Tucker Carlson and Darryl Cooper on the True History of Jeffrey Epstein and Ongoing Cover-Up
by Tucker Carlson and Darryl Cooper
Streamed live on Jul 17, 2025 The Tucker Carlson Show
[Lightly edited]
I'm going to summarize what I think you've said. We have no idea why Wexner gave him all this power and money. We have no idea. We don't have any hard evidence about it. Some people have suggested blackmail because of things that have come out about Epstein, but we don't have any evidence. There are people who were in the Wexner circle back in those days when Epstein was around, and they've claimed that Epstein was known around Wexner's office as the boyfriend, but that's just an allegation. Epstein was asked about it under oath, and he obviously denied that. I'm trying to understand something that otherwise really inexplicable. So what were there other. Because Epstein's annual operating budget would be hard to calculate, maintaining aircraft, a big yacht, etc. Who are the other rich people he got money from? Do we know?
There was a story that actually just came out in the last few days that I have not had an opportunity to really dig down deep in. I should go check Mike Benz's Twitter feed. He's probably done this, or he will soon. But there are records, apparently, of a billion and a half dollars that were transferred to and from Epstein, apparently involving people whose names we've we've all heard before. That's not public. So I haven't dug deeply into that, but maybe there's one document that's going to tell us something. I mean, he's living the lifestyle of a guy who has billions and billions of dollars. But it doesn't explain motive. It doesn't explain why Wexner would give him all of this money at a very young age, with no relevant experience as a tax advisor, or an investor.
Think about this, Tucker. There was a point in the 1980s, and it might have been the early 90s, that Wexner owned Victoria's Secret. For a guy like Jeffrey Epstein, that's kind of a gold mine you're sitting on, right? Because he would go out and pose as a talent scout, and present credentials that made it plausible. And he would get girls who wanted to be models, who wanted to be in Victoria's Secret, to pose for him, and sometimes he would sexually assault them. So word got around that he was doing this, and two of the top executives at Victoria's Secret, guys who had worked there for years, and knew Wexner, they went to him together and presented the evidence, and told him that this is what this guy's doing. And they never heard anything more about it. Nothing happened. And so you ask, like, when two of your top executives come and say he's using your name, basically, to sexually assault women who want to work for our company, and Wexner blows it off, who should get away with something like that? And the answer is the kind of guy that Wexner would give full power of attorney over his estate to, I suppose. Its wild.
So there was a story revealed in the popular press of a couple of people who had relationships with Epstein, and gave him money. And one of them is a guy called Leon Black. So we know that Leon Black gave him over a hundred million dollars. I think he's admitted that he did, right?
Yeah. They all have the same story. They trusted this guy as an investment manager, basically, and turned out to be suckers. There's not a lot of billionaire suckers out there, when it comes to the money side of their life. I'm not completely firm on the details of he and Leon Black's relationship, but in general, he gives the same story that Wexner gave. "Oh, I trusted him. I was just too naive, and too trusting, and he scammed me." But they don't describe what the scam was. What's the scam? So if you look at what happened with Hoffenberg before Epstein turned on him, Epstein took a hundred million dollars out of Hoffenberg's company and accounts, moved it offshore, and then turned state's evidence on the guy, and he got sent off to prison. And what Hoffenberg said Epstein would do to other people, what eventually got done to him, is he would put their money into Towers Financial at the time, but he would set up other companies to do this as well, and he would get investors to come in, and then he would take their money and he would hide it away, and he would do it after he had procured blackmail on people to control them afterwards so that they didn't come after him. And this is something that I wouldn't probably put much stock in if Hoffenberg hadn't been interviewed about it in 2019 and told that story.
Steven Jude Hoffenberg (January 12, 1945 – August 2022) was an American businessman and fraudster. He was the founder, CEO, president, and chairman of Towers Financial Corporation, a debt collection agency, which was later discovered to be a Ponzi scheme. In 1993, he rescued the New York Post from bankruptcy, and briefly owned the paper. Towers Financial collapsed in 1993, and in 1995 Hoffenberg pleaded guilty to bilking investors out of $475 million. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison (serving 18 years), plus a $1 million fine and $463 million in restitution. The U.S. SEC considered his financial crimes to be "one of the largest Ponzi schemes in history".
-- Steven Hoffenberg, by Wikipedia
Nobody knows who Jeffrey Epstein was in 2002. He maybe was in the society pages in New York City or something, but he was not a celebrity. And so Hoffenberg was making these very specific allegations about people that Epstein was connected with in the 80s and 90s, from Lease, and Khashoggi, and others. He gets down to exactly what he called the specific scheme that he was running called "Playing the Box." It's a way to scam wealthy people out of their money, using blackmail to make sure that they're afraid to come after him. Now, how much of his wealth that represented, it's kind of hard to say, because when he got sent off to jail in 2000, 2008, 2009, he moved all of his money offshore to Israel, and also sent 46-1/2 million dollars to the Wexner foundation, which Wexner says was him paying him back for the money he had stolen.
There are allegations that are pretty well substantiated by now, that one of the things Maxwell would do was act as essentially like a slush fund for Israeli intelligence black ops. And what he would do is reach into his company's pension funds, for example, and pull some money out so they could pull off an operation. And then six months or a year down the line, they figure out ways to get the money back to him.
Why didn't he press charges? Who knows?
So let's talk a little bit about what happened in that first case of his. Epstein was unknown to most people, and then he sort of becomes famous in 2006. 7. He was pretty famous in society circles, West Palm beach is a small community of people who are very connected. How did he get busted? What was he accused of? What was he convicted of?
So Epstein's thing was that he started with Ghislaine Maxwell as his initial recruiter. She would find girls that were vulnerable in one way or another, like young girls, usually in high school, [middle school]. I think the youngest girl that he's accused of messing with was 12 years old at the time.
Maxwell would go out, and identify a girl who very often was from a broken family, or a family with no father in the picture, because fathers tend to beat the hell out of, and sexually assault, their daughters. And so she would find girls who already had some problems, and she would bring them in to give him a massage. Say, "Look, he's this wealthy guy. He really likes massages. He'll pay you $200 to give him a massage. Don't you want to make $200?"
Back in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, he gave a lot of money to high school girls from the wrong side of the tracks. I presume some said no, but others would do it. And once they found girls who kind of fit the profile, they outsourced the recruitment to those girls. They'd start out with the massage, and go from there. And the girls find themselves in this billionaire's house, isolated behind a gate, and what are they gonna do? It's a scary situation for a high school girl. I guess it's not strange when you really think about it, but when I talk to men about this, they're like, "Kill that guy. Get rid of that guy." When you talk to women about it, they're a little bit more punitive towards the girls, maybe thinking, "What was she doing there? I remember being 15 and I wasn't just some purely innocent dove."
Men are protective of women, as they should be. And there was one girl who did refuse to do anything. And they said, "It's all right, it's all right. We still think you're awesome. We want to get massages and everything. I'll tell you what, you don't have to do anything, but we'll give you $200 for every one of your friends that you bring. If you find others, you bring them in to do this and, you know, we'll give them $200. And you'll get $200 every time you do it. And she did it. And they were kind of portrayed in the Press as prostitution solicitors. These are minors, high school girls being manipulated by adults who very skillfully manipulated billionaires. So that's just a ridiculous idea to place responsibility on them. It's kind of a sick thing to write in a newspaper, honestly. And the girl who is from a broken family, and has some problems, from the wrong side of the tracks, she might know a girl who is from a middle class family, with two concerned parents, but very often her friends are from the same mold that she's from. Every once in a while there was a father, a mother who cared, and came from a pretty regular family. One girl, after everything was over, ran back to her parents and told them what happened, and they went to the police in West Palm Beach. This was down in Florida. The West Palm Beach Police Department starts looking into the guy, starts gathering more information, and talking to witnesses. And very quickly, this thing starts expanding out where two witnesses becomes four, and four becomes eight, and eight becomes 16. It's like expanding exponentially. And they're realizing they have a big, big, big issue on their hands.
When you're going through the Netflix documentary, it leaves out a lot of really important information, but in general, it's really good. They interview the Chief of Police in West Palm beach, and you can see he is flabbergasted. Outraged, to the point where he says that it cost him his faith in the U.S. Criminal justice system, because he was getting stonewalled at the local level. People in his department, or somewhere in the local government, were leaking information on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. So when they raided his house, all the computers had been taken away. He was totally prepared for it. Everything was removed. And they say he was 100% tipped off. So the Chief of Police is facing resistance at the local and state prosecutor level. So he does something that you don't normally do as a chief of police. He went completely around his chain of command and went directly to the Feds himself, because clearly the state and the local officials were too corrupt. Maybe it was just because Epstein's an important guy, and they don't want to rock the boat, and bring bad publicity to West Palm Beach. Whatever it was, he needed to bring the heavy artillery in. So he gives it over to the Feds, and that's when it ends up in the lap of Alex Acosta, who was the Southern District of Florida U.S. attorney at the time. So he starts looking into Epstein, and building out a case. This woman, A. Marie Villafaña, was the lead Prosecutor for the U.S. attorney's office on the Epstein case. And from all appearances at least, she was very enthusiastic and earnest about trying to pursue this case and was very upset about how the whole thing was handled by her superiors.
A. Marie Villafaña
The lead federal prosecutor in the 2006-2008 U.S. investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, she repeatedly advocated for Epstein’s indictment on federal sex crimes charges and drafted a 60-count indictment, but was overruled by her superiors. She expressed frustration with the resulting plea deal, stating Epstein should have served 18 years, not 18 months. While some reports indicate she tried to uphold victims' rights and opposed work release, other records show she acquiesced to defense demands to keep the non-prosecution agreement secret from victims, which violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act. She resigned from the Justice Department in August 2019 amid a federal probe into the handling of the case and transitioned to a legal role at the Department of Health and Human Services. Villafaña maintained she acted properly and criticized the lack of release of the full OPR report, citing institutional biases that undermined the case.
-- A. Marie Villafana, by Google AI
So West Palm Beach police department builds out a case, and they get to the point where there's 40 something witnesses on the record, underage witnesses telling the exact same story of how they were recruited, what happened when they got there, what they were asked and made to do, and everything else down the line, right? This is when the West Palm Beach Chief of Police first went to the Fed. Marie Villafana sort of chuckled and laughed, and said that this was going to be the easiest case she'd ever done. They were going to put this guy away for 100 years. So the Police Chief hands it over to the feds, and it's an open and shut case. I mean, how do you get away from 40 on the record corroborating independent witnesses, right? You can discredit one or two or ten, of them but you still got 30 left, you know. So he goes to the Feds, and they build out the case even more, they bring in more witnesses, gather more evidence. And all of a sudden, the prosecutor starts running into obstacles of her own. One of the things she found out was that the computers that had been taken out of Epstein's house in West Palm beach were in the possession of somebody connected to Epstein's lawyers. And so she put out a Department of justice subpoena demanding those computers from the lawyers. And the lawyers kind of delayed, had meetings, and put things off and so forth. People like Alan Dershowitz.
And so one day she goes to her boss and grills him a little bit, like, "What the hell is going on here?" She wrote this in an email, actually. She was very aggressive about it, saying, "I don't know what's happening here; I don't know what the deal is; but we have a child predator on our hands, and an open and shut case that should put this guy away for the rest of his life. What is the problem here?" And she gets reprimanded, and told in no uncertain terms that her attitude was not appreciated, and she needed to back off, and all these other things by her superior. And then one day, while the subpoenas were out for the computers, Alex Acosta personally goes in and cuts a deal with Epstein's lawyers without telling the lead prosecutor who's looking into the case, and without telling the victims, which is in contravention of victims rights law. You know, if you're going to cut a deal with a sex offender, you've got to tell the victims that this is happening, and why you're doing it. You have to tell them. It's a law. How did this guy wind up as Labor Secretary? That is a story worth looking into. I don't know. But there were a lot of candidates for the gig. Why that guy? So he comes in, and he cuts a deal with the lawyers that says, "Sorry, the federal government agrees not to prosecute Epstein for any of the crimes that are being alleged, any related crimes that have yet to be alleged, nor will they prosecute any of his accomplices, known or unknown. So crimes that come out in the future, committed by people who aren't known about yet, those are covered under this immunity as well. It's the most blanket non-prosecution agreement you can possibly imagine. And as a condition of the deal, the subpoena for his computers was dropped. So it sounds like they intentionally didn't gather a lot of evidence. So this is relevant.
The reason I'm bringing it up is this. I said I wouldn't talk about contemporary politics, but there's a huge controversy over why the DOJ isn't releasing all this information. And my informed understanding is, at least to some extent, it's because they don't have it. And they don't have it because it was never gathered. And I don't know why nobody has said that publicly. I'm not making excuses for anybody, by the way, but it's really interesting. So the cover up began immediately, 100 percent. And it went all the way up to the federal level. And then just to remind everybody where this conversation started, that U.S. attorney, Alex Acosta, future labor Secretary under Donald Trump, was apparently on the record telling the people who were vetting him for the Labor Secretary job that the reason he cut that deal was because he was told "Epstein belonged to Intelligence, and to leave it alone."
So let's just set this in time and place. The feds are basically Protecting Jeffrey Epstein in 2007 ish. That's the Bush administration. And clearly, this is a very high profile thing. It was in the papers. Acosta is a U.S. attorney. He's the federal prosecutor in Southern District of Florida. Correct? So what does DOJ think of this? Are they involved in like the cover-up?
That's the interesting question. I go back to the question I asked earlier. A U.S. attorney is pretty high up. He's running the Southern District of Florida's U.S. attorney's office. There's not that many people above his head. You can tell him to drop a case like this. You got to think about it like this too. This is a career case for a prosecutor like Acosta. I mean, you're going to be Attorney General behind this case someday. Putting away a billionaire playboy for his entire life because he's sexually abusing underage girls for years and years, this will make your whole career. So there's only a couple of reasons that somebody like him would agree to do that. There are people whose names we've all heard probably, like Alberto Gonzalez, who was Attorney General at the time, it's only a few people who could do that. You have this billionaire who's the very definition of a flight risk. They don't take his passport away. And before he's sentenced, he flees the country, and goes to Israel, stays there for several months, moves all his money offshore, and while he's in Israel, he tells people that he's thinking about staying, because you can actually do that. They don't extradite Jewish criminals who flee to Israel. There's an organization called Jewish Community Watch, which is a Jewish organization that tracks pedophiles who have fled the United States to Israel, where there's no extradition of Jewish criminals there. And between just the years, I think it was 2010 when they started, when they opened up in 2016, 2017, when this story was written, so for a period of six years, there were already 60 pedophiles from the United States that had fled to Israel and were living freely there. Some of them had reoffended there and got thrown in Israeli jails.
So when Jeffrey Epstein was over there, why didn't the US Government demand that Israel send them back? I mean. you've been self employed for a while, but when you weren't, was it your habit to go to your boss and make demands of them on a regular basis? I don't know. When do we ever make demands on Israel? But that's obviously distressing. So, there's clearly a cover up from the very beginning.
And I just want to say, one of the reasons we don't have this information now is because DOJ doesn't have the information.
Can I tie up that last point real quick? So him being in Israel, that may have played a role in him cutting his deal, because that's when his deal happens. He's already been charged at this point, he's awaiting sentencing, he's been convicted, and they don't take his passport, And he --
Wait. He's been convicted? He leaves the country?
Correct.
Let me back up. His plea deal was negotiated while he was out of the country because he didn't fight the charges. It didn't go to a jury trial or anything. He fled the country, and his lawyers could credibly go to the DOJ and ask for -- that is special treatment. Did any of the J6 defendants get that treatment? No, I don't think so. That's what's infuriating about all this. Leaving aside a lot of other elements that are upsetting, the most infuriating is just the two tiers, or multi tier system of justice. This is something that people do not understand, maybe even at the highest levels. When I read President Trump's truth socials about it, people don't seem to understand that this isn't about some guy that sexually assaulted a bunch of girls, because Jeffrey Epstein, for better or for worse, has become a proxy for other things.
Can I interrupt you to say that our faithful and gifted researcher has just held up a note saying that apparently Alex Acosta never said that Epstein was connected to intelligence. So that is not my understanding. He was asked about it at a press conference and he essentially refused to answer. He said, "I wouldn't take those media reports at face value. And beyond that, Department of Justice policy kind of forbids me from going any further into that." And then there was an ABC News report that was talking about his DOJ deal back then. And they said that the DOJ had stated that he had no connections to intelligence. But when you actually read the documents, that's not what was asked at all. The question was not whether he had any connections to intelligence, the question was whether he was given leniency because of cooperation that he was giving to the FBI and DOJ on cases related to Bear Stearns. And they said no to that. And it got written up in the news as him saying he had no connection to the intelligence community, which is not true. The lies are overwhelming.
And just so everybody understands, there are over 40 on-the-record witnesses, most of them underage, corroborating each other's stories independently, of this guy sexually assaulting underage girls for years. He gets this non prosecution agreement with the federal government in perpetuity. "Him and all of his accomplices, known and unknown for crimes, known and unknown." Which gets sent down to the state level, and he agrees to a two year term down there in southern Florida. Not in a federal prison, not in a state prison, but at the county jail. It sounds like I'm making this up but I'm not. He has his own wing of the jail to himself. His cell door remains open. He gets out on work release for 12 hours a day, six days a week. accompanied only by security whom he pays the salary a salary. He only has to stay the night there six days a week, and then spend one day a week in the jail. So, it's like the National Guard.
Yeah.
And again, you're not talking about a guy who got busted embezzling funds. You're talking about a guy who got busted doing a crime that, if you were to poll every American, and ask them, "What is the worst thing that anybody can do?" It's molesting little children. Everybody agrees that that is the red line. Everybody feels that way.
So you ask, "What are the possible reasons that could be big enough, and important enough, that they would give a deal like this to a guy like this? It's insulting to the investigators, to the police, to the prosecutors to give this guy a deal like that. And can I say one thing that has always struck me about this case, and why I think it reveals the entire power structure in the United States? Public testimony from women who lived with Epstein talked of his contempt for Americans, sort of normal middle class, working class Americans. He did not see them as fully human. So molesting a high school girl from a housing development, or a trailer park in South Florida, doesn't really count as molesting, because who cares? And that attitude suffuses our leadership class. 100,000 people die of fentanyl ODs, and it's sad, but it's not an emergency because they're people you would never meet, and don't really care about. The people who are building the dollar store in their town, nobody cares about them. He really had that attitude. But that's the attitude they all have. He had justification for having that attitude in terms of the impunity with which he operated. And this is actually something I was hoping we would get to, because all this stuff is super intelligent, interesting, and important, all the deep, deep, deep detail on that stuff. I did a six hour long podcast series on it. And guys like Mike Benz and Ryan Dawson, who is one of the chief researchers who's done a lot of the work that writers crib this guy's research without crediting him, and I'm actually gonna interview him next week, just go really deep on a lot of the stuff that we're not able to get to tonight.
Jeffrey Epstein Client List, by Ryan Dawson: Page One
https://www.youtube.com/@RyanDawson109
https://sonar21.com/the-epstein-client-%20%20o-publish/
The Epstein Client List — Why is Trump Breaking His Promise to Publish?, by Larry C. Johnson, 9 July 2025
The question that I want to leave people with, as we get into the last part of this conversation, when Epstein was convicted in 2000, this was in the newspapers. If you were watching a football game, you might not have heard about it. But if you were a wealthy person in Washington D.C., or New York City, or West Palm Beach, Florida, you knew who Jeffrey Epstein was, and you know what happened to him, and you knew what he had done. His private plane was nicknamed the Lolita Express. [url=x]Lolita is a novel written by Nabokov, based on a true story, about a guy who kidnaps a 12 year old girl, and takes her on a kind of odyssey across the country, raping her over the course of two years. It's a novel about child molestation. And his airplane was nicknamed the Lolita Express.[/url] That nickname was given by other people. Other people knew who this guy was. They knew what he was doing. So a question that I really have been wrestling with for a long time relates to the point you were just making about our ruling class. If literally any one of my male friends or family members, any of them, were invited to go somewhere on some dude's plane, and when they walk onto that plane, as soon as they get in the air, five or six underage girls who are not related to them come out in their underwear and start offering massages, my responses to that are basically, what level of criminal action am I gonna take against this guy? Am I gonna beat him senseless? Am I gonna throw him out of this flying plane? Those are basically the range of outcomes for me in that situation. And that's true for almost everybody. Almost everybody watching this knows that. So when regular people hear about this, they have trouble believing that this is possible, because they don't know anybody who would have such a cavalier reaction. That's why I think it's important to cover this. And I don't want to get into the conspiracy theory side of this; that's not important to me, honestly. But we've been here now for 1 hour and 57 minutes, and I think I'm sort of familiar with the framework, and I don't think you've said anything that's speculative, have you?
I've tried not to.
So the story, based on available facts, which are a minority of all facts about it, but just what we have, it's a true indictment. You remember when the Podesta emails came out, and the whole Pizzagate thing took over the Internet for a while in every dark corner of Reddit and everywhere, which was this satanic pedophile conspiracy called Pizzagate. I'm not going to get into the conspiracy theory itself, but just use it to raise a larger point about what we're talking about here. The interesting thing to me about that whole saga was not the idea that there's some big crazy conspiracy involving whatever. That's what the Internet does with information like that. The interesting thing to me was the things that were just 100 percent fact, the bits and pieces of the story that they were using to construct that narrative, the pieces themselves are really interesting. One of the first things that came up from people digging into Reddit, and everywhere else, one of the things everybody remembers is hearing about spirit cooking, by the performance artist Marina Abramovic. She invited the Podestas to one of these events, and apparently they enjoyed the spirit cooking very much. And what, pray tell, is spirit cooking? Tucker?
It was a performance art piece, a dinner event, where the attendees would go and sit in rooms with white walls, and eat meals off of mock corpses in tubs of blood, with weird creepy messages about cutting the finger on your left hand, and eating the pain, and drinking fresh breast milk with fresh sperm milk on earthquake nights. All these crazy edgelord art school, things that are just embarrassing, these weird cryptic sayings written in goat's blood on the walls. In one room, there's an effigy of an infant with a bucket of goats blood thrown all over it. There's another room where there's a bunch of shelves with little figures in various positions of copulation. There's photos from these events that Abramovich would put on. Lady Gaga's there eating off of one of these mock corpses. Gwen Stefani's at one of them. And this is a satanic ritual, but just forget about all that. Forget about all that. What if this was your friend, or your brother, your sister, and they brought you to this thing, you'd be like, "What are we doing here? What is this?"
And Tony and Heather Podesta went to this. Well, I don't know if Heather did or not, but he and John did. Tony's a big art collector.
No, I'm aware. I knew his wife.
And his art collection became a big part of the whole pizza gate. This is like right in my neighborhood, by the way, where I live. So weird. Tony Podesta's "taste" in art became a big part of that whole Pizzagate story. And it's one of those things that, again, when you have gaps to fill in a story, and just pieces of information, and you're not getting any explanations from anyone that make any sense, who are explaining it to you in a way that's plausible, that's how conspiracy theories grow like mold. If something like that is going on in your city, if some of the most powerful people in your city are participating in something like that, I don't need to know anymore. I literally don't need to know anymore.
Already in Mahayana Buddhism, the naked corpse of a woman was considered as the most provocative and effective meditation object an initiand could use to free himself from the net of Samsara. Inscribed in the iconography of her body were all the vanities of this world. For this reason, he who sank bowed over a decaying female body could achieve enlightenment in his current life. To increase the intensity of the macabre observation, it was usual in several Indian monastic orders to dismember the corpse. Ears, nose, hands, feet, and breasts were chopped off and the disfigured trunk became the object of contemplation. “In Buddhist context, the spectacle of the mutilated woman serves to display the power of the Buddha, the king of the Truth (Dharma) over Mara, the lord of the Realm of Desire.”, writes Elizabeth Wilson in a discussion of such practices, “By erasing the sexual messages conveyed by the bodies of attractive women through the horrific spectacle of mutilation, the superior power of the king of Dharma is made manifest to the citizens of the realm of desire.” (Wilson, 1995, p. 80).
-- The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism, by Victor and Victoria Trimondi
I told you earlier that I went and bought a copy of the Architectural Digest in Washington, and Life magazine, that profiled his apartment and his art collection. And on the walls in the photographs in these magazines, there's a lot of different art there, but the most prominent ones that are a mural size centerpiece of a room. The others are poster size. The big, important, prominent pieces that he's got out for everybody to see are by a Serbian artist named Biljana Djurdjevic. And they're part of a series of paintings that, according to the artist's own interviews, are based on explorations of child molestation, sexual assault, and just childhood trauma and abuse in general. And it is, you know. there are a lot of paintings in the series, but the ones that show up in the magazine piece, for example, the great big mural one is a bunch of young girls, that look like maybe teenagers, 12 year olds or something, who are lying in a circle. The name of the painting is called Synchronized Swimming. They are lying in a circle at the bottom of like a tiled room or something. And they all have this spaced out, kind of dead, drugged out look in their eyes, and some of them have black eyes, and they're just playing there. A
And so I don't want to be ruled by people like this. This just keeps getting so much worse. You're upsetting me, because I lived in this world for so long, and I intentionally ignored this. But now that you are describing it, I can't even believe I was in the same county as people like that. If I was into art that featured tied up pubescents, pre-pubescent children in their underwear by an artist that says this is all about child sexual assaults, if I was into that, I would at least take it down before company came over. These were rooms that he threw his parties in, he invited people over to. I would definitely take them down before architectural digest gets there. Being into something like that means that you are on an evil path. That's evil. I don't know what to say. Like an image like that. It's also obvious now that I have distance from it.
He was asked in an interview about some of his favorite artists. One of those listed was a woman named Patricia Piccinini who does sculptures, you could say, I don't know if they're clay sculptures, whatever, but they are really grotesque images of a small girl standing up on her bed, maybe five years old, with this demon thing with its claws around her, kind of leering at her There's one with this sort of weird pig monster spooning this little boy in his bed with pustules on its back. There's a lot of mouths that look like sphincters and vaginas, and the kids are playing with them. It's all very suggestive, weird, surrealist horror movie kind of sexually slanted stuff.
He listed her as one of his favorite artists.
Another one that he listed was a woman named Kim Noble. And I'll stop. Can I tell you that you're upsetting me. And because you're describing Tony Podesta, who is the brother of the former White House chief of staff, two time chief of staff, John Podesta, who is the most powerful Democratic lobbyist in Washington. This is not some fringe character. It's not a homeless guy, Not even some eccentric rich guy. This is a person who's at the center of the Democratic establishment for decades, for my whole life there. And his wife is, they've since divorced, but pull up a picture of those two on Google, and just look at it, and ask yourself, how brainwashed would you have to be not to see there's something really wrong there? Really wrong. Like deeply spiritually wrong? I'm not trying to be judgmental or cruel. I don't understand how that could exist at the very center of power in Washington D.C. I just feel it so deeply. This gets to the question that we're trying to answer here.
So another artist that he named is one of his favorites, a British woman named Kim Noble. And I don't think I could pull it up on my phone and show that to the audience right now without getting this video banned. Kim Noble was a woman who was violently, sexually assaulted countless times between the ages of 1 and 3. It shattered her mind. She has dissociative identity disorder, what we used to call multiple personality disorder. And several of these personalities are artists. And the art is something that a four or five year old would do. It's scribbled stick figures, the most grotesque depictions of adults sexually abusing children that you can think of. However bad you think it is, it's worse. And this was another woman that Tony Podesta said he was a fan of. So I just think to myself about this millionaire lobbyist in D.C. and his friends, the biggest Democratic lobbyist, saying, I'm a fan of the artist Kim Noble, and the image of the demon with his arms around the little girl feeling her while another demon urinates on her, is just fascinating in its use of color. Who are these people? So that's what I didn't understand.
I lived right down the road from Comet Pizza. I knew David Brock and James Elephantis, who are liberals, Democrats, whatever, and I'm not gonna have dinner with them. And I knew the Podestas. I assumed they were just douchey, pretentious townies. They made all this money. they're pretending to be sophisticated. They have terrible taste. This is like my snobbish thinking. I didn't, or couldn't, or refused to, or whatever, face the obvious reality that's just hitting me hard right now in the face. That's evil. That's just evil And what I thought was gauche is satanic, strictly speaking. Whether they're part of some organized Church of Satan, or whatever, I don't even know if that exists in real life. But certainly obedience to Satan exists, and that's what that is. There's a lot of people who have strange proclivities and weird interests. Fine. But he's at the center of the city. He's at the center of power. What is the culture of this place that he would feel comfortable inviting magazine photographers over to take photographs of the paintings he puts in his rooms by Biljana Djurdjevic that is unmistakably two dead little girls lying on their backs in a pond, or a lake or something. It's in the magazine And don't sue me, Heather Podesta, if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Heather Podesta told me to my face that they had another house just for the art. I think he supposedly owns 5,000 pieces of art or something. So why do you have a house? So you can invite people over. So they were like my neighbors. I never went, but I was never invited. But that means that a lot of people I know went over to the Podesta's house and saw paintings of demons having sex with dead children or whatever. I can't even put that into my head. And they're like, yeah, kind of far out, kind of funky, you know, sort of edgy. Tony Podesta should check yourself, dude. This is hell. And this is something that ordinary people really need to understand, because this is not the first ruling class that this has happened to. No, this is happening to ruling classes throughout the world, throughout history. This is Weimar, Caligula, yes. It's the British gentry in the late 18, early 1900s when, they're all into Aleister Crowley, and all that White mischief in Nairobi in 1925. This is late empire. So how is it that every single person I know would run screaming off of that airplane when six underage girls in their underwear come out? The answer is, if you just came from a spirit cooking dinner, followed up by a party at Tony Podesta's house where there's pictures of tied up dead 8-year-olds all over the wall, and then you go onto that plane -- I never went on the plane,. I never went to the Podesta's house, but boy, did I live in a world of people who did. And not one time in 35 years in D.C. did anybody say, "Holy shit, I was at Tony's house last night, and you should see what's in there." Instead, they were like, "Oh, it's douchey." I mean, you would get kicked off of a local school board for having pictures of tied up dead 8-year-olds on your wall. What's happening to your society? This is the seat of power. Its values flow downward. It's the top of the pyramid. "There's some freak down the block who's just into weird stuff, whatever." You might tell your kids to avoid that house and everything, but fine, this is America. We interpreted -- at least until Israel attacked Gaza -- we interpreted the First Amendment pretty broadly. Most people still do. Fine. I'm not calling for that guy's arrest or anything. He can go be a freak in his own house. But you're not participating in the conversation, or in the decision making process, of whether we do gender reassignment surgeries on 8-year-olds, when you have pictures of dead tied up 8-year-olds on your wall. And I think most ordinary people, and I think people who are in the Washington world and in a lot of these elite circles, they just don't get how this looks to the rest of the of the country.
And it's not just how it looks, it's how that kind of thinking allows you to kill a lot of people, which they do. And so they have these conversations about we need to do this or do that. What they really mean is drop bombs on kids, which they do continuously. And no one even mentions it. So the acceptance of violence against civilians, I've only started to realize this since I left. It's been five years. And maybe there's a circumstance where you need to go full Dresden on somebody. Let's talk about it. But they don't talk about it. It's just like, "Well, we're going to bomb the Houthis, and open the shipping lanes. What does that mean? Nobody cares, because they have a total acceptance of killing people.
One of the reasons I left the Department of Defense, you know, I used to work on air and ballistic missile defense systems for a long time with the DOD, and I would go all over the world, work with our allies, work on American bases, and travel on American ships being deployed to hot spots, so that they had a real expert, on in case something bad happened with one of their defense systems. And a lot of times I'd be on a little destroyer. And I don't think I'm divulging any classified information here or anything. And honestly, with something like this, I don't particularly care. I guess nobody ever told me not to talk about it. But when the Saudi war, and UAE war, on Yemen was going on, and every day you're reading in the paper of kids literally starving to death, of kids dying of very preventable, very treatable diseases by the tens of thousands on a regular basis, while we would be interdicting smugglers coming from Baluchistan and other places, trying to come in and out of Yemen, and we'd stop their Dows and small boats and board and search them and so forth. And when this was going on, I was a civilian Department of Defense employee. But I would go out on deck and kind of watch these things go down And I can't tell you how many times, eventually it was one too many times, I would read one of those stories about what was going on in Yemen, and then we're 100 miles off Yemen, stopping a boat that's coming into that country that has nothing on it but medicine, and then watching everybody dump it into the ocean, then everybody kind of celebrating like we just won another big victory, you know? And it got to the point where, again, it was just one too many times. I couldn't sleep at night. It was a big factor of why I left the job. And I want to be very clear. I don't indict the sailors who were carrying out the mission. When you're part of the military, it's hard to describe to outsiders, but these are guys who thought they were fulfilling their patriotic duty. I get it. But there's not a strong Christian vibe in that environment. Not exactly.
Yeah. It's not too welcome when you're asking people to throw medicine in the water that's on its way to a country where kids are dying of diarrhea. And that moral compromise, the answer to the question of how could Jeffrey Epstein get away with what he did, when everybody in elite circles knew what he had done? Why is anybody accepting an invitation to go hang out with Tony Podesta, or Jeffrey Epstein? Why is anybody flying on the Lolita express, or any of these things? I think we're talking about a moral environment that is very different from the one most of us live in.
There was an article in the New York Times several years ago about this French author named Gabriel Matzneff. There was one line in the article that really shed a lot of light on this for me. Gabriel Matzneff was a very famous French author, who had a column in Le Monde, I think. And all of his novels were about pedophilia, and painted in a very positive way. And the book that kind of broke through was called under 16 years old, and they're all graphic depictions of a pedophile. That was the name of the book. And eventually he gets busted, and when he's going through the criminal justice process, he doesn't deny anything that he gets really angry, saying, "I could name names right now that would bring this whole place down. Are you kidding me? And one of the things that they said in that New York Times story is that in France, this is common. This isn't unique to France.
