sense. Is there anything else you want to add to this? I mean, we can kind of go on for days. Yeah. I mean, you spend so much time on this stuff. How do you have that kind of an attention span? It's kind of nuts. I mean, I follow some of your live streams. First of all, your recall is insane. You know, I heard something once, which I think is really helpful. I don't think I'm special in any way like this. I think literally anyone can do this if you just kind of apply this kind of trick. I heard this once, which is that if you read a history book, don't just read it agnostically. Give a theory in mind about what you think this is and how it worked. Even if you are wrong about that theory, what you will find is that names, dates, locations, your brain will remember them forever because they're not, you know, if I'm thinking about something that happened in, you know, I don't know, like November 11, 1983. Okay. If I see like that date on a driver's license card or something, and I have no theory of mind when I see that, I'm not going to remember that five minutes from then. It's going to be like remembering, trying to remember a 11 string, you know, number or like someone's cell phone or something when you don't really know the person or you've never, you know, you haven't dialed in a million times. But if you have a theory of mind that you are indexing those things in relation to, what you find is that your brain keeps those in that index. So like I've joked like because we've talked about this Iran contra affair, which was really the creation of this apparatus that we live under today, where because the sea, I've got handcuffs put on it, everything had to become CIA to get around those handcuffs. The universities had to be the foundations, the private philanthropic donors, you know, that and this is what happened in the censorship industrial complex. It was all wrapped around this. But what you find is like those dates mean something to you because they're placed in relation to something else that happens. I joke that like I index things by, you know, Iran contra often like, for example, if there's, when I was, you know, studying about BCCI and I learned, okay, this happened in 1984. I don't just think about 1984 as an abstract thing. I think, okay, well, that means it happened after the meeting between Robert McFarland and Anand Kishoggi, but before the, you know, the oil pipeline scandal of edmese. And then so I remember that this thing happened on this date because I place it into that index. And anyone, I think it's a, I think it's something that anyone, you know, I think people organically do it when they're really passionate about something. And you know, this is an easy thing to be passionate about because it gets to the heart of networks that are the determining power structures of your life when you look up and then you look up at the thing that you're looking up at and you look up at the thing above that. This is the network you say, whether it's an intelligence, military, statecraft, high finance, private philanthropies, universities, labor unions, scientific research. It doesn't mean it's, you know, the F-stein network, so to speak, but it's, it's this, this layer of interconnected human networks. And I think it's an important history for the American people to have access to so that they can make informed decisions about how they want to change that world, how they can make informed decisions about what to vote for, they can make informed decisions about what kind of, you know, industries that they're participating in that they might want to see reformed. And so it makes it easy to be passionate about because if we can, if we can get a win here, it'll really change the world. Well, I think you do a great service and I think your abilities are exceptional. I think you're selling yourself short a little bit. You're being a little self-deprecating because it's very unusual what you're able to do. And I think just the sheer amount of time that you've invested in this stuff is kind of mind-boggling. Well, what would you like to see in this? Like if you had a wish list, what are the things that are open threads or? Well, the real concern with me is that it's unfixable and that this is just a standard way that our government has operated since the 1950s or whenever and it can't be fixed and that they'll just gloss over it. A new person will get into office and promise that they're going to implement some reform and it never happens and that we just accept that. over and over and over again. That's the real fear. The real fear is that there's a slow capture of our democracy to the point where it's just a mere illusion. And I think a lot of people think that we've already passed the point of no return on that. That's what scares the shit out of a lot of people. And then when you see things that are happening in other countries, like particularly England, which is just rampant, crack down on free speech and what the arrests from people that are posting things on social media sites and the implementations of, there's a new thing that they try to do, or I think they are doing this concept of having a limited amount of times you can drive outside of a zone. And after that, you have to pay for it. That's a new thing, right? - Yeah, smart cities type concept. - I can send this to you, Jamie, because I just sent it to Constantin, 'cause it appears to be real. And it's terrifying. - Your carbon budget. - Yeah, fuck, that's nuts. Well, look at what California's doing right now. What California is doing is they are taking, or they're moving forward with this. The idea that you have a tax on the amount of miles that you drive now. So instead of just taxing gas, like they've always done, now they're taxing you on the amount of miles that you drive. Well, you're already getting tax on that. If you're driving more miles, you're spending more money on gas. So you're spending more money on tax. But now they're taxing on top of that, which is essentially they're stealing money. - Yeah. - Why can't I find it? Forward here. There you go, looks so good. Jamie, you're on signal, right? - I can get it to myself now. - It is really interesting how that whole thing is done. - I said it's time-outs ago. - The whole put, but it's crazy that the California thing is bananas. - It just says wow. - That's it? - Yeah. - It doesn't have the link. - Link, okay, hold on. Sorry. Huh. Oh, maybe this is it. Oh, I don't know, sorry. I think there's a really interesting underdeveloped history around the origins of the climate of 2006, 2005, 2006, 2007, really global warming climate, kind of policy push from the US government that became a runaway train as investor money rushed in. It's my opinion, and I'm open-minded about it, but it appears to be the case in my view after a study of this that the US government together with foreign allies pursued this kind of, demonization of carbon at a real policy, love or hydrocarbon based fuels as a, it's kind of geopolitical battering ram against newly resurgent Russia in the mid 2000s as Putin was getting power back over a bunch of post-Soviet Eastern satellite countries through basically pipeline exploiting his leverage around pipelines and the fact that, you know, this is like the John McCain type quote, right? That Russia is a gas station with a military, right? You hear that a lot. Gasprom, the state-sponsored oil company was like, effectively the biggest oil company. And gasprom was for gas, but it rossed in after. Russia had at one point the largest oil exports in the world. It was the motor engine of the economy, oil and gas, and the relationship between Russian oligarchs and businessmen and Eastern European Russian oligarchs and businessmen allowed that hydrocarbon based dependency and financial opportunity to let Putin reassert Russian control over central and Eastern European countries that NATO was trying to, you know, turn into, you know, Western Vassal States essentially. So you had this, in the 1990s, this wasn't an issue because Boris Yeltsin was the president and he was effectively an adjunct of the US government incidentally through Larry Summers and the Jeffrey Epstein Harvard network. But so there became this push after, you know, Russia's interventions in Georgia and the like and a big attack on a lot of, you know, high level Republican. Well, basically, I think this push to try to create a shift in the types of energy the world uses was a way to kneecap Russia's main source of revenue to ensure that the, the Eurasia, the plant disease, political or Vassal State control over Eurasia would continue against Putin's new nationalist and global resurgence and this includes a bunch of crap that in 2004. But effectively, then you start to see the US government champion these hydrocarbon policies and you started to see all of these international forums, journals, regulators, openly talking in this mid-Auts period as Russia was starting to reclaim political influence that these climate policies would be a way to stop Russian power and influence because it would cripple them economically. They'd have, there'd be no business, you know, between oligarchs in the different countries for them to even leverage, it would effectively allow us to continue the golden age of the Uniparty 1990s moment. And then you saw all these government subsidies to it, you know, tax benefits, you know, free money basically and then it became a runaway. As the market saw that this was a highly protected and centralized space by the US government, they all flooded it or now they've got a sunk cost. If those policies change, you've got trillions of dollars in climate finance globally. And then these started becoming part of like IMF loan requirements and but now it's like, even if the science is completely wrong, what started arguably is a kind of, you know, national security based way to force energy diversification. This is what we put Europe through the United States with the sanctions against Russia. We force them to, you know, divest of, avoid the gas and invest in a basket of, you know, alternative energy, cleaner energy supplies. But now it's, and they, and that could be justified at the national security level with the science of this actually being the case. So you could sell it to the whole world. Even if, even if you prove that false, at this point there's so much infrastructure built up that, you know, you have this network. You have the, you have hedge funds, you know, you got, I mean, Bill Gates has a climate fund. Al Gore is a billionaire from, from this one, Tom Steyer, one of the biggest investors in the DNC, the climate impact fund, Michael Bill's who funded the CIA governor of Virginia, Abigail Spanberger and then the momentum of the, it's sort of an unstoppable social narrative now. Right. Well, and it's, and the thing that's terrifying about it is that it is, can join the diplomatic muscle of the American government and whatever allies abroad with private finance. Like, for example, like, we over through the government of Bangladesh in 2024, the Biden administration did. They ran this whole coup. They did it through the national down for democracy. A CIA cut out and a million other orgs on the ground. It was a color revolution street protest. You know, I think we may have talked about this last time where literally the CIA sock puppet, national down for democracy sponsored like rap music videos and, you know, produced them and put them on YouTube and then worked with the unions, you know, set up like transgender dance festivals to try to get the LGBT community, you know, on board against the government. And then, you know, giant rides they install, you know, it's effectively a, okay. But part of the thing that they leaned on in the post-transition government is to, you know, agree to these, you know, basically, basically like climate finance reforms. And you can just like the CIA and the oil industry, became completely inseparable, completely inseparable. I mean, George Bush, for example, is a pot of energy offshore in the whole Texas oil thing. And, you know, to then becoming the central intelligence agency, do I mean, Trump's first Secretary of State was Rex Tillerson. Rex Tillerson never worked in government. The Secretary of State oversees the CIA. He's got the whole CIA portfolio. As you know, well, he was the chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil. You can't, the CIA and the US military creates the market for oil companies. You can't get access to the oil unless you either overthrow government or support against of insurgency political movement, one that will guarantee you favorable terms, you know, access yada yada, the whole market. And then the CIA and DOD people will rotate into board seats on those oil companies. And so it becomes inseparable. And my fear about this is that over the past 10 years, the same things started to happen with the client, the sort of, you know, clean energy side of the, you know, of big energy companies like big oil and see it, big oil and CIA for a century. Now you have like big climate and CIA because there's so much money. It's energies, the master resource. And so now you've got, you know, what appears to me, CIA intervention in part, like some of these things you have to wonder, why did the Biden CIA try to overthrow the Bolsonaro government in Brazil? This was a pro-US political party. It was a, the person, you know, Lula was tied at the hip with China, divested from all these US contracts, you know, massively reduced the, you know, the footprint of US aligned policies in the second biggest country in our hemisphere. And well, you know, Brazil just announced like this 1.3 trillion dollar climate finance initiative. And you know, all of these people are, all these New York hedge funds and London banks who've skated towards this are in on that. You have, I mean, this is a crazy case. You know, one of the biggest beneficiaries of the post-Cougat, the Lula's government in Brazil, were all of the clean ethanol, George Soros's longest standing equity investment. At that point, it was a country company called Attico Agra, which did clean ethanol fuel alternatives. The problem is it's, you know, it's part of its business. Part of it is it's not competitive on price with, you know, diesel-based fuels. So the only way to, you know, compete and win that market and make millions of dollars is if the government imposes a mandate, a quota that forces people to buy your product. Well, George Soros co-sponsored those CIA adjacent national down for democracy operations all over Brazil. Well, he's, you know, holding an equity interest in the thing that day one, there's an imposed mandate to use those, those climate products. It's the same thing in Africa. You have like CIA regime change to force clean energy companies so that the people who sponsor the donors who sponsor the politicians who pick the staff of the CIA, in acts policies that makes money for those hedge funds invested in climate finance. So fucked up. I think that's what's happening in California. Without the regime change element, I think it's the kind of, you know, I think you have investors who profit from this and the only way those investments can be profitable is if government imposes mandates, quotas and bans on the alternatives to that product. I mean, that's kind of the way the vaccine market works. Do you have that link? Yeah. Yeah, just play it. Do you pay? They just set up their little 15-minute city and they are now charging people for leaving the city. You get 100 free days. They call it a free day. You get a free pass to leave the 15-minute city. And if you exceed your 100 free days, you have to pay the US dollar equivalent of 93 dollars per day. And if you live outside of the 15-minute city, you want to travel into the 15-minute city, you get 25 free passes, free move. Oh, they're the government's giving you free movement capability. You get 25 free passes and if you exceed those 25 days, it's 93 dollars a day. And how are they tracking all this? Oh, there's not a man at the gate. They're not writing up tickets or having police officers that, oh, no, they are monitoring you with digital AI surveillance and cameras. And then they're automatically finding you. This is why we have to be against the flock cameras in the United States. They're not just speed track cameras. This is why we have to be against the volunteer whole of government database. This is why we have to stand up and raise awareness and bring attention to these matters instead of arguing with each other and NPCs on the internet over left versus right issues or my side. You're said they are keeping us artificially divided because they're setting up this infrastructure in the United States right now. Divide and conquer. We are in the division part of the divide and conquer agenda. Conquer is next. You think it's bad now. We too you have to pay $100 a day to leave your 15-minute city. You can spear see. Right. So only rich people are going to be able to afford. That's just like the meat thing. The irony of Australia being a prison colony and now you've got now it's like the homeland in the UK. But I mean, look, the UK just got rid of like jury trials for a lot of cases. And yeah, you know, as 12,000 speech arrests a year and some people arrested for what seems like even holding up their own country's flag at an opportune moment or silently prank. And, you know, we need to liberate the British people. I mean, it's unbelievable that I mean, they call it "perfidious" Albion, right? British statecraft has been so pernicious to the American people in the past decade. It was, I would rush a gate. The entire three-year special prosecutor saga was because of a British spy Christopher Steele and and an Iran contra veteran Stefan Halper residing abroad at Cambridge to kick that off. And then the British government conspired with the Biden administration to create, to to, to join the US, UK censorship industrial complex. America first legal, Stephen Miller and Gene Hamilton's nonprofit law firm they started obtained these incredible documents that showed a planning meeting between the British government and the Biden administration attended by the CIA, the National Security Council, USAID hosted the White House and it was the British, the UK Digital Commission. They brought a huge slide deck of all the ways that their new censorship law, what's today called the Online Service, Online Safety Act, the USA, would effectively help throttle misinformation in the United States. Like, basically, it was like, you scratch your back, our back, we'll scratch yours and it was this, you know, US Democrat Party, UK Labor Party, Alliance, meanwhile, the Biden government was paying British censors. They, the global disinformation index, which, you know, killed like the ad, you know, revenue for like, they went after daily wire, federalist, a million conservative news sites and social media accounts, you know, went after the social media platforms in the United States, they're British black ops by their own language, the, well, CCDA chose, but they were funded by our government to censor our voices but longed out to the UK. And I think we need to fundamentally restructure that special relationship. We've had that relationship for a long time, totally unquestioned. I, we can't farm that out. And if that's not, if that's not addressed and we don't fix that relationship, I think you can't really fix our own system unless we, you know, cut out some of the poise and that we inject from the outside. Mike, we give people a lot to go almost too much, but you, if anybody wants more, your ex account is amazing. You're, you're tireless. I don't know how you do it, but thank you for doing it. I really appreciate you and appreciate you coming on here. Oh, thanks so much for having me. Nothing but fun from here. I mean, look, it's fun. I mean, guys, or the world is opening up and we are seeing behind a looking glass where there has been a veil of secrecy for 60 years about some of these things for 10 years about some of these things. So don't get too blackpilled. This is something has happened that has never happened before and you are alive to experience it. So, you know, try and enjoy the ride.