Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
Jess Day has been under fire now for quite some time,
but one group that has avoided any sort of collateral
damage up to this point is certainly Barclays. You know,
the company, the bank that hired him after he was
sitting around sucking on Epstein's teat for all of those years. Yeah,
that group. And after years of feeling like I've been
screaming from the mountaintop into the wind, finally Barclays is
catching some flak here as well. How are you going
to hire this dude and then protect him throughout the
whole entire pandemic and then act like you have nothing
to answer for? And I'm not just talking about from
a regulation standpoint. What else were they hiding about jess Daily?
What else did their investigation uncover? We're never going to
know because it was an internal investigation and they're not
obligated to share those findings with us. The whole entire
idea behind internal investigations for companies in general is to
make it look like they did nothing wrong. That's what
they're trying to do. It's just like when you go
to the human resources department at your job. They're not
there for you. Their role is to protect the company.
So today we have an article from the Guardian and
the headline Barclays should face questions over former chief and Epstein.
The author of this article is Rupert Neat the Barclays
Board should face questions about his decision to back former
bosses Daily despite his connections with the convicted sex offender
Jeffrey Epstein. A leading corporate governance service, has said, are
any of these regulatory boards or government services ever going
to have any teeth in their reports and call for
people to go to prison? Because we never see that
in the financial sector. How often do you see one
of these bankers get their asses tossed in prison? Very rarely,
and when they do, it's because they've been sacrificed by
the other masters of the universe. Institutional Shareholder Services told
investors and Barclays that questions can be posed now about
the board's judgment in continuing to support Stay between twenty
nineteen and twenty twenty one, when he was the subject
of regulatory investigations into the nature of his relationship with
a disgraced financier you mean pedophile, And now it's okay,
now we can have an investigation. It wasn't okay though,
when he was the chairman of the board and he
was sitting there guiding Barclays through the pandemic, right, because
it's all about securing that bag profits over people at
every step when we're talking about the financial sector. While
it is accepted that the board could only act on
the information available to it at the time, there are
questions over the judgment exercise during the period, Iss said
on Monday, given the particularly disturbing nature of the charges
against Epstein and their potential for reputational damage to the company.
And not only that, remember, Jess Staley has also now
been accused in one of these lawsuits by a anonymous accuser,
saying that he was taking part in some of the abuse.
He was there the whole thing. So where previously Staley
was considered just a financial enabler, he is something completely
different as of now, at least according to the allegations.
Despite his reservations, Iss recommended shareholders vote in favor of
re electing all Barclay's directors at its annual general meeting
on May third. The Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential
Regulation Authority began investigating the nature of Staley's relationship with
Epstein and the truthfulness with which state he described it
in twenty nineteen. Look, he didn't describe it in truth
at all. He lied about it because if he told
the truth, forget it. Even the scuzzballs over at Barclays
wouldn't be able to whitewash it. But if you just
tell him a little bit and hope that it all
blows over, well everything's gonna be all good. And Staley
and all of these scuzzballs, they were all banking on
the fact that Epstein had already been arrested once, he's
not gonna get arrested again, so we can, you know,
move behind the scenes with him with a modicum of privacy.
That's what they were thinking. But what they didn't plan
for was this whole entire thing getting blown the fuck
out of the water via social media and other avenues.
So now dudes left holding the bag and everybody's pointing
the finger at Jess Staley. When the investigations became public
in February of twenty twenty, the Barclays board said it
believes that mister Staley has been sufficiently parent with the
company as regards the nature and extent of his relationship
with mister Epstein. It said Staley retained its full confidence,
not full confidence. Remember, we had several different people who
were not down with Jess Staley being on the board.
Chiefly among them was Edward Bramson, and he led a
scorched earth campaign to get rid of Jess Staley. Staley
quit Barclays in November of twenty twenty one after a
prelim report by the two regulators suggested that he had
mischaracterized his relationship with Epstein. Staley has said he plans
to contest the preliminary findings by bringing the case to
the FCA's Regulatory Decision Committee. The findings have not been
made public, so we don't know what the full report
has inside of it, and we probably never will. Remember,
this is a company and they initiated this report on
their own, and whatever the government watchdogs forget it, we're
not going to be privy to that either. But these
investigations that are initiated by companies or by the government
very rarely, if ever, do those kinds of investigation expose
anything that we're not already aware of. Staley has since
been named in a US lawsuit that accuses him of
personally observing the sexual abuse of young women by Epstein.
Staley denies the allegations made in a lawsuit against JP Morgan,
where Staley was chief executive of its exclusive private bank
and had Epstein as a client. And it was a
lot more than just him being a client. It was
the relationship that the two of them had, and the
fact that Jeffrey Epstein was obviously involved in all kinds
of financial malseasons how much of those ill gotten gains
was moved through the doors at JP Morgan. Meanwhile, these
boobs are out here talking about you need to report
every six hundred dollars you make on Etsy, and you'll
wonder why people are fired up, and guys like Jess
Staley continuously get away with their bullshit. And I'm talking
about real bullshit. Meanwhile, people like you and I continue
to bear the brunt of all of their nonsense while
at the same time watching all of our wealth get
transferred up. Two lawsuits and at JP Morgan claimed Staley
personally visited young girls at Epstein's apartments and exchanged one
two hundred emails with the late financier pedophile that included
photos of young women in seductive poses and referring to
women by the names of Disney princesses. So why would
they be doing that? What is the logical reasoning behind
calling women Disney princesses. Well, when you're talking about Epstein,
keep in mind that he also used the word massage's
code word for sex. So you really think he's talking
about Disney princesses here, or are these two scoundrels talking
about something much more devious. My guess is it has
something to do with women that were purchased in places
like Eastern Europe for the explicit purpose of being abused
and being trafficked. They'd say to them, look, you come over,
you be a model. And that's where Jean Luke Brunel
came in. He was the one that would go out
and recruit these girls in places like Eastern Europe and
the whole thing ho lo oie. I am Jean Lous
brunelm helf from the modeling agency. I want you to
come to my house. Can you imagine this disgusting scumbag
pitching the whole modeling thing to these girls in these
developing and war torn countries and then bringing them to America,
putting them in the House on sixty six, and abusing them.
Because that's what happened, That's exactly what happened in New York,
right under the nose of the SDNY and under the
New York State Prosecutor's office. Where was Cyvance? Where was
pret Bajara? Where were all of these clowns that get
up there on their ivory towers and preach to us.
Where were they when Epstein and his buddies were doing
all of this right under their noses. JP Morgan has
countered that the lawsuits are misplaced and without merit, adding
that the plaintiffs have made troubling allegations concerning the conduct
of our former employee, and if true, he should be
held responsible for his actions. So they're saying, look, he
was an employee, he did all of this on his own,
and he was the reason that Epstein was here. We
know that's bullshit. We know that Jeff Staley, for as
powerful as he was, wasn't calling all of the shots
at JP Morgan. He had bosses. I'm looking at you,
Jamie Diamond. So all of these people are not culpable,
they're not held responsible for what their employees do, or
what their company does, because down here in the trenches
where the rest of us live, the buck has to
stop somewhere. The US Bank is also suing Staley, saying
that he should be made liable for any penalties the
US Bank may face as a result of the outrageous
alleged conduct. Barclay said that's in Staley resigned it had
received no material new evidence from authorities to challenge the
findings of a regulatory investigation into how Staley characterized his
relationship with Epstein. Staley's lawyers have dismissed allegations that he
hid what he knew about the late disgraced financier as
slanderous and false. Well we're gonna see soon, aren't we.
We're gonna see who's lying and who's not. Because once
things get going and we get to Discovery, the rubber's
gonna meet the road, and all of Jeff Staley's nonsense, well,
he's gonna have to back it up. The question is
will he be able to do that? All Right? Everybody
that's gonna do it for this one. All of the
information that goes with the episode can be found in
the description box