WEBVTT 1 00:00:00.120 --> 00:00:02.879 What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the 2 00:00:02.879 --> 00:00:06.240 Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're picking up where we 3 00:00:06.320 --> 00:00:11.119 left off with Bill Barr and his deposition chairman, Comber 4 00:00:11.560 --> 00:00:15.119 General Barr. May I jump in for a couple of questions. 5 00:00:15.320 --> 00:00:18.399 Were you aware of the involvement of Hillary Clinton and 6 00:00:18.480 --> 00:00:24.399 the Clinton campaign in the Russia collusion investigation involving President Trump? Barr, 7 00:00:24.600 --> 00:00:27.719 to the extent it was determined by Durham, Yes, Durham 8 00:00:28.120 --> 00:00:31.359 was looking into that. Comer. Did you review documents that 9 00:00:31.480 --> 00:00:35.399 indicated the involvement of former Secretary Clinton in the Russia 10 00:00:35.439 --> 00:00:43.520 collusion investigation involving President Trump? Barr? Did I look at documents, Comer? Yes, Barr, yes, Comer, 11 00:00:43.719 --> 00:00:45.880 to the best of your recollection. Did you at any 12 00:00:45.920 --> 00:00:51.759 point attempted to classify items in the Russia collusion investigation? Barr? 13 00:00:52.000 --> 00:00:55.479 Some items to classified and some I opposed to classifying. 14 00:00:55.799 --> 00:00:59.240 Comber Okay. Were you aware of the involvement of President 15 00:00:59.280 --> 00:01:03.520 Obama or his officials in the Russia collusion investigation involving 16 00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:07.439 President Trump? Barr. I was aware of meetings held at 17 00:01:07.480 --> 00:01:11.319 the end of the Obama administration. They were described Comer. 18 00:01:11.599 --> 00:01:14.640 And did you review any documents, Barr. I think I 19 00:01:14.680 --> 00:01:17.120 saw a set of notes taken by an intelligence official, 20 00:01:17.159 --> 00:01:22.519 perhaps comer. Okay, all right, thank you sir. Question and 21 00:01:22.680 --> 00:01:25.519 much like disclaimer at the beginning of the Minority Hour, 22 00:01:25.760 --> 00:01:28.439 I might ask some similar questions this hour. But we're 23 00:01:28.480 --> 00:01:31.159 going to start back with mister Epstein's death and some 24 00:01:31.200 --> 00:01:35.040 of the irregularities within the jail. We talked about the 25 00:01:35.120 --> 00:01:39.120 missed institutional counts and observations, and the two guards two 26 00:01:39.159 --> 00:01:43.599 corrections officers Tovin Owll and Michael Thomas were eventually indicted 27 00:01:43.799 --> 00:01:47.159 for falsifying those records. Were you involved in that indictment? 28 00:01:48.319 --> 00:01:50.959 I was. I think it was passed by me. I 29 00:01:51.000 --> 00:01:53.239 think I was informed as to what they were going 30 00:01:53.280 --> 00:01:57.000 to do. Question. I think they eventually entered a plea 31 00:01:57.000 --> 00:02:01.359 agreement bar yep question, and the case was otherwise dropped. 32 00:02:01.439 --> 00:02:04.359 Were you involved in that at all, Bar, I think 33 00:02:04.400 --> 00:02:08.039 people described it to me, I think before it happened. Yeah. Question, 34 00:02:08.439 --> 00:02:11.360 But much like some of the Epstein investigation, you're not 35 00:02:11.520 --> 00:02:15.360 involved in the prosecutorial decisions on whether or not Bar 36 00:02:15.439 --> 00:02:19.439 cuts them off. Right question to take the case on 37 00:02:19.479 --> 00:02:23.039 the institutional counts. My understanding of these is that at 38 00:02:23.080 --> 00:02:26.960 set intervals corrections. Officers need to go through their area 39 00:02:27.039 --> 00:02:30.319 of responsibility and just do account of the inmates to 40 00:02:30.360 --> 00:02:33.240 make sure that everyone is accounted for. Is that a 41 00:02:33.240 --> 00:02:38.919 fair summary of that answer? The count process. Yes, and 42 00:02:38.960 --> 00:02:42.080 they report the counts, I think, is it? I forgot 43 00:02:42.080 --> 00:02:45.120 how frequently they report the counts, but they call in 44 00:02:45.159 --> 00:02:49.199 the counts. Question from the indictment, at least they were 45 00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:52.759 responsible for counts at four pm, ten pm, twelve am, 46 00:02:52.840 --> 00:02:56.080 three am, and five am. Does that sound right? Answer? 47 00:02:56.240 --> 00:02:59.560 Sounds right? Question? And then, to the best of your recollection, 48 00:03:00.159 --> 00:03:04.240 were these institutional accounts done by those officers? Answer? I 49 00:03:04.280 --> 00:03:06.520 can't remember if one of them was done, but they 50 00:03:06.599 --> 00:03:10.800 generally were not done. Question and then you testified earlier, 51 00:03:10.800 --> 00:03:14.599 but the officers falsified the records. Is that correct answer? Yes? 52 00:03:15.080 --> 00:03:18.639 Question Moving to the thirty minute rounds again, my understanding 53 00:03:18.639 --> 00:03:21.319 of the rounds or that they were directed by the 54 00:03:21.319 --> 00:03:24.479 psyche department and the medical department because mister Epstein was 55 00:03:24.479 --> 00:03:28.479 coming off suicide watch and coming off kind of the 56 00:03:28.520 --> 00:03:33.360 more enhanced observation. Is that correct answer? Yes, I'm not 57 00:03:33.439 --> 00:03:35.680 sure if it was. I think that's part of and 58 00:03:35.719 --> 00:03:39.680 parcel of this level of scrutiny question like the step 59 00:03:39.759 --> 00:03:44.800 down from suicide watch. Answer yes, question, and my understanding 60 00:03:44.840 --> 00:03:48.360 again is that they would have conducted this twice an hour, 61 00:03:48.719 --> 00:03:51.800 once the first thirty minutes, once in the second, at 62 00:03:51.800 --> 00:03:55.080 irregular intervals, and at least forty minutes apart. Does that 63 00:03:55.159 --> 00:04:00.319 sound right? Answer? Yes, question to your recollection and to 64 00:04:00.360 --> 00:04:03.560 my knowledge, yes, question, to the best of your recollection, 65 00:04:03.919 --> 00:04:07.879 were these thirty minute rounds done? Answer? I believe that's 66 00:04:07.879 --> 00:04:10.800 why they were prosecuted for not doing them and lying 67 00:04:10.840 --> 00:04:14.759 about it. Question and then to your recall the officers 68 00:04:14.759 --> 00:04:19.160 falsified the records. Answer yes, question, I believe you said it, 69 00:04:19.360 --> 00:04:22.160 and I know I have. But I want to ask directly, 70 00:04:22.360 --> 00:04:26.120 were those thirty minute rounds specific to mister Epstein? Answer? 71 00:04:26.399 --> 00:04:28.879 I believe they were specific to anyone who warrants that 72 00:04:29.000 --> 00:04:31.480 kind of level of watch. I don't know who else 73 00:04:31.519 --> 00:04:34.879 did in that shoe question, so that was my next question. 74 00:04:35.040 --> 00:04:37.639 Do you recall if anyone on L block required thirty 75 00:04:37.639 --> 00:04:41.240 minute observation or even in nine South? I don't know. 76 00:04:41.759 --> 00:04:45.040 Question there was I can introduce if you need me to. 77 00:04:45.360 --> 00:04:47.920 But there was a sign on the SACHU officer's desk 78 00:04:48.000 --> 00:04:51.680 that read mandatory rounds must be conducted every thirty minutes 79 00:04:51.720 --> 00:04:54.839 on Epstein, as per God and as per God, I'm 80 00:04:54.879 --> 00:04:57.680 assuming it was a joke for the warden or something. 81 00:04:58.120 --> 00:05:02.800 Answer right, question hearing about that sign? Answer after the fact? 82 00:05:03.319 --> 00:05:07.399 Question prior to your departure as attorney General? Answer I 83 00:05:07.439 --> 00:05:11.360 can't remember. Question and what do you recall any discussion 84 00:05:11.439 --> 00:05:14.439 regarding that sign? Answer? It may have been part of 85 00:05:14.439 --> 00:05:17.680 the case, in other words, that it was clear to 86 00:05:17.800 --> 00:05:20.720 them that it was a priority to conduct those rounds 87 00:05:20.839 --> 00:05:24.319 as to Epstein. Question part of the case against Noel 88 00:05:24.399 --> 00:05:28.600 and Thomas. Answer yes, question we've gone through all of 89 00:05:28.639 --> 00:05:32.720 the kind of major irregularities. After you learned of these, 90 00:05:32.800 --> 00:05:37.800 did you take any disciplinary action against anyone involved? Answer? 91 00:05:37.920 --> 00:05:40.800 It could be referred to as disciplinary. I think on 92 00:05:40.839 --> 00:05:43.079 the very day I was informed of his death, I 93 00:05:43.160 --> 00:05:46.519 started reaching out to find the old management of BOP 94 00:05:46.920 --> 00:05:49.839 that I was familiar with and had always considered to be, 95 00:05:49.920 --> 00:05:54.040 you know, fantastic managers of BOP. So I started lining 96 00:05:54.040 --> 00:05:56.319 them up because I intended to see if I could 97 00:05:56.360 --> 00:05:59.399 bring them in. And then within days, I think, maybe 98 00:05:59.480 --> 00:06:02.720 very quickly, I reassigned the warden and I replaced I 99 00:06:02.759 --> 00:06:05.680 think the following had the people come in to interview 100 00:06:05.959 --> 00:06:08.199 within a few days with the job, and then I 101 00:06:08.240 --> 00:06:10.480 think within a week I moved out the head of 102 00:06:10.519 --> 00:06:14.160 GOOP and put in new people. Question and to point 103 00:06:14.160 --> 00:06:17.720 in a new deputy BOP a director. Answer yes, both 104 00:06:17.720 --> 00:06:20.279 the top and the deputy. And that was all done 105 00:06:20.319 --> 00:06:23.120 within a week, and I left the other discipline up 106 00:06:23.160 --> 00:06:26.519 to them to meet out. Question they would be the 107 00:06:26.560 --> 00:06:29.839 ones that placed the two guards on leave? Answer I 108 00:06:29.879 --> 00:06:32.120 don't know. I think they were probably put on leave 109 00:06:32.199 --> 00:06:37.680 right away. Answer okay, but further discipline in figuring out 110 00:06:37.879 --> 00:06:40.720 you know, who was responsible for what oversight? But I 111 00:06:40.759 --> 00:06:43.480 think there was no question they admitted it right up 112 00:06:43.480 --> 00:06:48.720 front that they screwed up, as they said, question that 113 00:06:48.759 --> 00:06:51.680 they were asleep at the desk? Answer yeah, Question was 114 00:06:51.680 --> 00:06:54.839 there to your knowledge? Was there a larger investigation into 115 00:06:54.879 --> 00:06:58.480 whether or not these issues were systemic at MCC or 116 00:06:58.480 --> 00:07:02.560 if they were isolated to Epstein? Answer, I actually can't 117 00:07:02.560 --> 00:07:05.800 answer that authoritatively. I think BOP does a lot of 118 00:07:05.839 --> 00:07:09.240 investigations of the BOP and I think maybe their report 119 00:07:09.240 --> 00:07:12.639 on this incident says this was not new news. I mean, 120 00:07:12.680 --> 00:07:16.720 this is a problem. Question uh huh. Answer I think BOP, 121 00:07:16.920 --> 00:07:19.600 you know, has gone downhill in terms of its professional 122 00:07:19.639 --> 00:07:23.560 you know, its management structure and professionalism. Part of that 123 00:07:23.639 --> 00:07:26.319 is the nature of the job and especially in big cities, 124 00:07:26.439 --> 00:07:28.600 the pay rate and so forth, it's hard to get 125 00:07:28.639 --> 00:07:34.160 good people. Question mcc I believe is now closed. Answer. 126 00:07:34.199 --> 00:07:36.879 I think it was closed after I left. Yeah, question 127 00:07:37.240 --> 00:07:40.959 it was after you left. Answer Well, I stopped new 128 00:07:41.040 --> 00:07:43.560 prisoners from going in. I believe that's what I did, 129 00:07:43.759 --> 00:07:47.680 and I think I redirected them to Brooklyn, MDC. Question. 130 00:07:47.759 --> 00:07:50.199 Thank you. I'm going to ask a few questions about 131 00:07:50.240 --> 00:07:53.839 the individual cases, similar to what my colleagues asked, and 132 00:07:53.920 --> 00:07:56.839 I might have some follow ups based off those questions. 133 00:07:57.360 --> 00:07:59.480 You testified a little bit, you know, I want to 134 00:07:59.519 --> 00:08:01.879 quote it as as as possible that you wanted to 135 00:08:01.920 --> 00:08:04.839 let investigators let the chips fall where they may, in 136 00:08:04.879 --> 00:08:08.120 other words, not involve yourself too heavily. In the twenty 137 00:08:08.199 --> 00:08:15.000 nineteen prosecution answer investigation question investigation in general. And then 138 00:08:15.040 --> 00:08:16.680 you said that I want to get it right, that 139 00:08:16.720 --> 00:08:20.120 it's DOJ policy to bring to the Attorney General's attention 140 00:08:20.439 --> 00:08:23.279 if a prominent person was going to be the subject 141 00:08:23.279 --> 00:08:26.079 of an investigation. Is that a fair summary of what 142 00:08:26.120 --> 00:08:31.160 the policy is. Answer, Yes, it's called urgent reports. I 143 00:08:31.199 --> 00:08:35.440 think they have to file an urgent report. Question did 144 00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:37.879 the Southern District of New York ever file an urgent 145 00:08:37.919 --> 00:08:41.559 report regarding the Epstein case? Answer? I can't remember. I 146 00:08:41.559 --> 00:08:44.600 don't remember what they did, but you know, certainly I 147 00:08:44.639 --> 00:08:47.279 was never informed by them that they were focused. You 148 00:08:47.320 --> 00:08:50.000 know that they believed they had a predicate to actually 149 00:08:50.039 --> 00:08:54.240 investigate the individual. Question and pardon me, I don't know. 150 00:08:54.720 --> 00:08:58.600 Answer other than Maxwell and Epstein. Question, I don't know 151 00:08:58.679 --> 00:09:02.039 the actual like formal desseigs nations, But they wouldn't have to. 152 00:09:02.320 --> 00:09:04.879 Would they have to issue a formal report if they 153 00:09:04.919 --> 00:09:07.679 wanted to interview someone as a witness that was a 154 00:09:07.679 --> 00:09:11.279 prominent individual, or just if that prominent individual was going 155 00:09:11.320 --> 00:09:15.840 to become a suspect or a target in the investigation? Answer? 156 00:09:16.200 --> 00:09:18.519 I don't think it was that refined. I think they 157 00:09:18.559 --> 00:09:20.799 had to use their rule of common sense as to 158 00:09:20.840 --> 00:09:23.639 what would the national leadership of the department want to 159 00:09:23.679 --> 00:09:26.759 know about? And just interject real quick, you see what 160 00:09:26.840 --> 00:09:29.759 he's saying right here, right that the bosses have to know. 161 00:09:30.879 --> 00:09:34.039 So taking that and bringing it over to what happened 162 00:09:34.039 --> 00:09:38.519 with a Costa, what does it tell you question? Uh 163 00:09:38.600 --> 00:09:41.879 huh answer. And you know, if they decided, you know, 164 00:09:42.080 --> 00:09:45.200 had some predicate to actually pursue an individual, you know, 165 00:09:45.320 --> 00:09:48.159 moving into the potential area of a target, they would 166 00:09:48.240 --> 00:09:51.519 have to do an urgent report. Yeah. Question and to 167 00:09:51.600 --> 00:09:54.720 the best, like out of this list that the minority 168 00:09:54.799 --> 00:09:57.440 read to you, the one that you were called elevating witness, 169 00:09:57.480 --> 00:10:01.120 suspect or target was Prince Andrew. Answer, I don't know 170 00:10:01.159 --> 00:10:03.440 if he was a target, and you know, I guess, 171 00:10:03.440 --> 00:10:06.159 to my knowledge, he was at least a witness question 172 00:10:06.279 --> 00:10:09.200 Uh huh answer. I don't know if it went beyond that, 173 00:10:09.759 --> 00:10:12.000 but you know that's somebody who in real time I 174 00:10:12.080 --> 00:10:13.759 understood they were trying to get in the door to 175 00:10:13.879 --> 00:10:18.879 question question understanding again what you said you don't recall 176 00:10:18.919 --> 00:10:22.120 specific urgent reports being filed with you. Would that have 177 00:10:22.200 --> 00:10:25.879 been someone that met the criteria of a prominent person? Answer? 178 00:10:25.960 --> 00:10:29.679 In my mind? Question and I'll ask specifically to him, 179 00:10:29.840 --> 00:10:32.320 do you recall whether or not you got an urgent report? 180 00:10:32.879 --> 00:10:35.799 They're cut off by bar and it could affect foreign 181 00:10:35.840 --> 00:10:39.159 relations and so forth. It's a sensible rule. Now, is 182 00:10:39.200 --> 00:10:42.840 it always followed by US attorneys? No? There are many 183 00:10:42.919 --> 00:10:45.519 that's it. Not many, but there's sometimes the case where 184 00:10:45.519 --> 00:10:47.919 you don't get a report for something that you should 185 00:10:47.919 --> 00:10:51.360 have been and the SDNY is relatively well known for 186 00:10:51.399 --> 00:10:55.639 playing its cards very close to the vest. Question and again, 187 00:10:55.720 --> 00:10:57.960 to the best of your recollection, you never got an 188 00:10:58.039 --> 00:11:03.200 urgent report regarding Prince Andrew. Answer. I don't recall quite possibly, 189 00:11:03.679 --> 00:11:06.879 but I don't recall that. All right, folks, we're gonna 190 00:11:06.879 --> 00:11:09.039 wrap up right here, and in the next episode we're 191 00:11:09.039 --> 00:11:11.519 gonna pick up where we left off. All of the 192 00:11:11.559 --> 00:11:14.679 information that goes with this episode can be found in 193 00:11:14.759 --> 00:11:17.960 the description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome to another 194 00:11:18.000 --> 00:11:21.759 episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're gonna 195 00:11:21.759 --> 00:11:24.960 get right back to that Bill Barr deposition that he 196 00:11:25.039 --> 00:11:29.360 gave to Congress. Question and again, to the best of 197 00:11:29.399 --> 00:11:33.960 your recollection, you never got an urgent report regarding Prince Andrew. Answer. 198 00:11:34.080 --> 00:11:37.039 I don't recall, quite possibly, but I don't recall that. 199 00:11:37.279 --> 00:11:39.519 You know, an urgent report could also be done. I 200 00:11:39.519 --> 00:11:42.720 mean it's a judgment call. A US attorney can want 201 00:11:42.759 --> 00:11:45.679 to question somebody as sensitive as a member of the 202 00:11:45.759 --> 00:11:49.000 royal family, you know, at our closest ally, and they 203 00:11:49.039 --> 00:11:52.279 might file an urgent report saying I want to you 204 00:11:52.320 --> 00:11:55.159 know that we're going to be pursuing this guy as 205 00:11:55.200 --> 00:11:58.759 a witness, and it's going to make the papers. Question, 206 00:11:59.080 --> 00:12:02.240 so that's definitely someone that there should have been an 207 00:12:02.360 --> 00:12:06.960 urgent report filed. Answer. Yeah, question now, whether it made 208 00:12:07.000 --> 00:12:11.399 it to your bar cuts her off or him off? Well, no, 209 00:12:11.600 --> 00:12:14.360 I mean they can say he is just a witness. 210 00:12:15.039 --> 00:12:17.159 But the fact, I think one of the reasons when 211 00:12:17.200 --> 00:12:19.200 you go and hold a press conference and you attack 212 00:12:19.279 --> 00:12:21.320 him in front of the mansion and so forth, that 213 00:12:21.600 --> 00:12:24.559 is actually something that the US Attorney should have run 214 00:12:24.600 --> 00:12:26.919 by me. Not that I would have opposed it, but 215 00:12:27.639 --> 00:12:30.039 I would like to know about it. And again, red 216 00:12:30.080 --> 00:12:32.679 flags for everybody out there. So you mean to tell 217 00:12:32.720 --> 00:12:35.080 me the Attorney General wants to know if you want 218 00:12:35.120 --> 00:12:37.279 to speak to a royal as a witness. But they 219 00:12:37.279 --> 00:12:40.120 have nothing to do with the deal that Jeffrey Epstein 220 00:12:40.360 --> 00:12:44.240 received from the Justice Department. Yeah, okay, sure, who is 221 00:12:44.279 --> 00:12:51.200 buying that answer? I don't think he told me, but 222 00:12:51.360 --> 00:12:54.600 I wasn't mad at him for the substance question. This 223 00:12:54.759 --> 00:12:58.399 is potentially a poorly worded question, but so based off 224 00:12:58.440 --> 00:13:02.240 that your recollection, is it possible that they just didn't 225 00:13:02.240 --> 00:13:06.559 inform you that there were other prominent people under investigation 226 00:13:06.960 --> 00:13:11.320 or as witnesses. Answer. I think it's possible that the 227 00:13:11.399 --> 00:13:14.240 SDNY did not inform me, you know, how deep they 228 00:13:14.279 --> 00:13:18.080 were in the investigation of particular individuals, that would not 229 00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:21.200 surprise me. By the same token, I feel that my 230 00:13:21.320 --> 00:13:24.320 view of that office and the people involved would be 231 00:13:24.399 --> 00:13:27.840 that if they had any evidence establishing a crime, they 232 00:13:27.879 --> 00:13:30.919 would pursue it as such. And I also feel, you know, 233 00:13:31.799 --> 00:13:33.919 it's sort of amazing after all these years, you know, 234 00:13:34.080 --> 00:13:36.879 going back to the nineties, when you had people reporting 235 00:13:36.919 --> 00:13:39.679 and the victims and a lot of speculation and people 236 00:13:39.759 --> 00:13:43.960 finding connections, I still have not heard no evidence has 237 00:13:44.000 --> 00:13:47.279 come out that would establish criminality for most of those individuals. 238 00:13:47.759 --> 00:13:51.200 Question uh huh, answer that have been named, And I 239 00:13:51.279 --> 00:13:53.720 think it would come out if there was any feeling 240 00:13:54.000 --> 00:13:57.360 that within the government on either side that someone was 241 00:13:57.399 --> 00:14:00.440 covering it up, I think it would get out. I mean, 242 00:14:00.559 --> 00:14:03.759 SDNY and New York is well known as being home 243 00:14:04.039 --> 00:14:09.039 of many many a leak on investigation. So question, So, 244 00:14:09.240 --> 00:14:12.840 in your experience, you have no doubt if SDNY prosecutors 245 00:14:12.840 --> 00:14:14.960 saw evidence of a crime, they would have followed that 246 00:14:15.000 --> 00:14:17.960 evidence and if it led to an indictment, they would 247 00:14:18.000 --> 00:14:20.360 have indicted. And if it led to a conviction, they 248 00:14:20.360 --> 00:14:22.600 would have followed the facts where they led. Is that 249 00:14:22.679 --> 00:14:26.600 fair answer? Yes, for that group. I also feel you 250 00:14:26.639 --> 00:14:29.519 know they would have done the same for Clinton. I 251 00:14:29.559 --> 00:14:34.679 believe remember this stuff also went on under President Biden's administration, 252 00:14:35.080 --> 00:14:38.039 and they were looking for something to bring against President Trump. 253 00:14:38.519 --> 00:14:41.279 And this was if they had any evidence, this would 254 00:14:41.279 --> 00:14:44.799 have been low hanging fruit. I was never informed of 255 00:14:44.840 --> 00:14:47.879 the evidence, and I'm skeptical that there is any. Do 256 00:14:47.919 --> 00:14:50.799 you recall when I'm more the SDNY is more formal 257 00:14:50.840 --> 00:14:54.799 investigation and Depstein began? Answer no, I mean I may 258 00:14:54.840 --> 00:14:58.519 have at the time, I just don't remember. Question likely 259 00:14:58.559 --> 00:15:02.240 prior to you becoming attorney general? Answer not necessarily, but 260 00:15:02.399 --> 00:15:06.519 quite possibly. Question Okay, do you recall generally when you 261 00:15:06.559 --> 00:15:10.399 became aware of the ongoing investigation? Answer no, I don't. 262 00:15:10.960 --> 00:15:13.720 I obviously became aware of it around the time of 263 00:15:13.759 --> 00:15:16.399 his arrest. It could have been shortly before his arrest. 264 00:15:16.440 --> 00:15:19.120 I mean, usually we would be told of an arrest 265 00:15:19.200 --> 00:15:23.279 like that going down in Teeterborough. Question a more high 266 00:15:23.279 --> 00:15:28.200 profile arrest the moment someone lands in an airport. Answer yes. 267 00:15:28.679 --> 00:15:31.279 Question in cases like this one will stick with the 268 00:15:31.320 --> 00:15:35.559 high profile cases. Do any of the kind of investigatory 269 00:15:35.639 --> 00:15:39.000 decisions rise to the Attorney General's office, whether or not 270 00:15:39.080 --> 00:15:41.919 to issue a search warrant, or apply for a search warrant, 271 00:15:42.080 --> 00:15:44.960 or apply for a subpoena? Would any of that have 272 00:15:45.039 --> 00:15:49.639 arisen from your office? Answer? I wouldn't say it would 273 00:15:49.639 --> 00:15:53.759 be very unusual for it, but there could be unusual circumstances, 274 00:15:53.840 --> 00:15:56.480 like you're going to search a very sensitive area. You 275 00:15:56.519 --> 00:15:59.840 know that's going to cause all kinds of hubbub. Question. 276 00:16:00.279 --> 00:16:02.159 I believe it was a member of Congress a couple 277 00:16:02.200 --> 00:16:05.600 of years ago suggested that you personally approve the search 278 00:16:05.600 --> 00:16:09.240 warrant for Epstein's house in New York, his townhouse in 279 00:16:09.240 --> 00:16:13.440 New York. Do you recall answer? Did someone say that question? 280 00:16:13.519 --> 00:16:18.080 I believe so. Answer. I don't recall that question, But 281 00:16:18.320 --> 00:16:21.559 that and the questions cut off by bar that's not 282 00:16:21.600 --> 00:16:25.039 the kind of thing I would have thought was particularly needed. 283 00:16:25.279 --> 00:16:29.600 You know, you needed my approval for question kind of 284 00:16:29.759 --> 00:16:32.399 just run of the mill search warrant answer of somebody 285 00:16:32.440 --> 00:16:36.519 who's already been arrested. Question, yeah, O Callahan. Run of 286 00:16:36.519 --> 00:16:40.080 the mill is your term? Redacted. Yeah, like not outside 287 00:16:40.080 --> 00:16:43.440 the ordinary practice of an investigation. I believe would be 288 00:16:44.360 --> 00:16:47.480 cut off by bar I would have considered the normal 289 00:16:49.320 --> 00:16:52.879 question Okay, during the course of the investigation, did you 290 00:16:52.919 --> 00:16:56.840 receive any regular briefings from the FBI or the SDNY 291 00:16:57.879 --> 00:17:02.240 Answer during what? Question during the course of their investigation? 292 00:17:02.799 --> 00:17:09.279 Answer into question mister Epstein answer death or question No? Answer, Oh, 293 00:17:09.319 --> 00:17:13.279 you're talking about before you committed suicide? Question yes, sir, 294 00:17:13.680 --> 00:17:18.359 answer I don't recall any question. Would there normally be 295 00:17:18.480 --> 00:17:21.400 those kinds of briefings or updates fall to the head 296 00:17:21.400 --> 00:17:23.799 of the criminal division or would it be even lower 297 00:17:23.839 --> 00:17:28.079 than that? Answer the investigation itself. I think I'm not 298 00:17:28.119 --> 00:17:30.960 even sure it would get to main justice other than 299 00:17:31.000 --> 00:17:34.680 alerting us maybe that the investigation was going on. What 300 00:17:34.839 --> 00:17:39.920 particular actions wouldn't be regularly reported? Question? I don't want 301 00:17:39.920 --> 00:17:42.000 to get it wrong, but I believe you said that 302 00:17:42.079 --> 00:17:45.359 there were in regards to the non prosecution agreement out 303 00:17:45.359 --> 00:17:48.400 of the Southern District of Florida, that there were conversations 304 00:17:48.759 --> 00:17:52.559 about being careful that the twenty nineteen investigation did not 305 00:17:52.680 --> 00:17:56.480 run a foul of that. Did I summarize that correctly? Answer? 306 00:17:56.799 --> 00:18:01.880 I vaguely recall some discussion exactly when it occurred, about, 307 00:18:01.960 --> 00:18:05.079 you know, to the extent what charges can be brought 308 00:18:05.279 --> 00:18:07.880 that don't run a foul of that plea agreement. I 309 00:18:07.960 --> 00:18:11.480 remember some discussion. Question Do you recall any more of 310 00:18:11.480 --> 00:18:16.599 the content of the discussion? Answer no, question concerns that 311 00:18:16.640 --> 00:18:19.279 the plea agreement restricted the Southern District of New York. 312 00:18:19.599 --> 00:18:22.279 Answer no, I just think it was a question of 313 00:18:22.319 --> 00:18:26.519 everyone agreeing on what we had a good legal argument. 314 00:18:26.759 --> 00:18:31.440 Question and then answer we being the whole Department of Justice. Question. 315 00:18:32.160 --> 00:18:34.720 And then you were asked about the kind of specific 316 00:18:34.839 --> 00:18:37.720 on the seizure list that the DOJ released earlier this 317 00:18:37.839 --> 00:18:41.200 year from the FBI that had like picked up a laptop, 318 00:18:41.400 --> 00:18:43.880 but didn't say what was on the laptop. Did you 319 00:18:43.920 --> 00:18:47.160 recall ever reviewing any of the FBI's evidence in the 320 00:18:47.200 --> 00:18:52.920 Epstein criminal investigation answer before a suicide question, yes, sir, 321 00:18:53.440 --> 00:18:57.480 answer no question. Do you recall reviewing any of the 322 00:18:57.519 --> 00:19:01.839 evidence after his suicide? Answer just evidence relating to his 323 00:19:02.039 --> 00:19:04.960 you know, relating to his suicide. I don't recall reviewing 324 00:19:04.960 --> 00:19:09.319 evidence relating to charging Maxwell or anybody else. Question So 325 00:19:09.480 --> 00:19:13.319 no answer. I mean I was told in Maxwell's case 326 00:19:13.519 --> 00:19:15.279 when they got to the point that they were ready 327 00:19:15.319 --> 00:19:18.279 to indict. I believe I was told the substance, but 328 00:19:18.400 --> 00:19:22.319 I didn't review the evidence myself. Question applying to both 329 00:19:22.359 --> 00:19:26.599 mister Epstein and miss Maxwell. You reviewed for mister Epstein, 330 00:19:26.640 --> 00:19:31.039 you reviewed evidence surrounding his death. Answer, uh huh question, 331 00:19:32.279 --> 00:19:36.279 but not substantive criminal evidence regarding his investigation and prosecution. 332 00:19:36.759 --> 00:19:41.480 Is that correct? Answer? Right question? And then with miss Maxwell, 333 00:19:41.640 --> 00:19:44.720 you didn't review the underlying criminal evidence. You just got 334 00:19:44.759 --> 00:19:50.440 notified about appending indictment. Answer right question, Okay, answer, that's 335 00:19:50.480 --> 00:19:54.079 my best recollection question. I just wanted to make sure 336 00:19:54.119 --> 00:19:56.799 it was all in line. There. We've been back and 337 00:19:56.839 --> 00:19:59.640 forth a little bit. And on that note, I want 338 00:19:59.640 --> 00:20:01.960 to shift to the non prosecution agreement a little bit 339 00:20:02.279 --> 00:20:05.440 as in relation to both, kind of like the minority said, 340 00:20:05.799 --> 00:20:10.640 your experience generally with non prosecution agreements, but then a 341 00:20:10.680 --> 00:20:13.599 few questions about whether or not they had any impact. 342 00:20:13.680 --> 00:20:17.480 During your second tenure as the Attorney General, you were 343 00:20:17.519 --> 00:20:19.440 asked if you were aware of it at the time. 344 00:20:19.799 --> 00:20:22.200 I believe you said you were not aware of it 345 00:20:22.240 --> 00:20:26.160 in two thousand and seven. Answer. I became aware of 346 00:20:26.200 --> 00:20:28.480 it when it was public you know in public coverage 347 00:20:28.480 --> 00:20:31.559 of the matter. Question, Uh huh did you ever review 348 00:20:31.599 --> 00:20:34.960 the agreement as Attorney General in those discussions about its 349 00:20:35.000 --> 00:20:39.160 potential impacts? Answer? I don't recall going back and looking 350 00:20:39.200 --> 00:20:42.079 at it myself. I think other people were doing that. 351 00:20:42.359 --> 00:20:45.079 I mean everyone, I think understood that there would be 352 00:20:45.160 --> 00:20:48.480 litigation over whether or not the indictment could stand and 353 00:20:48.559 --> 00:20:52.480 whether it was preempted by the settlement. Everyone understood that, 354 00:20:52.799 --> 00:20:56.640 and I think they were Everyone was satisfying themselves that 355 00:20:56.680 --> 00:21:00.319 we were in a strong legal position. Question. Of course, 356 00:21:00.319 --> 00:21:04.119 mister Epstein never got a chance to appeal, never got convicted, 357 00:21:04.319 --> 00:21:06.799 and never got the chance to appeal the conviction. But 358 00:21:07.000 --> 00:21:10.400 miss Maxwell is appealing based on the non prosecution agreement. 359 00:21:11.240 --> 00:21:16.000 Is that your understanding? Answer? That's my understanding. Question. You 360 00:21:16.039 --> 00:21:18.519 were asked a little bit about this, specifically the co 361 00:21:18.519 --> 00:21:22.160 conspirator language in that agreement. You said something along the 362 00:21:22.200 --> 00:21:25.680 lines of the United States not prosecuting any and all 363 00:21:25.799 --> 00:21:29.279 co conspirators, including but not limited to, and then listed 364 00:21:29.279 --> 00:21:32.519 for people affiliated with Epstein. And I want to ask 365 00:21:32.559 --> 00:21:36.279 you again, had you seen in your experience that breadth 366 00:21:36.319 --> 00:21:40.319 of language in these kinds of agreements before answer, you know, 367 00:21:40.920 --> 00:21:44.200 I don't recall seeing that, you know, I think as 368 00:21:44.200 --> 00:21:47.480 a general matter, in a you know, unspectacular case, I 369 00:21:47.519 --> 00:21:50.200 think it may not be inappropriate to when you're trying 370 00:21:50.279 --> 00:21:52.920 to get a deal done with the primary suspect to 371 00:21:53.039 --> 00:21:56.200 agree that you won't go after peripheral people as a 372 00:21:56.240 --> 00:21:59.440 way of continuing the case, like I'm going to also 373 00:21:59.480 --> 00:22:02.039 go after you, or I won't go after your wife 374 00:22:02.400 --> 00:22:06.119 for you know, her role in this question uh huh answer, 375 00:22:06.519 --> 00:22:08.960 or I won't go after your children for their role 376 00:22:09.000 --> 00:22:11.720 in this and so forth. That kind of stuff is done, okay, 377 00:22:12.279 --> 00:22:14.519 But this case is different because of the nature of 378 00:22:14.559 --> 00:22:17.519 the crime and because of the span of the victims. 379 00:22:18.839 --> 00:22:22.680 Question and kind of the breadth of what those potential 380 00:22:22.680 --> 00:22:27.240 co conspirators could be. Answer yes, question in general, then 381 00:22:27.279 --> 00:22:30.599 I'll ask about high profile answer and you know, arguably 382 00:22:30.960 --> 00:22:33.799 not enough was known to make that kind of broad agreement. 383 00:22:34.920 --> 00:22:38.799 Question in general, do non prosecution agreements need to be 384 00:22:38.799 --> 00:22:43.279 approved by someone in Justice headquarters? Answer? Actually, off the 385 00:22:43.279 --> 00:22:46.519 top of my head, I don't know. Question what about 386 00:22:46.599 --> 00:22:49.880 in bar cuts them off? I think there are certain 387 00:22:49.960 --> 00:22:54.359 kinds of cases, definitely, but I'm not sure about this question, 388 00:22:54.720 --> 00:22:57.599 and would it be more likely in higher profile cases. 389 00:22:58.200 --> 00:23:01.000 Answer no, I mean certain kinds of the cases where 390 00:23:01.039 --> 00:23:03.960 the substantive law is in play and the money laundering 391 00:23:04.000 --> 00:23:06.359 section may have to sign off on some things, or 392 00:23:06.400 --> 00:23:11.160 the fraud section may have to sign off on some things. Question, 393 00:23:11.480 --> 00:23:14.079 So it's to the best of your recollection more akin 394 00:23:14.200 --> 00:23:17.559 to what's the alleged crime is versus the profile of 395 00:23:17.599 --> 00:23:21.119 the person being charged? Answer right, All right, folks, We're 396 00:23:21.119 --> 00:23:23.480 gonna wrap up right here, and in the next episode 397 00:23:23.519 --> 00:23:26.160 dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we 398 00:23:26.279 --> 00:23:29.079 left off. All of the information that goes with this 399 00:23:29.200 --> 00:23:33.079 episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone, 400 00:23:33.119 --> 00:23:36.680 and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In 401 00:23:36.720 --> 00:23:38.960