SHOCK REPORT: Only 2% Of Epstein Files Released

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to Breaking Points. Emily, great to see you. Hosho.

Yep, that's right.

We're both in the gardening. That's what it's about, though. People think sometimes it's another thing. It's not.

Oh, really?

Yeah.

Get your minds out of the gutters, people. I'm just the messenger. Don't take it out on me. Sager is recording an Epstein episode with Andrew Schultz. So that is why I get to have the lovely Emily here with me on Tuesday. And there's a lot to talk about, including we are starting with a bunch of Epstein revelations.

Bannon talking 25th Amendment with Jeffrey Epstein. Bannon, I feel like, has escaped a little bit of scrutiny in this. But we've also got all kinds of other crazy revelations. Tom Rock, who continues to be, you know, he's in this administration, longtime friend of Trump. He is all over the Epstein files.

He and Trump were buddies with Epstein, you know, at sort of the peak of Epstein's whatever. We've got Trump making some new comments. We've got new revelations that the government may be lying about how many of the files exist and what they have released. We've also got a bunch of DHS news. They are making it official that they're not going to share any of their evidence from the investigation into Alex Pretty with local officials.

At the same time, they're also having to acknowledge they lied about yet another shooting, so I'll break that down for you. Christine Noem is making more comments about how they need to get the right people to vote. Lot going on there with regard to the 2026 elections.

Randy Fine, doing Randy Fine things, you know, posting just the most disgusting comments you can imagine. And I'm only getting a little bit of a back and forth here with the Babylon Bee folks.

Yeah, and you know, we'll have an interesting discussion about the backlash or, I mean, relative lack thereof backlash to what Randy Fiennes said. It's a good glimpse at things that are either changing or at least up for grabs on the right now. So there's much to be said.

Okay, I'm looking forward to hearing your take on that one. And then we have two great guests. We've got Jasper Nathaniel gonna join us as Israel moves to just overtly, it's being called a mega land grab in the West Bank.

So we want to keep our eye on that. And then we have someone from FIRE, the civil rights organization, that is joining us to talk about their lawsuit against Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem. They have been, this government has really been pressuring tech companies to take down any sort of anti-ICE accounts, also to reveal the identities of any anonymous accounts that are opposed to ICE.

So a real assault here on civil liberties. And just breaking last night, we're going to see if we can ask them about this as well. Stephen Colbert revealed that the FCC, Brennan Carr's FCC, which was the one that previously came down on Jimmy Kimmel, told them they cannot interview James Tallarico, or at least CBS felt pressured that they should not interview James Tallarico,

candidate for Senate in Texas. So yet another, you know, sense of crushing of any sort of dissent. So we'll get their take on that as well.

Yeah, and that one, it's actually, I'll be curious as more reporting comes in, because this is just coming to us, but I'm really curious if it's more CBS than the FCC.

Well, I think- That could be interesting. You may be right. I think it could be that, so apparently they threatened the view after they had James Tallarico on.

Tallarico's just like the wrecking ball.

I don't know, they're very sensitive about this man. I mean, it is kind of telling that they feel like Texas may be in jeopardy. If they didn't see him as any sort of a threat, then I think they wouldn't care what shows he appeared on. So in any case, I think it probably does come out of his appearance on The View, the government action

that was taken there.

And those government actions, that's exactly what they're intended to do, is to make others think twice. They're saying you should equal time to his, whether it's John Cornyn or whatever, that's the line that the FCC is pushing. I wonder in this case if CBS is scapegoating, if they're like trying to mess with Colbert. We'll get into it. But if they're trying to mess with Colbert and they're like, well, listen, the FCC pressured ABC, so we gotta be careful.

Yeah. It's hilarious that Tallarico is at the center. Ends up at the center. I mean, it's great for him, honestly. Oh, fantastic. Because Colbert made a whole thing of it on his show. Tallarico, I think, posted the interview that should have aired, etc. So I mean, great publicity for him. If you were looking to, you know, to quash this guy's prospects, congratulations.

You've just absolutely elevated him. Before we get into the Epstein news, I want to thank everybody so much for your support. I think people have been really interested in the Epstein coverage. As you guys know, this is very fraught politically in terms of YouTube monetization. We're able to do this kind of coverage and not really have to worry about those things because of your support. If you can become a premium subscriber, breakingpoints.com. And also, last note here, I wanted to mention and reflect on the life and now the passing

of Reverend Jesse Jackson, who of course, civil rights leader, born in segregated South and South Carolina, was an acolyte of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., went on to be a presidential candidate for the Democrats and really ran on this message of multiracial unity

and solidarity and really pushing that idea that we have to have this broad coalition, a sort of universalist coalition to fight for social and economic justice. So obviously, it's a message that is very important to me and very inspiring to me in my own politics.

And you probably had a chance to meet him a couple of times?

Met him once or twice, you know, in passing at MSNBC. And so certainly, you know, his legacy is a large one. I pulled up one of his speeches, his patchwork quilt speech, from 1988 Democratic National Convention. And just to give you a sense of some of the messaging here, he talks about seeking common ground,

and this is in the context of trying to pull Democrats together to fight alongside one another. And he said that we need to build a quilt like the one that his grandmother would patch together. He says, farmers, you seek fair prices and you are right, but you cannot stand alone.

Your patch is not big enough. Workers, you fight for fair wages, you are right, but your patch labor is not big enough. Women, you seek comparable worth and pay equity, you are right, but your patch is not big enough. Women, mothers who seek Head Start and daycare

and prenatal care on the front side of life, relevant jail care and welfare on the backside of life, you are right, but your patch is not big enough. Students, you seek scholarships, you are right, but your patch is not big enough. Blacks and Hispanics, when we fight for civil rights, we are right, but our patch is not big enough. Gays and lesbians, when you fight against discrimination and cure for AIDS, you are right, but your patch is not big enough. Conservatives and progressives, when you fight for what you believe, your point of view is not enough, but don't despair. Be as wise as my grandmama. Pull

the patches and the pieces together, bound by a common thread. When we form a great quilt of unity and common ground, we'll have the power to bring about health care and housing and jobs and education and hope to our nation." Reverend Jesse Jackson, may he rest in peace.

Also was on the balcony when Martin Luther King Jr. was dying. That's right, He was there. Mm-hmm. Yeah, so a piece of history, for sure, that now has passed away, and that's a tether from one generation to the next,

especially on the left, which is an interesting point because I know Jesse Jackson mentored many, many young,

especially young black leftists. And Ryan could probably speak to this better than many. His impact continues to be felt on the left of the party in particular.

Well, rest in peace, Reverend Jesse Jackson. Crystal, let's move to Epstein.

Yeah, so we got some new comments from Trump on, I guess this was on Air Force One, about how he viewed the release of the files and what we have learned there. Of course, he feels he's totally exonerated, Emily. And let's take a listen to that.

So, Hillary Clinton said in an interview today that she and her husband are getting pulled into the Epstein matter to divert attention from you and that your administration has something to hide. What's your response to that?

I have nothing to hide. I've been exonerated. I have nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. They went in hoping that they'd find it and found just the opposite. I've been totally exonerated. In fact, Jeffrey Epstein was fighting that I don't get elected with some author. That's Liesbag, by the way. And I've been totally exonerated.

No, no. They're getting pulled in, and that's their problem. I don't know. They're going to have to see what happens. But I watched her in Munich, and she seriously has Trump derangement syndrome.

Do you think that she should publicly testify?

I've been totally exonerated on Upstate, and it's really interesting because they've been pulled in. Think of it. They've been pulled in. Clinton and many other Democrats have been pulled in.

So there you go. Totally exonerated. Let's talk a little bit more about that. This was an important investigation, I think, from Channel 4 News, and something that I've been wondering as well, I can put this up on the screen. So they are saying that based on emails

within this latest release, the actual quantity of data and files that exist within the government vaults, within the government archives, are likely much vaster than what they have led on. And they're saying potentially just 2% of the information

that the FBI retrieved from Epstein's homes has been released. That's based on previous information that the government has, you know, was indicating within these files about just how much was taken

in the various searches of his residences. And like I said, this is something I was wondering about because everybody just seemed to like take the government's word for it about how many files. I'm just like, what are we basing this on other than their word that,

oh, well, there's 6 million files, we released 3 million and that's all you're gonna get. And I've always wondered, okay, that 6 million number, first of all, you should be releasing all of that because that is what you're legally required to do. But also, are we just supposed to take your word for it that that is actually all that there is, and this raises significant questions about that.

Yeah, this is interesting because even by their own word, they said there are some six million documents, files. What constitutes a file or a document, by the way, nobody has ever defined to my knowledge. So that's interesting, meaning is each email a document? Because there are threads.

So is each thread a document or is it each email? That could completely change our concept of actually what's out there. Because if, per the Channel 4 investigation, for example, you have all these other emails on the thread, sometimes when you're going through the files, the threads stop. They have more emails on the thread. Do they just have sometimes the Epstein side?

Do they have more? There's just a lot of questions that we don't have answers to. At least even by what they've said, there's six million files. That means we're supposed to believe three million fit the national security designation

or the victim designation, meaning that they can't even be released on a redacted basis. So that's a big question because when Thomas Massie was here, Crystal, he told Ryan and me actually that, and he's gotten flack for the act

that enabled this recent file release, but he was saying, you actually can, in a different administration, come in and potentially prosecute Trump officials if they are out of compliance with the law. It allows for that.

So there's, it's not just a casual matter of them saying, eh, we're redacting this or that. They have to meet a burden of proof that they're actually keeping things for the right reason. Otherwise, you could easily see a Democratic attorney general coming in and saying, oh, sorry, Pam Bondi or Todd Blanch. Looks like you were out of compliance on the

Satisfaction Transparency Act. Yeah. And it wouldn't just be them either. You know, I'm sure they can imagine that they would be pardoned by Trump and they would perhaps be in a position to escape free. But if you're any of the low-level employees who are doing the grunt work of redacting things improperly, then you could also be exposed, which is one of the messages I know Ro has been putting out there. Like, listen, you don't want to get tangled up in this to do Trump's dirty work. He's not going to be loyal to you. He would throw anyone

under the bus if it serves him. So I think that's a very important note here and it's part of why when Massey and Cona and other members of Congress have gone in and viewed the redacted files, they've been able to put pressure on the government. It's like, look, I viewed some of these files. There's no reason for this name or that name or the other name to be redacted. And they've actually been successful in, you know, unredacting some of this information because of the force of this law and the concerns about being out of compliance with it. Speaking of Trump and the entanglements here, you know, we've obviously covered extensively

the various allegations against him that are contained within these files, all of the various mentions and entanglements, et cetera. But some of his top, top aides also very, you know, very prevalent throughout this entire document dump. Steve Bannon being one of them. And this was kind of a remarkable exchange because Bannon, of course, is supposed to be big Trump guy, big Trump loyalist, etc., etc. And here you have Marjorie Taylor Greene sharing, actually,

this text exchange between Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein where he's talking about the 25th amendment for Trump and I sort of assume this so this is right after the Republicans performed very poorly in the midterms and I don't know what was exactly going on then that caused him to that caused them to trigger this like discussion about whether or not 25th amendment was appropriate or not but in any case they're saying hell of a year we could put this up on the screen we either own 2019 or it will surely own us I'm back

in the F&B biz only F&B director no it does not stand for F word and blow spoke to my Dems though this weekend and this is Jeffrey Epstein boy our emotions running high Bannon says going to blow him up right out of the box. White House has zero plan to push back. Fort Apache with no cavalry on route. And no soldiers in the fort.

He is really borderline not sure what he may do, Epstein says. Bannon says, I think it's beyond borderline, 25th amendment.

Yeah, yeah. I mean, it feels like a throwaway line from Bannon, but either way, either way. I mean, that's just me trying to interpret it years later, but either way, one thing that's clear when you're going through these emails and text messages in the Epstein Library

is Epstein's relationship with Bannon was actually very close. And if you're reading the raw files, you're just seeing, I mean, Epstein had relationships with many people, obviously, but when he's talking to Bannon, it's very bro-y. They had a really, clearly,

a very, very warm, friendly relationship, as everybody can tell just from the mirror selfie, of course, that popped up in the files. But for Bannon. I mean, this is a fascinating conundrum. There are a couple of potential explanations that aren't excuses,

but could maybe be explanations is, are they both Intel? Is Bannon doing Intel for one person or another? Is that behind it? No idea. Bannon hasn't supplied any excuses other than it was part of documentary that has not been other than it was part of a documentary that has not been delivered except for a part of an interview that was released, was compelled

to be released by the files. So is it possible that Bannon, he's constantly like ribbing Epstein over populism and like trying to get him to like come to the light side and joking about him in that sense. Is he trying to manipulate Epstein for his broader international populist cause? Is he trying to drive a wedge in Trump world?

That's what some of it seems like, that text message that Epstein sent Bannon along the lines of, this is what keeps Trump up at night knowing that we're friends. I think that was Epstein to Bannon. But we have no idea.

And Steve Bannon hasn't explained it yet.

I mean, Bannon wants to be a power player. Yes. And Epstein is the type of person that can help facilitate those power plays. And at the same time, Ryan said something interesting

about the Chomsky entanglements, which were, I mean, Chomsky, there were thousands of emails with Chomsky. And his wife had to come out and put a statement, et cetera. And Ryan's take was basically, and you guys can go back and watch to get his words precisely, Chomsky is an anarchist.

And in some ways, it sort of validates the left-wing criticism of anarchists of like, yeah, they're kind of, you know, this whole, like, laissez-faire attitude is too close to liberalism, and it's too safe to the system. And then when you see these entanglements with Epstein, who is obviously, you know, from what we've learned, this incredibly influential node in this secret power system that is actually incredibly influential in the way the world

actually works, it kind of gives credence to that view. And I feel sort of the same about Bannon here, is it gives a lot of credence to what is my view that right-wing populism, while it may cause some mild problems for the billionaire class or the Epstein class around the edges, it's not really a threat to them. And which you can see from how delighted Epstein is with Trump being in office. You know, it's not just because Trump is his guy

and now he feels like he's gonna have this access and connectivity, it's also, you know, he thinks this is gonna be beneficial for him in terms of the type of deals that he can do around the world, the type of disaster capitalism that he can engage in, which he talks about routinely with a variety of figures including Ehud Barak. So, you know, I sort of see it in that lens and then I think also not only does Bannon

want to be a power player, but also he would have a motivation, since he is in the Trump circle, to keep Epstein close and keep tabs on him and how he's feeling about things and, you know, whether he has any information that could be damaging to Trump. Allegedly, Bannon said that this is the one guy he thought that could destroy Trump's presidential prospects back in 2016. So there's all sorts of motivations for him there to be to be cultivating this very close

friendship with with Epstein and even to the point of trying to rehab his image.

Well, I think we still have to get to the money trail as well with Bannon because it wasn't, I mean, if you look at some of the stuff Bannon is clearly advising Epstein and it's public relations advice. He's in the room with Kathy Rumbler, the Obama White House counsel, as they're advising Epstein basically on how to rehabilitate his image and it seems like Bannon was using this documentary with Epstein, which is not necessarily an act of journalism.

If you are creating this, I don't know that anyone was accusing Bannon of being a journalist, but that means you're collaborating basically on an image rehabilitation. And this is long into the 2010s,

and we're talking like 2018, that a lot of this was going down. And so you can see Bannon going back and forth giving him advice on X, Y, and Z. Bannon is holding his ground in most of the text messages on populism,

but the throwaway line about the 25th Amendment, back in, again, like 2018, 2019, and then Bannon is now joking about third term for Donald Trump. To your point, the heart of MAGA populism, you start to see who's pulling the levers and it brings us to the, I think it brings us to the Tom Barack story, Crystal, because

to your point about why Epstein was delighted about Trump World coming into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, one of the reasons is that people like Tom Barak were suddenly empowered by their relationship with Donald Trump.

Yeah, that's right. So let's put this up on the screen, some reporting from CBS News. Hey! All right, let's go. Trump insider Tom Barak kept in regular contact with Jeffrey Epstein for years, file show.

I'm gonna read a good bit of this because there is a lot of important revelations. I do recommend you read this entire article because it would be too long if I read all of it. In any case, Tom Barak, who was a longtime friend of Donald Trump,

he is now the US ambassador to Turkey. He is also a special envoy to Syria. He was in the first Trump administration. He actually was, what was he put on trial for? Some foreign, foreign entanglements or something. Farah. Farah. Farah. Farah. I did a lot of reporting on this. Yeah, a jury found him not guilty of those allegations. In any case, he is described in the CBS News article as a quote globe-trotting billionaire,

certainly fits with the Epstein class tag here. But in any case, he and Trump and Epstein were really close in the 80s and 90s hanging out together. And what they say in the piece is, how Barack first met Epstein is unclear. But in the book, Fire and Fury,

Michael Wolf described Trump, Barack, and Jeffrey Epstein as an 80s and 90s set of nightlife musketeers. Epstein's emails indicate that both Barack and Epstein had served as sources for Wolff's book. Mr. Trump called the book full of lies, misrepresentation, sources that don't exist.

Mr. Trump has also said he cut ties with Epstein years ago. The Barack-Epstein friendship appears to have continued undeterred by Epstein's alleged fall from grace in Florida after he was charged with sexual misconduct involving teenage girls. In September 2009, just months after Epstein's release from the Palm Beach County Jail, Barack wrote to him, quote, thinking about you, hope you're good, and life is calm again, a sentiment that marked the beginning of an extended period of contact between the two.

Over the following years, EPSTEIN encouraged meetings and facilitated introductions between Barack and individuals, including Palantir CEO Peter Thiel, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin.

During the 2016 presidential campaign in the early months of 2016, after Mr. Trump surprised the political world by winning the New Hampshire Republican primary, Barack emerged as one of a select group of insiders helping to shape Trump's outsider bid for the White House.

As the Trump momentum grew, Epstein emailed his friend Barack a greeting and a reminder of their shared past, writing, hope you are well, photos look good, FYI, I receive many calls a week about both Donald, redacted, Marla,

beauty contest, Mar-a-Lago, et cetera, and Clinton from reporters. Less so recently with Clinton, but my answers are always, I have nothing to say, or I try to ignore altogether. Few times I've been ambushed on the street with questions,

but I'm more careful now. Barack replied, hope you're good, let's catch up. Epstein then asked for a photo of Barack's newborn baby, writing, send photos of you and child, make me smile. Creepy. In April 2016, with Barack deeply enmeshed in the Trump campaign,

Epstein reached out again, this time with a warning. He forwarded an email about a potentially damaging lawsuit just filed by a woman using the pseudonym Katie Johnson. In the civil complaint, she alleged Epstein and Trump raped her in 1994 when she was very young. The lawsuit was withdrawn. Mr. Trump denied the accusations,

but Epstein wrote he considered the legal claim nuts, but I thought you guys should know the documents do not indicate if Barack acknowledged or replied to the email. I think that email, and it goes on from there, you guys should take a look at, it's an extensive set of communications over years.

And clearly he knew, because he's querying up, say, hey, I hope you're good after your sweetheart deal jail term is finished. Like clearly he knows what happened here and they had been close friends previously.

But that email, right during the 2016 campaign, where he's like, hey, just so you know, getting all these questions from reporters. To me, that is his way of saying, you know what I know, and you know people are starting to reach out. It's his way of insinuating himself

and holding out the threat of, there's some tales I could tell that would be damaging. And that that's how I read that. Oh, Marla, Mar-a-Lago, you know, getting a lot of questions here about Trump.

Interesting. I mean, one of the things that Ryan has reported with Barack going back to the first Trump administration is what we were talking about, the FARA charges. So that's the Foreign Agents Registration Act, meaning if you are acting on behalf of the UAE, he was accused of not registering under FARA as an agent of the United Arab Emirates. He is now our ambassador to Turkey, which we should mention is irrelevant to all of this. The current ambassador to Turkey, a NATO ally, as they say. So Tom Burak is going through in these emails,

it's not just some of the social stuff that Crystal mentioned, they're also very clearly having politically significant, politically freighted conversations, like the Teal conversation that you mentioned, but also then Epstein invests a million dollars

in what was his firm was called Colony Capital after they talked one day. Yeah, so here, the day after the meeting with Thiel was scheduled, Epstein wrote to Barack, I love Thiel's suggestion regarding women and children, that every time you're saving lives, et cetera, I think of the tens of thousands of women and children that died as a direct result of your careless interventions.

That's likely a reference to Thiel's sort of like libertarian perspective on things like USAID, quote unquote, libertarian perspective on that. I'm assuming that's what he meant, Teal was talking about. But the day after that, CBS reports Epstein purchased approximately $1 million of stock in Colony Capital, the publicly traded company founded by Barack. So if you think that it's a coincidence, the day after they had a meeting where they are discussing Peter Teal's suggestions or Peter Teal's thoughts, theories on how the world works,

and then Epstein goes and purchases a million dollars of stock the day after. I mean, I think that's obviously, obviously ridiculous. They were also having lunch. Crystal, I think you mentioned this, according to the CBS report, with Ehud Barak. Epstein, Ehud Barak, Vitaly Churkin, all at the same time. So to act as though Barak, or this will be hard for the Trump administration to act as though Tom Barak's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was purely social, because clearly

it was also business and politics.

Yes, yeah, that's exactly right. And DropSight has another report about the power plays that were being made with Jeffrey Epstein. And this is another, you know, business deal or series of business deals with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. We can put this up on the screen.

Here the focus was on Africa. And the TLDR here is that they saw a genuine crisis in Nigeria. There's an extraordinary email. I'll try to pull it up, but from Epstein where he says, you know, all of this chaos in the region, this is kind of great for you, isn't it? And Barack replies basically like, yeah, but it's hard to turn it into a cash flow. Well, they managed.

They managed to do it. So in any case, you know, Nigeria is struggling with this Boko Haram terror attacks. And Ehud Barak wants to position himself as this businessman who can help deal with security issues. This is, of course, a lot of Israeli tech is geared towards because they try it out on Palestinians, and then they sell it to the world. And so that ends up being their in.

And they start with this small sort of like pilot project, and then they're able to gain a larger foothold. And eventually, they're able to secure various infrastructure deals as well. And you can see the way that Epstein in all of this is acting as a facilitator and a connector and a strategist

for Ehud Barak to help him position himself as this expert on technology and security and offer his services to a variety of countries.

Yeah, and I think that's an important point. Also the Epstein-Bannon relationship, important point in this context, meaning the reason, and this is in the most fundamental basic sense the problem with public corruption. When you put public policy up for sale, whether you're a Podesta or whether you're Tom Barack, Donald Trump, Jared Kushner, what you're doing is creating corrupt points of entry into public policy.

And the reason that you saw people just in total action, wheeling and dealing, we've seen it throughout the second Trump administration especially. This is what was happening behind closed doors we now know in Trump 1. A lot of this is happening in front of everyone in Trump 2. And the reason for that is they all know each other. They've all, you know, traded capital.

They've all probably traded secrets and spent social time together. And so they've got this self-perpetuating machine right now. It's burrowing, it's printing money for them.

Yeah. One of the things that I really have taken away too is just how explicitly they see chaos, death, disaster, terror attacks as business opportunities. It's just very naked. I mean, I obviously knew about disaster capitalism and all of that, but just to see it spelled out of like,

hey, all these wars are really great for you is really something else. I mean, I think that's been my, the thing I keep coming back to is that while I had an understanding of the existence of these power structures,

I did not understand just how explicit it was. And that's what's wild about reading through these emails. This next one I pulled because I specifically wanted to hear your thoughts on this and it's been a piece that I've been sort of you know thinking through. Epstein went out of his way to cultivate a lot of scientists and a lot of academics, obviously Chomsky being one of those but there were many others besides.

The New York Times did an article on this, which I thought was not really great. You'll be unsurprised to learn, but in any case, it's the headline here is Epstein's ties with academics show the seedy side of college fundraising. Professors and presidents are often eager to raise on-site cash. Some are now facing blowback after connecting with Jeffrey Epstein. And the framing of this article is basically like,

you know, well, some of these elite institutions, they have these gigantic endowments, but those are very restricted, so they're still sort of like desperate for cash. And that leads them, especially if you're, you know, a professor who's trying to get a grant

for this or that to do the study, it leaves them vulnerable to being preyed upon by someone like Jeffrey Epstein. And the reason why I don't love the article is because I think it sort of, it lets them off the hook in a sense. It's a way to sort of seek to rationalize why,

oh, there's an innocent, there's a somewhat innocent explanation for what's going on here. Now that doesn't mean I don't think that the fundamental premise that, like, yes, that desire for funding for their research, et cetera, certainly does leave them vulnerable. But to me, it doesn't fully answer the question of why Epstein was so interested in cultivating

these academics and why many of them had extensive back-and-forth relationships with him over years, especially, according to The New York over years, especially according to the New York Times reporting, a lot of the funds that he would promise or sort of float for these various institutions never actually really came through. So he'd kind of, oh, I'll make a multimillion dollar gift, and then he's sort of stringing people along, and it never really fully comes through, et cetera.

We also cover on the show, did you see this, him getting his girlfriend into the Columbia Dental School and all of that? And it was for, again, I mean, this is for normal people, large sums, but for him, nothing. It was like, you know, a few hundred thousand dollars

that he was giving to the school and able to get in his girlfriend who did not have the requisite experience or credentials to be able to get into this school and sort of easing her path all the way through.

And Ryan reported on the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Alan Dershowitz and how they collaborated to undermine Mearsheimer while Dershowitz was, I think, at Harvard. That's right. And part of this is, I mean, on some level,

it's just, it makes sense that if you're a billionaire who's hoping to influence policy and particularly scientific research in this transhumanist direction, having like seduced all of these academics and getting them in their orbit, on the one hand, you feel like you've consolidated influence because you can bring people into your townhouse, which the emails, and we already knew this, show was happening over and over again. We now have a more complete picture of exactly what was happening,

but also the Bill Gates relationship. He was, in fact, probably because giving this money brings you into the circles. I mean, giving money to academia gets you invited to all the fundraisers and dinners. That's where you meet the people like Bill Gates and others. That's currency.

I guess huge currency to be able to say, why are you looking at this? Or why are you looking at that? Or when you want to be connected with an NSA codebreaker, you can email Bill Gates' second in command and say, hey, introduce me to someone at the NSA.

The guy's like, oh yeah, no problem, and takes care of it, which we know this Boris Nikolaev fellow as DropSite reported recently, that's what was happening. And so you make it easier, you're greasing the skids for your grand plan with this money to academia. I agree, The Times is kind of letting them off the hook.

It is pathetic to see some of the academics in the emails begging, basically, all but begging Jeffrey Epstein for, you know, they're flattering him. Oh, what a wonderful time. What an interesting idea. It's disgusting.

And that's happening over and over again. Now, I think for some people it really was just research. I actually see that. I know we're about to talk about Peter Attia. I look at the Attia emails. He's a good example of somebody who you're like,

okay, you were sucking up to Jeffrey Epstein. If you Googled him, as Rogan did, Rogan talked about how someone, he had a guest who was trying to introduce him to Epstein. He's like, I just Googled the guy and like 10 seconds later, I was like, no, I'm not meeting this guy. You know, after he's in prison, Peter Attia sucking up big time to Jeffrey Epstein over and over again. And all I can say after going through many, many

of these messages is many such cases.

Many such cases.

It's all over the place.

And it just.

Well, it fits too with your reporting on his eugenics obsession. And there's actually, we can put A10 up on the screen because this fits with this. New Mexico legislators have just passed legislation to launch the first full investigation of what happened at Zora Ranch, where the late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is accused

of trafficking sexually assaulting girls and women. And Zora Ranch seems to be, have been at the center of this eugenics scheme. And I don't know, I don't know what could be discovered at this point. Hopefully there's something there that could be found. Obviously this search should have happened long ago, but we have no idea how far he got down the road

of these eugenics ambitions. We do know that there are some emails from, I remember, I think it was like Fergie in the UK, like some of the British royal types congratulating him seemingly on the birth of a baby. And as far as we know, he doesn't have any children.

So there are some things in there that are not any kind of definitive proof, but are like question mark. There are some allegations from victims. One girl alleging that he offered to buy her baby. Things, extremely disturbing things of that nature.

And again, Zora Ranch...

In an email to him, by the way.

Yes, that's right.

You offered to buy my baby in an email to Jeffrey Epstein.

That's right, yes. And Zora Ranch, this was reported by The New York Times years ago, was the center of this, whatever this eugenics scheme truly was.

Yeah, and we still don't have that. This is one of the big enduring mysteries. I feel like even the most recent release, it has made the picture more complicated and more interesting, but I feel like we haven't even gotten significantly closer to understanding

what went on at Zorro Ranch, because it seems to have been, I mean, everything is pointing to it being the dark place that it's is kind of legend for having been, unfortunately, that it's notorious for having been. So that part. The other thing I want to mention about academia is Tyler Austin Harper had a fantastic essay in The Atlantic. He is so good. He's such a good writer, but about how the Mellon Foundation has basically controlled the monopoly on

funding to academic institutions on the humanities and over many many years and That's interesting too because it just goes to show well if you're close with people in melon world Hmm guess how you can get money for X, Y, and Z, right? It's just the consolidation of our supposedly democratic society

in the hands of so few powerful institutions and the people that lead those powerful institutions. That's what they're getting off on throughout these emails.

That actually gets to the kind of premise of some of Anand Giridharadas' work about the dark side of philanthropy, where it's exactly that. Where, you know, if it's the Gates Foundation or the, you know, the various Walmart heirs or the Melons or whoever it is that are doing the investing in scientific research or funding various philanthropic projects, then, yeah, you're gonna be pressured to suck up to them,

and the work that you engage in is going to be very much influenced by whatever their tastes or interests happen to be. In Jeffrey Epstein's case, one of those interests was eugenics, and so that was the sort of thing that he was looking to, you know, facilitate relationships with

and potentially provide funding for.

And everyone else is cooperating, by the way. They're fully on board with this total anti-democratic oligarchic effort to change the human race. Yeah. That's, it was normal to them. They're all just like, yeah, yeah, yeah, okay, cool,

interesting, interesting. Again, we're in their sandbox. That's how they look at it.

The rest of us are in their sandbox. And still look at how Elon Musk talks about his breeding project. And I mean, there's a Chinese billionaire who was revealed to have hundreds of children or something like this. So it's a naturally unnatural development from a class of people who thinks they are better than, who have various supremacist ideologies that justify that view. You know, Epstein clearly from the language that he uses in a bunch of these emails is

a Jewish supremacist. You know, Elon has his own IQ supremacist view, et cetera. But many of them have some ideology which causes them to believe they are different from the rest of the species, which is what enables that dehumanization is what enables the abuse and the grotesque behavior that we know occurred in the case of Epstein.

We've got Naomi Campbell was present in these files quite a bit. We can put A6 up on the screen. This is a new one. Obviously she's a high-level model. Makes sense in a way because she was one of Victoria's Secret's most high-profile models. Epstein is connected to Victoria's Secret via Les Wexner.

He apparently would like name drop her with some of the young models that he's looking to cultivate. You know, it appears that this modeling pipeline from Eastern Europe was one of the ways that abuse was enabled. So you know, that is an interesting piece of the puzzle in terms of how he's able to, you know, persuade these young girls that like, oh no, I'm legit in the modeling industry

and I'm gonna make your dreams come true.

Well, you've been going deep on like over now, on the modeling ties between Jean-Luc Bernal, Wexner, and Epstein. I was curious when I saw this. And Trump. And Trump, right.

I was curious when I saw this.

What is your sense of how the models were aware of any of this?

It's a good question, and I don't think it's really answerable at this point. I mean, we have some indications from the emails. We have some indications from actually some old documentary footage about these contests. We know there was at least one party that was held at Mar-a-Lago where girls were promised like, oh, there's going to be all these VIPs here. You're going to be able to network.

And then they show up, and it's just Trump and Epstein. So the modeling world is infamous for being a pipeline for human trafficking and for sex trafficking. And Casablanca's who Trump really admired and wanted to emulate was a known abuser. I mean, he had a relationship with, what's her name? Stephanie Hirsch, is that her name?

Stephanie Seymour, there we go, when she was 16 years old. And so this was all known. I mean, it's disturbing to me that he put his own daughter, Ivanka, into this world when she is a young girl, 14, 15 years old.

And this is why he wants to start his own modeling agency. Obviously, Epstein, I think this is part of why he latches on to Les Wexner, because he sees this connection with Victoria's Secret and holds himself out. He was actually rebuked internally at one point because he was holding himself out as

he was a Victoria's Secret recruiter. And that was not technically- To women, right? Yes. That was not technically the case. But I think they believed a lot of the promises. There were probably some up front like, oh, I'll provide this for you.

I'll provide this for you. I'll provide that for you. And you're also talking about a lot of poor girls from Eastern Europe after the Soviet Union collapses who are kind of desperate and who are put into this incredibly vulnerable situation. All right. Let's go ahead and take a look at one piece of this.

This is A8, which speaks to what you're talking about here, Emily, in terms of how he's interacting with these girls who are aspiring models. So she's asking, I think she attended some dinner with him or whatever, and he's giving her this advice on how she should conduct herself in the future. He says, it's time you start an education. I do not say fuck to anyone except in bed,

especially not at the table. Number two, you are 22 only ask questions of men. They are not really interested in your opinions until you are 30 and then only marginally. Ladies, that's great. That one. Luckily we both make the cut for at least marginal interest in our opinions. That's what the, That's what the girl show is. We should call it the marginal. Marginal interest.

Yeah.

Zone of marginal interest. Also, oh shit, Crystal.

It's also our band name.

Anyway, it goes on to say, I'm very respectful, you've not been taught 21st century science so you can be forgiven and believe in the world is flat, the sun revolves around the earth or there are energy fields or you can get sick from air conditioning or magnets can tell what type of yoga poses to do.

Or Santa Claus exists or if you think positive thoughts, positive things will happen or things are meant to be, fate, destiny, angels. I realize you have the potential to understand and you've learned very old fashioned ideas that country people believe.

It's now time you take your life seriously. Actor slash model is not freedom. You have time, try them on for size, look around, they are not free. Winning the lottery is not a good strategy to bet on. Start learning a skill, if you need help, I will be there. So he, and I believe-

Subject line, by the way, clouds taken by me, exclamation point, amazing.

Yeah, what does that mean? I'm assuming it was like a picture, but who knows? Anyway, so he grooms these girls, and then I believe this is one of the ones that ends up in some sort of quote unquote relationship with Leon Black. So he's grooming them how to be with the various rich and powerful men, and then he uses them as currency.

And he's, well, I shouldn't say grooming, but he's also coaching Larry Summers, for example, on how to have relationships with these younger women who are often mistresses. It's disgusting.

Yeah, all right, one more just to make sure we're all deeply disturbed before we move on to the rest of the show. TMZ with some reporting here, and by the way, Sagar messaged us this morning that he did confirm this reporting too.

Jeffrey Epstein asked about zombie drug plants he kept at nursery. Jeffrey Epstein may have had a collection of highly poisonous plants known to produce a drug that blocks free will in its victims, according to newly discovered emails. In one of the uncovered messages, Epstein sends an email asking about his, quote, trumpet plants at nursery. For background, angels trumpet plants are extremely toxic. They produce a drug called scopolamine, which is known to basically turn humans into zombies, wiping

them of memory and eliminating their free will. Severe intoxication reportedly may even cause paralysis and death. Even more alarming, scopolamine reportedly does not show up on toxicology reports. And if you're wondering if Epstein was aware of this, there's an excellent chance he was. In another email, he was sent an article all about the effects of scopolamine

and the plant that it comes from.

Yeah, and Sacher said he confirmed these emails existed as Crystal mentioned. So that's as disturbing as you'd expect it to be. Not surprising actually at all, based on the various projects he was getting into in this email inbox.

But what that can be used for, it's chilling.

Yeah, completely.

Hey, if you liked that video, hit the like button or leave a comment below.

It really helps get the show to more people.

And if you'd like to get the full show, ad free and in your inbox every morning, you can sign up at breakingpoints.com.

That's right, get the full show, help support the future of independent media help support the future of independent media at breakingpoints.com.