Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Epstein Chronicles. A couple of days ago, we were talking
a little bit about Leon Black and how he was
supposed to be deposed as part of the Bank of
America lawsuit filed by the Epstein survivors. Well as predicted,
Bank of America has entered into a settlement with the
Epstein survivors, So that also means that Leon Black obviously
is not going to be deposed, and honestly, I doubt
that we're ever gonna get Leon Black under oath. Talking
about Jeffrey Epstein, you know that Congress isn't going to
do it. And anytime there's a lawsuit that pops up
that has to do with Leon Black, he always finds
an exit because he has a big bank account. I mean,
he paid sixty two million down in the USVII to
get out of that trouble. He also paid guselle Ganieva
a king's ransom during their dispute. So it's not like
Leon Black is against spending a bunch of money to
try and get out from underneath the shadow of Jeffrey Epstein.
The problem for Leon Black, though, is there's no escape.
Maybe with legacy media, maybe with people that want this
to go away, But when it comes to people who
know the story, who know the people that were truly
involved and breaking news, it's not Ted Waite. Why Congress
is wasting their time opposing Ted Waite, I'll never understand,
especially considering they've never even spoken to Leon Black. Have
you guys brought in Adriana Ross or Leslie Groff? But sure,
let's talk to Ted Waite. But considering the way that
the Congressional Committee has conducted itself, is anybody surprised that
they're trying to waste time and bring in Ted Waite
instead of somebody of consequence. How about you guys talk
to Nicholas tartag leone put him under oath, Or how
about the OIG investigators that investigated what happened in that
jail cell. Why don't you guys talk about the NPA. Well,
the reason is they're not trying to get to the
bottom of what happened. They're trying to placate you. They
want you to focus on other things, certainly not this.
And as far as Bank of America is concerned, the
last thing they want to do is have some drawn
out lawsuit where they end up just settling like JP
Morgan anyway, So they took a look at the allegations,
they took a look at the paperwork, and they were like,
you know what, why don't we just settle here? And honestly,
that's in their best interest because if this got to discovery,
if it got to a point where those depositions started
coming in, it could have got real bad for Bank
of America real quick. And I think Bank of America
saw the writing on the wall, considering the lawsuits that
have been filed previously against the financial sector and settled
for a gigantic amount of money. So Bank of America
was very aware of that, and when they went into this,
that was probably the goal, right see what they had
get the initial you know, back and forth discovery process going,
and once they saw the evidence or the proposed evidence,
they decided that it's in their best interest just to
cut their losses here and settle up. And if I
was an investor at Bank of America, I'd be happy
about that. This article was published by ABC News and
the headline Bank of America reaches proposed non binding settlement
in pseuit alledging it aided Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. This article
was authored by Peter Charlembeau and James Hill. Bank of
America has reached a proposed, non binding settlement in a
lawsuit that alleged that the bank helped facilitate Jeffrey Epstein's
trafficking operation. According to court records, the proposed class action compliant,
filed in October of twenty twenty five, alleged that Bank
of America knowingly provided the financial support and the veneer
of institutional legitimacy to Abstein and ignored suspicious transactions by
the late disgraced financier. And look, there's a paper trail
for all of that, and that's why you see the
bank so willing to settle. Don't think for a minute
that Bank of America doesn't have the best lawyers, that
they don't have a legal team filled with high priced
lawyers and hotshots. And if they could have found any
way out of the settlement, right, anyway out of the suit,
that's what they would have done. A notice on the
case docket said the lawyers for the bank and the
victims reached a settlement and principle, the terms of the
settlement were not immediately disclosed and would need to be
approved by a federal judge. US District Judge Jed Raykoff
had previously scheduled the case to go to trial on
May eleventh. Well, being a bit familiar with Judge Rakoff,
my guess is he's going to approve this and let
it go through. I think it's in the best interest
of the court obviously, if he can have both parties
come to the table and find a middle ground, that's
obviously the goal. So I think Judge Rakoff is going
to okay this deal, and we should see this settlement
kept moving relatively quickly. A court hearing to consider the
settlement proposal is scheduled for April second in federal court
in New York, according to the docket. Bank of America
declined to comment on the proposed settlement. To ABC News,
an attorney for the victims called the proposed settlement one
more step on the road to much deserve justice. Well, look,
I agree, right, there's no doubt that there's really no
other avenue for the abused and the aggrieved to get
compensation here. Nobody's going to go to prison, so all
that's left is making it a financial burden on these people,
and I know that's not what any of us want,
but unfortunately that's the way the system set up. If
you're rich enough, you can buy your way out of
just about anything. The women entrapped and abused by Jeffrey
Epstein and Glenn Maxwell started a monumental reckoning with their
brave voices and fearlessness. The road to justice for these
women has been long and trying, Attorney Cigarett McCauley said
in a statement, and I look back to where this
started seven years ago and where it is today, and
I'm kind of blown away. Honestly. The amount of progress
that's been made as far as making people aware of
what's going on is monumental. Now, of course we all
want those arrests, we all want justice, but I think
one of the first steps toward that occurring is more
people being aware of what went on and more people
understanding that this most certainly is not some conspiracy theory.
Though the terms of the settlement are known, a proposed
resolution of the case would likely scuttle an upcoming deposition
of Apollo Global Management co founder Leon Black, who was
scheduled to sit for questioning on March twenty six. Black
resigned from his role at Apollo in twenty twenty one
after an inquiry into his relationship with Epstein, which found
that Black paid Epstein one hundred and fifty eight million
dollars for tax and a state planning advice. And I
remember when the push was on to get Leon Black out.
That was a concerted effort by a lot of people.
And the same goes for Glenn Dubin, the same goes
for Les Wexner, and also the beginning of the end
for Prince Andrew. All of them were sacked due to
their nonsense with Epstein during the initial investigation, after Epstein
was arrested and certainly after he died. So the people
that you see stepping down now due to their ties
to Epstein is just a continuation from what was going
on back in twenty nineteen all the way through twenty
twenty two or so. And when Leon Black was first
called on the carpet, it was a battle, right, he
wasn't going to go down without a fight. But again
the evidence is abundant, and Leon Black at Apollo, they
understood that Leon Black had to step down. Now, does
that mean that Leon Black had nothing to do with
the company that he wasn't still you know, in the shadows,
of course not. But to act like Leon Black, as
somebody knew in this story is absolutely insane. This man
has been in the center of what Epstein was up
to for a long ass time, and whether you believe
the trafficking allegations or not, I have a hard time
believing anybody thinks that Leon Black was giving Jeffrey Epstein
one hundred and fifty eight million dollars for tax advice.
In a statement from January, Black's attorney said his client
had no awareness of Epstein's criminal activity and there is
absolutely no truth to any of the alley against mister Black.
The lawsuit against Bank of America alleged that those payments
from Black and other transactions by Epstein should have raised
concern by the bank, which fell to alert law enforcement
as to Epstein's crimes before it was far too late. Well,
that's the problem when you don't file the stars. If
you would have filed the suspicious activity reports, you would
have to worry you'd be covered. You did your job,
You filed the stars, and the government chose to ignore them.
But as the financial institution, if you didn't do that.
If you didn't file those stars, you're now responsible. It's
on you. And obviously a Bank of America and all
of these banks that were involved were way more interested
in making money than protecting anybody. Epstein committed these crimes
by means of not only his own extraordinary wealth and power,
but through access to funding and financial support from both
individuals and institution, including Bank of America. Egregiously, Bank of
America had a plethora of information regarding Epstein's sex trafficking operation,
but shose profit over protecting victims. The lawsuit alleged, well,
that's exactly what they did. I don't even think that's
an allegation. Honestly, does anyone out there really believe that
the bank had no idea that these transactions were suspicious
and that they should have been flagged and notated. Of
course they knew, but again they didn't care. And now
it's going to cost them. But unfortunately, the damage is
already done and nobody's going to really be held to account.
It's going to cost them financially, but that's it. Bank
of America had unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the court to
dismiss the case. By arguing that the suit was based
on nothing more than allegations that it provided routine services
to customers who at the time had no known cannet
to Epstein's trafficking ring. Bank of America opposes trafficking in
all of its forms, but this suit attempts to radically
expand the liability for banks, holding them liable for providing
ordinary banking services to individuals one or more steps removed
from a trafficker. On November twenty twenty five, filing from
the bank's lawyer said, Meanwhile, they have no problem canceling
or closing your account if you're doing something that don't like,
shopping somewhere that don't like, donating somewhere that don't like.
But Jeffrey Epstein and his friends, Ah, come on, what
are you crazy. We can't miss out on that money.
We got to make sure that we're banking the beast.
And that's always been the story, right The financial sector
is going to do what the financial sector does, whether
it's Jeffrey Epstein, whether it's some god awful war, or
whether it's the next monster in waiting. One thing you
can count on is the involvement of the scoundrels in
the financial sector. All right, folks, that's gonna do it
for this one. All the information that goes with this
episode can be found in the description box.