The Last Days Of Jeffrey Epstein

Howard Lutnick And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Congressional Hearing (Part 6)

11 min · 12 de jul de 2026
Portada del episodio Howard Lutnick And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Congressional Hearing (Part 6)

Descripción

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick’s closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein’s townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein’s private island alongside Lutnick’s family The transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf [https://assets.newsweek.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Lutnick-Transcript.pdf]

Comentarios

0

Sé la primera persona en comentar

¡Regístrate ahora y únete a la comunidad de The Last Days Of Jeffrey Epstein!

Empezar

2 meses por 1 €

Después 4,99 € / mes · Cancela cuando quieras

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

Todos los episodios

300 episodios

Portada del episodio 'Uncle Jeffrey’: New DOJ Files Detail Epstein’s Troubling Obsession with Celina Dubin (7/24/26)

'Uncle Jeffrey’: New DOJ Files Detail Epstein’s Troubling Obsession with Celina Dubin (7/24/26)

Newly released United States Department of Justice files, as reported by The New York Post, reveal disturbing details about Jeffrey Epstein’s long-standing and unusually close involvement with Celina Dubin, the daughter of his former girlfriend, Eva Dubin. Epstein first met Celina when she was a child through Eva, with whom he had a relationship in the 1980s and early ’90s. Emails in the documents show that even after his 2008 conviction for soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution, Epstein maintained contact with Celina through hundreds of messages in which she called him “Uncle F.” He attended family events — including visits to her home and her high school lacrosse games — and was involved in aspects of her life that went beyond typical family friend interaction, such as offering to help with potential modeling opportunities and academic connections. Records also showed him buying clothes for her as a teenager and arranging professional contacts for her, though plans like a photoshoot never came to fruition. One of the most striking revelations in the documents is that Epstein told acquaintances around 2014 that Celina, then 19, was “the only person he wanted to marry.” While there is no evidence of a romantic or physical relationship, the assertion raised concerns due to his history and the ages involved. Epstein even named Celina a contingent beneficiary of his trust without her knowledge; she later renounced any claim after learning of it. The Dubin family, through a spokesperson, pushed back against the implications, stressing that Celina was unaware of Epstein’s intentions, did not benefit from his estate, and that Eva Dubin would have cut ties had she known about his criminal conduct. to  contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Jeffrey Epstein's obsession with ex Celina Dubin's teen daughter [https://nypost.com/2026/02/14/us-news/uncle-jeffrey-epsteins-obsession-with-ex-celina-dubins-teen-detailed-in-new-documents/]

24 de jul de 202616 min
Portada del episodio Leon Black’s Testimony Fiasco and the Failures of Epstein Oversight (7/24/26)

Leon Black’s Testimony Fiasco and the Failures of Epstein Oversight (7/24/26)

Leon Black’s congressional testimony encapsulated the broader Epstein scandal because it combined immense wealth, legal maneuvering, institutional deference, and carefully controlled cooperation. Despite paying Epstein at least $158 million for tax and estate-planning services and continuing their relationship after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, Black was initially allowed to appear voluntarily rather than under subpoena. When questioning moved toward women, nondisclosure agreements, and other sensitive matters, he refused to answer and left the interview, forcing the committee to issue a subpoena afterward. That sequence reflected the same pattern that has defined the Epstein case for decades: authorities begin by treating powerful people cautiously, those people exploit that caution, and meaningful pressure is applied only after delay and public embarrassment. The fiasco also demonstrated why every significant witness in the Epstein investigation should be compelled to testify, produce relevant documents, and face serious consequences for lying or obstructing the inquiry. Congress should not permit wealthy associates to decide which subjects are private, irrelevant, or off-limits, particularly when financial arrangements, confidential agreements, and post-conviction relationships may help explain how Epstein maintained his influence. Black’s return under subpoena gives the committee another opportunity to demand direct answers and test his claims against records, payments, communications, and other testimony. Unless lawmakers use their full authority and treat deception as a potential crime rather than a public-relations problem, the investigation will remain another performance in which powerful men delay accountability while survivors are once again expected to wait. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

24 de jul de 202619 min
Portada del episodio The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 6)

The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 6)

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein’s 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) presents a disturbing portrait of federal cowardice, systemic failures, and deliberate abdication of prosecutorial duty. Instead of zealously pursuing justice against a serial predator with dozens of underage victims, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida, under Alexander Acosta, caved to Epstein’s high-powered legal team and crafted a sweetheart deal that immunized not just Epstein, but unnamed potential co-conspirators—many of whom are still shielded to this day. The report shows that career prosecutors initially prepared a 53-page indictment, but this was ultimately buried, replaced by state charges that led to minimal jail time, lenient conditions, and near-total impunity. The OIG paints the decision as a series of poor judgments rather than criminal misconduct, but this framing betrays the magnitude of what actually occurred: a calculated retreat in the face of wealth and influence. Critically, the report fails to hold any individuals truly accountable, nor does it demand structural reform that could prevent similar derelictions of justice. It accepts, without sufficient pushback, the justifications offered by federal prosecutors who claimed their hands were tied or that the case was too risky—despite overwhelming evidence and a mountain of victim statements. The OIG sidesteps the glaring reality that this was not just bureaucratic failure, but a protection racket masquerading as legal discretion. It treats corruption as incompetence and power as inevitability. The conclusion, ultimately, feels like a shrug—a bureaucratic absolution of one of the most disgraceful collapses of federal prosecutorial integrity in modern history. It is less a reckoning than a rubber stamp on institutional failure. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: dl (justice.gov) [https://www.justice.gov/opr/page/file/1336471/dl]

24 de jul de 202611 min
Portada del episodio The Gates Foundation Investigates Its Epstein Connections (7/24/26)

The Gates Foundation Investigates Its Epstein Connections (7/24/26)

An external review commissioned by the Gates Foundation found that Jeffrey Epstein participated in roughly 30 meetings with Bill Gates and nine other foundation leaders and employees between 2011 and 2014. The meetings reportedly focused on philanthropic matters, including a proposed donor-advised fund, polio eradication strategy, donor introductions and Gates’s involvement with a nonprofit that later received foundation funding. Some meetings took place at Epstein’s Manhattan home, while one occurred on the foundation’s campus. The review found no evidence that the foundation paid Epstein or that its personnel knew about or participated in his ongoing criminal activity. However, the review also confirmed that Gates and senior foundation officials were repeatedly warned about the reputational dangers of dealing with Epstein because of his 2008 conviction. Despite those concerns, the relationship continued for several years, with Gates later acknowledging that he failed to properly scrutinize Epstein’s background. The foundation has responded by approving stronger centralized vetting procedures and a formal system for escalating organizational risks. Gates said the review was necessary to provide transparency and strengthen oversight, but its findings raise fresh questions about why clear warnings from foundation employees were not enough to end the relationship sooner. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

24 de jul de 202613 min
Portada del episodio Former New Mexico Attorney General Alleges DOJ Stonewalled Epstein Probe (7/24/26)

Former New Mexico Attorney General Alleges DOJ Stonewalled Epstein Probe (7/24/26)

Former New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas has offered to assist the state’s renewed investigations into Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, alleging that federal authorities effectively shut his office out of the case after he began investigating in 2019. Balderas said his team interviewed one survivor and was developing a potential first-degree criminal sexual penetration charge against Epstein when federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York intervened. Although federal officials indicated they would share evidence with New Mexico once their prosecution concluded, Balderas says the promised records never arrived and repeated requests from his office were ignored. Balderas has now contacted current Attorney General Raul Torrez and the chairwoman of New Mexico’s Epstein Truth Commission, offering his records and cooperation as they investigate what occurred at the ranch and how authorities handled the allegations. Torrez, who has reopened the state investigation, said Balderas’ account confirms that the Justice Department repeatedly failed to honor its commitments to share information. He has threatened legal action unless the DOJ turns over specific unredacted records, arguing that New Mexico needs the evidence to protect survivors, determine whether state laws were violated and hold anyone responsible accountable. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

24 de jul de 202611 min