The Vault: The Epstein Files

Mega Edition: Les Wexner And The Epstein Related Q&A Session With Congress (6/3/26)

1 h 0 min · 3 de jun de 2026
Portada del episodio Mega Edition: Les Wexner And The Epstein Related Q&A Session With Congress (6/3/26)

Descripción

Les Wexner’s Epstein-related deposition landed less like a breakthrough and more like another controlled pass through already familiar terrain: Wexner said Epstein conned him, denied knowing anything about Epstein’s sex trafficking, denied participating in abuse, and tried to frame the relationship as professional rather than personal. He described Epstein as a family-office figure who managed parts of his financial life, claimed Epstein stole from him, said he never saw warning signs, and insisted that after Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea, Epstein was essentially “dead” to him. The questioning did force Wexner to address uncomfortable details — the birthday-book message signed “your friend Leslie,” photos of him with Epstein, a visit to Epstein’s island, Epstein’s role around New Albany, and the question of how much money Epstein may have taken — but Wexner’s answers largely stayed inside the same defensive box: he was deceived, he did not know, he does not remember, and Epstein was a criminal predator whose full operation escaped him. The problem is that the process did not appear to substantially move the ball. It produced optics, denials, memory gaps, and a few headline-friendly moments, but very little that fundamentally changed the public record. The public already knew Wexner was one of Epstein’s most important early patrons, that Epstein had unusual access to his money and world, that the relationship helped give Epstein social credibility, and that Wexner has long claimed he was betrayed and financially exploited. What the deposition added was texture, not revelation: Wexner’s own tone, his repeated distancing, his admission about the birthday note, his “con man” framing, and his inability or unwillingness to nail down key specifics. In that sense, the interview reinforced the larger frustration with the Epstein inquiry machine: powerful people are questioned, transcripts and videos are released, everyone gets a day of headlines, but the public still comes away with the same core unanswered questions about who enabled Epstein, who protected him, who benefited from him, and why the system let him operate for so long. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Comentarios

0

Sé la primera persona en comentar

¡Regístrate ahora y únete a la comunidad de The Vault: The Epstein Files!

Empezar

2 meses por 1 €

Después 4,99 € / mes · Cancela cuando quieras.

  • Podcasts exclusivos
  • 20 horas de audiolibros / mes
  • Podcast gratuitos

Todos los episodios

998 episodios

Portada del episodio The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 3) (6/6/26)

The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 3) (6/6/26)

Pam Bondi’s congressional transcript showed her trying to defend the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files while repeatedly distancing herself from the day-to-day mechanics of the review. She told House Oversight lawmakers that Todd Blanche was the official “in charge” of the Epstein records process, saying she did not personally conduct the document review and that the work had been delegated to him. Bondi acknowledged that mistakes were made, including redaction problems, but framed the release as a massive and difficult undertaking rather than a deliberate attempt to obstruct transparency. At the same time, she insisted the department was committed to accountability, even as lawmakers pressed her on why the disclosures remained incomplete, flawed, or slow-moving. The transcript also showed Bondi trying to avoid directly blaming Blanche while making clear that he was the person managing the release. She praised him as ethical and capable, but Democrats seized on her answers as evidence that Blanche, along with other DOJ and FBI officials, should be brought before Congress to explain the process in detail. Bondi also said she learned about Ghislaine Maxwell’s prison transfer from news reports, denied involvement in that decision, rejected the idea of a Maxwell pardon, and refused to discuss private conversations with Donald Trump. The result was a transcript that did not settle the Epstein files controversy, but instead widened the accountability fight by making clear that Congress still does not have a clean answer on who controlled the review, why errors happened, and whether the public has truly received the full record. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf]

6 de jun de 202612 min
Portada del episodio The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 2) (6/6/26)

The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 2) (6/6/26)

Pam Bondi’s congressional transcript showed her trying to defend the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files while repeatedly distancing herself from the day-to-day mechanics of the review. She told House Oversight lawmakers that Todd Blanche was the official “in charge” of the Epstein records process, saying she did not personally conduct the document review and that the work had been delegated to him. Bondi acknowledged that mistakes were made, including redaction problems, but framed the release as a massive and difficult undertaking rather than a deliberate attempt to obstruct transparency. At the same time, she insisted the department was committed to accountability, even as lawmakers pressed her on why the disclosures remained incomplete, flawed, or slow-moving. The transcript also showed Bondi trying to avoid directly blaming Blanche while making clear that he was the person managing the release. She praised him as ethical and capable, but Democrats seized on her answers as evidence that Blanche, along with other DOJ and FBI officials, should be brought before Congress to explain the process in detail. Bondi also said she learned about Ghislaine Maxwell’s prison transfer from news reports, denied involvement in that decision, rejected the idea of a Maxwell pardon, and refused to discuss private conversations with Donald Trump. The result was a transcript that did not settle the Epstein files controversy, but instead widened the accountability fight by making clear that Congress still does not have a clean answer on who controlled the review, why errors happened, and whether the public has truly received the full record. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf]

6 de jun de 202611 min
Portada del episodio The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 1) (6/6/26)

The Pam Bondi Congressional Oversight Committee Epstein Related Transcript (Part 1) (6/6/26)

Pam Bondi’s congressional transcript showed her trying to defend the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files while repeatedly distancing herself from the day-to-day mechanics of the review. She told House Oversight lawmakers that Todd Blanche was the official “in charge” of the Epstein records process, saying she did not personally conduct the document review and that the work had been delegated to him. Bondi acknowledged that mistakes were made, including redaction problems, but framed the release as a massive and difficult undertaking rather than a deliberate attempt to obstruct transparency. At the same time, she insisted the department was committed to accountability, even as lawmakers pressed her on why the disclosures remained incomplete, flawed, or slow-moving. The transcript also showed Bondi trying to avoid directly blaming Blanche while making clear that he was the person managing the release. She praised him as ethical and capable, but Democrats seized on her answers as evidence that Blanche, along with other DOJ and FBI officials, should be brought before Congress to explain the process in detail. Bondi also said she learned about Ghislaine Maxwell’s prison transfer from news reports, denied involvement in that decision, rejected the idea of a Maxwell pardon, and refused to discuss private conversations with Donald Trump. The result was a transcript that did not settle the Epstein files controversy, but instead widened the accountability fight by making clear that Congress still does not have a clean answer on who controlled the review, why errors happened, and whether the public has truly received the full record. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Final-Bondi-Transcript.pdf]

6 de jun de 202615 min
Portada del episodio Mega Edition: Kathlyn Ruemmler And The Ghost Of Jeffrey Epstein (6/5/26)

Mega Edition: Kathlyn Ruemmler And The Ghost Of Jeffrey Epstein (6/5/26)

Kathryn “Kathy” Ruemmler’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became a major reputational crisis because it was not presented as a brief, distant, or accidental association. Newly released DOJ Epstein files and prior reporting showed that Ruemmler, a former Obama White House counsel who later became Goldman Sachs’ chief legal officer and general counsel, maintained friendly contact with Epstein years after his 2008 conviction. The communications reportedly included warm personal language, gifts, career discussions, and advice about how Epstein could handle media scrutiny over his crimes. Ruemmler has said she never represented Epstein as a lawyer, did nothing wrong, did not know about ongoing criminal conduct, and regrets ever knowing him, but the released material badly undercut any attempt to portray the relationship as minor or incidental. The problem for Goldman Sachs was obvious: Ruemmler was not just another executive, she was the bank’s top lawyer and a senior figure responsible for legal, regulatory, and reputational judgment. Once the Epstein communications became public, the optics became untenable for someone whose job was to help safeguard the institution’s integrity. Ruemmler announced she would step down as Goldman Sachs’ chief legal officer and general counsel effective June 30, 2026, saying her responsibility was to put Goldman Sachs’ interests first. Her resignation became one of the most significant U.S. professional consequences tied to the latest Epstein file releases, showing again how Epstein’s network did not merely stain reputations by association, but exposed the judgment of powerful people who stayed close to him long after the public already knew what he was. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

6 de jun de 202657 min
Portada del episodio Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein And Those At The Very Top Of The Modeling Industry (6/6/26)

Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein And Those At The Very Top Of The Modeling Industry (6/6/26)

Faith Kates’ exit from Next Management became another example of the Epstein files turning old relationships into present-day professional consequences. Kates, the co-founder of Next, had long been known as a major figure in the modeling world, but newly released Epstein materials and follow-up reporting painted her relationship with him as far deeper than a passing association. The files showed years of warm, personal communication, business discussions, apparent advice from Epstein, and troubling exchanges involving models or aspiring models even after his 2008 conviction. Kates stepped down from Next in late 2025, officially citing personal reasons and charity work, but the timing and the later revelations made that explanation look incomplete at best. Once the emails and references became public, Next moved to distance itself from her, saying her Epstein relationship was unknown to current management and that the company was working to end all legal ties with her. In practical terms, the Epstein revelations turned Kates from a powerful agency founder into a liability. The Brunel side of the story shows how deeply Epstein’s orbit overlapped with the mainstream fashion and retail ecosystem before Epstein’s second arrest in 2019. Jean-Luc Brunel’s MC2 Model Management, which had Epstein ties and was later scrutinized over allegations that it helped supply young women into Epstein’s world, was not operating in some obscure corner of the industry. Reporting linked MC2 to major retailers and brands including Victoria’s Secret, Nordstrom, Macy’s, Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, JCPenney, Kohl’s, Target, Sears, and Belk. Some companies later minimized the relationship or said the work was limited, but the larger point is brutal: Brunel’s agency had enough legitimacy to operate inside the commercial bloodstream of American retail while Epstein’s history was already publicly known. That is what makes the modeling-agency angle so disturbing—not just the individual allegations, but the way a loosely regulated industry, powerful retailers, wealthy men, scouts, agencies, visas, housing, and access all overlapped in a system where vulnerable young women could be treated like inventory long before the public reckoning finally arrived. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

6 de jun de 202640 min