Speaker 1: So here's a question for you. How much information, how
many secrets does one person really need to collect to
organize and then weaponize before they have real power over
the world's elite.
Speaker 2: It's an unsettling question.
Speaker 1: It is right because that idea, that architecture of secrets
and vulnerability is really at the absolute core of our
deep dive today.
Speaker 3: It absolutely is, and based on the source material we're
going through, the answer, well, it pretty much confirms our
worst suspicions about how these power networks actually function.
Speaker 1: So today we are diving deep into that recently released
trove of Jeffrey Epstein emails.
Speaker 3: And this is so much more than just high society
gossip or financial records. This is about trying to understand
the actual levers of control that Epstein was trying to
wield on a global scale.
Speaker 1: The sources we're using for this are I think really
crucial because they come from someone who has been inside
these files. We're primarily looking at excerpts from a CBS
News video transcript, and it features the author Barry Levine,
the one who wrote that incredibly comprehensive book The Spider
Inside the Criminal Web of Jeffrey Epstein and Gislaine Maxwell.
Speaker 3: And he's been just instrumental in this, in filtering what
he calls the signal from the noise in this just massive,
massive data dump.
Speaker 1: And that's our mission today, right to separate that signal
from the noise exactly.
Speaker 3: We're going to focus on two main areas that this
email release really shines a new and frankly profound light on.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, what are they?
Speaker 3: So? First, we need to get our heads around the
sheer scope of Epstein's networking strategy, his true commodity. It
wasn't money, it was compromised information. And the second point, second,
we have to dissect the very specific, very complex and
in the end very acrimonious relationship between Epstein and Donald Trump.
And critically, we're looking at potential new names people who
might have aided his sex trafficking operation.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's just get straight into it then, because the
story of how we even got these emails is well,
it's a fascinating thing in itself. It's a case study
in institutional friction.
Speaker 2: It really is.
Speaker 1: So let's start with the access. This is a point
that Barry Levine really really emphasized these emails. They weren't
just handed over through some standard DOJ process. Were they
not at all?
Speaker 3: No, The source material is very clear. They were only
obtained because of a subpoena from the Oversite.
Speaker 1: Committee, the Overset Committee in Congress.
Speaker 3: Yes, and they went directly to Jeffrey Epstein's.
Speaker 1: Estate, So they essentially went around the Department of Justice.
Speaker 2: They circumvented them.
Speaker 3: And that procedural detail, it's not just some bureaucratic footnote.
It's absolutely central to how difficult this entire investigation has been.
Speaker 1: Right, as Levine pointed out in that New York Times
op ed, he wrote, you have to ask the question.
Speaker 3: Why, exactly why did a congressional committee have to step
in and basically do an n run around the DOJ
to get these records.
Speaker 1: What does that suggest? I mean, when there's a criminal
investigation of this size, you'd assume the DOJ would be
all over it. They'd have primary.
Speaker 3: Access, you would think so. But for a political body
like the Oversite Committe to have to intercede, it tells
you something about the complexity of Epstein's estate, or maybe
some jurisdictional.
Speaker 1: Messiness or just roadblocks or.
Speaker 3: Just major institutional roadblock. It suggests a few things, really First,
Epstein's estate is unbelievably complex. We're talking about offshore trust's
careful legal shielding. I mean, it was all designed specifically
to protect assets and information from discovery.
Speaker 1: And the DOJ's normal process might be too slow for
that kind of defense.
Speaker 3: It can be standard criminal procedure can get bogged down
against those kinds of legal fortresses. But a congressional subpoena that's.
Speaker 2: A different animal.
Speaker 1: It carries different weight.
Speaker 3: It carries different weight in a different kind of urgency.
It's often aimed at things like national security or government oversight,
which allows it to cut through some of those of
state privacy laws. It became a necessary workaround.
Speaker 1: So it was a parallel track. The traditional route was stalled,
So the Oversight committee just used its own authority to
pull these files into the light.
Speaker 3: That's it, and that maneuver, in and of itself, it
just reinforces this idea that getting to the truth about
Epstein required extraordinary measures.
Speaker 1: It validates that suspicion that crucial information wasn't exactly flowing freely,
not at all.
Speaker 3: And once they finally got their hands on these files,
this massive trove of data, Levigne and the investigators they
weren't just you know, scrolling through randomly. They had two
extremely specific goals that guided their entire search.
Speaker 1: Two needles they were trying to pull from this enormous
digital haystack.
Speaker 3: What were they Well, the first one is the one
that's been a public question for years. They wanted to
clarify the nature and really the extent of the relationship
between Jeffrey Epstein and President Trump.
Speaker 1: Given how close they once were, and then how publicly they.
Speaker 3: Weren't precisely understanding that timeline, the depth.
Speaker 2: Of it that was paramount.
Speaker 1: And the second objective that goes straight to the criminal
ecosys to me, built right the actual infrastructure of abuse.
Speaker 3: Correct. They were looking for additional names, specifically of men
who could possibly be prosecuted for aiding or facilitating Epstein
in his sex trafficking scheme.
Speaker 1: So not just friends or party guests.
Speaker 3: No, not social acquaintances, actual enablers. The focus is constantly shifting,
and this is important. I think it's not just about
the abuser anymore, but about that complex network that allowed
this whole thing to thrive for what two decades.
Speaker 1: They needed to identify that enabling infrastructure.
Speaker 2: That's the goal.
Speaker 3: A surgical approach really understand the political entanglement and find
the co conspirators.
Speaker 1: And according to Levine's analysis, the email release actually delivered.
It gave them insights into both of those areas.
Speaker 3: It did it provided crucial details that you know, they
reinforced a lot of existing research. But they also offered
up what he called startling news.
Speaker 1: Okay, so just to be clear for you listening, the
files didn't just hand them a perfect prosecutable case against
every person mentioned.
Speaker 2: No, of course not.
Speaker 3: And we'll get into the whole ambiguity of what knowing
something means later on. But what they did provide was
enough context, enough names, and enough specific claims to significantly
move the ball forward on both of those primary objectives.
Speaker 1: So these emails were essentially evidence logs. They detailed his operations,
his network, his methods.
Speaker 3: They were and it just leaves you wondering about the
files they didn't get, the records that are still locked
away behind all that procedural complexity.
Speaker 1: Well, the fact that this extraordinary measure, the congressional subpoena,
was even needed, it implies the complete story of this
vast global network is still being uncovered, piece by piece,
and again some pretty serious institutional resistance.
Speaker 3: That difficulty. It speaks volumes, doesn't it. It says so
much about the level of protection Epstein managed to build
around himself and his records. It just confirms his calculated
efforts to ensure that even after he was gone, his
secrets remained weaponized.
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's get into the scale of that network
and that the motivation behind it. All the emails seemed
to really reinforce this self image that fueled everything Epstein did.
This core belief that he was just intellectually superior to everyone.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that he was smarter than everybody else. His actions
were completely rooted in that perception. And this wasn't just
you know, simple narcissism. It was an operational principle for him.
Speaker 1: What do you mean by that?
Speaker 3: I mean that belief is what allowed him to approach
these elite circles, you know, CEOs, academics, world leaders, with
the absolute confidence that he could manipulate them, and.
Speaker 1: That he could run a high spakes criminal operation right
under their noses.
Speaker 3: Without any consequences. His arrogance was the engine for all
of it. It was the primary driver of his risk taking, and.
Speaker 1: It was that arrogance that enabled him to build this
truly vast, almost incalculable circle of associates. The sources are
pretty specific about the groups he targeted. It wasn't just
generic rich people. It was celebrities, business tycoons, and.
Speaker 3: Most importantly, individuals who were highly placed in or even
leaders of foreign governments.
Speaker 1: The way that circle was put together, it reveals the
true scope of his ambition, doesn't it. This wasn't just
random social climbing, not at all.
Speaker 3: The sources confirm that Epstein collected people. He did it
for two decades, and he used his sex trafficking operation
as the deliberate mechanism for their.
Speaker 1: Collection and ultimately for their compromise and.
Speaker 3: Ultimately for their compromise. And this is where the conversation
moves beyond just sexual abuse. This is organized intelligence gathering.
Speaker 1: So if the sexual abuse, and I guess the documentation
of that abuse was the tool he used for collection,
we need to be really clear for you listening, what
was the actual commodity he was trading in? What was
he leveraging?
Speaker 3: The real commodity, as Levine and the sources make very clear,
was leverage leverage that he got from confidential information secrets.
Epstein's ultimate calculated goal was to get secrets and bits
of information about individuals that he could pass to other people.
He was, at his core, a trafficker in this currency
of secrets, private, compromising, politically sensitive details about the most
powerful people in the world.
Speaker 1: That completely reframes his entire operation, doesn't it.
Speaker 3: It does.
Speaker 1: It turns him from just a high society sexual predator
into this calculated a high level intelligence broker, a geopolitical
player who used the most horrific means imaginable sexual coercion
and abuse his primary method of bea collection.
Speaker 3: That is a conclusion that the emails strongly strongly support.
The analysis points out the while he was, without any
ambiguity a monster for the two decades of sexual abuse
and rape of underage girls, yeah, at the very same time,
this same man was able to communicate seriously with people
who were close to heads of state, people who were
actively soliciting or receiving information from him.
Speaker 1: They were taking his insights seriously.
Speaker 3: They were taking him seriously. That level of operational duality
is just it's staggering. It confirms that the lines between
high criminality and high politics were just completely dissolved in
Epstein's world.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's get into the most specific and I think
the most stunning detail that illustrates this trafficking of information
to major forigm powers.
Speaker 3: We have to the most shocking revelation in these emails
when it comes to this information trade is the claim
that Epstein was offering up what he called insight into
Donald Trump to the Russians to Putin's Okay.
Speaker 1: Let's just pause on that for a second, really unpack
what that means. Yeah, if Epstein, an American citizen, was
claiming to be in a position to sell information about
a very high profile US figure who would later become
president to intermediaries who are close to the head of
a hostile foreign state, what kind of insight are we
even talking about.
Speaker 3: Here, Well, it's not going to be something you can
read in the news, right This insight would almost certainly
be highly sensitive, personalized information. We're talking about financial vulnerabilities,
deep seated personal weaknesses, details about his social network, or
knowledge of past activities that could be used to compromise him.
Speaker 1: Classic compromise.
Speaker 3: It's classic comprom at the very fact that he was
positioning himself as a provider of that kind of information
to Russian interests.
Speaker 2: It just demonstrates a terrifying scope.
Speaker 1: He wasn't just leveraging people from money or status. He
was playing the geopolitical game of espionage and influence pedaling.
Speaker 3: And think about what that says about the intermediaries he
was dealing with. This suggests a formal or at least
a semi formal channel. This isn't just a casual chat
at a party. No, to be offering up insight to
the Russians. To putin that means he had established channels
into those circles. He had access to people who valued
this very specific type of high leverage information.
Speaker 1: Which requires a level of trust and access and perceive
reliability that goes way beyond normal social networking.
Speaker 3: He was effectively running his own shadow intelligence service and
it was all based on sexual exploitation and coercion.
Speaker 1: The calculated nature of it all, Yeah, it means he
was interested in control, in disruption, not just status. The
leverage he must have gained by collecting secrets on figures
like Trump and then selling them to hostile actors it
must have been immense. It would have given him a
degree of protection or influence that very few criminals ever achieved.
Speaker 3: And it speaks directly to that structural vulnerability of elite
power we were talking about. If you are leveraging compromised
information about major US figures and feeding it to high
level Russian contacts, your operation is no longer just a
Manhattan or Palm Beach problem.
Speaker 1: No, it's a matter of international security.
Speaker 3: It's a matter of international security. The criminal world of
abuse and the world of high politics. For Epstein, they
weren't separate things. They were perfectly fused. Through the collection
and the weaponization of secrets. He really was a master
manipulator of geopolitical data.
Speaker 1: That geopolitical scope is it's just a defining feature of
this email trove. But the documents also managed to bring
the focus right back down to the ground, to the
immediate criminal infrastructure.
Speaker 3: Yes, fulfilling that second investigative of jective, finding new names
and evidence of complicity.
Speaker 1: And this is where the files are just invaluable for investigators.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, the emails did provide evidence pointing toward possible complicity
involving some of the statements that he made and some
of the emails to individuals, and crucially, Barry Levine noted
that there were new names in some of the emails
that I think investigators need to look at.
Speaker 1: These are the threads, the threads that could lead to
new prosecutions. It could be And was there one name
or maybe a type of enabler that really stood out,
something that demonstrates the mechanism Epstein used to get his victims.
Speaker 3: Yes, the spotlight landed firmly on a modeling agent.
Speaker 1: I'm mouthing it.
Speaker 3: And the analysis of this person is it's deeply disturbing
because it immediately draws a parallel to the criminal infrastructure
we already knew about. We know about Jean mc brunel, right,
he's been linked to bringing underage girls from overseas to
Epstein for abuse, while this newly uncovered modeling agent, they
appeared to be operating within a very similar systemic framework.
Speaker 1: The modeling industry has for a long time been seen
as a high risk environment for this kind of exploitation.
It acts as this like seemingly legitimate funnel for introducing young,
often very vulnerable girls into these elite circles.
Speaker 2: It's the perfect cover.
Speaker 1: So if this new agent followed a similar blueprint to Brunel,
what does that suggest about their specific role in the operation.
Speaker 3: It suggests they were an access gatekeeper. And these agents
are so crucial because they normalize the whole situation. They
provide the cover of legitimacy. It's a casting call, a
career opportunity, and that masks the real exploitative intent.
Speaker 1: They handle the logistics.
Speaker 3: They handle the logistics of transport, of introduction, of vetting.
They make sure that only the desired types of victims,
often the ones who are aspirational and easily coerced, entered
the orbit of Epstein's homes in New York or Palm Beach.
Speaker 1: And this connection to the modeling agent, it introduces a
really complex layer to all of this because it pies
back to Epstein's very high profile former associate, Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: Through a shared facilitator. And this is where that overlap
becomes just incredibly stark. The specific modeling agent that investigators
now need to look at, the one who apparently provided
young models for Jeffrey Epstein, also provided young models for
Donald Trump's modeling agency back when.
Speaker 2: You ran it.
Speaker 1: Wow. Okay, so this is a detail that just can't
be accidental. It reveals the shared ecosystem they were both
operating in.
Speaker 3: It does and we have to be extremely careful here
to maintain the strict neutrality that the Sork material demands.
The analysis is about the system of access. It's not
necessarily about implicating the agency itself.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's a very important distinction.
Speaker 2: It's critical.
Speaker 3: Lavine's analysis explicitly states, and I'm quoting here, it's not
to say that there was wrongdoing on the part of
Trump's modeling agency.
Speaker 1: So we are not asserting criminal activity on one side.
Speaker 3: No, the significance lies entirely in how both Epstein and
Trump were moving in the same circle with enablers for
both of their agencies.
Speaker 1: So they relied on the same professional class of people,
of facilitators exactly. But if a facilitator is willing to
provide young vulnerable women to a known criminal enterprise like Epstein's,
it raises serious questions about the ethical standards they were
applying when they were servicing other more legitimate clients.
Speaker 3: Well, of course, it demonstrates a systemic failure within these
elite circles to vet the people who manage the flow
of young talent into their world.
Speaker 1: So what of this is that it basically defines this
shadow zone of complicity. It shows how the same people
these agents exist in this morally gray area. They're servicing legitimate,
high profile businesses while at the same time they're feeding
a deeply criminal network. The worlds are intertwined through these facilitators.
Speaker 3: And for investigators, this shared contact list it's a map.
It shows where the legal enterprise ends and the criminal
one begins, but it also shows just how culuse they
operate to each other.
Speaker 1: It makes it almost impossible to truly separate legitimate high
society socializing from systemic criminal exploitation, because if the gatekeepers
and the facilitators are the same people.
Speaker 3: Then the networks are effectively merged. It highlights this critical
vulnerability where the people who feed legitimate businesses also have
access to a vulnerable pipeline that can be hijacked for
criminal purposes.
Speaker 1: And considering that Epstein and Trump had this deep history,
which included a massive falling out, it's not really surprising
that they would have relied on the same types of enablers.
Speaker 3: No, they were operating the same professional and social spheres
in New York and Florida. These shared contacts just reinforce
how close they were historically before that enormous acrimony.
Speaker 1: Set in which brings us directly to that relationship, the
decades long, very complex relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump,
a relationship that these new emails put under a microscope,
especially when you look at them alongside the existing.
Speaker 3: Right and to just kind of set the stage for you.
The sources reference commentary from Michael Wolfe, the.
Speaker 1: Author yeah known for his reporting on Trump.
Speaker 3: Exactly, and wolf described this as a deep relationship where
they knew everything about each other.
Speaker 1: Knew everything about each other, that's intent.
Speaker 3: It is a deep relationship that spanned more than a decade,
and it all existed within that very exclusive social world
of the New York and Palm Beach elite.
Speaker 2: This was so far beyond a casual acquaintance.
Speaker 3: This was a serious shared history built on proximity and
shared interests.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, the documents show they were operating in sync for
most of the nineteen nineties and into the early two thousands.
The sources detail their activities. They partied together, they entertained
women together.
Speaker 3: Primarily at places like Marlago around Palm Beach and then
various spots in New York City.
Speaker 1: And Michael Wolfe's commentary was very specific about the foundation
of that friendship, wasn't it their mutual obsession with women
girls' models.
Speaker 3: That shared obsession seems to be the context for all
of their social interaction. That shared focus is the critical backdrop.
It defines the social arena where their relationship really flourished.
Speaker 1: But then we have to talk about the ending.
Speaker 3: We do that intense relationship, it just stopped abruptly, and
the sources note that they fell out with enormous acrimony.
Speaker 1: Enormous acrimony. That's really powerful language. It applies a huge,
dramatic falling out over something very significant, not just you know,
a slow fizzle.
Speaker 2: It does.
Speaker 1: So what are the likely reasons, based on the context
of their relationship and Epstein's whole operation, what could generate
that level of bitterness?
Speaker 3: Well, given their personalities and the nature of Epstein's secrets,
you can imagine.
Speaker 2: A few possibilities. First, you know, financial or real estate disputes.
Speaker 3: They were business rivals, after all, ego could have led
to some spectacular failure on a joint mentor Second, maybe
rivalry over social access as Epstein tried to climb higher
and hire on the world stage. Their egos could have
c gosh violently over who commanded more influence. But the
most likely and maybe the most frightening reason it centers
on risk and exposure.
Speaker 1: The fear of being implicated. As Epstein's predatory behavior became
more risky, more visible, a figure like Trump, who was
already thinking about a broader political future, might have realized
he needed to create some distance, a lot of distance exactly.
Speaker 3: The acrimony could have come from an attempt by one
or the other to seize information or leverage from the
relationship before making that final, definitive break.
Speaker 1: In that world of power brokers, a falling out is
rarely a clean break, is it. It's usually a calculated
move to reduce future risk almost always.
Speaker 3: And this background, this intense closeness, followed by this intense hatred,
it makes the most stunning revelation from the emails all
the more potent.
Speaker 1: The revelation being that central unresolved question, the crux of
the startling news that the emails introduce.
Speaker 3: Yes, this is the new claim that absolutely demands investigation.
Jeffrey Epstein a allegedly claim in the emails that Donald
Trump knew about him and the women.
Speaker 1: That is the ultimate act of weaponizing secrets, isn't it
even from beyond the grave. If that claim has any
weight at all, it changes the entire ethical and legal
landscape around their separation. It forces the public and investigators
to confront that relationship directly.
Speaker 3: And this claim immediately throws up three critical questions, questions
that investigators and legal experts.
Speaker 2: Are now grappling with.
Speaker 1: Okay, what are they?
Speaker 2: First?
Speaker 3: Did Donald Trump truly know about Epstein's conduct, and specifically
his alleged criminal conduct involving minors right? Second, if he
did know, when exactly did he find that out? When
did that knowledge come to them?
Speaker 1: And the third one, this is the massive legal ordle I.
Speaker 3: Imagine this is it did he do anything to report
that information to the authorities?
Speaker 1: That question of reporting, that's where the legal consequences could
become just incredibly severe. If you have knowledge of serious
criminal conduct and you withhold it, especially as somewhat of
high stature, the implications are immense. You're talking about potential
charges like misapprision of a felony or accessory after the fact.
Speaker 3: They are huge implications. But and this is a critical
butt that the source itself demands we inject. Here, we
are dealing with a claim made by Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 1: A man who, as we've established, was a master trafficker
in secrets and leverage.
Speaker 3: And a man who split with Trump with enormous acrimony.
Speaker 1: So we have to approach this with a healthy dose
of skepticism. We have to understand that this claim could
be a calculated post morte maneuver to inflict maximum damage
on an old enemy.
Speaker 3: You have to how to investigators separate malice from truth
in a context like this. It requires meticulous, painstaking corroberation.
You cannot just take Epstein's word for it.
Speaker 1: And the central difficulty, which the source confirms, is the
ambiguity of that one word knowing exactly.
Speaker 3: The source confirms there is no clarity yet on that question,
no clarity on what knowing means, what knowing represents, and
what knowing might portend as this goes.
Speaker 1: Forward, that ambiguity is the legal battlefield. Yeah, did he
know in the social sense? Like Epstein was a known scoundrel,
He slept with a lot of women in models. He's
generally scandalous, that's one thing. Or did he possess concrete,
undeniable knowledge of specific alleged underage abuse. That legal distinction
between social knowledge and actionable criminal knowledge. Yeah, that's the
key hurdle that lawyers will spend years and millions of
dollars trying to parse, and that.
Speaker 3: Gray area is a major ongoing consequence of this email release.
The emails introduce the allocation this possibility of criminal knowledge,
but they don't have the corresponding evidence to immediately clarify
the nature.
Speaker 1: Of that knowledge, so just forces a continued investigation.
Speaker 3: It does, and given the context of their bitter feud,
Epstein's final act of leverage may have been to leave
behind a claim so damaging and yet so ambiguous that
it which is perpetually cast a shadow over his former associate.
Speaker 1: It transforms these documents from just correspondence into carefully placed,
I don't know, evidentiary landmines. The shadow boxing match, built
on secrets and animosity, just continues long after Epstein's death,
using his own archives as a weapon against the very
network he once cultivated.
Speaker 2: It's incredible when you think about it.
Speaker 1: So this deep dive into the source material it has
been I think profoundly revealing. If we try to synthesize
the most critical threads for you, the listener, we've really
moved beyond the image of Epstein as just some wealthy predator.
We see him instead as this calculating criminal whose whole
operation was built on information trafficking, on selling secrets, including
secrets about powerful US figures like Trump, to people close
to foreign leaders like Putin.
Speaker 3: And we've also detailed the systemic nature of the complicity.
We've shown how that shared reliance on enablers like that
modeling agent mentioned and the emails created this necessary overlap
between the supposedly legitimate business worlds of high profile figures
and the deeply criminal enterprise of Epstein.
Speaker 1: And that overlap is the absolute key to understanding how
he got away with it for so long it is.
And then finally we grappled with that lingering shadow over
his former associates, specifically that deep acrimonious Trump connection and
the enormous unresolved ethical and legal ambiguity around Epstein's claim
what did knowing truly mean in the eyes of the
law and in the context of their bitter feud.
Speaker 3: The emails Ultimately they just confirmed the profound reach and
the calculating, almost geopolitical nature of Epstein's operation. They pain
him not merely as a monster, but as this unique
and powerful source of compromised intelligence, someone who used sexual
coercion as the means to acquire leverage over global elites.
Speaker 1: His enterprise was fundamentally about power, blackmail, and the weaponization
of human weakness.
Speaker 2: That's it in a nutshell.
Speaker 1: So here is the final provocative thought we want to
leave you with. Ah, It's one that expends beyond the
specific names we've mentioned in these sources. If a network
that was built entirely on coercion, on sexual abuse and
on crime, if that network can successfully establish and maintain
connections to people who are close to both US and
Russian heads of state, what does that imply about the
inherent structural vulnerabilities of elite power circles globally?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 3: If the criminal world and the world of high politics
rely on the very same facilitators, and if the most
powerful people on the planet can be compromised and leveraged
by secrets that were gathered through sexual exploitation, then how
small truly is the distance between the criminal world and
the world of high politics?
Speaker 1: And who else is out there trafficking in secrets today
using methods we haven't even uncovered.
Speaker 3: Yet that vulnerability, that structural compromise, that's the real lasting
damage of the Epstein affair. It shows just how easily
the highest echelons of global power can be coroded by
what looks like localized criminal activity.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us on this extensive
deep dive into the source material.
Speaker 3: We really appreciate your time and your engagement with what
is obviously a very difficult subject.
Speaker 1: We look forward to analyzing the next round of revelations
with you soon