The Full Evidence Epstein was a Spy w/ Saagar Enjeti

Summary

Podcast Summary: Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh
Episode: The Full Evidence Epstein was a Spy w/ Saagar Enjeti
Release Date: July 17, 2025

---

Introduction

In this compelling episode of Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh, comedian Andrew Schulz and Akaash Singh delve deep into the enigmatic and controversial figure of Jeffrey Epstein. Joined by Saagar Enjeti, an expert on the Epstein saga, the trio navigates through Epstein's intricate web of connections, alleged intelligence ties, and the profound implications surrounding his activities.

Jeffrey Epstein's Early Connections and Career

[00:00 - 03:01]
Andrew Schulz opens the discussion by highlighting a recent vote by the House committee aimed at releasing the full Epstein files. He expresses surprise that several politicians opposed this release, suggesting a potential cover-up or unwillingness to confront the full extent of Epstein's activities. Recognizing the complexity of Epstein's story, Schulz invites Saagar Enjeti to shed light on the case.

Notable Quote:
Andrew Schulz: "If we release a report that implicates people without them being investigated, that's a concern." [00:00]

Epstein's Role at the Dalton School and Early Signs of Illicit Behavior

[03:01 - 06:07]
Enjeti traces Epstein's early career, noting his unusual hiring at the Dalton School in 1974 despite lacking formal credentials. This anomaly raises questions about the influence and connections Epstein had from the outset. A New York Times report from 2019 reveals that Epstein exhibited troubling behavior even in his early 20s, leading to his departure under suspicious circumstances.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "It's the master game that these people play, the non-denial denial. It's one of the most classic things in the history of Washington." [01:33]

Epstein's Transition to Bear Stearns and Expertise in Money Laundering

[06:07 - 08:44]
After leaving Dalton, Epstein joins Bear Stearns, initially struggling on the options desk before being transferred to high-net-worth money management. Over five years, Epstein hones his skills in offshore accounting and money laundering, establishing connections with shadowy figures in the Cayman Islands. This period marks the foundation of what would later be perceived as Epstein's utility to intelligence agencies.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "Playing the box is a strategy he admitted to, where he said, 'you can break the law and you can always get away with it...'" [06:58]

Formation of Intercontinental Assets Group (IAG) and Intelligence Ties

[08:44 - 12:22]
In 1981, Epstein forms IAG, presenting himself as a "high-level bounty hunter" aiding clients in asset recovery. Enjeti suggests that such a facade indicates Epstein's deeper involvement with intelligence networks, facilitating money laundering for illicit arms deals and covert operations between nations like Israel and Iran.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "These are vital parts of any intelligence network. Israeli, US, Saudi, everybody." [08:58]

Connections with Notable Figures: Adnan Khashoggi and Robert Maxwell

[12:22 - 20:04]
Epstein's network expands as he associates with influential figures like Adnan Khashoggi, a Saudi arms merchant with verified Mossad ties, and Robert Maxwell, a British intelligence operative and father of Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell's involvement in intelligence operations and his mysterious death add layers to Epstein's intricate connections.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "Robert Maxwell... He's been openly acknowledged at this point as a Mossad asset." [16:23]

The 2005 Investigation and the Sweetheart Deal

[32:32 - 38:00]
The discussion shifts to the pivotal moment in 2005 when Epstein faces his first major investigation following complaints of sexual abuse by a minor. Despite overwhelming evidence, Epstein secures a lenient non-prosecution agreement in 2008, pleading guilty to lesser charges and avoiding substantial prison time. Enjeti criticizes this deal as a miscarriage of justice, highlighting its implications for unearthing Epstein's broader network.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "He is only asked to register as a sex offender. He does not spend decades in federal prison." [15:13]

The Epstein Files and Government Complicity

[38:00 - 54:47]
Enjeti emphasizes the importance of releasing Epstein's financial records and legal documents to uncover the full extent of his operations. He posits that Epstein served as a conduit for intelligence agencies, facilitating illicit transactions and potentially using blackmail to influence powerful elites. The suppression of these files, he argues, protects government and intelligence agency secrets, maintaining systemic power structures.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "Epstein appears to have been an intelligence asset, and the government likely looked the other way to maintain his utility." [44:12]

Government's Response and the Non-Prosecution Agreement Overturned

[54:47 - 67:23]
The episode delves into the aftermath of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement, discussing how victims' lawsuits led to the agreement's overturning in 2018. This legal move paved the way for new indictments in 2019, but Epstein's sudden death left many questions unanswered. Enjeti critiques the government's inconsistent handling of the case, suggesting ulterior motives tied to intelligence interests.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "The non-prosecution agreement was kept secret from the Epstein victims, which violates federal law." [66:12]

Epstein's International Connections and Intelligence Operations

[67:23 - 118:03]
Enjeti explores Epstein's extensive international ties, particularly with Israeli officials like Ehud Barak and Benjamin Netanyahu. He theorizes that Epstein's financial maneuvers, including significant payments to former Israeli Prime Ministers, were strategic moves to bolster intelligence collaborations. The use of false passports and covert meetings underscores Epstein's role as a pivotal figure in global intelligence operations.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "Epstein is the gold standard of an intelligence asset in the United States of America, the capital of the global empire." [91:12]

Conclusion and Call for Transparency

[118:03 - End]
Wrapping up the discussion, Enjeti calls for the release of Epstein's complete files to fully understand his role and the extent of his influence. He warns that without transparency, Epstein's connections with intelligence agencies and global elites will remain shrouded in secrecy, perpetuating distrust in governmental institutions.

Notable Quote:
Enjeti: "Epstein's files are what we need to uncover the truth about his influence and how he operated with impunity." [115:00]

---

Key Takeaways

• Epstein's Early Influence: Epstein's acquisition of a teaching position without credentials at Dalton School indicates his deep-rooted connections and influence from the beginning.

• Financial Expertise and Intelligence Ties: His transition to Bear Stearns and formation of IAG highlight his proficiency in money laundering, making him a valuable asset to intelligence agencies.

• Critical Connections: Associations with figures like Adnan Khashoggi and Robert Maxwell suggest Epstein's pivotal role in facilitating international arms deals and intelligence operations.

• Judicial Miscarriage: The lenient non-prosecution agreement in 2008 raises questions about governmental complicity and the protection of Epstein's broader network.

• International Operations: Epstein's interactions with Israeli officials and use of false passports point to his integral role in global intelligence collaborations.

• Call for Transparency: The episode underscores the necessity of releasing Epstein's comprehensive files to unravel the full scope of his influence and connections.

Relevant Quotes

1. Andrew Schulz on Political Reluctance:
   "If we release a report that implicates people without them being investigated, that's a concern." [00:00]

2. Saagar Enjeti on Non-Denial Denies:
   "It's the master game that these people play, the non-denial denial. It's one of the most classic things in the history of Washington." [01:33]

3. Enjeti on Playing the Box:
   "Playing the box is a strategy he admitted to, where he said, 'you can break the law and you can always get away with it...'" [06:58]

4. Enjeti on Intelligence Networks:
   "These are vital parts of any intelligence network. Israeli, US, Saudi, everybody." [08:58]

5. On Epstein's Intelligence Role:
   "Epstein appears to have been an intelligence asset, and the government likely looked the other way to maintain his utility." [44:12]

6. Enjeti on Government Complicity:
   "The non-prosecution agreement was kept secret from the Epstein victims, which violates federal law." [66:12]

7. On Epstein as an Intelligence Asset:
   "Epstein is the gold standard of an intelligence asset in the United States of America, the capital of the global empire." [91:12]

8. Final Call for Transparency:
   "Epstein's files are what we need to uncover the truth about his influence and how he operated with impunity." [115:00]

---

This episode serves as a profound exploration into the murky intersections of wealth, power, and intelligence, urging listeners to demand greater transparency and accountability from government institutions.

Transcript

[Andrew Schulz]

What's up, everybody? Welcome to flagrants. You know, there is a vote by the House committee to see if we could get the whole Epstein file released. And shockingly, some of these politicians, I believe, how many of them, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 of them, said that it's probably not a good idea that we release the full detailed Epstein file? And, you know, what we could do is just decide to move on to something else. I'm sure there'll be other news stories. Or maybe we could bring somebody who has become quite the expert at the Epstein Story Phenomenal podcast, our good, good friends Sagar and Jenny. Yeah, I saw your episode with Tucker was absolutely amazing. And, like, I didn't realize how detailed, in depth, your knowledge of.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Thanks, brother.

[Akash Singh]

Well, he's got a kid now, so we got. Now.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's true. You got. And I have a baby girl.

[Andrew Schulz]

I didn't do the research, but I.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Asked you a lot of questions. That's what all good men do.

[Akash Singh]

Outsource to an id.

[Andrew Schulz]

So maybe it's a good idea that we just kind of, like, start with the case for Epstein being intelligence. Because what I've seen quite recently is a lot of people kind of wiping the record and acting like this is pure conspiracy, that he did have any ties or connections. And I think there's a lot of, like, we have a lot of tidbits of information that we've all kind of collected, and there's this collective conscious that he absolutely is. So, like, what is the argument for it? Maybe give us some backstory. I know you put together something amazing, so just break it down. Who is this Epstein character that we all think we know so well?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'll start off from the top. I totally understand people who are saying it's a conspiracy theory. And in large part, I think it's because it's been wildly overstated by some people, which is natural in open environment. Right? They're like, he's obviously Mossad. He's obviously CIA. This is part of a blackmail ring. And in my opinion, the American people actually have it right. They just don't have the language, the facts, and they need to pull it together. And I want them to have the information that they have to be able to make that case. Especially whenever we have the Israeli Prime. Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett just yesterday, who unequivocally, Epstein did not work for Mossad. Now, remember, you know, there are key terms here that matter. Work is not the same as asset or worked with or worked with at some Time. And this is the master game that these people play, the non denial denial. It's one of the most classic things in the history of Washington. So let's start at the very, very, very beginning. And I've put together some stuff. That's why I have my laptop here with me. So the first time that we can see any link between Jeffrey Epstein and somebody who would become eventually very important to a story in the intelligence world is in 1974, so 19, right here in New York City, where we are today. Jeffrey Epstein, despite having no college degree and being a dropout from New York University, is hired by Donald Barr. Now why does that last name sound familiar? Donald Barr is the father of William Barr, who is the US Attorney General under Donald Trump in 2019, who actually presides over the investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein suicide. I'll just call it a death here for now. So Donald Barr in 1974 hires Jeffrey Epstein at the Dalton School.

[Andrew Schulz]

Does Donald Barr have intelligence connections himself?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes, he certainly does, as would be a surprise to all of you, as do all of the storied families of the people who are connected to the most elite private schools here in New York City. So here we have a New York times report from 2019. Jeffrey Epstein taught at Dalton. His behavior was noticed. And what they talk about specifically is that Epstein, even here in his early 20s, is already exhibiting the pedophile behavior that it becomes known for. He starts harassing a lot of young girls and in the span of just one year, finds himself basically under investigation and departs under weird circumstances after teaching math here at the Dalton School. So the question is, why did Donald Barr hire Jeffrey Epstein, a person at the Dalton School, to teach math, despite having no credentials, no college degree? I mean, you can't even get a job at a public school without a college degree and a teacher's certification.

[Andrew Schulz]

Let me ask you this, and this.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Is the first time we see this.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay, so let me ask this question. And I think it's important to just give pushback so we kind of understand. I don't even want to call it pushback. You know, my dad had a college degree. He walks in and he asks if he can be a work in the news station.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Sure.

[Andrew Schulz]

And so this is back in like the 70s. He's able to get a job working in new station, eventually was on air. So there was a different time. Could teachers just teach at an elite private school? No, they could not.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's the thing. So no, not common. The Donald Barr, by the way, actually departed the school at the very same time as Jeffrey Epstein, the cope from Donald Barr and others. The explanation is that he very often had an unconventional hiring strategy. But you know, people who attended Dalton and others basically said it was a very weird hire at the time. And nobody still to this day really has an explanation for why. That's the very first known link. And it's weird. Okay, let's just be honest. It's weird. So from 1974, 1975, we have the departure. So somewhere around 1976, Jeffrey Epstein meets a guy named Ace Greenberg. Ace Greenberg of Bear Stearns. And of course you guys know, for the younger audience out there, Bear Stearns is one of the most storied investment banks in Wall street history. Went down in 2008. So Ace Greenberg, whose child goes to Bear Stearns, meets Jeffrey Epstein ostensibly at some sort of like parent event. So here we have Jeffrey Epstein's deep ties to top Wall street figures and talks here about Greenberg.

[Andrew Schulz]

Just so I. Yeah, so Jeffrey Epstein was teaching at Dalton. Ace Greenberg's kid at Dalton.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Correct.

[Andrew Schulz]

Builds a relationship with this Ace Greenberg guy who is one of the what, the heads of the bank?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes, he's the head of the bank. One of the most powerful men on all of Wall street in the 1970s and 1980s. Got it. So Jeff, so Ace Greenberg hires Jeffrey Epstein initially on the options desk. What ends up happening is Epstein's actually not very good at that. So they're like, what's this guy any good at? So they transfer him to basically the high net worth money management desk. And effectively for the next five years, Jeffrey Epstein learn, learns the art and really the art of money laundering. He manages high net worth individuals money. What he does with that money is he specializes in offshore accounting. And then specifically what he does is he gets deep in with all of these shadowy figures who are experts in the Cayman Islands and moving money offshores. Now this is the first known time that he begins to develop the portfolio that will make him very useful for intelligence agencies in the future.

[Akash Singh]

Now sorry, real quick, are they moving money offshores to avoid taxes or.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Initially it's to avoid taxes now. But what we eventually learn is from the formation of something called iag. So after five years at Bear Stearns, Jeffrey Epstein is fired for a regulatory D violation. Basically he broke internal banking rules and insider trading. So there's two things that we learn here. Number one, he's involved in sketchy behavior from the very beginning. Two, he's not prosecuted. He's basically fired, let go, and everybody keeps it hush hush. I'll come back to that in the future. Because he develops a strategy there called playing the box. Playing the box is a strategy he admitted to, where he said, you can break the law and you can all always get away with it because people will be too embarrassed to be able to call you out for it, which will enable you to continue your money laundering. Because Bear Stearns would be embarrassed by the fact that they have somebody who's managing so much money inside of their bank.

[Andrew Schulz]

Was he internally called?

[Sagar Enjeti]

He was internally called and that's why he was.

[Andrew Schulz]

So SEC doesn't find out, Bear Stearns.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Find out Bear Stearns compliance. And they're like, look, we need to make this go away. We just, we don't want to deal with this anymore. He just needs to go. So from that point forward, 1981, Epstein forms a company called IAG, the Intercontinental Assets Group. But I'm read directly here from the description. He is a quote, high level bounty hunter who helps clients recover assets. This is the first entree into what will eventually sprawl as a global intelligence network. Because a high level bounty hunter who helps you recover money is not involved in, quote, legitimate business.

[Andrew Schulz]

What does that mean, recover money?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, exactly. So it's in many cases he eventually gets involved with people who are running Ponzi schemes and basically keeping and hiding money offshore. He sells himself. And it's very unclear because none of the records of this have ever really been really. But the description of high level bounty hunter indicates to us that his specialization in offshore banking is one that becomes very important to intelligence networks. So this is where people might ask, hey, why do we even care about this? Why would an intelligence network even want offshore banking? And the reason why is in the 1980s there were all of these very sketchy arms deals that were happening here. We have in the United States the Iran Contra affair. This is the Cold War. And everybody actually has a very distorted attitude as to how the CIA front companies work. Nobody at the CIA has a bank, JP Morgan Chase that says CIA that goes and buys a front company building, right? Did you guys. Perfect example. Do you ever watch Argo? Did you guys watch the movie? So remember how Ben Affleck's character flies to Hollywood and gets a front man to open a company and the money is laundered through the front man. That man would be known as a CIA asset because he's able to open that front company. So that's why it's very important to the CIA.

[Andrew Schulz]

It works for the CIA. Of course they have their own job Exactly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They have their own money. In many cases they put up their own money.

[Andrew Schulz]

Exactly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But eventually get reimbursed somewhere in shady offshore banks. Banking thing on the back end. So these are vital parts of any intelligence network. Israeli, us, Saudi, everybody.

[Andrew Schulz]

Because if it's something everybody does, then of course work as espionage.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly. And then you get a wrong contra blown.

[Akash Singh]

That's exactly necessarily in and of itself bad.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, it's a necessary. Look, it's just the way that you do business. There's no value judgment here. So the point is, is that at this time, this is when he begins to develop a relationship in somewhere around between 1976 and 1981 with a man named Doug. Now, Leese is a very important character. Douglas Lease was a UK national. He's a verified in UK government documents as having been involved in multiple arms deals and is thought to have been at least somewhat of a CIA MI6, some sort of intelligence asset. Douglas Leese is an expert again in offshore banking and international money laundering. At the age of 20, I think it's 28, and somebody can check my work on this is that at the age of 28, Douglas Lease brings a young Jeffrey Epstein on a private plane to the Pentagon. For purposes that we still do not know. This is long before Epstein is a billionaire. This is when he's involved specifically in offshore banking. Lease is basically the conduit through which he is then introduced to all of these very important people. Yes, Adnan Khashoggi, who is a very important person in this story. Stephen Hoffenberg, who is basically the source of a lot of this information. Keep in mind Stephen Hoffenberg. And he went on the record to Vicky Ward, who's the journalist who did the original expose on Epstein. In 2002, he was convicted of one of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history. What ended up happening is he was trying to Epstein, but Epstein actually conned him out of $100 million. But he, Stephen Hoffenberg basically showed the relationship between Douglas Lees and Epstein, which Epstein got very testy about whenever he was asked. Basically pretended. I hardly know the guy. Leese is the person who introduces Epstein to Hoffenberg, to Robert Maxwell and to this Adnan Khashoggi. Now, the reason why all three of those names matter is that Hoffenberg shows the conduit of the way that Epstein was already working with illegal enterprises and offshore bank. The way that he alleges Epstein stole his money was specifically through one of these offshore transactions. The other two names, I assume so.

[Andrew Schulz]

A Guy was running a Ponzi scheme.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And then he got caught and then.

[Andrew Schulz]

Wrote a hater article about it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And actually Epstein, actually Epstein cooperated with U.S. authorities against Hoffenberg and basically got him locked up in prison. This was only acknowledged years and years later. I mean, he was a master networker. We have to give it to him. But again, here's another link between the community intel, you know, the US government, Jeffrey Epstein. Here's a link to offshore banking and then specifically Adnan Khashoggi and Robert Maxwell. So who are these two individuals? Here he has Adnan Khashoggi. Adnan Khashoggi is the uncle of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist who was butchered in the Turkish embassy. But for our purposes, what can we look at here? Saudi arms merchant, world class playboy dies. This is from his obituary in the Washington Post. So why do we care about Adnan Khashoggi and his association with Epstein? And these are verified ties between the two. Adnan Khashoggi is somebody who worked on all kinds of sketchy arms deals throughout his life. These people are very useful to the Saudi Kingdom, to the Israelis, because they are cutouts. They're not officially part of the royal family. Their money is used to finance various arms deals. He has a verified connection to Mossad and to funneling arms between Israel and Iran in the past. All of this is out in the public record. It's effectively been acknowledged. And I don't even think it's really disputable.

[Andrew Schulz]

I know that you spoken about this already, but I just want to make this. Yeah, I want to make this incredibly clear. Right. Where it's like governments and countries cannot be actively involved in these Cold War tactics. They need to find these proxies to do it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

And those proxies might not necessarily be bad. Matter of fact, they offer incredible utility. So a Khashoggi, for example, for Saudi Arabia might be one of the most important figures.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Absolutely.

[Andrew Schulz]

Executing the plans of Saudi Arabia without getting the people in charge of Saudi Arabia dirty. And at this point in time, it's looking like as we go through the story, Epstein might be an asset to the United States of America. Or maybe when we get into Maxwell, or at least it doesn't look like there's anything incriminating on him so far. No.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, I mean, to be fair, his pedophilia and his proclivities were kind of secondary to his money. Now the reason why I think he eventually gets away with the stuff that he does in the future is because of all the work he did in the 1980s and the 1990s for these various governments.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't want to connect this to like a movie, but there's this, this movie, Art of War that Nicolas Cage is in.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

And there's this.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I love that movie.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's a great movie. And it's based on I think like.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A relatively, I think that guy we just released from Victor, Brittany Grant, Victor Bout or something like that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Lord of War, I think it's called. You got a six woman. Yeah, or the Lord of War. Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

And so basically he goes, there's this moment where he's arrested and this like guy from the FBI has been holding it down. He eventually goes, hey, listen, somebody's going to come in that door and let you know that it's time for me to go. And he's, I don't know what you're.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Talking about, blah, blah.

[Andrew Schulz]

And, and to me that's kind of what it's feeling like so far. Where there could be these connections and we might get it misconstrued where it's like the government is involved in this like illicit child fucking blackmail scheme when in reality the government's looking be like, no, actually we're just running guns and.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We'Re running dirty money and we're funneling stuff between Israel and Iran. This is why, you know, the Saudi government can't facilitate an Israel, Iran arms deal. Right. These are all allegedly mortal enemies. But a Khashoggi, oh, he can do it, he can finance that deal and we can make him whole on the back end. Similar. Yeah, go ahead.

[Andrew Schulz]

And last thing I would say is I was talking to a friend of mine, I think that, I think Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan banked him. I forget which one.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Was it JP Morgan at that time?

[Andrew Schulz]

This is later on.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, Deutsche bank and JP Morgan both banked Jeffrey Epstein and like a friend.

[Andrew Schulz]

Of mine was working over there and he basically I was asking about it, he was like, he's like, yeah, like he just operated with dirty money. Yeah. And I think that's why, you know, the government had an eyeball on him because it was advantageous for them to know who's sending him $30 million from El Salvador. He was the banker and a lot of these banks will just take dirty money.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Of course they will.

[Andrew Schulz]

If you're getting tens, millions of dollars from a third world country, please believe it's not because they're selling slushies on the street, you know, like there's some fucked up shit going on. So I'm just trying to position at this point right now, the government might think that they have an asset working in their best interest.

[Sagar Enjeti]

At this point, this is a rational case for them. This we're not yet involved with eventually becomes the pedophilia ring.

[Akash Singh]

Also, guys, tour dates. I'm going to be in Kansas City, August 1st and 2nd, August 8th and 9th. I'm going to be in Toledo, Ohio, at the funny bone, August 22nd and 23rd. It's a lot, lot of Ohio, huh? Liberty Township, September, September 11th through 13th. Let's hope I don't bomb in those shows. Dania Beach, Florida. Bunch of other dates on my [e-mail].

[Sagar Enjeti]

What'S up, guys? Mark Agnon here. I got some tour dates for you if you want to skip forward. Dude, I'm not going to stop you. You know what I mean? I completely understand. It happens. All right. Suck his dick. His dick. That's not bad.

[Andrew Schulz]

Honestly. It's not bad. That's not bad.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I bet it actually. It is bad. Don't do it. Okay. Because this Saturday, New York City on July 19, I'm gonna be doing Alex's show at the Hard Rock. Come on out. It's gonna be absolutely. And then I'm gonna be in Stanford, Connecticut, Hoboken, New Jersey, Levittown, New York, Chandler, Arizona, San Diego, Burlington. I'm also going to Canada, Toronto, Montreal, a bunch of other days. Detroit is in there and we're adding some dates. You could suck his dick into the new year.

[Akash Singh]

I'll see you guys at the show.

[Sagar Enjeti]

God bless you all and peace be with you.

[Andrew Schulz]

And like Mark said, this Saturday, July 19th, New York City, Times Square at Hard Rock Casino. Times Square. We have a happy hour. We have comedy. We have an after party after. Come, have a good time. Wait. Cancel Comedy X on Instagram. Lincoln bio.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Let's move now to Robert Maxwell. Now, Robert Maxwell is probably one of the most central important figures in this story. Robert Maxwell is the father of Ghislaine Maxwell. And Robert Maxwell is based, basically an intelligence operative from day one. So Robert Maxwell is a very interesting early life story. He's a Czechoslovakian orthodox Jew. He flees the Nazis, finds a way to escape from mainland Europe, fighting with the resistance to the UK fights the Nazis in World War II. He gets the second highest medal from the British government during World War II for his exemplary service. And he becomes a British national, changes his name multiple times. What eventually happens, though, is that Robert Maxwell begins to roll up the tabloid news empire. He's a Rupert Murdoch of his by rolling up tabloid news in the UK and effectively becoming like a sovereign wealth fund in and of itself with his billions. Maxwell is a very committed Zionist and somebody who's very important to the state of Israel. He's been openly acknowledged at this point as a Mossad asset. I have his code name here. Let me find it. He's known as Mega Quote, the Bountiful Source. This is from a former Mossad operative.

[Andrew Schulz]

Who described the Tetris movie.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, I actually didn't know it.

[Andrew Schulz]

He's a character in the Tetris movie.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, okay.

[Andrew Schulz]

All right. He's personified as himself as part of the story. One of the assets that they owned, I guess, might have been the.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Maxwell is again, just like Khashoggi. He's financing international arms deals. He's very important to Mossad. He's very important to MI6. He's very important to the US intelligence community. But the thing that really puts him apart is that Maxwell is a committed Zionist and he works specifically on behalf of the state of Israel to advance his interests. And the most extreme example of that. Can we put that wired one up there? It talks about the in slot operations Octopus. This is a very important article from the 1990s, and it describes basically a piece of software that Robert Maxwell was integral in both financing and selling to the Department of Justice. And it was Israeli spyware that was installed on vast numbers of US Government computers that was used specifically to spy on the United States by Mossad and the Israeli intelligence community. What year is this? This was in the early 90s. This is whenever it was exposed. But in the 1980s, this is something that Maxwell was directly involved.

[Andrew Schulz]

Has there been taken for this act?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Actually, I'm not actually sure about this. I mean, as usual, whenever it comes to Israeli operations on US soil, we're all like, hey, you should cut it out. And then we don't really do anything about it. There's a great doc. Jonathan Pollard is a very good example of this. There's a doc on Netflix about this, the Octopus murders and this guy, Danny Castellaro, that basically tried to expose us. Oh, that's right. I forgot. I never watched it, but I know it's fantastic. And he gets murdered in his attempt to try to expose the In Law software. All right, so there we go. That's Robert Maxwell. He's involved in things like this. But I could actually go on for.

[Andrew Schulz]

Is it a Pollard?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Jonathan Pollard? You know who that is?

[Andrew Schulz]

No.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Jonathan Pollard is one of the greatest spies in US history. He was a NSA employee in the 1980s, he was spying on behalf of the state of Israel. Selling them secrets. Yeah, there's a picture of him right there. Yeah, I did. So he served 30 years in a US prison while he was here. He became a cause celeb in Israel, saying that he was unjustly persecuted, even though he was a United States citizen selling secrets to Israel. Bibi Netanyahu visited him.

[Andrew Schulz]

Secrets to Russia. Not.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, no, no. Israel sold the secrets to Russia. He the secrets to Israel. No, no, no, no. He sold the secrets to Israel. Let's be clear. Israel sold them to the Soviet Union. Jonathan Pollard was actually granted Israeli citizenship, I think in absentia. Bibi Netanyahu visited him in prison here in the United States of America, basically saying, we're always going to stand with you. The moment his federal probation is up, after he's released from prison, after his sentence, he moved to Israel and he's never coming back. So that's a perfect example here of you have a United States citizen spying on behalf of the Israeli government. Open caught. It's all admitted out in the open. The, the government says, hey, we're friends, just forgive him. He was just a Jewish patriot doing what he wanted for his country, even though he was not an Israeli citizen there at the time, granted him citizenship and openly campaigned for all of our presidents of the United States, Bill Clinton onward to pardon Jonathan Pollard. And they came pretty damn close. Let me be clear. So that's another example of how we really treat Israeli espionage very differently than all other espionage on the United States. If you guys remember in the Ted Cruz interview where Tucker was like, it doesn't concern you that Mossad is spying on America. He's like, well, all countries do it. All friendly countries spy on each other. There's an exception that we seem to make here for this country.

[Andrew Schulz]

Have we been caught spying on Israel?

[Sagar Enjeti]

You know, I don't know if we've ever been caught in a high profile operation. I mean, I'm sure that we do. And in fact, we probably should, considering, you know, what's going on. Actually, you know what? We definitely have been because I remember there's been documents leaks from the Israeli cabinet meetings. You remember the signal gate, the signal leaks? I published some of those documents and in one of those was actually minutes from the cabinet meeting from Bibi. So, yes, we are spying on Israel as well, to be fair. We're spying on, on everybody.

[Andrew Schulz]

So it's like if we're doing it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Although the Israelis did get kind of upset about that. So, you know, it's a little ironic because they got upset whenever we're doing it, but, you know, not intentional.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's not Dershowitz saying that like, yeah, we do that, or they do that, like he was trying to make it. They seem like since everybody does it, it's okay.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, but it's not okay. It's not okay. It's like we should all punish, you know, if we.

[Andrew Schulz]

Not okay when we do it. It's not okay when you guys do it. We're supposed to be allies.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right. Okay, so let's continue.

[Andrew Schulz]

We should do it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, let's continue.

[Akash Singh]

Let's get away with it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We're coming back. Robert Maxwell. All right. Robert Maxwell, the father of Ghis Maxwell. This is how Jeffrey Epstein meets Ghislaine Maxwell, his eventual co conspirator in the child trafficking network. And Robert Maxwell, of course, has a very shady death. Nobody's still really sure how he died. He allegedly either jumped or fell off of his yacht, which of course, happens to everybody. I mean, somewhat believable, but I mean, it's just one of those things where, you know, he is killed in various or he dies in very suspicious circumstances. He has all kinds of luminaries at his funerals, and whatever he knew kind of goes to the grave with him. So after that, in this period, we have 1980, this is probably one of the most important years in the history of Jeffrey Epstein.

[Andrew Schulz]

Before we move away from Max, can I just tell you a fun little tidbit?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Of course.

[Andrew Schulz]

I want to get this right, and I have to check spelling and everything on this, but I wish I. Okay, ready? Right now. I think one of the issues with releasing the Epstein files is because if you release a report that implicates people without them being investigated, that's a concern. And I think in Britain, there's called the fca. That's their version of the SEC or something like that. So basically, they have a process that you give that person that is named a chance to respond or submit evidence before the report is released so that they can address concerns which might end up altering the report's conclusions about that person. That process is called Maxwellization, and it's named after Robert Maxwell.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's amazing because it fits with his character in the way that he was a media magnet. And look, actually, let's take a second. Why do these tabloids matter if everybody remembers the whole David Pecker scandal here in America with Donald Trump? It's that they basically Hoover. They're like private intelligence services. They hoover up all of these stories. They often buy people's silence through non disclosure agreements. And then they use that as pedigree with the richest people in the world. Like, hey Donald, we held this story on Karen McDougall who accused you. So we, you know, we set you.

[Andrew Schulz]

All through the middle of the algorithm. If you own five different tabloids and you can print the same story that's allegedly on all of them, then the other newspaper articles and TV shows, they start picking it up. So before an algorithm, you have to create the trend.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You're liter describing the New York Post to Fox News pipeline. Right?

[Andrew Schulz]

Which are you talking about? This is crazy to make an allegation like that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That is, I mean, they're owned by RER Murdoch. It's out in the open. Many people who work there will tell you that's literally how it works. It doesn't take a genius to figure this stuff out.

[Andrew Schulz]

Right?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, let's turn return to the money. So 1988, very important year in the, in the life of Jeffrey Epstein. He leaves or basically reforms IAG at this point, it's been seven years. He's very important, important to many of the world's most influential arms dealers and other people almost certainly at this point is embroiled in some of these deals. This point is a very sketchy point because now he creates the J. Epstein Company. The J. Epstein Company, self described, accepts only clients with $1 billion. This is a year where there are only 140 billionaires. In all of his existence in 1988, there's not very many people who are billionaires. And to have 1 billion in cash liquid to be able to invest is effect unheard of. So who are the people that this is ostensibly for? He pitched specifically as quote, an economic advisor to the super rich. No other services have ever been advertised. And this is the source eventually of all of his wealth. And so it's somewhere around this time in the 1980s and the J. Epstein company that he signs a client named Leslie Wexner. Wexner, one of the most important figures again in this story, really the source of much of his money and his power to the way that it eventually, eventually becomes. Leslie Wexner is one of the richest men in America, one of the richest men in Ohio. Leslie Wexner is a committed Zionist. He's donated and worked with the Israeli government and we'll talk about that in a little bit. But Leslie Wexner eventually, in this time period, effectively signs over his entire portfolio and eventually leads to power of attorney being signed over to Jeffrey Epstein. You guys had a great exchange where you were like, hey, we have a decade of friendship here, and I would not sign power of attorney over to any of you. There's only one person I'm signing power of attorney to, my wife. There's nobody else who's ever going to get it.

[Andrew Schulz]

Supposed to do that?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, if we wanted to. That's the only person who conceivably has ever been.

[Andrew Schulz]

What about business managers? Do they have power of attorney?

[Sagar Enjeti]

No. Or they have a limited power of attorney, and that's very different than his entire control of his estate. So somewhere in this time, in the 88 to 91 period, in just three years, he is able to convince this man, Leslie Wexner, multi billionaire, the founder of Victoria's Secret, to basically sign over all of his power of attorney and control of his assets. Even more importantly, over the next five years, he effectively begins transferring many assets from the Wexner fortune to his own personal portfolio. Multiple properties in the state of Ohio, which are actually referenced in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial for the sex trafficking purposes. Those are Wexner properties. And then the infamous massive townhouse in Manhattan at that time, the largest private residence, basically valued at some $70 million. I mean, again, who in this world is transferring $70 million townhouse, largest private residence at the time, the city of New York, over to this man, Jeffrey Epstein Steelman. For what purpose?

[Andrew Schulz]

Go ahead. Is there a purpose? For example, is he trying to avoid taxes? Is there, like what? Give me the argument outside of corruption.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Sure. Leslie Wexner has talked to his people and he's talked to people about this. And his explanation is that Epstein was a money wizard, that he simply had ideas. They said he's a wizard with money. He's the smartest man with money actually ever seen. The Steelman case for how this has nothing to do with blackmail is exactly what you just said. And this is eventually what's hinted at by the richest and most powerful people in the world is, guys, we were doing money laundering. It wasn't about blackmail or any of this other stuff. It was a way for us to launder our money internationally. I'll come back to it, but that's basically the excuse that Leon Black gave. Leon Black is genuinely one of the richest men in New York. He was $9 billion net worth, founder of the Apollo Group, one of the largest private equity firms in the world from 1997 onward. He has a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein to the point he puts him on the board of The Black Family Foundation. And it eventually comes out. Between 2012, 2017, he transferred $170 million to Jeffrey Epstein and to Epstein related accounts. His argument, tax advice.

[Andrew Schulz]

Now, his argument is that over that five year period, he gave him $170 million and saved to the tune of 1 billion.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's what he claims. What he claims.

[Andrew Schulz]

Now, if that is the case, all of us would hire Epstein immediately, right?

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right. But there's no way to do that legitimately. And also, if at all of the paper trail for this. Epstein was not a licensed financial advisor. He was not a licensed tax advice person. He was not somebody who had ever well known in the hedge fund industry. I mean, this is the question about why are these super rich people transferring all of this money to this individual? I'm willing to believe money laundering, but with the Wexner case, I just simply can't get there. Vicky Ward and James Stewart biographers and others who've looked into the story, they really believe that blackmail is somehow at the center of the story of Wexner. This is purely speculation on my behalf.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think that makes a lot of sense, especially, you know, for economically ignorant folks like myself, which are like, I'm not giving a fucking townhouse to anybody for any purpose.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

But there are these certain situations where people set up these trusts, they set up these llc, they set up these S Corp so they can put certain to avoid taxes. They create these loopholes. So there is a version where he had found a way to do this. I don't understand why passing it directly to Epsom Epstein avoids taxes. Because Epstein would then have to pay those taxes.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, exactly. Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, why not put it into a joint trust that Epstein has access to? Why is it specifically passed to Epstein unless.

[Sagar Enjeti]

For his personal use. Yeah, for his personal use.

[Andrew Schulz]

Let's be clear, he needed it under his name to validate him to do.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Certain things, which is what eventually we began to see with the story. And also, look, let's be honest here about Wexner. Wexner is the founder of Victoria's Secret. Like, would it be crazy to say the founder of Victoria? Kind of perverted. And Leslie Wexer has been photographed with all these young women. It's like literally. Yeah. Making laundry for teenagers.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm joked to be told that this person is involved with some weird stuff. Again, look, because he's still alive and he would sue me. That is purely speculation on my part, based upon publicly available information. I'm not claiming anything otherwise. But don't they have to go find.

[Andrew Schulz]

Barely grow models around the world.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I mean, that's their business model, to be clear. So let's just say that.

[Andrew Schulz]

When do you turn 18? So I could put you on the. With wings.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This happens, Right? So that's the person and the individual who's at the nexus of a lot of this stuff. Now, let's say then what? We move from there because that Wexner transfer sets Epstein as the king of New York, as the king of New York society.

[Andrew Schulz]

Can I ask one more question before that? Are there any people in finance that look at that transfer and they go, wow, this was a smart financial decision for Wexner.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I have not yet found a single person. In fact, every rich person who I have ever talked with about the Epstein thing has told me I have no idea what the fuck was going on.

[Andrew Schulz]

And has anybody explained Wexner or his people explained why it was advantageous to him to.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, he just said it was a terrible mistake and that he trusted Epstein entirely with his money. He literally called his relationship and the transfer, quote, a terrible mistake. That's the only public apology that he's ever given on the case.

[Andrew Schulz]

It is.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Wexner's never gone into it, by the way. He's still alive, and he should answer questions.

[Andrew Schulz]

It is interesting that we haven't seen him in an interview.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, we've seen he shut himself down.

[Andrew Schulz]

But we've seen Prince Andrew in an interview.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, yeah, he's maybe the only person that we haven't heard speak publicly about this a little bit.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But, you know, it's been years. I think in 2020 is when he gave his apology. But same with Leon Black, by the way, who resigned from his public company and has basically disappeared from New York society. Jess Staley, the former CEO of Barclays, Epstein's private banker. I'll return to him in a little bit with the Israel connection, because he's a very important part of that story. But he's also resigned, and now he's not CEO of a publicly traded company, doesn't need to testify, doesn't even give any interviews. He's filthy rich, and you know how these people operate. You can hire bodyguards and live behind a wall for the rest the of of your life. So that's basically where we are with Maxwell Senior.

[Andrew Schulz]

And when Epstein and him meet, did they do any business together that we know of?

[Sagar Enjeti]

So this is the problem. We don't have the full records, and this is part of the ride. The release of the files is very important, and I will also return where I think defining the files as, as a list is very important because that's not how it works. People seem to have it in their head that there's a ledger, that there's a black book that's like paid or have kitty tape supports Israel. Now this works, guys, like as a journalist, like what. What we're doing here is we're compiling information. We're looking at public stuff that cannot be explained otherwise. We're steel manning the case. We're reaching out to Leslie Wexner for comment. The IRS today, as you guys all know, has all of our information, all of the Butterfly Trust accounts connected to Jeffrey Epstein.

[Andrew Schulz]

What's a Butterfly Trust account?

[Sagar Enjeti]

That was an Epstein linked account which the New York Financial Services. By the way, you guys should take this up here. In the state of New York, they have all access to Epstein's financial records 2013 onwards, because they find Deutsche bank for their business with Epstein, for violating the bank rules and for violating New York State regulations. New York State has the books for his entire financial life. 2013.

[Andrew Schulz]

Didn't JP Morgan pay out an insane.

[Sagar Enjeti]

JP and Deutsche Bank. Well, Deutsche bank paid like $75 million to the Epstein victims specifically for facilitating a lot of this trafficking. But my point is, is that I want those documents. I want the Butterfly Trust accounts. Leon Black, the way that he even paid Epstein, and this was only available by subpoena power that we know of was through some private jet holding company. I mean, this stuff is all masked in a way that their names were never supposed to be on top of any of it way we can get it is from release and from subpoena from the United States government. Part of why the Trump administration's decision is so very disappointing.

[Andrew Schulz]

And so I know I keep cutting. I just want to make sure that I understand this. It seems so brazenly foolish for these people to even be tangentially connected to Epstein.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, not before this time.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't want to be giving them an out, but I want to be really understanding the situation. If you are operating with somebody who uses, you know, nefarious techniques to hide money, which I do not put past any wealthy person. No, anybody who's got tens of millions of dollars, I promise you, they are doing some shady to hide that money, to move that money. Like, I, I know a guy who like, would fly to the Bahamas with tens of thousands of dollars strapped to his body. It sounds like out of a movie. He would do it regularly. Why are you snitching on me like.

[Sagar Enjeti]

These guys, you guys all know him.

[Andrew Schulz]

I just want to. So there was a regular thing to just avoid taxation, setting up accounts back. And I think this is probably like the 80s. This is not as. So. So doing these things to avoid taxes is quite common amongst the people who makes tens, 20, hundreds of millions of dollars. But doing it so directly with Epstein is what I find peculiar. And there's a part of me that goes, if they're doing it directly with him, do they not feel concern about his relationships and intentions? Is there some sort of trust there? Because like you said earlier, the CIA knows they're on some fuck shit. So they're like, we gotta make sure that we're not associated with this. Why would you not?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, that's a great question, especially, you.

[Andrew Schulz]

Know what I'm saying, If he's been operating for a decade now and he hasn't been caught, hasn't gotten in any trouble, it's like, oh, this guy's good.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's the defense I would make. Is that pre 2005, before the invasion investigation. Yeah, it's actually somewhat. Somewhat understandable for somebody who is not in Palm beach or New York society. I would say more in the 1980s, from about 95 onward. It's an open secret. Jeffrey Epstein likes kids. Jeffrey Epstein likes them.

[Andrew Schulz]

When does he first get caught?

[Sagar Enjeti]

2005. That's the very first investigation into Epstein, the actual law enforcement.

[Andrew Schulz]

So we could make the argument that before that. Yes, it's greed.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, yeah. Again, though, because all of these people live. This is. As you're saying, the super rich is the smallest world in the smallest group in the world. They may live all over the world, but they're actually all in the same place, basically. All at the same time.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, they're doing all the st Barns.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They're always in London. They're always, you know, Tahoe, whatever, like Palm Beach. This is why they all know each other. So to a certain extent, I actually can't really forgive it because it's such an open secret in the 1990s that Jeffrey Epstein likes little kids, basically, and is trafficking young women. Well before the 90s, yeah. I guess we could give them somewhat of a pass, but it starts to become out in the open.

[Andrew Schulz]

I'm not trying to give a pass. What I'm trying to do is like not be guilty of. Of Internet trends.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, sure.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which is like applying something we learn about and is confirmed in 2005 and 2008 with a conviction to everyone prior to that. I think after 2005 and definitely after 2008, like, you're aware that you're dealing with a convicted pedophile, so you're a registered sex offender. Yeah, yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, registered sex offenders.

[Andrew Schulz]

There's no excuse. But before that, I do think that there are these people that just want money and they'll do anything for money, and they are already operating in pseudo illegal behaviors and activities, and there' this incredible desire and thirst for power. So they might be willing to rub shoulders with these nefarious characters.

[Akash Singh]

Before 2005, there's some level of plausible denial.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There is some. Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Even if, you know, they're like, he's not.

[Akash Singh]

And if he's like, I could save you a billion dollars, you might be tempted to take.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Here's the thing. You're taking it literally. And I'm still not quite sure that I'm there yet. I'm not quite sure he actually was doing anything of the tax advice sort. I still don't know. Yeah, I. I still am, like, not clear on what he was actually doing.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't think anybody's clear.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Nobody's. That's part of the problem.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which is what's. So. But I want to make sure that when we're pinning people to certain things, like if you're staying in his penthouse after he's a registered sex offender, you're pinned. Like, there's.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There's like, no prime minister of Israel. Sorry. Multiple times.

[Andrew Schulz]

Bill Gates.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, Bill Gates.

[Andrew Schulz]

Didn't he have an office in Harvard?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Was that after.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, I'm not sure about that. I have to go back and double check.

[Andrew Schulz]

But again, those things, like, let's pin it right there. There's no question you have stories.

[Sagar Enjeti]

George Stephanopoulos, who had dinner in his house.

[Andrew Schulz]

How are you hanging out? Like, can't do some Google Exact.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

And you should be. So. So, okay, so there are these. I get it. I get. I just want to make sure that we're compartmentalizing a little bit. Not to say that they don't know that they're engaging in illegal activity. They just maybe aren't going. I'm with a kid who's using this as potential blackmail or as an intelligence.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Very true. And that's important. So let's get into actually sex trafficking and actually that whole race.

[Andrew Schulz]

Don't let me speed you up.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, you're fine. So, 1991 to 2005. I call this the Epstein heyday. So. So this is. I've gained control of the Wexner empire. I've transferred these assets and these properties into my Name Ghislaine is here. And now it's on. So if you look from that, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial describes many of these Ohio properties being used specifically for sex trafficking purposes. Right. So these are just in late 1994, late 1995. Basically move from that point forward, the Palm Beach Virgin Islands connection begins to. To materialize. We have the house in Palm Beach. We have the compound in the US Virgin Islands, the Lolita Epstein Island. That's the Epstein Island. We have the Virgin island island that's acquired under the Epstein basically estate. Then we have the Lolita Express that's purchased the private jet. So all the pieces that are now famous, these all come into play between 91 and 2005. This was the heyday of the Epstein empire.

[Andrew Schulz]

Is this where you see the images of him and Trump hanging out?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes, exactly. 2002. That's when we have the first image. Although I have it in my notes for the Trump Epstein relationship. Let me go ahead and find that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Don't let me speed you up.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, no, it's fine. So 2002, Trump says, I've known Jeff for 15 years. So basically putting their relationship back to the 1980s. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It's even said he likes beautiful women as much as I do. Many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it. Jeffrey enjoys his social life. So that's Donald Trump in 2002. Just again, to show everybody here what we're dealing with. Open secret. All right, so yes, he likes him on the younger side. He said it. And if you want, there's video. If you want to go ahead and play it. I have the YouTube link from NBC News of them hanging out. Let me find. Yeah. Footage from 1992. Actually, can you go ahead and click that one? It's a YouTube link. It's from a NBC news package in 2002. It's some B roll that actually shows them hanging out. So here we go. This is the. This is the famous. You know, they're all hanging out together. And by the way, there are. I haven't showed this yet, but there are photos of Trump and. And Robert Maxwell hanging out together as well in the past. So he certainly knew a lot of these individuals. We could see him dancing. They're at a party. Apparently, in the mid-2000s, there was a party that was thrown involving Victoria's Secret models that was put on by Epstein and another associate of Donald Trump where they all hung. Hung out. So just putting that out There. Yeah, I actually don't know. I. I love his tie. It's very 1990s. So, anyway, look, the footage all exists, and I'm sparing nobody here.

[Akash Singh]

I want to be point. The super. The super rich, the super elite is kind of a small circle. It's not kind of incredibly small circle.

[Sagar Enjeti]

All know each other. So if in physically hanging out, you're.

[Akash Singh]

Going to hear some whispers about one of your friends.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's not even a whisper. He said it out loud on the record. Trump said it. He just said it.

[Akash Singh]

All right, guys, we got to take a break real quick because America is under attack. Our freedom is under attack. Epstein's List is being suppressed, and there's only one company that could stop that from happening. There's only one company that cares about freedom. There's only one company that cares about America, and it's a caffeine company, obviously. Black Rifle Coffee. They make this energy drink right here. I drink it every single episode. You guys see it right there? You see me sipping out of it?

[Andrew Schulz]

It is.

[Akash Singh]

This is the reason that I'm not getting sent out of the country, because Trump's team sees this and they're like, oh, he's one of the good ones.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, patriots.

[Akash Singh]

Otherwise, it might not matter that I'm a citizen. Black rival coffee keeps me in America. If I had to go back to India, I'd be in jail.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But.

[Akash Singh]

But I'm here because of this. Yes, I do think it's a little bit offensive that Jamil handed me this specific flavor, Project Mango. I felt that as a bit of a slur from Jamil to toss this can at my head, but that's what it is. Project Mango. I am Project Mango. Black Rifle Coffee. 200 milligrams of pure American caffeine. You drink this, you won't be on Epstein's list because you won't even mention children, because this coffee is from good Americans, good veteran Americans who help keep us saf. So, guys, head to blackrifflecoffee.com flagrant and use the code flagrant and you get 30% off your purchase and your first order. They didn't need to do that. Honestly. It might get to the point where if you don't buy Black Rifle, you get sent out of America, and that's.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Just what it is.

[Akash Singh]

But they're gonna give you 30% off regardless, even though this is the only coffee and energy drink that you should consume in this entire country. Again, go to blackrifflecoffee.com Flagrant Use the code Flagrant. And if you don't want to do it online, if you like to do things in real life, you can also find Black Rifle coffee and energy drinks in grocery stores and convenience stores near you. Convenience stores. Ending with that also felt a little pointed.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But let's get back.

[Akash Singh]

Listen up, noodle dicks. You know what time it is? It's Blue Chew time. Listen, not all of us have a 12 inch dick like Alex Media, right? Okay, not all of us look at Conor McGregor's dick and say, oh my God, that thing is puny. Oh my God, his dick can only bench press 25 pounds. What a weak dick he must have. And if you're one of those people, which I am, same who doesn't look at it at Conor McGregor's dick and say, oh my God, that's a micro penis, unlike Alex Media, then you need to probably introduce BlueChew into your sexual regimen. Listen, ladies, if you're with a guy and he's fucking awesome and perfect and thoughtful and considerate and he has a small dick, you might be dating me. And if that's the case, I would compensate by just taking some Blue Chew. It's got all the same active ingredients as those other dick medications, but this the one we trust because it's the chew they've been rocking with us since day one. And as always, they got a special deal for flagrant listeners. You get your first month for free. If you go to bluechew.com and use a promo code flagrant at checkout. All you got to do is pay $5 for shipping. That's it. Again, head to bluechew.com, look at the safety information, look at the details, make sure everything is okay. Again, that is bluechew.com use a promo code flagrant, you get your first month free. Just pay $5 for shipping. Now let's get back to the show.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock.

[Andrew Schulz]

Between two factor authentication, strong passwords and.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A VPN, you try to be in control of how your info is protected. But many other places also have it.

[Andrew Schulz]

And they might not be as careful.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year.

[Andrew Schulz]

Visit lifelock.com podcast for 40% off.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Terms apply. 2002. Very important year in the Epstein story. 2002 is when journalist Vicky Ward, she works here in New York City. Vanity Fair magazine.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is the Vanity Fair Vanity Fair.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This is the very first premier magazine to say, who is this guy?

[Andrew Schulz]

Yes.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Graydon Carter, the legendary Conde Nast editor, king of New York society. It basically works with Vicki and says, hey, let's go write about this Epstein figure. Vicki eventually unclogs, uncovers evidence of the young women trafficking of the intelligence community ties and all of this in 2002.

[Andrew Schulz]

How does she uncover this?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Because she goes, she does a great job. She goes and interviews these people. That guy Stephen Hoffenberg, who's in prison, she interviewed him in prison and she didn't print his quotes until 20 years later because it was shut down by Graydon Carter. Now, Joey, can you please put up the story from New York magazine?

[Andrew Schulz]

Can you tell me why Graydon Carter would be able to. I understand the name Conde Nast, but maybe explain.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, so what I'm having here in front of me is a very. Oh, shit, Clayton. Crazy story is that according to Carter, somebody put a bullet outside of his. I think it was either outside of his house or wherever he was and a dead cat to intimidate him while he is investigating the Epstein story. So it eventually comes out.

[Andrew Schulz]

What is Conde Nast?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I mean, they own Vogue, they employ, you know, if anyone's ever seen the Devil Wears Prada, like that's based on Vogue magazine and Anna Wintour. That's part of the Conde Nas empire.

[Andrew Schulz]

The Conde Nass empire. Imagine with Rupert Murdoch, with news stations. This is with magazines.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Dude, it's so hard because the audience here is going to be young, so they don't even remember the Vanity Fair heyday. Like this was a big fucking deal.

[Andrew Schulz]

Before blogs, before like your favorite Instagram page, there were magazines.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This was the beating heart of American culture. Vanity Fair magazine, the New Yorker, Vogue magazine.

[Andrew Schulz]

Newspapers were information and magazines were more like op ed.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, magazines were not just op ed. They were actually the places where this type of journalism, I mean, there's stories that Conde Nast about. Guys were getting paid half a million dollars a year. They would write three stories a year, but they would spend six months like.

[Andrew Schulz]

Vicky Ward, because it was really journalism.

[Akash Singh]

It would change the face of the.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, some of my favorite journalists, there's a guy named Dexter Filkins at the New York. He spent like six months. One of the favorite war reporters. He'll. They'll go out and report for seven months conspiracy theories about a 10,000 word article.

[Akash Singh]

Theoretically Watergate, whatever the conspiracy take, conspiracy theories aside, that's journalists breaking a story that caused a president to resign. Change the trajectory of the Entire world.

[Andrew Schulz]

And now when it happens and you see like a 20 page article in the New Yorker or something like that, you're like, who the fuck reads this? And nobody really reads it, but at.

[Sagar Enjeti]

The time, oh, it was everything thing.

[Andrew Schulz]

And that's why like our parents and I think that we're probably a little bit even too young, us, maybe you just because you're involved in journalism so much.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I have read about it so I can contextualize it, but I never experienced it.

[Andrew Schulz]

But this was the heyday of like information and it created habitual reading.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right?

[Andrew Schulz]

Like just my parents had a subscription to New York magazine in New Yorker. And like every single. When is it coming? It's weekly. Yeah, yeah, it used to be.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I don't know anymore.

[Andrew Schulz]

But it's like. So they're reading it every single. And the pieces that are in there, the assumption was that these were like real investigative journalism pieces and they're unfold uncovering truths that take months and months to put together. So they really gained like the support and trust at least of maybe like, I don't want to say like more like coastal elites.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's what you just described, the global elite. The global elite is very small. It's like maybe 10,000 people who run the entire world. Like, and actually that might even be a little bit generous. And they're all subscribing to vote. I mean, look, Anna Wintour is still an icon amongst the super rich, so. So obviously it really matters. So Epstein basically uses the threat of legal action to shut down any mention of his intelligence ties, which he's confronted with directly. Any mention of the sex trafficking and the pedophilia accusations. And all of it is dropped from the Vanity Fair article that culminates in the 2002 story. Who is Jeffrey Epstein? The mysterious man of New York. But it basically, it insinuates things about being with women. And he knows everybody. He's friends with Harvey Weinstein, he's friends with all of New York society. Everybody seems to know him. You have the quotes by Donald Trump and others. And so what we see there is 02 is a very important year because it shows his power, his power to shut down Graydon fucking Carter, his power to bring the Conde Nast empire to bear and say, no, no, no, no, no, you're not reporting any of this. The power of using Harvey Weinstein and others to basically call all the journalists and other people around him and say, I'm going to sue the shit out of you if you report even one word of this.

[Andrew Schulz]

Now, it's important to note that, like, shutting down stories is quite common if you have a PR agency or something.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like that, especially at that time, at this time when access really matters.

[Andrew Schulz]

I would even say now, like, you have a PR agency or something's about to release on tmz, and you know somebody over there at tmz, you're like, yo, can you just not put out this.

[Sagar Enjeti]

If you hold this, I'll give you an exclusive on.

[Andrew Schulz]

But there's a. There's a quid pro quo, which is like, if you don't release this, I'll give you the first dibs on this story coming out with this album release. So that is. It is quite common practice. But to shut down a story that's making an allegation or multiple allegations this big, you need to have some serious weight and some serious quid pro quo. I think it's got to be more than just lawsuit, because these people, I mean, they're. They're lured up to the gills, like, if you run.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's what I was trying to say to understand how extraordinary this is. This is conde. Fucking nasty.

[Andrew Schulz]

Massive. I mean, dude, even me and you.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And others, when people are like, I'm going to sue you, I'm like, yeah, good fucking luck. I'm like, all right, I've got insurance. I'm like, and I know the fuck the First Amendment works. And New York Times versus Sullivan. I'll be like, I'm gonna eat your fucking legal fees for lunch and I'll see you in court. All right. Because of the legal standard, if you are a public figure like Epstein was basically at that time, the possibly the bar for defamation and libel is so incredibly high. I actually really support that. It's one of my key differences with Trump is I think it's a good thing because it allows for investing journalism. Well, not just that. We can fucking go for it without secure.

[Akash Singh]

So let's not.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Akash Singh]

But we'll get into that at another time then.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Why does he agree to this article? Is it just hubris? Oh, Epstein. No, he didn't agree to. It was assigned. Epstein did not want this to happen. Oh, really?

[Andrew Schulz]

They changed the article to make it less accusatory.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You could actually go and read it.

[Akash Singh]

I don't think we're understanding how crazy this is to. He intimidated Graden Carter basically, to take out a lot of the salacious.

[Sagar Enjeti]

To take out the intelligence with a.

[Akash Singh]

Fucking bullet and a dead cat. We've seen the Godfather.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, yeah. It's like the same thing.

[Akash Singh]

Literally mob Instead of a horse in the head, it's a dead.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's crazy.

[Andrew Schulz]

And there's no way to prove that he was the one that did it. But having those.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He's not. Listen, Graydon certainly believed it. And Braden works and has dinner with the most powerful people in all of New York.

[Andrew Schulz]

He hasn't spoken about this.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He has certainly not. He has not actually answered a whole lot of questions about this. So that's an important thing. But does he give comment to Vicky Ward here?

[Andrew Schulz]

Huh?

[Sagar Enjeti]

You know, Epstein goes on the record in some places, but we don't learn the full extent of all of their exchange until 2021, after he's dead, when she begins to reveal a lot. Lot of the stuff that she actually had on the record in this story. So this is the very first known time of a major expose which would have really hurt Jeffrey Epstein if it had come out that he's able to shut down eventually in the future. We see the same tactics with Good Morning America and with the Prince Andrew story, if you'll recall, of that famous video, the leaked video from CBS or ABC News, where she's like, I had this story. I had everything. And the palace shut it down. And Epstein and all of them basically came together, and we didn't want to lose our coverage of the royal wedding, and so we didn't publish any of this. And she's like, I had the story from day one.

[Andrew Schulz]

We didn't want to lose our coverage of the royal wedding.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

So we shut this down so we would have access to the royal wedding.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

So. So again, that's the quid pro quo. It's like, if you want to work with us, if you want access to this, this story that you know is going to probably sell way more ads.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Than your prince wedding is huge. You remember that? So women in America got up at like 5am to watch it or what.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah. Which is so.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Which is wild. Yeah. Sorry, Alex.

[Andrew Schulz]

Go, go, go. It's good to ask questions about this. I think. I think we feel guilty asking because it looks like we're trying to create it out. I'm not trying to create. They understand the totality of this and, like, where they would be coming from if they were going to defend it. So I asked you a question. You said that's 2002, when she's working.

[Sagar Enjeti]

On that story came out in 02.

[Andrew Schulz]

But then she actually.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It was published in March 03, but it was reported throughout 2000.

[Andrew Schulz]

But then she doesn't release the other part of the story until 20 years later.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, basically after he's died.

[Andrew Schulz]

That means you knew he was kids. Well, and she sat on it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, she didn't have evidence. Man, we're journalists. We can't say these things. No, no, no. See, this is very important. Yeah. I can't just come out and say this without evidence. You need to. And look, that I talked about to Mark many times, but I talked about the barrier, you know, the defamation stuff. Like you need to have some. You need to have some stuff on the record. And she did not have enough that they felt comfortable going forward with something like that.

[Andrew Schulz]

I thought.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Comfortable.

[Andrew Schulz]

They. I thought they just took it out.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Because of the claiming that it didn't meet the evidentiary standard. Vicky Ward says otherwise. Look, I could see the case either way, but the point is, is that what's come out afterwards is that Graydon Carter was terrified. And so it's not really about the story. It's that he was afraid to be able to publish this. So that is the context. Afraid of his social power.

[Andrew Schulz]

Afraid for.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He just seemed to be. He was afraid for his life.

[Andrew Schulz]

But. Okay, yeah, because these are different things. Afraid for your life is different than afraid for the success of your. What would you call that?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like his magazine? His magazine, yeah, his social cache. His cache.

[Andrew Schulz]

Because if you lose access, you essentially have no cache. And which is ironically what Epstein is concerned about. If Epstein becomes Persona non grata because of this piece, he no longer can do the thing that he does, which is connect and liaison with super wealthy and influential people.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There you go.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay.

[Sagar Enjeti]

All right, so that gets us to 05. So 91 to 05 is the heyday. 2005 is the first time that we really know about of a prolonged investigation in. Into Epstein and eventually culminates in the sweetheart deal of 2008. So in 2005, a 14 year old girl who was lured by Epstein, Maxwell Associates and all these people, her father complains to the Palm Beach Police Department about being sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein. This leads to an undercover investigation by Palm beach pd, where they launched this investigation where they're able to connect multiple underage girls who are being lured by Epstein and Maxwell and other associates to the compound and the west well oiled system. There's a documentary on Netflix. This is the part they actually did quite well of. Just showing the way that that all worked. Search warrant finds hidden cameras, sex toys, basically proof of underage communications with Epstein. They have him nailed, dead to rights, probably 20 years or whatever. Under state law. However, Epstein hires all of these extremely Filthy rich lawyers who are able to go to the Palm Beach Police Department. They claim that they were poking holes in their case. Palm Beach PD basically throws up their hands, and they're like, look, I can't handle this shit. They're like, this is a level of, you know, this is a machine. I'm going up against that. I don't know how to combat this machine. They only have a bulletproof charge on him of solicitation of prostitution, but they go to the feds. Now, the feds, of course, have the vast resources of the federal government, the Department of Justice. The person who's in charge at that time is a guy named Alex Acosta. Alex Acosta, the U.S. attorney for the Southern Florida, now U.S. attorney for Florida. This comes under his purview. This investigation is long launched under him. Using FBI resources, they are able to develop a large case against Jeffrey Epstein. The operation is called Operation Leap Year that is launched by them. Leap Year uncovers evidence that Epstein has an interstate sex trafficking operation involving girls as young as 13 years old.

[Andrew Schulz]

Geez.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Now, this is a very important point. We have a secret federal indictment that was issued against Jeffrey Epstein where they lay out all of this evidence for a sweeping indictment which would have put him behind bars probably for. I mean, for. Probably for the rest of his life. This is where the. Everything starts to happen. This is where the sweetheart deal comes into play. And it's at this point, after this secret federal indictment that they come to the Epstein team and they're like, this is what we have on you. Let's begin a negotiation. Because they're looking for a plea deal, ultimately.

[Andrew Schulz]

Why are you looking for a plea?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, I think it's part of. I think it's kind of customary where you bring, you know, when the feds investigate you, they have to send you a target letter. They're like, hey, you're under federal investigation. You need to hire counsel, you know, just so we can get this whole ball rolling. I mean, something like 95% of people charged by the federal system plead guilty. So it's quite common. Most people don't go to trial. The feds don't want you to go to trial. If they do, they're going to smack your. You know, they'll hit you with charge after charge. You're going to spend the rest of your life in prison. The vast, vast majority of people.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's why they have the 95% conviction.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's why they have their conviction rate. Exactly. So that's how they get. Get to it, you know, and there's variety of systemic issues. So it was all generally par for the course up until this point. That's when Epstein hires Alan Dershowitz. That's when he hires all these Bush connected officials.

[Andrew Schulz]

All of these are Aldershowitz Bush connected.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, no, no, not Dershowitz. There are other lawyers on the team who are connected to George W. Bush, the administration, to Republican politics in general, because George W. Bush is the president at this time. And it's at this time that you have the sweetheart non prosecution agreement that is agreed upon by Alex Acosta and the Epstein legal defense now at this time, too. This is a very important point. Joey, can you please put up my tweet? Epstein flees to Israel while he negotiates his deal with Acosta. So if you go to the first slide there, please. Yes, this is from a Vicky Ward story. Talk that Epstein had moved himself and his assets to Israel had reached the ears of such luminaries as Harvey Weinstein, Jeff Buches, Alex Gibney, Taylor Hackford, Dustin Hoffman, Alec Baldwin, and filmmaker Michael Mailer. Has anyone told Vicky Ward, I heard someone say, ah, fame. Ever since I wrote this article about EPSTEIN in the March 2003 story, I've had dubious honor of being considered the New York expert on the case. Well, I've never been one to leave a riddle unsolved. So I called Epstein's office to ask. Around lunchtime, he phoned me laughing, assuming he'd been in Israel, but assuring me he'd been in Israel but was now back in New York. And he says, would you want to live in Israel as he denigrates that? So he goes to Israel while this sweetheart deal is. Is being negotiated. This is very important. Okay, Again, very important is that he was safe in Israel for reasons that remain unknown to us to this day.

[Akash Singh]

And you generally can't leave the country.

[Sagar Enjeti]

If you're underneath it. Actually. Yeah. Joey, can you go to the next slide? Next thing the government will allow when he returns to America. As you can see right there, April 2008, Epstein returns from Israel before pleading guilty. Some question why he was allowed to even keep his passport while his team is undergoing negotiation with the federal government.

[Andrew Schulz]

Can you explain how normal that that is?

[Sagar Enjeti]

That is not normal. So that is extremely not.

[Andrew Schulz]

If you have money like that. You're a flight risk.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

So while you're being federally investigated, they will take your password because you are flight. It's very similar to what happened, I think, at least in the beginning of the Diddy trial. Remember, there was there's the words like Diddy was going to flee. And I think that they told him that he had to stay in America. Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So I don't have the. So to be clear, I don't think it's while investigation there are other. I'm not a lawyer but the way I'd read about it is it was very uncommon at that time especially after you agreed to plead guilty because remember he please. He agrees to plead guilty under a non prosecution agreement. September 2007. This is April 2008. During this period he is in Israel where he's effectively he's going to 2007 to 2008. 2007 to 2008 is while he is in his is in Israel. Again basically the theory was the open talk in New York society that Vicky Ward heard is that Epstein had moved himself and all his assets to Israel. This is apparently by the way a common thing. Relatively common for pedophiles who are Jewish in the United States who actually actually have fled to Israel to escape prosecution.

[Andrew Schulz]

Really?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. Actually Joey, can you go down Glenn Greenwald?

[Akash Singh]

That is a bad look for Israel.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Dude. How Jewish American pedophiles hide from justice in Israel.

[Andrew Schulz]

Why do they accept?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well Israel has the right to return for every Jew in the world. It's called aliyah.

[Andrew Schulz]

So they're taking advantage of like a.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, some of them are taking advantage and basically being able to go to Israel. I It's complicated as well in terms of extradition agreements etc. But Glenn Greenwald flagged that piece to me how Jewish American pedophiles hide.

[Akash Singh]

But sorry just to try to understand this. Is that something that the United States.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Just allows for anybody I I again I actually don't know. I know I only learned of it yesterday. I didn't realize that it wasn't just Epstein that there. This is like a common enough phenomenon that people have written a story about it before. I need to go look into it in general, I would hope personally that we use our influence with all allies or any extradition agreement than anybody charged with a crime on like this against children be immediately extradited to the United States.

[Akash Singh]

Because I mean my friends that are in trouble with Indian government over the joke. They took their passports. Yeah, they just got them back. But like I don't even know if one of them got them back. You're under arrest for freedom of speech potentially. We're going to trial. You have my passport. This guy is on trial for pedophilia.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not on trial. He's in investigation and eventually a non prosecution Agreement which is different because he admits pleading.

[Andrew Schulz]

So he hasn't been charged yet.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It. Well, he had not been charged yet. He enters the non prosecution agreement in September27. While he's here, while he's away, while he's in Israel.

[Andrew Schulz]

So while he's in Israel he enters.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So his legal team enters.

[Andrew Schulz]

He had already left. What I'm trying to understand is did he do anything illegal by leaving?

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, I don't think so. Or anything.

[Akash Singh]

That's not normal.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's more about the question of why do you feel so safe in Israel? You know, and it's like why, you know, why are you going over there with all your assets? Did you get some promises there from the government? But are you normally allowed to leave intelligence connections? Again, if you look at that story that. That scroll up Joey and again put that screenshot about returns from Israel to the next one. It was noted at the time. This is a report from the Palm Beach. Palm beach local news that it was uncommon and that there were questions at the time why he was allowed to.

[Andrew Schulz]

Obviously it looks incredibly fucked up but I am trying to steel man in terms of. Let's say that there was somebody that all had dual citizenship to Britain. They're being investigated. Investigated for something. Could they go stay in Brin. So that would be. That would be okay. And maybe not common, but it would be legal.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Although you just made an important point there is that we have never yet been acknowledged that Epstein ever was an Israeli citizen. So we have no idea whether is.

[Andrew Schulz]

He at that time.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We have no idea. To this day we don't know. We do know that he was found with false passports that were inside of his house in New York City. So it's possible that he even.

[Andrew Schulz]

What do you mean?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes. Can you google it, please? Join Epstein. Epstein. Passports that were found at his New York City residents. This is an open acknowledged fact. And I'll come back to this. This is part of the intelligence case. Who the fuck has false passports? It's not exactly a easy thing for multiple passports and travels to Africa and to the Middle east. And they were found in his residence in his New York City.

[Akash Singh]

Guys, did Jason born a title I.

[Andrew Schulz]

Never understood False passports because everything's connected to.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right. Which means that there's no really such thing as a false passport and there's a passport that's issued to you under false pretenses by foreign governments. So let's just. Or by your own government. Possibly by your own government. Wow. In the age. In the age of the barcode. There's no false passport. Okay. All right.

[Akash Singh]

Wow.

[Sagar Enjeti]

When's the last time you guys flew into America? You know how much biometric data and all that stuff. This is not happening. But like CIA can issue pass. CIA can issue a passport under that. That will clear State Department. I mean, look, even.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which would confirm the connections to intelligence. So look. Yeah, go, go, go.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, I was just saying when you land in any country in the world, even the jankiest country in the world at this point, everybody swipes in the passport. Yeah, it's all there.

[Andrew Schulz]

So then the question would be, or the logical thinking would be, goes to Israel. And while this deal is being negotiated, if the deal is not advantageous to.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Him, I'm staying in Israel.

[Andrew Schulz]

Then he's staying in Israel. Now is there, is that. Does he have enough leverage where staying in Israel is actually a threat to the US intelligence apparatus?

[Sagar Enjeti]

This is unfortunately we still don't know because this is all part of the unreleased perhaps Epstein files. And I would be happy to be wrong.

[Andrew Schulz]

So in one circumstance, it could be as simple as I'm not living in America as a pedophile. I'd rather just live over here.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'd rather live in Israel.

[Andrew Schulz]

I'm going to stay. And there is no intelligence involved. There is another version where it's like, hey, I'm going to go over here. Do you want me to tell all these guys everything I know? Because I could easily just tell them everything I know and they'll accept that information.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Let's actually really sit on this because this is what leads to the sketchy non prosecution agreement. So September 2007, Alex Acosta offers Epstein non prosecution agreement despite massive evidence of a national of a sex trafficking ring that crosses state lines, a textbook definition of a federal case. He pleads only to the solicitation of prostitution involving a minor and he must register as a sex offender. The conditions of his non prosecution agreement basically say he must spend 18 months in the Palm Beach County Jail. He has weekend release. He's allowed 12 hours a day, six days a week to basically do whatever he wants. There is some evidence that he actually continued some the of of his trafficking while he was actually locked up in prison. He had a black car that would pick him up for 12 hours a day. It's the greatest deal in the entire world. And all he has to do is serve 18 months under these sweetheart conditions. And what he is able to do is that he is only asked to register as a sex offender. He does not spend decades in federal.

[Akash Singh]

Prison 12 hours a day.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's a joke. Wait four, six days a week. Yeah, it's called work release. They actually call it work release. That was extreme conditions. Now here's another very important thing about this plea deal. Under this non prosecution agreement, the federal government grants immunity for all crimes that were under investigation of that indictment to Jeffrey Epstein and to all unindicted co conspirators, including Ghislaine Maxwell. So this non prosecution agreement grants sweeping immunity of all crimes that were named indictment both for Ghislaine Maxwell and for the Jeffrey Epps. And for Jeffrey Epps. Pause right here.

[Andrew Schulz]

So in other words, he gets this slap on her wrist compared to what they're investigating him for.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

And he gets to wipe the slate clean for all the way worse shit.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

That now he gets immunity. That's different than wiping the slate clean. Does he then acknowledge all the things that happened through his immunity?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I don't believe so. I think it was just that these were the crimes that you were being investigated for. And we're going to basically agree that we'll never prosecute you for them. In exchange for. It's a limited hangout. Yeah, it's like exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

What is that called?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Limited hangout.

[Andrew Schulz]

What does that mean?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Basically it's like the publishing of some of the bad things you did in order to hide all of the bad things.

[Andrew Schulz]

So everything before 2008 he gets off with 18 months?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, everything in the secret indictment that was against.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yes, exactly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Which by the way still exists and has never been released to this day. So.

[Andrew Schulz]

So there is a virgin. Virgin. A lot of them. There is a version where we could. Is there any version where we could learn about what was in that?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, they could release it if they wanted to. I mean these are part of the promises that have been made by.

[Andrew Schulz]

Would that break the immunity agreement?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, actually no. So hold on a second. This is part of the reason. Can you put that back up? Because this is important.

[Akash Singh]

The reason than getting your reason why.

[Sagar Enjeti]

The reason why we ever learn anything about this is because of the victims and the courageous victims who according to the law on the books at the time is that the victims themselves had a right, a federal right to be informed of this none prosecution agreement. This non prosecution agreement was kept secret from the Epstein victims, which violates federal law. And once he fight for justice, and it's in 2018 that a court rules that the Epstein non prosecution agreement violates the federal rights of the Epstein victims. It's under that ground that the non prosecution Agreement is overturned.

[Andrew Schulz]

And.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And it is under then that the Southern District of New York is able to arrest Jeffrey Epstein on new charges. So this civil rights, this lawsuit is. Yeah, the Crime Victims Rights Act. That's exactly what it is. Except they complained they were not informed of the government's deal and were very unhappy about it because they trusted the feds to basically work, basically give them justice on their behalf. And they ruled. The district court ruled that it violated their rights under the Crime Victim Rights act and overturned the non prosecution agreement, which opens the door to his rearrest in 2019.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay, so hold on right here.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Because it overturns that convict. I don't want to say conviction, but it overturns the non prosecution agreement and the immunity. We should now legally have access to the indictment and investigation we don't legally have access to. Why is that? Why is there legal? Why, why can you overturn something but he still gets immunity through it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, he didn't have immunity. These re. They indicted. Indicted him on new charges. But there's still an open question as to whether all the new charges in the 2019 indictment against Epstein include the secret indictment and many of the charges that were made against him.

[Andrew Schulz]

Bare minimum. There would be nothing that would go against our system of justice that would simply expose all the charges and investigation in that initial crime. Or those initial crimes. Right. Because it was overthrown.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, it's complicated. So I do know that the grand jury docs were actually released from 2007. I have this in front of me because I don't have all of the details exactly on here, but it's not the full like actual investigation.

[Andrew Schulz]

I guess what I'm trying to get at is, is, is this doesn't necessarily prove a blackmail ring.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which it seems the narrative is incredibly popular online and something that we've obviously talked about, but it would at least acknowledge the accusations and the extent of the crimes that he was. Was accused of.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which we haven't really gotten to at all. We've heard about them.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

But that information is not. And I think what would be very interesting about that is that if we have access to that information. Yes. It might not incriminate the. The co conspirators. No. Actually would incriminate those co conspirators now. But that would be okay because those people were being investigated, was going to go to trial anyway.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

We don't fall into that same maximalization act or whatever I was talking about.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

This idea that like. Oh, you were around Epstein. So we don't want your name to be mentioned because your image could be tarnished when you weren't actually accused of anything. No, no, this is. They were accusing you of it and they were ready to go to trial.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right. They were willing to go release that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Bare minimum. Bare minimum.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They've released some of that. They've released the grand jury documents. But. Exactly. So this gets to the whole point and then, even then, whether we can really trust whether all those grand jury documents, which are only released about a year or so ago. And by the way, I'm not a lawyer, so if I misspeak on any of this stuff, like, please forgive me. I'm actually just trying to compile like all the evidence. What we do know, at least according to the Justice Department, is that this was a deal that should never have happened. But that doesn't happen until 2020 after Epstein kills himself. After the Office of Professional Responsibility officially says Alex Acosta showed poor judgment whenever he entered this investigation. But that's the whole ball game. Here is why we did not. Why we let him off on a sweet yard deal. Go ahead.

[Andrew Schulz]

Was Ghislaine the only co conspirator that got immunity?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I think if she wasn't named in it, it was like to any co conspirator it was. She wasn't specifically named, but it did cover her because she was one of the people who would.

[Akash Singh]

I guess it covered all co conspirators.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Asking who else was covered. You'd have to. I'd have to revisit that exact case. But I know there were like assistants and other people who were involved.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's the thing. Like this.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I mean, look, this doesn't just. It's like remember Harvey Weinstein and he had all of his assistants.

[Andrew Schulz]

Harvey.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. It was like there's a lot of people that need to know about this to make this all happen.

[Akash Singh]

So here's a weird question. Kind of why would that judge in 2018 suddenly kind of buck everything else that's happened and say no, these victims have a right to justice?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Because it's a clear cut case. They were. It's literally the law that they had to be informed of the. Of the non prosecution agreement.

[Akash Singh]

Very ignorant question. Why say 10 years where other judges.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Legal system is very slow. That's just basically what it is. Also a lot of them were felt in silence. A lot of them didn't even know about it. They learned about it later and after they learned it, learned about it, they thought that this had all been A lot more penal. He'd been penalized more after they learned again, that documentary on Netflix that actually goes into all of these specifics. But I'm more focused on the intelligence question. That's like the case I want to really stick with, because that's the whole ball game is here is why did Acosta let him off?

[Andrew Schulz]

And before you get to that mark, what were you saying?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Do you know if the statute of limitations applies for these kinds of things? If someone's sort of like collaboration with a crime is. Yeah, well, we'd have to go. We'd have to do the math. But if you think about the statute of limitations, Ghislaine goes on trial for crimes in the 1990s, so presumably, you know, all of her convictions, if it's in, what, 20, 21, I think she was convicted, then let's go back some 20 years. So there must be the statute of limitations. There is for everything, I think, but murder. But it presumably does go back, like decades, enough that she was able to be prosecuted. So at the very least, other co conspirators. The other co conspirators could also be.

[Andrew Schulz]

And wouldn't it wipe away the statute of limitations of limitations if there was proven that there were. The case wasn't handled according to the legalities. I'm a lawyer situation.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm not a lawyer.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't get what I'm saying. It's like, let's say like, they.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You would think so. But I could also see some way where they're like, no, it's the government's fault for entering into a bad thing, so you can't prosecute it.

[Andrew Schulz]

But they didn't enter into a bad thing. They didn't tell the. What were they? What are they?

[Sagar Enjeti]

What are the victims?

[Andrew Schulz]

They didn't tell the victims of the agreement. So I would imagine you'll. It's like a mistrial. You allowed to do it again. I don't think that the statute of limitations should wipe that away. I think the victims will just have right to see that agreement. I don't think it would undo the agreement.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, they. Yeah, exactly. The thing is that they were all. They didn't have to do anything except to tell them, hey, guys, this is what we did.

[Andrew Schulz]

And the reason they didn't do it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And they just didn't do it because it was a sweetheart deal.

[Andrew Schulz]

It was a sweetheart.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And they didn't want to reveal why he's able to get away with that. But this is kind of what.

[Andrew Schulz]

Miles has one question really, really quick The Freedom of Information Act. Would this apply at any point? Is there like a time in which this will have to release?

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's a foia. It's a big FOIA question. So foia, I mean it can take forever in the Department of Justice and there are various like classification rules. This leads remember there was redactions in the Epstein files and even then it has to go through review of the FOIA officer. This is not really something that we'll ever find out via. And that's almost impossible.

[Andrew Schulz]

Got it. And then secondly, when people talk about the word or like say Epstein files.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Are they generally referring to this secret indictment? Is that the bulk of it or are there so many other pieces?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm trying to find the secret indictment details here. Just so. Yeah, so the sealed federal indictment prepared by the Southern District of New York that led to his eventual July 2019 arrest. This was under seal in late or June. So this basically goes back to this, the indictment that was previous, prior to the non prosecution agreement. That's what I'm talking about. That is not what the Epstein supposed files are.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And this is the other problem. Nobody really knows what the Epstein files are. And there's been this bastardization again of this idea of the black book and the so called client list. I'm telling you it doesn't work like that. Like there are names in books. Some of the names in the Epstein black book actually it turned out he never met them. Right. So what Epstein files to me is financial records, is the entire like co conspirators. Co conspirators, right. The entire, the original investigation documents the FBI 302s and the, you know, the.

[Andrew Schulz]

What's the operation?

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's what we're going to learn. That's, that's what we all want to.

[Andrew Schulz]

But then take a back bunch of.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Tapes and the tapes that were allegedly lost about the cash and the artwork and the flight logs which are still not, you know, entirely released and very been released in dips, drips and stabs.

[Andrew Schulz]

Hilarious.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Okay.

[Andrew Schulz]

Anyone did to that shit.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So let's focus here on the non prosecution agreement and why this did not happen and the case for why it is very, in my opinion likely he was an intelligence asset. So in 2019. Joe, if you could please put this up from the Daily Beast, Vicky Ward. Remember this is Vicky Ward, this is the person who reports From Vanity Fair 2002, probably the foremost authority on Epstein. She reports that Alex Acosta, while he was being screened by the Trump transition team in 2017, when he was Asked why did you back off the Epstein case? She says here, he was told, she was told he belonged to intelligence and to let it go. Now this, I wanna be clear, it's not been confirmed 100% that he said this. This is reporting from Vicky Ward about the Trump transition team. Now though, if you can go to the next link that I sent. In 2019, when Alex Acosta holds a press conference about this entire issue and he is asked specifically about intelligence ties of Jeffrey Epstein and whether he would confirm this, he says, quote, I would hesitate to that reporting as fact, but he would not deny it. Later on, he is asked on the record here by the Office of Professional Responsibility, whether he had any information that Epstein was an intelligence asset. He says, absolutely not. I did not have information. And he's informed that he is allowed to speak about this in a classified setting if he would like to. But he denies that he had information. But it's important to actually release the exact transcript as to what and how he was asked, because you remember when I said earlier when Naftali Bennett said he never worked for Mossad, that's very different than worked with Mossad. That's very different than was aware of, had contact with. Right. Do you see what I'm saying? There are multiple non people can be.

[Akash Singh]

Very specific with their wording to evade the truth.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Correct. As any lawyer and any former U.S. attorney would know when he's under question. But nonetheless, Alex Acosta had an opportunity to address this and issued a non denial denial in his public press conference in 2019. Last time I was here, I told you guys, my great regret is I sat him next to him on a plane and I didn't ask him about it because it was midnight flight from Miami and nobody was talking. And I'm just staring at this dude being like, bro, I got a, I got an ass, you know. Yeah, he probably thought I was such a freak. He's like, who is this guy? Yeah, it's like. Anyway, so Alex, if you're listening, I would still love to, to talk to you about. But he's never, he has never confirmed. He's never confirmed, he's never denied it. He's like, I guess he basically lives, I mean, look, he lives a private life in Miami. He can come out at any time, kind of deny. Well, here he said here and didn't really deny it.

[Akash Singh]

And again, he wants the exact.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This is why the exact transcript match matters, because he said, here, let's open it up. Very specifically.

[Andrew Schulz]

Is that transcript available?

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, it's not available and actually that's one of the Epstein files that people would like release. So Acosta told OPR he did not have any information about cooperating in federal investigation or relating to media reports that Epstein had, quote, been an intelligence asset. OPR says it did not find any reference to his purport, purported cooperation or even a suggestion. In the footnote, they says when OPR asked Acosta about his apparent equivocation in a 2019 press conference in answering the media question about Epstein being intelligence asset, he said, quote, the answer is no. So that's what he told them. Okay, let's be clear about what he said, at least in one on the record setting because there are various different reporting on this. I am personally inclined to take the totality of evidence of everything I talked about about his connections with Hoffenberg, with Adnan Khashoggi, with Douglas Lees to show all of his connections that we're about to get into with, with, with Israel and say, I think there's a pretty good case to be made. And let's also get now to why the intelligence community would ever want to cover this stuff up. All right, why? So can we go to the next link, please? This is from BuzzFeed News 2021. A great reporter, Jason Leopold, he's like the FOIA king. And what he reported in 2021 is secret CIA files say that staffers committed sex crimes involving children declassify CIA inspector general report shows a pattern of abuse and repeated decision by the federal prosecutors not to hold agency personnel accountable. Now why? And by the way, some of these agents abused children as young as 2 and 6, which are named here in the documents. All right, and so why would the feds not want to prosecute known pedophiles, people who are actually abusing children, not just child pornography? Why they were concerned if they prosecuted them in open court that sources and methods would be revealed. So in sources and methods. So in 10 different known times here from the CIA inspector general, they decided not to prosecute known pedophiles specifically to make sure that they could protect intelligence at the expense of justice and bringing people and putting these people in jail. So that shows you that there is a track record here from the United States government from the CIA inspector general report in which even in a much lower level scenario that they don't want this information to come to light. Not cuz they necessarily care about the justice. They care at the end of the day about sources and methods and about at all costs they want to keep all of these people out of open court. Because those people might start talking a whole lot of shit while they're on the transcript, on the record, and they might say, hey, you put me in federal prison, I'm going to tell the whole world what I know. And in exchange, they're let off with probably the worst crime that you can commit. You know, literally, in my opinion, like the worst possible crime that you can commit. We're talking about the sexual abuse here of children as young as two and as six. Second one, and this shows you actually a more systematic one. Shout out to my friend Darrell Cooper, who flagged this case to me in his podcast. I highly recommend it. The Martyr Maid podcast on the Epstein Files. So this is something he brought to my attention by his podcast, is that all throughout the 1970s and 1980s, there was this place called Kinkora Children's Home in Northern Ireland, where it was basically a hub and an orphanage for orphaned boys who were being systematically abused by intelligence assets known to MI6 and MI5. And it was basically covered up and ignored because they were key conduits in helping MI5 manage the northern Irish problem during the Troubles. This is but a clear cut example of basically how it works.

[Andrew Schulz]

Everybody understands MI5. MI6 is British intelligence. British intelligence and then the Troubles is a time in which there was a.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Irish resistance, Irish resistance against the UK and Northern Ireland. And it's complicated. I'm not a full expert.

[Andrew Schulz]

The argument is, in order to manage that resistance, they had these intelligence assets.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Who were sexually abusing children they knew they were sexually abusing and they let it happen.

[Andrew Schulz]

And they let it happen because it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Was advantageous to continue that intelligence. What I'm just showing you, though, this has all happened in the past.

[Andrew Schulz]

But just so we can clarify, it doesn't mean MI5 and MI6 are orchestrating the molestation of these children. It means that they're looking the other way, which is equally heinous.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's honestly worse, in my opinion. I actually think it's worse.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay, fair enough. Because it is advantageous for what the current administration or what the country wanted at the time. And so you're using this as evidence that intelligence communities have done this, have.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Done this in the past. These are verified incidents. They show us this has happened.

[Andrew Schulz]

And real quick, it would lend itself to this idea that intelligence communities were aware of what Epstein was doing and was able to look the other way because there was access to certain information and money and money that they wanted. So it would thwart this idea that the government is actively using Epstein as a worker, if you will, to run a blackmail ring. But it would confirm this idea that they were aware of this pedophile sex trafficking ring happening, and they allowed it to happen. So as long as that they could use him, continue to use him as an asset.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's exactly right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Which I think is an important slice, because I think the Internet has taken Epstein and turned him into the Mossad, CIA, government blackmail ring that they use to incriminate the elites, which at this point in time, we don't know if there's any evidence of that, but it seemed like there's overwhelming evidence to his access to these elites and his utility to intelligence services.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Correct? That's exactly right. And I wonder if it's advantageous for. For intelligence to have an asset or someone like this that has such a malignant proclivity. Correct. You're exact. See, this is very important.

[Andrew Schulz]

Go on. Can you continue on?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Just like, if basically you have someone that's able to have access to all this information and money, but also is a known pedophile, he's much easier to control and coerce.

[Andrew Schulz]

So it's like in the hood, if you got a crackhead or a heroin addict that you need him to do some fucking, that they always got to come back you. Because they're addicted to the thing you got.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's exactly right. I mean, the FBI looks the other way for on criminals, actually. Joey, can you Google this? It's like, confidential informants commit crimes. FBI. There was a report recently, it came out a couple years ago, that named, like, the number of crimes that the FBI allowed its confidential informants to commit while it was working with them.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is Whitey Bulger.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, but it's. It's not Whitey. It's like, it's way bigger than that. Whitey would be like, the perfect example of that.

[Andrew Schulz]

So the notorious Boston gangster, of course, always an FBI informant, but they allowed him to continue to run shit in Boston.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I mean, it's thousands of crimes, shocking profit dictator. They can do whatever they want. They can do whatever you want as long as you keep certain things.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh, you can kill tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people. As long as that, you're loyal.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You could say, like, wow, I would Google something like confidential informants commit crimes. Like FBI admits. Something like that. Maybe we can find that. I'm just citing it off the top of my head. Sorry.

[Akash Singh]

In the meantime, do we have.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Since I've looked at it. Go ahead.

[Akash Singh]

Do we have any idea what he's providing? That is Worth the kids.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There it is. Yeah, There we go. FBI allowed informants to commit 5,000 or something like, it's like maybe 5,000 or 50,000. I can't read the headline exactly. I'm again, I'm trying to. I'm trying to show everybody that this is, this is business as usual for the, for the federal government.

[Andrew Schulz]

And just to clarify, not all these crimes are kid. Some of these crimes are drug running. Most of these drug deals are drugs. Exactly. There are illegal activities that the FBI is aware of, and they allow these people to have operate in these spaces. They know that they're operating these spaces and being watched just as long as that information trickles back. For example, if you're a gun runner in America, you want to send some guns to some third world country, the FBI or the CIA is going to be aware of that. They can tap you for that information. And they might actually want those guns to get over totally. And they might need somebody like you were describing before to ensure that those guns actually get there for their nefarious purposes. But again, I just want to parcel this. It's not like the only crimes being committed are having sex with children. It is quite common that you are using these nefarious characters to carry out the horrible crimes that you cannot be associated. As you pointed out earlier.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, always business as usual. It's just extended to the furthest possible 1. Pedophilia.

[Andrew Schulz]

That is agreement, struggling. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And we all struggle with that because we're good people. Right? But when you're surrounded by this, look, it's all, how do. How do you commit major crimes? Right? It's all a buildup. Like nobody just starts out immediately, like going for a billion dollar Ponzi scheme. I mean, one of my favorite books is the history of the Madoff scheme. It starts small, man. It starts with one. It's one doctored paper and then it leads to this. And then it's one lie. It's one quarter, it's just one. That's all. And then you take another. Next thing you know, you run a $56 billion Ponzi scheme. It takes 50 years to get there, but it doesn't happen all overnight. It happens in a permission structure. In an environment of crime, the permission structure is huge.

[Akash Singh]

This might be the most obvious answer in the world. Or the is no answer and that's obvious. What intelligence is he providing? Do we have any idea that it's like, oh, this is potentially a pedophilia ring involving the most powerful people in the world? And instead of having any kind of justice information.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Okay, okay, so let's speculate at this because this is pure speculation and we have no idea. And this is part of what it would be great to get from files or investigation or a Church committee. You know, the Church committee actually would be the only answer here. We need a congressional committee. Sure.

[Akash Singh]

Church doesn't know about pedophilia.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Do you know what the Church committee is? No. It's in the 1970s. It was Senator Frank Church who was American hero.

[Akash Singh]

No Church can help itself.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Dud. Why call it the Church? Senator Frank church in the 1970s exposed COINTELPRO, all of the out of control operations by the FBI and the CIA. And he brought the intelligence community to bear post Watergate. And basically America didn't trust them anymore. Senator Church basically seized on this. He exposed a lot of the issues with the Black Panthers with cointelpro, with the.

[Andrew Schulz]

Can you explain cointelpro to anybody?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Cointelpro was a. What was it? A CIA, was it? Is that mind control? What am I thinking of?

[Andrew Schulz]

No, no, Agent Provocateurs.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm getting them all.

[Andrew Schulz]

Agent Provocators. You put the FBI agents in.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right. Peaceful, like with.

[Andrew Schulz]

Against the Black Panthers.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So there's that. And then what was the mind control? MKUltra. That's the MK Ultra. He exposed all this. Right. So that's why what I'm saying is we need something like that to happen with this.

[Andrew Schulz]

The intelligence community could be effectively using illegal measures to incriminate people that are not doing actual crime.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Or acting against their own citizens. Or acting against their own citizens.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like he was an arms dealer. Money launder. That's a lot of.

[Sagar Enjeti]

By the way. I'm speculation. That's not speculation. What I'm trying to say is there is a lot of evidence that points in that direction. I can't get further without the documents, without verification.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like it was what information dealers knew.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A lot of people who were doing so, you know, look, we can only speculate as to what is exactly happening.

[Andrew Schulz]

Bare minimum. What we can confirm is that he was involved. We obviously outside the child sex traffic that he was doing illegal money laundering.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He appears in my opinion to have been.

[Andrew Schulz]

Well, didn't he get caught at Bear Stearns? Maybe not money laundering, but insider trading.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He was doing something that violated compliance rules in the 1980s.

[Andrew Schulz]

Doing illegal stuff with the transfer of money. Probably tax evasion, which is quite common when you're dealing with this type of money. Yes, but still willing to go to illegal measures to, you know, Prop up the wealth of the world's elites, that he opens up his own firm and only accepts.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Billionaire. Billionaire. Right. Again, like, what do we do?

[Andrew Schulz]

That's what I'm gonna do. I'm open up a podcast studio.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Actually, today it would be the equivalent of saying only 20 billion. Right. There's not that many people.

[Andrew Schulz]

What if there was one guy that was managing the money of all the richest people in the world? It would be advantageous for the intelligence communities of any country to have access to that guy.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It would actually be quite foolish if he didn't.

[Andrew Schulz]

If you didn't, you have to have something.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right, Exactly. So this is again, like, we can only speculate. What did they get out of this? In my opinion, in the 1980s, he was obviously financing arms deals. There's just like clear cut case for me, that's the most useful. Black money is the most useful thing in the world to a US Intelligence or Mossad intelligence, Saudi intelligence, any of these other people. Then it gets to the question of the whole blackmail thing. And look, I think there is at least some evidence here in the case of Wexner and others that it appears to look like blackmail was used by Epstein for his personal financial gain. And then we combine the. And channel too, to where we have hidden cameras that we know about in the Virgin Islands, that we know about in the New York residence, that we know about in Palm Beach. Many of this footage and other things never have been released. We know about the DVDs and all on the cameras.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think it's important to note that it's not simply security cameras. I have cameras in all my homes. Exactly. Like they were wired for audio as well. And they were in the bathrooms. Yeah, I don't have.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes, but I actually think that's another interesting point.

[Andrew Schulz]

Point.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Because that doesn't necessarily mean it's only sexual blackmail.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh, I. I imagine it's the. It's more.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not that come over to my house, talk about. Let's talk.

[Andrew Schulz]

You go to the bathroom and you're like this fucking weirdo. I got to get the hell out of here. He's a piece of shit. Blah, blah, blah. And now you got that locked. And then the FBI gets.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Which I think is an important delineation that you might have some head of state. And let's say they're in the Epstein files as, oh, there is audio visual blackmail of Bill Clinton or ehud, Barack. It might not necessarily necessarily be sexual. Yeah, you're exactly right.

[Andrew Schulz]

All right, guys, take a break for a second. You need to take care of your mental health. Okay, we know how important it is, but we also know how daunting it seems to drive up from a therapist's office every single week. And that's where talk space comes in. Talkspace makes therapy easy and convenient because you can take your appointments from the comfort and privacy of your own home. You can even talk it out between sessions by sending text messages to your therapist. Talks based therapy and psychiatry are covered by many insurance plans and employers, including tricare for for active duty veterans and their dependents. Most insured members have a $0 copay. You can easily sign up online and get paired with the licensed provider that's the right fit for your needs, typically within 48 hours. You can also switch providers at no extra cost. And as a listener of this podcast, you'll get $80 off your first month with Talkspace when you go to talkspace.com flagrant and enter the promo code SPACE80. That is S, P, A, C, E80. To match with a licensed therapist today, go to talkspace.com flagarant and enter the promo code SPACE80. Now let's get back to the show.

[Akash Singh]

All right, guys, listen. I know I'm all about bitcoin, and here's what I've learned. I should not invest in any other coins. Kraken gave us some money to Invest. I lost $7,000 last time out of 10.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Wow. So that's almost hard.

[Akash Singh]

So this time they gave me more money. All I'm doing is bitcoin. That's it. I'm not around with fartcoin anymore. Everybody's sending their meme coins yourselves. It's bitcoin only for me. What about you guys?

[Andrew Schulz]

I think I'm mostly bitcoin, too, and I think I've been doing okay.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You're up the most.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think I'm up the most. Yeah. I'll be honest. I didn't pick them.

[Akash Singh]

But you had a Jewish person. Yeah. You had your handler.

[Andrew Schulz]

My Jewish handler. Pick it. That's smarter and it's working out, so you're winning. Also got gold.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A lot of gold. A lot of diamonds. I bought real estate. No, I doubled down an Epstein coin, and it's crushing right now through the roof. Dude, they should make that. I don't even know that's.

[Akash Singh]

You know, they don't ever show you the results of Alex.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. Trump said there's actually no coin.

[Andrew Schulz]

What the hell?

[Sagar Enjeti]

What did I put all my money in?

[Andrew Schulz]

This is crazy.

[Akash Singh]

And then now you're pretty much break even, right?

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, I Broke even.

[Akash Singh]

Yeah, but listen, guys, whatever you believe in, Kraken has a special offer going on for all flagrant fans. You sign up on the Kraken mobile [e-mail] flagrant and use according flagrant 25 and you get 25 in free Bitcoin that could be worth a billion dollars.

[Sagar Enjeti]

One day.

[Andrew Schulz]

One day.

[Akash Singh]

You never know. Also, just so you know, if it wasn't clear for me telling you I've.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Lost 70% of my money.

[Akash Singh]

This is not investment advice. Crypto trading involves risk of loss and is offered to US customers excluding Wyoming, New York and Where's Wall?

[Sagar Enjeti]

New York and Maine. Maine.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Akash Singh]

Thank God. Through pay at Interactive Inc.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game?

[Andrew Schulz]

Well, with the name your price tool.

[Sagar Enjeti]

From Progressive, you can find options that fit your budget and potentially lower your bills. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates Price and coverage match limited by state law. Not available in all states. Foreign let's get to aid Barack. This is important because now I want to start making the Israel case specifically. So we already talked about how earlier. Epstein. Jesus. Hold on. I am. I. Look, I want to present this actually. I don't need people coming with the anti Semitism accusations. Let's live only in the world.

[Andrew Schulz]

Let's make those accusations.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Absolutely.

[Andrew Schulz]

Wait, that happens today?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right now. This entire thing is going to be. Brandon. Anti Semitic. But listen, I don't care anymore. But even though they are going to say that no matter what, we should not be irresponsible and let's live in the world of fact. So go ahead, Joey and scroll down.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's too fucking anti Semitic.

[Sagar Enjeti]

The thing that I had that says Epstein and a Barack. So okay, let's go ahead and put this up here. Here are the lists that I compiled just yesterday of every Israeli prime minister who we know who was linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Number one is Shimon Peres. Shimon Peres was the prime minister of Israel in the 1980s. He, according to Ehud Barak himself and the open record, introduced Ehud Bar to Jeffrey Epstein. So that's the first prime minister of Israel that we know is linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Number two is Eoud Omer, who is named as an Epstein associate by the US Virgin Islands in their lawsuit against JP Morgan and Chase. I will be honest, EWD Olmeir. We don't. We have the least amount of information. We only know he was named by the US Virgin Islands as an Epstein associate. Number three. Ehud Barak, as I list there connections too vast to paraphrase. All right, and so let's spend some time now on Ayud Brock. Let me return to Netanyahu in a bit. In my document, you can scroll to the Epstein, Epstein and Eud Barak section. Eud Barak stayed for multiple times at Jeffrey Epstein's house. This is confirmed. He flew dozens of times on Jeffrey Epstein's private jet.

[Andrew Schulz]

But he has nowhere to stay in New York City.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, right. He's a former Prime Minister of Israel.

[Andrew Schulz]

Where could you see?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Actually, Joey, can you pull up the photo? Ayud Barack Epstein mansion.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is the biggest part of remedy. You going to go say it to Four Seasons?

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, I want you guys to see the photo. There's a photo of Abe Barack walking into the Epstein mansion with his face covered with a scarf up to his nose. And this is pre Covid times. He says it was cold, but it was cold. It was cold. Yeah, there it is.

[Andrew Schulz]

Look at that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Look, look at that. That's him walking into Jeffrey Epstein's house. That's insane. People don't walk around like that. They don't walk around like that. Sorry. Yeah, and that's post 2008.

[Andrew Schulz]

So again, we're talking about post conviction. Yeah, post conviction, he's a registered. Registered sex offender.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Still staying at his house.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He's staying his house. Yes. Okay. All right. Also 2015, I have a documented link here. Epstein funded Abrox, you know, the Jews of real estate in New York City. All right. Epstein funded Aoud, Barack's defense intelligence startup to the tune of millions of dollars. So that, in my opinion, is one of the real smoking guns. Because what did I talk about earlier with Jeffrey, with Robert Maxwell, was the funding of software used by the Israeli government. To do what? To spy on the United States.

[Andrew Schulz]

Now this. This software would be used to spy everywhere, I imagine, right?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, of course. Like Pegasus. Right. And all of these other things are. Right. So it's not just the United States, but it's everybody. All right, but here in this case, Epstein entered partnership worth millions with a Barack in 2015. Post conviction, registered sex offender. Okay, let's continue. Barack is who? The former. Not only Prime Minister, the former head of military intelligence inside of Israel. Let's continue beyond that and let's say ask about Eid Barak and what else he did. I have this in the Wexner section if you want it is. Let me find it here. I may not have actually put a citation. You can Google it if you would like. Epstein, who was also named by Leslie Wexner as a trustee of the Wexner foundation, paid Ehud Barak $2.3 million to complete two consulting reports, one of which he never finished. Okay. $2.3 million paid by the Wexner foundation to Eud Barak, the former Prime Minister of Israel, for one of which he never finished. Okay. I'm just saying. Good. Good work. If you can get it right. 2.3 million. Everybody out there, if you're struggling with your bills and your mortgage. This is insane. All right? This is insane for purposes of what we don't know. Now, let's return to the Wexner Foundation.

[Andrew Schulz]

Why would you be paying him?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, exactly. What's going on?

[Andrew Schulz]

No, I guess I'm. Why is that advantageous? Like, if.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Because it's like a jobs program for all of these former Israeli officials, and it's basically a network where. And this is actually fits what I was about to continue. The Wexner foundation funds a fellowship right now at Harvard University, which, by the way, of course, also had connections with Jeffrey Epstein. And what did we see is that the Wexner foundation has, for decades now, sponsored programs where Israeli officials, including military officials and civil government officials, come to the United States to, quote, learn leadership. And it's known as one of the largest networks of, like, highly influential Israeli government officials who come to the United States and basically link up with one another as a very, very powerful nexus. So the Wexner foundation is involved.

[Andrew Schulz]

And why is that incriminating that they come here and learn leadership?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, it's not incriminating. I'm just saying that the Wexner. This is an American. He's a billionaire. He's funding AIPAC and all of these various Zionist groups, causes. He's also paying, weirdly, $2.3 million to a former Israeli prime minister. This is a foundation which Epstein has a lot of control over, by the way. Just to be fair to them, they have claimed that they. That Epstein had no influence over that decision. Okay. I mean, he was, you know, basically running it, and he had. Power of Attorney by Leslie Wexner. But, you know, to be fair to the Wexner Foundation, I mean, I just think it's crazy. This is insane. To pay $2.3 million to a Barack.

[Andrew Schulz]

So what? So take me down that line of thinking. If you pay him that money, what does that mean?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, for what it's like to what?

[Andrew Schulz]

But to what?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I don't know.

[Andrew Schulz]

Give me a legit. Give me a hypothetical.

[Sagar Enjeti]

My hypothetical is that, you Know is that these are basically ways to create slush funds that perhaps he was using and others to fund other intelligence operations. So this returns me to the black money. Point is that you need legitimate ways to wash money.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay? Nonprofits are great ways. Giving the money to him, and then he's doing, you know, nefarious.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Who knows what he's with it. I don't know what he's doing.

[Andrew Schulz]

Is there a way of looking at it where you go, jeffrey Epstein is working for US Intelligence, and in a way, this is how they're bribing Israeli intelligence.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You very may well be on something. And this is why I will never sit here and say he was solely a Mossad agent or Mossad asset. Solely a U.S. asset. I think he was a high. He was a hired gun. He would work for anybody, for anybody, and everybody would want to work with this person because he has access to.

[Andrew Schulz]

All the militants, to the world's money.

[Sagar Enjeti]

To the world's rich and the famous. He can tell you the secrets. I mean, this is the gold standard of an intelligence asset in the United States of America, the capital of the global empire, right? New York City, the capital of global finance. People, even private business people would want to be friends with Epstein because, like, hey, what's going on with that deal? Are they gonna, you know, do a leverage buyout with this person? And Epstein would be like, yeah, maybe I can find out for you, right? And he calls up this person. So there are a lot of reasons to want to have access to all of this. And watch, which is, why.

[Andrew Schulz]

Would he want access to Epstein?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, that's. That is one of those things where I actually think the relationship was the other way, because it might be just a pretty quid pro quo situation. Like, you're a Brock or the former prime minister of Israel, and Jeffrey Epstein is a guy who made his money somehow, and you need millions of dollars from him. Not a legitimate venture capital firm. I think that the reason that they want sketchy money is because it was probably, in my opinion, some sort of intelligence front, and that this is exactly, exactly. He's fulfilling his purpose. The financier uses the money, the dirty money or the untraceable money to fund future spyware intelligence companies. This gets to the front company discourse. It also shows us that he was involved in this in 2015. It wasn't that long ago. Okay. It was only 10 years ago that he was still doing this. So it shows that even post conviction, he's continuing the behavior, which is very suspicious, in my opinion.

[Andrew Schulz]

Got It.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So that's. That's where we are with aid Brock. Now let's return to Netanyahu, because this is a fun story, actually. So Netanyahu in 2011. I have that screenshot in my tweet, if you want to go ahead and put that up there. Netanyahu met with the JP Morgan exec I mentioned earlier, Jess Staley. Right. So Jess Staley in 2011 emails Epstein and he said, I got to find the exact text. I don't have it here in the document, but I tweeted it a couple of days ago. Let me just go ahead and find it, because the wording of it is genuinely remarkable. Where he sends him an email and he said something like, against all odds. Yeah, here we go. In 2011, JP Morgan executive forward and emailed Epstein, against all odds, we have been granted a meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Epstein replies, surprise, surprise. The US Virgin island notes that he was a key conduit in prison brokering meetings like this. And so here's from the U. S. Virgin Islands lawsuit where they note some of the world's dignitaries. Prince Andrew Eud Barak Netanyahu, David Gergen Pritzker, by the way, Pritzker is who? The governor of Illinois, the billionaire, the fat billionaire Mandelson, various other people that.

[Andrew Schulz]

They have to have fat in there. You ain't have to put fat in there, bro.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Pull up a picture of him. Let's be honest. All right, let's just be honest. My favorite thing about Pritzker is he said, unlike Donald Trump, I'm a real billionaire.

[Andrew Schulz]

Wow.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. I mean, come on.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, what are we doing a Honeymooners?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, look at this, dude. Bang, zoom. Anyway, all right, so that's one of the other names that was listed there in the U.S. virgin Islands. Now my point is around this is this. J.P. morgan CEO is able to, you know, from the email discourse, he's like, against all odds, we were granted a meeting with Netanyahu. And Epstein replies, surprise, surprise.

[Andrew Schulz]

Why can't JP Morgan get a meeting with Netanyahu?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly. And first of all, it's super weird. You know, why. Why wouldn't you be able to get a meeting with Netanyahu?

[Andrew Schulz]

JP Morgan, one of the baseballs.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Would you forward that to Epstein? And Epstein's like, yeah, you're welcome for hooking it up. I think it's weird. Now, none of these point perhaps to like, direct employee relationship. Employees points to a vast network connectivity and network, which was useful perhaps at times with the US And Israeli intelligence.

[Andrew Schulz]

But this looks like Epstein has influence over Israel, not the other way around.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, it looks like, but it could be bidirectional.

[Andrew Schulz]

Right? Of course, of course. I'm just saying in this certain circumstance, like, hey, we need to meet with this guy. We can't happen. He's like, I'll tell him what to do.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, yeah, but it's not really influence. It's more acting as an agent for major financial institutions to hook them up with the Israeli government. Now, look, I mean, Netanyahu, by the way, has never answered any questions about this. Ewud Barak has, you know.

[Andrew Schulz]

You're saying in his Nelk Boys interview, he didn't talk about this?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Is that out yet, by the way? Do we know? No. What's up with signing them? I don't understand. Like, bro, I said this. I was like, you have a newsy interview. You got to release that shit. You can't just hold a prime minister for a week.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's fucking crazy.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm sure that's your nail thing is still one of my favorite things in the universe.

[Andrew Schulz]

How long keg sticks? How many happy dads you think you can drink in 30 seconds?

[Sagar Enjeti]

I forget the one who was annoying with you who's literally like, be on his phone while BB is talking or some.

[Akash Singh]

Well, the thing about Israel, Palestine. What kind of watch is that?

[Sagar Enjeti]

What a joke.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Akash Singh]

Wait, so, okay, to play devil's advocate for some of these people who would be on Epstein's list. And you brought this up earlier, but, like, theoretically, you got. If I'm a Bill Gates and this guy has access to all of these people, and I'm concerned with wealth, I guess he's already been convicted of the pedophilia, so even associated with him is crazy. But theoretically, it's like, well, he could connect me with that billionaire and that billionaire and that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, that's what happened in Bill Gates's case.

[Andrew Schulz]

So.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Bill Gates, if you guys remember. Well, it's complicated. There's a lot of reporting about it, but allegedly, you know, he would use Epstein for marriage advice and things like that. Sketchy. Yeah. You know, I mean, actually, this is important on the Bill Gates story. Melinda Gates divorced him over the Epstein thing.

[Andrew Schulz]

And is that Confess.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Okay, well, that's what she says. No, no, no.

[Andrew Schulz]

I would say that, too.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But, guys. Yeah, let's stick with that, because here's the thing. It had to be bad because Bill Gates was an obvious philanderer for over 20 years for their entire marriage. So what was worse than that? To get you to divorce him. Yeah, there had to be something. I. I think there was something sketchy that she found out. Like, look, maybe she was just appalled by all the reporting, but she knew. Look, everybody at MIC knew that Bill Gates was having affairs. This is already documented. It's out there. Like, in terms of his conduct with women over the last 20 years. Yeah. So it can't have been as bad as to support what you're saying.

[Akash Singh]

There's an income level where it's like, right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Come on, they're multi billionaires. I mean, come on, they probably are not even in the same country. Right. They're like. They're both like, vast estates that can just move around on private jets. So again.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh, my God. I did not like that. Yeah, this is Melinda Gates. I did not like that. Meetings with Jeffrey Epstein. No, I made that clear to him. He was abhorrent. He was evil personified. My heart breaks for these women. Yeah, I guess you got to say that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. But it's one of those things where there might be something else.

[Akash Singh]

Do we know the first time? What's the gap between the divorce and the first time this guy meets EPS? Because there's. I think there's like, 12 years where Melinda could have left.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah. Do you not like that it got out?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, that's part of it.

[Andrew Schulz]

I mean, if you don't like that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I just. I do not know.

[Andrew Schulz]

Maybe she didn't know.

[Akash Singh]

She could have left earlier if she.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Was so bothered by it.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think what Alex is saying. Maybe she didn't know.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I think she didn't know because all of the stuff is about his, but. And I think actually she may know even more than we all do about what was going on in some of those rooms.

[Andrew Schulz]

Wait, why?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, maybe it's like she asked him to come clean and he came clean. Or maybe there's some stuff in court documents and lawsuits and others, but have been alleged against him that, again, could have been cast. It was like, billions. I mean, we can look at it. It's gonna be billions no matter what. So it's. What was it, 40 billion? Something like that? Maybe 50. And control of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They agree to continue those two things together.

[Andrew Schulz]

There's something going on.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's all I'm saying. All right. All right. 12.5 billion grand for her work. Can you hit show more maybe? I'm thinking Mellie.

[Andrew Schulz]

Mel.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They have no prenup division of no matter what, Right? Yeah. She was going to get it no matter what.

[Andrew Schulz]

Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So anyway, my thing is, like, why now? I just Think again. She knew about his cheating. Like, it had to be worse than that. I don't really know what it was or just public or public. It's possible, but Bill Gates met with Epstein because he was trying to win a Nobel Peace Prize. Bill Gates wanted the Nobel Peace Prize for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Epstein's like, oh, I can make that happen. And why? Like, that's the questions, like, why, even after being a registered sex offender, like Andrew, you and I are in a weird position.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's why Trump is cool with him.

[Sagar Enjeti]

He just wants to. I'm sure all of us as public people, we get invited to dinners, like, all the time. Right. And I very rarely go because it's, like, annoying. But I used to go. But, like, what I always do is just a cursory Google search. Right. And if somebody invited me to dinner, you know, and was a registered sex offender, which one of the very first things gonna pop up? I'm not going. But George Stephanopoulos went. Bill Gates went. Reid Hoffman. Why do you think they went? Peters? I don't know.

[Akash Singh]

How do you have time? I barely hang out with my real friends.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right, exactly. Yeah. It's like, what is going on here? You know? And not only you guys are doing dinners or whatever, you're all, like, wiring money to each other, the Bill and Melinda Gay, or like the Nobel Peace Prize. And there's all kinds of people we don't even know about because there has not been yet a release of the files.

[Andrew Schulz]

But isn't it like the rich people stuff that you were saying before? It's like, well, he's going over there. I guess it's cool if we all go.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, but still, doesn't the sex offender thing register at any point like this point for us once they're convicted, does it register to be like, oh, we're not doing this?

[Akash Singh]

I can understand. Not right now, to be honest with you. I probably wouldn't Google. But come on, once somebody's convicted, that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Your staff is going to Google.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, right, exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, all these meetings are going through.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Your staff, and I'm not.

[Akash Singh]

I'm not worth enough to have a staff. If I was, they would.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. Hey, Google assistance. You're not getting in the door.

[Andrew Schulz]

Think about how many people were terrified of just coming on a podcast. Almost terrified to come on a podcast. Right. You have some of the most powerful people in the world that are going to meet up with a convicted pedophile.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right?

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah. You know what's going on?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

You know, but you said in the 90s, it was already common knowledge. It was like some young.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Big difference being a registered sex offender. Yeah, there's a possible deniability before that they all, they all rationalize it. I'm sure their staff says yeah, look, he was given such a light sentence because it was kind of bullshit. The charges were charged, you know, that the girl was. And so the whole thing was overblown and you're about to get $2 billion in a peace prize in your foundation and then you go, all right, for.

[Akash Singh]

$2 billion I have people that could help.

[Andrew Schulz]

I can have a cl.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Closed door meeting with a guy. Weirdest thing. It's the reputation laundering like again we're talking about Bill Gates, we're talking about mit, we're talking about the Ivy League universities, we're talking about some of the world's most professional and smartest scientists who are going over to his house for dinner, who are accepting grants for his work at the MIT lab, who. All of this is post conviction guys. You don't just give money to mit. They have enough money. They don't just take it from anyone. They do extensive background research to make sure that you can put your name on something and they know what's happening.

[Andrew Schulz]

Of mine who has a, a real estate fund or whatever and he got investment from these institutional places like MIT and that and the amount of background.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Due diligence must be insane. It's not insane.

[Andrew Schulz]

And it, he, he often like criticizes some like the developers who just like they raise money in the community and he's like yeah, that's bullshit. Because if you lose their money it's no big deal. There's nobody to answer to. When you get money from an institution like the uc. Yeah like you see pension fund or pension fund. Exactly like the amount of due diligence. The SEC is on your phone like that should be. You are getting looked at constantly. So it's not like that's not going to come up. It does come up and they look the other way which is peculiar.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's weird. Last thing. I actually didn't put this in my notes. And this really I just, my goal here is to just emphasize all the connections and what could possibly still yet to be released. So please Google the New York Financial Services report on Epstein which regards Deutsche Bank. Now this report, I read it in 2020. It's one of the craziest things I ever read because it is a description of financial behavior at this bank that any normal individual would never get away with. Not only looking the other way holding high level meetings, being like, guys, we're not in compliance right now. They're like, this is violating banking rules. He is taking out like millions of dollars in cash, $9,900 at a time. They're not reporting it to the feds, which are supposed to. He's wiring money to Eastern European women and obvious like sex trafficking wings. Post conviction, which by the way, post conviction they weren't even really going to, supposed to be doing business with them for the reputation of the bank. But they cite in the Deutsche bank settlement with the New York Financial Services internal emails where they're like, hey, he's really good for business because he connects us with a whole lot of people. These are out here, that's open, right? And like inside you literally watch as lower level compliance people who don't know what's up flag to their bosses and they're like guys, what are we doing here? This is violating banks bank rules. And they're like, hey, like stop, right? I mean I'm talking all the way up to the highest level of the bank where internal conversations are had in multiple times. This rep violates multiple bank policies. It violates the law, in this case New York state law, about the way that you're supposed to conduct yourself as a financial institution looking the other ways. All these insane wire transfers for millions and millions of dollars. So to me that's like my final thing here. These are the files I want, I want the actual banking records. I want the LLC formation documents. Follow the money, I want the trust. Yeah, from the Wire. My favorite quote, you know, from Lester Freeman. If you start to follow the money, you don't know where the fuck it's going to take you. And that's really what the whole story is about, you know. And yes, I understand the salacious details and I spent a lot of time on it here, you know, the pedophilia investigation and all of that. But it's secondary to the level of influence that he had. And to the extent that it, it mattered, it mattered because he was so important in some respect that everyone was either able to look the other way or enable it or empower it and to make it happen in such a systematic way that involves all the world's most powerful elite. So that's my final thing is release the Epstein files that actually matter and show us who he was. It's not just about intelligence, it's about the financial network. And the reason I think that it's being covered up here is because it does implicate everybody. I think it implicates multiple governments, specifically the Israeli government. I think it also implicates the United States government. I think it's very uncomfortable for the world's richest and most powerful elite. It shows the Bush administration, it shows the Trump administration, it shows the Biden administration who sat on some of these, some of the most powerful and influential people in the whole world. It's not necessarily that they're on tape, but perhaps, perhaps they're financially entangled. Perhaps the tapes were used at a time and that's I think the most disappointing thing about this. So my goal here was to give people the language they can use as to why it validates your feelings as to why something is being covered up. And there's a reason they don't talk about this. They call you a conspiracy theorist. These are all facts, everything that I've laid out.

[Akash Singh]

Can I say one thing? That was awesome.

[Andrew Schulz]

Thank you.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I was fucking fucked.

[Akash Singh]

I don't know what the non sexual.

[Andrew Schulz]

Version of being turned on, honest.

[Akash Singh]

But that was awesome.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Thank you. Thank you.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, that, that, that's interesting. It's almost like the blackmail ring, the sexual blackmail ring for the global elites is the conspiracy simply following the money outside of the child's sex trafficking might be what incriminates the most people.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, it absolutely will, yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's almost like it benefits them for there to be focused on, on the child sex. Right. Because they might not be tied to.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It or to talk or to talk in stupid terms of like client list. And it's like guys, they're all on the island.

[Andrew Schulz]

They're on the island, the girls. It's like as long as the focus is on that, it will almost be a letdown to find out, oh, actually they didn't have sex with any girls, but he was giving the Brock $2.3 million, whatever. And then the people go, Ah, it's only 2.3 million, what's the big deal? We thought they were having sex. It's actually like to their benefit for the public, public to believe this blackmail, the sexual blackmail ring and then be quote unquote like let down by we should hope that there are less people having sex with children, by the way. We all want that to not happen. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't continue to shine light on what's going on over here and understanding his influence and why he was able to operate with impunity despite being a registered sex offender. That's the thing that seems so peculiar and lends itself to conspiracy. Why was he able to Behave in this manner. Why was he able to. Why were the higher ups of this bank able to thwart their responsibility to the SEC, to their investors?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Two weeks. If I withdraw $9,900 in two weeks, the federal government's knocking on my door like the JP Morgan is going to flag my account.

[Andrew Schulz]

I thought it was over ten grand for them to do.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, but if you, it's 9900. They have a mandatory reporting. But if they have, they have things in the bank to make sure that you're not. If it looks suspicious to do 9900, two weeks. And they're like, all right, he's trying to violate, trying to make sure that he doesn't come under reporting, we're going to the Feds, we're notifying the irs. The irs, by the way, again, has all of the stocking.

[Akash Singh]

The bank's not so stupid to be like, oh, it wasn't 10,000.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They're not dumb. They have software. They literally. Palantir. That's what they use Palantir for. To automatically flag all of these suspicious activities. My point is only that all of this exists. And you, as Americans, you guys need the language to be able to know what to ask for. I was telling Mark earlier, one of the reasons why it took so long to get Cointel Pro and MK Ultra is that it took people breaking into a warehouse to learn about the specific code words so that they could then FOIA and ask to investigate. Oh, without, without knowing what to ask for. You don't, you don't know what to ask for. It's an unknown, unknown in the words of Donald Rumsfeld. Like, it's one of those things where you can't even begin to go down the rabbit hole if you don't even know where to start.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is interesting.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. And this is why. And by the way, again, they're very, very right now, today, who are trying to make sure you don't look at this. You have the Prime Minister of Israel, former Prime Minister of Israel, Neftali Bennett. He never worked for Mossad. There's an entire influencer set right now, Mark Levin now. It includes the President of the United States, all of these like kind of Zionist influencers who are calling you an anti Semite because they say that there's no evidence. And they define the terms to be like, he worked for Mossad. I'm not saying that he directly was an employee for Mossad. He was run from the very beginning. I'm saying that he has shown all of the hallmarks to use an infamous phrase of being some sort of an asset working with these various intelligence agencies. And I think that that stuff is so dirty that they just don't want to get into it. And this is where Trump. I mean, we have to be honest, we have to call it out, bro, you ran on this. I have the evidence here that we can go through of, like, what they said in 2023 and what they say today.

[Andrew Schulz]

Plus the seven congressmen that voted against Roe, Congress, his amendment. I know, like, that's blatant. All right, guys, let's take a break for a second. Listen, it's summer. Grill season is upon us, and if you're the type of guy who takes pride in a perfectly seared steak like a real man, it's time to stop messing around with flimsy kitchen gear. That's why you need hex clad the cookware that serious about giving you the perfect sear. Not only do hex clad pans give you that perfect sear, they're durable, they're easy to clean up, stainless steel strength, toxin free, non stick convenience, and they look damn good on that stove top. But the real game changer is Hexclad's Japanese Damascus steel knives. These things are stupid sharp, perfectly balanced, and tough enough to handle everything from carving up a tomahawk ribeye to dicing onions like a pro. And most importantly, everything comes with a lifetime warranty. Buy it once, use it forever, and right now, you can get 10% off your order with our exclusive link. Just head to hexclad.com flagrant and level up your kitchen before for your next cookout. Cook better with Hexclad. Remember, take pride in not just your perfectly grilled steak, but in the exceptional tools you use to create it. For a limited time, get 10% off Hexclad with our exclusive [e-mail] Flagrant support the show and cook with gear as serious as your [e-mail] flagrant. Let Hexclad know Flagrant sent you and experience the ultimate upgrade in your kitchen with Hexclad Superior performance. Now, let's get back to the show. All right, guys, let's take a break for a second. I'm actually bummed that we don't have any more of these things on us. And the reason we don't have is because we devour them, okay? They're the first thing anybody grabs when they come into the studio. They're groons. Okay, what are groons? Well, instead of having the powders and the pills and all this other stuff to get your multiple supplements a day. What if you made them into gummy bears? That's what grooms did. They're smart. They use their brain. Gummy bears are easy to consume. They're fun to consume. We love consuming them. If you're eating gummy bears and you feel healthier by doing it, okay, this isn't a multivitamin greens powder probiotic. Okay? It's all those things and then some at a fraction of the price. And most importantly, it tastes amazing. Being healthy has never been more convenient or tasted better. Toss these in your beach bag. Just carry them wherever you go. You're traveling.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Boom.

[Andrew Schulz]

Make sure you're getting all of your vitamins that are necessary. You wanted a supplement that you could enjoy. This isn't a chore, Something to look forward to. So right now you go to www.g r u n s.co get up to 52% off. Use the code flagrants. Let's get back to the show. We were in this, like, this very interesting, like, media spin in the last few days where, you know, I was doing what I thought we're supposed to do, which is like, hold our elected officials accountable for the promises that they say they will make. I didn't realize that. Now I know better.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right?

[Andrew Schulz]

You're not. You're just supposed to let them do whatever the fuck they want, despite them promising.

[Sagar Enjeti]

As long as you're consistent.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah. You just have to make it to. That's right. But, but, but, yeah, like, to that, to that note, like, I've thought about this a lot. I actually think that, like, when the person you voted for is in power, that's when you have to be the loudest.

[Sagar Enjeti]

You're exactly right. Thank you for saying that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Because that's the only opportunity for you to get the things that they promised enacted.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

When someone that you did not vote for is in power, there's nothing you can do because they're not going to do the things you asked for anyway. So you should be stomping the pavement. You should be clamoring. And when they're not doing the things you should be going, hey, this is not what I voted for. This is the thing you want. This is the thing. These are against everything that you said. Not everything.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Otherwise you're in a cult. You're in a cult because everybody's like, trust the plan. No, I actually don't trust the plan. Like during the Iran, I think that 40 chess shit.

[Andrew Schulz]

I hate to trust the process. How About I trust what the fuck you said you were going to do, and how about you do it?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Thank you. I mean, again, this is important. Everybody is always like, oh, there's a split in the MAGA base. I actually think maga, by and large, will always kind of support Trump, but that. I'm gonna define the terms narrowly. And this is kind of where we're all speaking to. The people we're speaking to are not like maga. Maybe some of them, a lot of them are disaffected. They're men. They're people who are tangentially interested in politics. And the reason why the Epstein story was important to them is it confirmed basically, the way that they thought about the international elite, and they saw Trump and Cash Patel and Dan Bongino as those who would work to usurp that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Power conduit to justice.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly. And for them to watch that betrayal, now that's happening, is one that only confirms the way that the system basically works. And it causes very uncomfortable questions here.

[Andrew Schulz]

I was saying this yesterday, but it's like, if I wanted to vote for somebody that was gonna keep the Epstein files under wrap, that was gonna extend the foreign wars that was gon the budget, I would have voted for Kamala.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right. And by the way. By the way, probably would have done it more competently, I'll say. I'll just say it, because they would do way more.

[Andrew Schulz]

It would have been very easy to.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Get on, and we wouldn't have had to live through this last six months of like, whatever bullshit is happening in the current day. I mean, yeah, look. I mean, literally today there is. Joey, you want to go and pull this up? You can go on my Twitter feed. Donald Trump is sending $10 billion of new offensive weapons to Ukraine. Not only that, by the way, it actually came out from the Financial Times that he reportedly told Zelensky the Ukrainians leaked this part of the phone call. Who knows if they're telling the truth, but the Trump administration has not denied it. Is Donald Trump asked Zelensky if Ukraine could hit Moscow and actually asked them, hey, Zelensky, Vladimir, he said, do you have what you need to be able to hit Moscow to hit St. Petersburg? These are the World War three fears that I. You guys know, the last time I hear we were spending an hour on Ukraine. So you can disagree with me if you'd like. He said he wasn't going to do that.

[Andrew Schulz]

So here's the thing, and this is where I have, like, a little bit. I give him a little Bit of wiggle room. And maybe it was just hubris. I think Trump actually thought that he was going to walk in. I think Trump actually thought that the only reason there are wars is because of lobbyists in. Lobbyists in government basically going, hey, we need to sell more military weapons. Let's have some wars around. So he's like, once I get in, I'll just call it it Vlad. And I'll be like, yo, Vlad, he.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Was president once, man. He.

[Andrew Schulz]

So he knows the game. Okay, fair enough.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And that's.

[Andrew Schulz]

And that's very fair. And then that. Then that could be my naivete, and I'll be held accountable for that. Right. And I'm. I guess I'm like, hoping, best case scenario, because at the end of the day, I don't care what side you're on, you don't want to see hundreds of thousands of people get murdered.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

You do.

[Sagar Enjeti]

For profit. Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

You do not want to see hundreds of thousands of people get murdered for profit. You can say, I told you so, you can do all this other shit, but at the end of the day, you just have to ask yourself, do you want to see hundreds of thousands of human beings get killed for profit?

[Sagar Enjeti]

And millions, actually. Now, I personally don't. Yeah, I don't.

[Andrew Schulz]

I personally don't. So what I'm going to do is if there's somebody that says, I aim to stop the foreign wars, and there's another person that says, well, we got to do what's right to keep on fighting, all I hear is, less people dead. More people dead. If you can sleep at night voting for the person that says more people dead over the person that says less people dead, that's fine. I can't. Yeah, that's not for me.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Same. That's not for me.

[Andrew Schulz]

I see what the fuck Gaza looks like and I'm like, I want that to stop.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

I see what the fuck is happening. You come and Russia, and I want that to stop. So I don't feel that. Oh, you regret. Whatever. I don't regret a second for voting for the guy who said that less people are going to die.

[Akash Singh]

Also, all the things about. He lied. He's a liar. I don't know, man. He promised he would overturn Roe vs. Wade the first time.

[Andrew Schulz]

And.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So I don't.

[Akash Singh]

I thought he could get shit done.

[Sagar Enjeti]

January 6th, protesters, he was like, I'll pardon all them. Yeah, he did, yeah. It's just important also to say what promises are being kept, what are not. All right, so immigration I actually say he's kept a lot of his promises, unfortunately. But we'll argue about this later whenever we record for my show. But my point around here is, let's look specifically Epstein. The Epstein memo is released when the day before Benjamin Netanyahu visits the United States of America for the third time in six months. July 4th weekend of the United States. We have Benjamin Netanyahu, who by Trump's own account, attacked Iran by the US Green light, where US Diplomacy was used as a ruse in order for the Israelis to conduct a military operation. We have United States military assets that were used to bomb Iran, which is, I mean, gotta be one of them. Like, again, like you said, you had a presidential campaign where, yes, Trump would always say, we cannot let Iran have a nuclear bomb. And I know this, and maybe I was too close to it. I knew many of the people involved, like in the actual decision making, and I know that they have ridiculed people who have, quote, wanted to bomb Iran for years. So then to watch that all just flip around and now President Trump is the greatest dealmaker in Trump strength artists of all time, when you would have ridiculed this level of logic long before. And we have all of this reporting that actually nuclear, it's like, actually the nuclear program really wasn't destroyed. And the reason that you could look at that is that the Israelis are leaking it, Right? You know, Joe, if you want to pull that up, Israel intelligence says Iran nuclear facility not destroyed. This is from the New York Times a couple of days ago.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh, my God.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And so look like.

[Andrew Schulz]

So now there's a reason to continue.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Now we gotta continue, right? And it's like, oh, but I was told that the 12 Day War was the only time it was ever gonna happen. Well, you guys, do you guys wanna do some history? All right, so in 1981, Israel took out the Iraqi nuclear reactor. They bombed it and they said, we have solved the Iraqi nuclear program. Question for all time, what did we end up invading Iraq for, Mark? For WMDs, right? And what actually happened as a result of that is that the nuclear program was driven underground. And Saddam actually was more convinced than ever that he needed to acquire nuclear weapons to the point where he almost create an image where he was having nukes, which, which caused the United States to invade him in 2003. In 2007, Israel did what it struck the Syrian reactor and the nuclear program. And the decision point beyond that was, listen, it's just about the nukes. It's not about regime change. Does anyone want to Tell me what happened to the Syrian regime. It was replaced by whom? Al Qaeda. On behalf of whom? Israel. All right. Israel literally supported the Syrian jihadist government, and ironically, today they're actually bombing them because now the Al Qaeda government is acting like Al Qaeda and persecuting. And persecuting religious Druze minorities in the country. And by the way, their justification, the Israelis for bombing them is that Syria has moved across the new border that Israel has declared for itself by seizing parts of Syria. Now we are supporting Ukraine for what? Because Russia invaded them. What is a seizure of territory as a result of a regime change operation in Syria? What is. Is that a violation of norms, Rules, may I say the rules based international order in the way that a civilized nation would conduct itself, a Western nation.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think the. I think the concern here is, is really, like, if you are an autonomous nation, you got to handle your candle. So if you want to do all this stuff in the Middle east, that's on you.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. But you bear the consequences and.

[Andrew Schulz]

Exactly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And you pay for it.

[Andrew Schulz]

It seems like we better. Yeah, And I think that's where the. I think that's like, an important fracture right here. If Israel's like, all right, we're going to go about it alone, and this is what we think is the best for our safety. It's like, okay, well, you go do that. The problem is every time they're about to go about it alone, and they say, we'll go about it alone, I think we get a phone call a few hours later, and it seems like we go back it up, and you can really do whatever you want in the world with impunity if America has your back no matter what. And I think that's the kind of imbalance of power right there. And it definitely feels like there's an imbalance in terms of the relationship, in. Of what we're offering each other. And now we're in a circumstance where, like, the war, you know, against Hamas has gone two years, and you look at them and Americans are starting to go like, what this? It's really kind of destroyed. I feel like you did it.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not kind of like it's destroyed.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, it's destroyed. And then there's all these people that I think Americans are starting to be like, okay, so we're paying for this. I can't buy an apartment. I can't buy a house. I got $300,000 worth of school loans, but we're still selling billions of dollars over here. And you can't begrudge Americans for starting to Feed feel like there's an imbalance in this relationship.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not even begrudge. I mean, I mean, honestly, America, like, it's been this way for years, I think.

[Andrew Schulz]

But I think the important thing to understand is, like, it's not saying that an independent country can't go do what it needs for its salvation.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

You just have to bear the consequences for those actions. And I think Americans are starting to feel like we bear the consequences, at least financially right now. And if we end up in some sort of ground invasion in Iran, we will bear the consequences.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There's no question what a nation of what I don't Forget the population.

[Andrew Schulz]

5 million or something like that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They're going to be able to invade a country of 90 million, by the way. Yes, I do know the population of Iran. We all know. Thank you, Dr. Carlson. But you know, look, let's really dwell on this like, yes, what's happening in Gaza is being funded by the United States of America. And you know, there's a large constituency here in America that says that's necessary for Israel to take out terrorism, whatever the hell that means, apparently requires killing at the minimum of like 17,000 children. I personally don't think civilized war. Western nations conduct themselves in that manner. I would. And everyone's like, well, what would you do? I was like, america has the template, guys, look, I will not defend the US Invasion of Iraq. Do you know how many thousands of American service members died and were wounded in missions to protect Iraqi civilians? Ground that was on the ground.

[Andrew Schulz]

On the ground.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Boots on the ground where the American service members are maimed and were blown up to protect Iraqi civilians from an interest civil war.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is a really.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That is how you conduct a counterterrorism operation. Operation.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think the point that you're making is really important. Yes, right. Is that in. In an effort, I imagine, to save Israeli lives, which I do empathize with, because I want to save American lives. What they're doing is conducting war that would save the most Israeli lives, but unfortunately kills the most Palestinian lives.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

And what you're innocent Palestinian life. And then what you're making the argument is in Iraq, instead of us doing that which we could have absolutely just. It would be easy.

[Sagar Enjeti]

We had the greatest bomb. You know, who do you think sells all these bombs to Israel? Where's it coming from?

[Andrew Schulz]

But we made a decision to do that. Boots on the ground, which cost American.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Lives, which was deeply regrettable.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't want a single American life.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Me either.

[Andrew Schulz]

But. But I think that is where we can put ourselves in a position of criticism for the way the war is being waged. Because we have been in that circumstance twice.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And I think Iraq and Iran.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's a really good argument. That is what war is. You have to sacrifice.

[Akash Singh]

Well, okay, no, no, I think there's.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Two types of war. So this is the thing they said it's to get rid of Hamas. And in that way, we are not at war with the Palestinian, we are at war with Hamas. So how would you conduct that war? We have an entire 20 years of experience, the United States military, where what we do is we want to separate the terrorists from the civilian population so we make sure that the civilians are protected, soldiers are put in harm's way. In order to separate those two and to be able to kill them, it requires a shitload of city combat. It's brutal. It's very difficult. It's bloody. Ask the Navy SEALs, ask the Marines, all the people who had to participate. But it was semi successful, at least in 2009 in the surge. It reduced the amount of civilian casualties as a result of the Iraqi civil war. But the other way to fight is when you're at war with the population and you want complete and total destruction. That's when you fight like the United States on Japan in 1945. And I agree with what's more analogous to what were happening. We can look at the intention. No, all I'm saying is, Akash, it's the intention and the words matter and the intention is obvious that they are actually at war with the population themselves. Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

Not just Hamas the terrorists.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not just Hamas the terrorists. And I think that's a very important point for people to digest. And I look at the conduct, that's.

[Akash Singh]

The piece that I agree with you, that Americans feel like we're bearing the brunt and all that. But also when we invade, we are usually told, or when we aid a country in war, we are always told we are on the moral high ground.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right.

[Akash Singh]

With Ukraine. Russia is invading Ukraine, this country that cannot defend itself. That's why we have to send a Ukraine. Now we're looking and we're seeing who we're supporting.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right?

[Akash Singh]

And we don't have a moral high ground. They don't have a moral high ground. And yet we keep supporting them. So I agree with you that we feel like, why are we bearing the brunt of this? And we don't have jobs, but also morally, we don't even have a high ground. So why are we supporting when we vote.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't think Hamas has a high ground deal.

[Akash Singh]

The way Israel is. Israel is flattening Gaza. We don't have a moral high ground with the way they aren't doing it. If there were boots on the ground and they're losing civilians. Okay, maybe. And Hamas is doing xyz.

[Sagar Enjeti]

This is why, as America, I actually think we should not talk about moral high ground. I know this every time. Like let's. Let's look at the history of US moral interventions. Serbia disaster.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh my God.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Kosovo disaster. 2003 goes without saying.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I mean, I can go on forever. Like Libya, I don't think Afghanistan, I.

[Akash Singh]

Don'T think we do it with the moral high. High ground. I think the perception we are sold.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, I agree.

[Akash Singh]

The mole high ground. And now we're just seeing.

[Andrew Schulz]

Talking about the story.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, I actually, that's why when I argue with liberals, I always tell them, I go, look, guys, I don't think you're doing anybody any good here using words like genocide or any. It's not because I don't disagree with you per se. It's just that when you couch. For example, when. And I talked about this last time, the debate becomes about the definition humanitarianism and Jesus. And it's like, no, we're not talking about that. We're talking about America's national interests. Yeah, we were talking this good for us or not.

[Andrew Schulz]

Mark and I were talking about that where it's just like now there's this debate on whether or not it's genocide. It's like whatever right below genocide is. Is really bad too.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, that's right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. And mass murder.

[Andrew Schulz]

And Mark is like, it's like someone says, like, I'm not a pedophile. I just like 16 year olds.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right. Isn't there a term for that? It's like a giliophile. Pedophile.

[Andrew Schulz]

There's one term.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It's just pedophile. It's just. Yeah, exactly. But my point beyond that is like, look, let's define things in terms of America's national interests. What good are we getting from this? We're bombing Iran. We had a terror. Do you guys remember the terror Alerts in the mid-2000s? Yeah. Do you guys remember that? Yeah. Or whenever the Iran thing happened, they literally sent out a terror alert across the whole country and they warned Americans living abroad to expect retaliatory attacks. That's America, our country. We are being felt the pain here.

[Andrew Schulz]

But you're just a Qatari asset.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, of course. But you know what's funny? The Qatari government hates me because I lived in Qatar, I went to high school, and I hated it so much that I've talked for years about the mistreatment disclosure.

[Andrew Schulz]

Oh, Indian slave labors disclosing disclosure.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Okay. No, but I just say it like, because it's about being some form of foreign asset or whatever. Why can't we all just be people talking in our own national interests? And I think the reason that they throw out anti Semite and race whatever on all of this is specifically to shut down this conversation. And the best thing that's ever happened is that we're all here. We can just talk honestly.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's really unfortunate because I think that it's almost like a permission slip for anti Semitism in a way.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, you're exactly a lot of increased real anti Semitism.

[Andrew Schulz]

But it's not, not even whether it's increased or not. There, like, are a lot of real anti Semites out there.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's true.

[Andrew Schulz]

And then when you throw the term around when you're criticizing a sovereign nation, it gets lumped in with the people who actually do hate people because of their religion and ethnicity. And that's the problem I have. Like, I always say this other times, like, everybody thinks I'm Jewish, so I get all the anti Semitism. It exists. Like, you guys might not hear it. I get it. I see it. So it's like, you can't just throw that term around so flippantly because then nobody will take it to boy cried wolf. Nobody will take it seriously when it actually does happen. And it does does happen. And it is a real problem. And I'm very concerned about, like, Jews in America who are dealing with it and they're concerned. So it's. We got to be very specific. Like the green black guys throwing it around. He's calling the Ponzi of America guys anti Semite.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly. Yeah, right. It's crazy.

[Akash Singh]

Guys.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I think they also dismissed Elon's salute as well. I think the ADL was like. No, they did. Yeah, that's right. They actually did the adl, which, you know, look, I mean, we could argue about that all day long, but the ADL is basically an arm for Israel. And this gets to the problem that I have with this whole, like, anti antisemitism industrial complex is they've conflated criticism of this foreign government with genuine anti Semitism, which is the worst thing that you could possibly do for anti Semitism itself because the term loses all meaning. Look at. Look Zoran. If we want to talk. I mean, you know, they blasted this guy, anti Semite. We're in the most Jewish city, what in the world, except for Tel Aviv, Right. And he just won the Democratic primary and actually a lot of Jewish votes. Let's just tell you something, guys, that should show that these attacks don't work. But the thing is, unfortunately, in Washington, they still work. It's the worst possible thing that you could be called because of the way look, it's ideology and it's money, and they're mutually reinforcing. So, for example, I, and I talked about this on Tucker. You were talking to me about it. I don't get invited to all the things I used to get invited to. And that sounds really silly, but that's the currency of the town. It's fine. I just don't care. I get to come here, right? They're always asking me to connect with you. They're like, hey, man, I, I think Congressman so and so should go on Andrew Schultz. I'm like, I guarantee you he doesn't give a fuck, so I'm not giving you his phone number. But that's my point though, right? It's like, there's a nice trade off for me and I've chosen this. But my point is, with them, the currency of the town is one that is entirely funded by AIPAC or pro Zionist interests. And the thing is, the way it's so nefarious is, is it bleeds into everything, is in people who are working at like a tax foundation to lobby for low taxes are being funded by people who are also very pro Israel. So if employees there were to, like, let's say, make an Instagram post about Palestine, even though it has nothing to do with taxes, they would still be fired. They would be drummed out of the organization. And guys like these people don't make a ton of money. Like, the lower level, the up and comers, like when I was in my early 20s, we actually made zero money.

[Andrew Schulz]

So it's not like risk for them.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Of course. I mean, listen, you got to eat, you want to advance, you want to be connected, to get a fellowship, to do whatever, you have to fall in line. Even if you don't even work on Israel or Palestine, even if it's just a tangential thing and you're like, it's kind of up.

[Andrew Schulz]

This is what happened in. This is what happened in Hollywood, not specifically with Israel, Palestine. I actually don't think at all with that. I think more with identity politics.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, absolutely.

[Andrew Schulz]

I think that People are just really scared that if they had a serious opinion about it, anything, that they would.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Be like, you're done.

[Andrew Schulz]

Thrown out. They'd be, you know, and. And I think now that's. We're moving away from that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, I think that's why what you do is so courageous, man. I'm like, somebody who's got to actually, like, intertwined with, like, the. I mean, you can say it better than me, but everything I've read, like, the studio system has got to be one of the biggest bottlenecks of pop culture in the world. Like, it's literally run by. Not care. A couple of agencies and, like, you know what? And these, like, movie distributors. And you're.

[Andrew Schulz]

If you still think he's Jewish, he'.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's.

[Andrew Schulz]

But this is why, like, it's. It's always, like, annoying when, like, people say, like, oh, you're just doing this thing for Trump or grift grifting. It's like, you don't realize.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, the real grift is the other way. Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

I'm in entertainment. I'm not in politics. I'm not in a media company. I'm in entertainment. So, like, the idea of even having Trump on the pod, and obviously we asked to have Kamala and everybody else, and none of them came, but, like, that costs us.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

There's not a financial.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Doing a hostage video for Kamala. That's a. You're a grifter.

[Andrew Schulz]

1,000%. Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, I get it.

[Andrew Schulz]

Doing those things for comment, you would. Absolutely. And I think that people don't realize that because I think they assume, you know, it's, you know, politics better than anybody. It's good versus evil. So as long as you're on the side of good, they don't see it as grift.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, yeah, right.

[Andrew Schulz]

So that there. There's all these people that are grifting off Trump. Absolutely. Happens. And then there's people grifting against Trump. The never Trump thing is a grift as well.

[Sagar Enjeti]

The Lincoln look it up. But also look up the pedophilia stuff with the Lincoln project. I'm just throwing that out there.

[Andrew Schulz]

People want to look into that now. I want to look at. But I guess what I'm saying is, like, the idea that, like, in order to. In order to grift, you have to be, like, financially satisfied, I imagine, by that thing. And in the entertainment industry, the industry that we exist in, you're putting yourself in harm's way, dude.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, worse.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's. It. So I don't even like, for example, like, just, I mean, I had flat out the Netflix people said, and who knows? But like, you know, I'm up for consideration or whatever for an Emmy for life. And I just had people tell me straight up, they're like, listen, dude, like, yeah, Trump on the pod. Like, there's no way that they're going to give you. And it's. It is the best hour comedy that was put out. It should win. It just is. You know what I mean? Like, no respect. Anybody's there, but it's not as good, right? And it's. But so. And if you want to judge it by any metric, you want to judge it by views, it has more views. If you want to judge it by, like, impact, you want to just by kind, in my personal opinion, obviously, but, like, that's the cost of it. So I think that's the frustrating thing, I would imagine, for all of us when we're like, no, no, we're actually curious about talking to these people and, and having these conversations and we understand the cost of doing it and we're willing to take on that cost. There is no risk. When you're the anti Trump grift and you just do all these things, you, virtue signal, you say, I told you so to us for criticizing Trump, it's like, if you actually cared, you'd be worried about the midterms and you worried about the elections and you would see people that were disillusioned by Trump not living up to his promises. If you actually cared, and you'd be like, hey, here's an opportunity to bring people into a coalition and in a democracy, gain more votes and potentially win.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, but you're presuming that they care about those. That's my point. They don't care about.

[Andrew Schulz]

They want clicks and views. They are the exact thing that they're accusing us, but they are so caught up in their own hubris that they don't realize it. And you sit back here and you rely and I watch it and I kind of just laugh at it, but people take it serious. They look at these people and I think it just makes them feel good in the moment and they can't disassociate that to, like, what might be better for the country.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, absolutely. And look, I mean, something I've always appreciated with this pod is like, we just talk, right? We can talk to anybody. And I mean, I've known you long enough to know when you were a Bernie guy, right? And I always tell people, yeah, I know that. And that's why people were so shocked to see you come around. And I was like, guys, you just don't know Andrew. Right. But it's one of those things where, because I've been able to get to know all of you and you know, the whole comedy scene or whatever, when people ask about podcast bros and maga, I actually think it's. You're very representative of the audience in your turn against people who it seems were like, fighting for the system. And to the extent that there was an appeal of Trump, and that's why it explains for somebody who could vote for Trump and also be like, yeah, mom, Donnie seems America first to me. And it's because the horseshoe.

[Andrew Schulz]

I said New York first, by the way.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm sorry, New York first. Okay.

[Andrew Schulz]

But the point conflated in news article.

[Sagar Enjeti]

But the horseshoe there is about talking about the country or the city that we're living in, as opposed to these more establishment interests that you were elected to fight against in Trump's case. But that's the appeal. And somebody was like, oh, you speak to maga, right? And I was like, no, I actually don't. I was like, to the extent I have any authority, it's with 18 to 35 year olds who are interested in politics, the vast majority of whom are pretty bipartisan. A lot voted for Trump. Yeah. But like, those common sense people are actually very independent. They do go along with trends and other things. And the most important thing is they both think for themselves.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They're not in a cult and they are not in a cult. Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

Not everybody. There's a. There are very loud people that are captured by the cults and the cults are rewarded online with the algorithms.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes, of course.

[Andrew Schulz]

There's the views and there's the clicks and there's the pats on the back and there's the yes queens in the comments. But in reality, it's not representative of actual people. So when the actual people see people having common sense conversations, which I hope that we have on this podcast, you know, I mean, today, right now, we had the pod save guys on the pod.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Nice.

[Andrew Schulz]

Do you know what I mean? Yeah. And like, what's so interesting is like, their criticism was the exact same thing. And I was saying they immediately were like, this reaction, I told you so is like typical liberal.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

Dumb, where it's just like, we have an opportunity to use this frustration to win. But these people don't care about winning.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

So they're acknowledging the grift as well. And these are the most liberal Guys, you can imagine.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, you know why that they say that? Because they actually won an election. They know how to win a fucking election.

[Andrew Schulz]

They work for Barack Obama.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, Barack Obama. I mean, do you guys remember the state of Ohio? He won that state. He won England, Indiana. That's insane. And MAGA does so well bringing people in. Like, you see people go to the protests, like, where they pretend to fake protest on the other side. So, like, liberals will go to the MAGA side. And then all the MAGA people are.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, yeah, come over.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah. They're like, hey, come on in. Right, but my point actually is the way that that was sold, but now that people like you are beginning to speak out, people like me and others, oh, it's like you are fake or, you know, you're not trusting the plan enough. And it's like, I would argue that the least patriotic thing you could do is actually trust the government. I would actually argue also in the case of, of when you support a political movement, is that the least impactful thing you could do is trust the plan. Because the people who don't trust the plan, they get shit done. You think Israel trusted the plan?

[Andrew Schulz]

No.

[Sagar Enjeti]

When we were trying to do diplomacy, they were like, no, we're fucking bombing Iran. Okay, and you're coming in with us. Yeah, exactly. They always win.

[Andrew Schulz]

And that's the thing. And I promise you, I promise you, but I would imagine in the next week or two, we will get some disclosure about the Epstein files that we were not going to get.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right.

[Andrew Schulz]

And the reason we got that is because there are people speaking out. There's a reason why the White House responded to us.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, right.

[Andrew Schulz]

The people are speaking out. It's not just us, but it's a lot of people speaking about our frustrations. And whether you like this or not, the White House, the current administration, is very transactional. If they feel that people are becoming disillusioned, they acknowledge it immediately. So if you do not voice these things, you do not get what the fuck you want. It's like, and what do you actually, actually, at the end of day, what do you want? Do you want to feel good in the moment? Do you want to get your little clicks and views, make your little face to camera videos? Or do you want to actually have some form of justice for a thousand girls that were victimized?

[Sagar Enjeti]

According to the government, According to our.

[Andrew Schulz]

U.S. attorney General, a thousand that were victimized. What do you actually want? Because I'm glad you feel good with your pats on the back. To me, it'd Be pretty good to know if a Thousand Girls gets a little bit of justice. That'd be. That would make me feel pretty good.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, it should. So before we leave, can I ask, what is Trump, Trump's game with the Epstein files? Why would he, while he's president, get, you know, Epstein is arrested, killed, dies, and then runs on releasing the files. Does the fake sort of kangaroo release and then now says that he was not working with any other conspirators. There's only two possible theories, which I was not that open to this one, which was that Trump is implicated in until the more recent statements. Why are my boys and gals, like, paying attention to all this? You guys all need to move on. Or on camera where he's like, are you really still asking about Jeffrey Epstein, by the way, the day after he put out that True Social, he was tweeting about revoking Rosie o' Donnell citizenship. So it's. No, I mean, it's funny, but he's like, you guys are focused on Epstein when there's all this other stuff happening. It's like, bro, you're literally tweeting about Rosie o' Donnell getting denaturalized as a citizen. But that's one theory is that. Look, I mean, I read you guys the quote. He likes him young. He said that in 2002. He said it. So.

[Andrew Schulz]

We'Re six months in.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

How do you feel? What's the job?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Oh, no, I'm sorry. I need to give the second. That was the first theory, which I had. Did not give credence to.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Also, Tucker made a good point. He's like, wouldn't have. The Biden administration released it. I was like, well, I thought that they would have. But listen, what if they wanted to prick Bill Clinton or, you know, all this other stuff?

[Andrew Schulz]

You can't release one.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Right. And you have to release.

[Andrew Schulz]

Because what would the Biden administration do? They've released one person, Trump, and then nobody else.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That would make a lot of sense.

[Andrew Schulz]

And then we'd be like, according to Trump, they created the files on them. Right, Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Obama created the files.

[Andrew Schulz]

Okay. And Hillary made the files about Clinton.

[Sagar Enjeti]

The second is that it would be devastating to our relationship with Israel, or it was at a request of Israel, or it'd be devastating to our relationship if the CIA is that to be exposed. I mean, for example, everybody knows the CIA killed Kennedy. Why has the CIA fought the release of these documents for 60 years? They.

[Andrew Schulz]

We just. We're just. That is.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I'm sorry. Okay, okay. Again, let me be More precise in my language, I think that they were aware of and participated at least in some form in the plot that killed Kennedy.

[Andrew Schulz]

I'll put more.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Not the kill, at the very least, involved in the plot. And of course in the COVID up, that's like actually not a question. So why did they do that? Because they knew that it would break the American public's irrevocable trust in the way that they conduct business. And that's why they fought for years to make sure that it didn't happen or to release the documents. I think it's the same here in this case. It's like, look, what we have is so bad to the CIA, to the FBI, to Mossad, to Saudi, to all these governments and to the Israeli prime ministers and others that it would just be so revelatory of the way that we conduct business, it would make it impossible for us to continue business as usual. And sir, business as usual is so important that we just have to release all of this stuff. And that's how the pressure comes down on capital Patel, on Dan Bongino, on the Attorney General. And yeah, I mean, it leads to them saying, Cash literally said in 2023, the Epstein files are under the direct control of the FBI director. He became the FBI director and now he's like, it was all a conspiracy theory. He literally said that the conspiracy theories were never true. The conspiracy theories you invented, man. So you were either lying then or you're lying now. Bongino. I mean, I have the clips that people can play if they want to of the stuff. We can never let up on this story. We can never let go. Attorney General Pam I and Bondi from the White House lawn, which means to you, means used to mean something. I have the client list on my desk. There are thousands of victims. There are all the files. We're ready to release them. And then, you know, Akash, I think you said this, you're like, either it was all a lie or you exploited the rape of thousands of children to get elected. That's pretty fucked up. If you. So there's no good answer here. Personally, I lean to the latter. I think it's an intelligence thing. And perhaps as a cross over with, with Trump himself, which I did not.

[Andrew Schulz]

Believe until very recently when you say intelligence thing, and this seems more realistic to me, not that the intelligence has devised this blackmail scheme exactly as I.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Laid out for the multiple hours, but.

[Andrew Schulz]

He was potentially an asset to multiple intelligence agencies and they looked the other way at his sexual deviant behavior. So that.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And then Started to cover it up with a non prosecution agreement. Exactly. And that's, that's the complicity. That's the smoking gun. And that's why it still remains. I mean, look, even the Justice Department admitted that was a bad deal. We never should have done it. Right. And you know what the irony is? It's the Justice Department themselves, main justice, the Washington D.C. they're the ones who told Acosta to do the non prosecution agreement. But then they turn around and they blame Acosta.

[Andrew Schulz]

And so like come.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's. I almost feel bad for the guy, you know, in, in a way because he pro. It looks like he was just doing what he was told and he probably wanted to continue the investigation. I mean, I don't know. I mean, still signed it. Yeah, I agree. He was complicit and he lived with it and he got rewarded for it. He was a labor secretary for like a day. No, for a while, 2017 to 2019. Oh, he reigned for over two years.

[Andrew Schulz]

And then they got.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And then. Well, yeah, and then he was the patsy. They were like, hey, you got to go.

[Andrew Schulz]

Somebody got to go.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Somebody's got to go down for this. And he resigned. I think he's, you know, very rich and probably works in finance or whatever now. But my point is just that it goes like, it goes up high and unfortunately, like we, we don't even really know how high. And what's left to be released is still just an immense amount of documentation which, no, we don't have a right to have it like a theoretical right. But we almost have a promise here from the campaign, from the president that they would release everything, they would declassify everything, and they have immediately turned their back on that.

[Andrew Schulz]

I gotta use the battle where six months in. Give me your grade on Trump. The good, the bad. What's his report, Gargar?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, you know, I'm actually not important in this. Just like let's look at the issues like for things that I think he was elected on. I think he was elected on two issues. Three primarily. Number one is the economy because inflation was high. Inflation report came out today. It's actually increased 2.7% since June. A lot of that is in my opinion because of the incompetent way that they've rolled out the tariffs. It actually makes me really upset. I'm really pro tariff, the idea of tariff strategic tariffs. I think the way that this has been done has been frankly a disaster. The only reason that it didn't crash the economy is because he rolled them all back and said we're going to do a 90 day pause or whatever. But creating chaos in people's lives and fucking with people's businesses is terrible. Mark and I are new parents. Do you remember the, you know, the stroller problem about over 90% of strollers and car seats come from China? Well, you know the uppababy stroller that like everyone in New York has, that went up by hundreds of dollars as a result of the tariffs. Sorry, I think that's wrong. I think the car seats have become more expensive. It's like you were elected to make life better for people. That's a pretty material way, actually, that Trump directly impacted me and all other new parents here in the United States. So that's where something, I think creating that chaos economically has been a problem on the bill. The bill, philosophically, to me, I just think really comes away from a lot of the Trump promise. And I think I heard you talking about the bill. I mean, let's just look at the math, right? Like they are like, oh, well, we're going to cut spending. And it's like, well, okay, but you increase the defense budget by $150 billion. Right. By the way, Doge never looked at the DOD. What happened there? You know, like, where, where are you, Doge? Why did we fire like somebody in the National Weather Service and not someone in the Pentagon who can't pass an audit for five years in a row? And so, you know, these are, this is talk. And it was cheap in my opinion. Like they increased the defense budget and instead, you know, they put work requirements in Medicaid and in food stamps. I'm not necessarily against work requirements per se, but really what bothered me was the way they were increasing the dollar shift to the states. This is really wonky. I apologize to everyone. But the end result is that more people could probably lose healthcare and, or food stamps. Again, we can have a conversation about welfare and food stamps and all that, but it was the priority of increasing the defense budget, of extending the tax cuts which are pretty overwhelmingly good for the top 1% overseas, it seems.

[Andrew Schulz]

Exactly.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So helping people overseas and you got people who are at least precarious in terms of that. So I think that the bill was a big miss, in my opinion, on.

[Akash Singh]

The simple promise of making America great again. It seems life for most Americans is not as great.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I think that the fundamentals still remain the same. And that's the problem is I don't see a concrete way to fix that. So yesterday a report came out from the national association of Realtors that the average first time home buyer in the United states is now 38 years old. He used to be 27. And look, Trump can't just wave a magic wand and fix that. To the extent that he can do anything, it's to fire the Fed chair. And I guess, you know, let's give him credit, he's trying to. But my point is just that the GOP as a whole and that bill did not seem laser focus, you know, on those problems. So I would say I don't think it's gone very well then, you know, on immigration, I mean, look, it's controversial. I wait for Andrew. I would say of all the things that he, quote, promised to do, that's the one where he really has, you know, I think he's delivered. The problem in my opinion is like the way the administration decides to conduct itself is kind of like an Iraq like shock and awe approach where you come in with these big operations. Now, I will explain the logic. The logic is because there's 30 million people here probably who are illegal, deporting them all, even with billions of dollars is like probably impossible. So you want to stay these like large scale things to get people to self deport. And then about a million people or so according to the administration has left. We don't have a way of checking those numbers, which is why it's kind of difficult. But I would put it all together and I would say that the story to me is just chaos. It's like one that flips back and forth. We have Doge, which is in power, Elon's the co president, then he leaves, right? And now he's, you know, talking about Epstein files and the America Party. And then we bomb Iran very shortly after. Afterwards we said we weren't going to do that. And then we had the tariff brouhaha like in between. It doesn't feel as if there's a steady hand on the wheel. Chaotically, I mean, and I would apply that to immigration as well. The biggest criticism Americans have right now about the immigration policy is not even necessarily deportation. It's the chaotic way that they feel it's being handled. And if you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Why were people so mad at Biden over the border? Because of the chaos at the border. And let's give Trump credit, he did fix that. There's zero illegal crossings. Fine. But the point is now they look at the raids themselves and the way they're conducted and kind of like blown up by the White House as chaotic, right? And I think that when you put that together with the way that the tariff policy, the immigration policy, and even the war policy, I mean, we were negotiating with Iran and then we weren't negotiating with Iran. We berated Zelensky in the Oval Office office and told him he didn't have the cards and we're giving him more weapons. It doesn't make any fucking sense. And then the Epstein thing is, well, you run on it, you say you have it, now you say you don't have it. It screams like chaos and kind of incompetence. And I can see why a lot of people are moving against it. So that's like my wholesome. What grade would you give a.

[Andrew Schulz]

That sounds all bad.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Me personally? Yeah, I mean, I would go issue by issue. So, like, on foreign policy, I genuinely, I would give an F just in of terms. In terms of Ukraine and Israel. On immigration, considering what he ran on, I would probably give him like a B plus just because on the merits, I think he actually is doing almost every single thing that he said he would do. If anything, I would say my criticism. I mean, I should be open about it. I'm very pro mass deportation. But my criticism of it is that it seems like in many cases they went more for the show as opposed to, like, the policy. And I think that's the problem. So that's like my.

[Andrew Schulz]

They said they were going to target.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A lot of people. And also the reason I would or will not give it an A is because a huge portion of the immigration machine was used to go after these, like, pro Palestine students for speaking out against Israel. I'm like, yo, fuck that, sorry. Okay? That's like a total. Not only a free speech concern. It's like, why are you using the resources of my government to deport critics of another country? What people who are here legally. This is the least of our problems. All right, but let's put that, you know, to the side. So on the economy. Yeah, I mean, look, this is me speaking, speaking like, people know, I'm like, I'm pretty out of step with like, the. The trickle down gop, but, like, I don't know. I think the big beautiful bill was a. It was a disaster. Like, only not only in terms of its unpopularity, but it didn't, you know, invest in all the things. It didn't invest in making America better. Like, as a country. There's no massive expansion of manufacturing tax credits. There's no, like, ability to compete and deal with China. It was really just kind of like a personal Tax extension for the rich, more corporate tax extension for business as usual. That just, I think business as usual is what he was elected to like go against. So for me it's like a C. So here. So you can average all that together. I don't know what that is.

[Akash Singh]

Here's my question.

[Sagar Enjeti]

A plus C. Yeah. So where does the conservative party go from here?

[Akash Singh]

We, we ask and to after the election, where does the liberal. Where does the Democratic Party go? The conservative party. What are y' all gonna do now?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, what do you mean conservative party?

[Akash Singh]

Like the Republican Party. The conservative. The Republican Party.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, those are two very different.

[Akash Singh]

Right. The Republican Party, where do they go from here?

[Andrew Schulz]

What's the difference?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Conservative is an ideology, Republican is a party. So conservative. So to be conservative is. It's a big. Yeah, I thought that's more of a meta concept.

[Andrew Schulz]

Conservative.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, in many cases, MAGA is not conservative. Actually, most MAGA voters are on, are on Medicaid and they don't want it to be cut. So they don't care about entitlement spending. That's a non conservative position. Right, but it's conservative to cut government spending. So those are kind of a direct tension. You know, we could, I could talk forever about this. It's, it's a very intro Washington kind of conversation, like what it means to be conservative and kind of what it means to be a Republican. And Trump, in my opinion, the reason why he was able to succeed is because he wasn't conservative. And he even said that, he said I'm not a conservative whenever he was running in the 2016 primary. He is originally, at least to me was more what I would call a rightist, like more somebody like the European right, a culture warrior who kind of accepts the legitimacy of the social welfare state and has more populist policies. But that's not conservative, Right? That's, it's very, very different. I know this is semantics, but like this is good. It's important to like analyze like what we mean.

[Andrew Schulz]

So what happens to. I think what you're trying to say.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Is the Republican Party. Yeah, the Republican Party. I mean, look, they still have a lot of choices. You got three and a half more years to go. Like that's a long ass time. Like, who knows, all of this could be ancient news. I don't think so. I think in general, if you look at the history of presidencies, you're basically baked by 100 days. They wasted their whole 100 days on Doge, in my opinion, which was a disaster. At this point. I Think we could fairly say. And then they did the tax cut or the tax bill, which exploded the deficit, increased defense spending by 150 billion. Yeah, the next hundred, you know, then they did Israel, the Iran thing, now they're doing Ukraine. Who knows what's going to happen with that? I skipped over the tariffs, which I talked earlier, which were bad for the public and have not been handled competently, really at all. So for them, I mean, their problem is, is that they're in a cult of personality. Like they're locked into Trump himself as an action. And the biggest problem for them is When John McCain lost, he was like, okay, it's your. You guys do what you want. When Bush left, he was like, I'm out. Right. They, they fuck off. And with Trump, like, do you guys ever see him not trying to guide the Republican Party? He would never allow a post mortem. When Romney lost. Right. The entire Republican Party had to have a conversation, who are we? What do we stand for? And the conclusion was, not that bullshit, not Romney. Right. That's not going to stand in with the Trump Party.

[Andrew Schulz]

Right.

[Sagar Enjeti]

So I think that, you know, they have a lot of issues like structurally for where they want to go. In my opinion, they won the popular vote for the first time in 2004, since 2004 for Republican. They flipped all kinds of crazy states because of the economy and really because of immigration. And if they don't find a way to flip their numbers on both of those, and especially if the American way of life does not get materially better at a structural level, I think they're going to lose and I think they deserve to lose. If that's what happens. If that, if that age for a first time home buyer goes from 38 from today to like 42, and if home prices continue to go up and the supply continues to go down, if we don't, if we see wages stagnant, if we don't see like real material changes to the way people live, I just think, yeah, I think that the Republicans will lose and we always live in a change election.

[Andrew Schulz]

I don't want to divert from this too much. I know that we probably got to wrap up soon because we got to do something for you.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

So just real quick, obviously, you know, we're in New York City right now, greatest city in the world.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yes.

[Andrew Schulz]

And there's an interesting mayoral election coming up. What are your thoughts on the cultural circumstances that have happened that have propelled Mamdani to superstardom and a primary victory?

[Sagar Enjeti]

Mamdani is a, is a, is there's this phrase from back in the day, and it's a vindicating phrase. To me, it was all politics is local. That was what they used to say back in the day in 2010. That actually flipped because there were all of these Democrats who lived in Republican areas and they just got blown out, even though they lived there for 20 years. Because they're like, support Obama. And Republicans are like, oh, I can't deal with that. You know, he supports Obama. Mamdani was a return. Right? Because what his opponents did is they made their entire campaign against him about Israel. And he's like, no, guys, I'm talking about New York City. I'm talking about the halal carts. I'm talking about rent is too damn high. And what I really love about that is it subverts all of this, like, national political rhetoric, lyric, DEI style language. And it re. It. It brings us back to, what are you gonna do about New York, dude?

[Andrew Schulz]

Which is what people need when they're suffering.

[Sagar Enjeti]

What people need. Exactly. And that this city, you know, people have made a lot about, like, oh, Mandani won. The rich people making 100 grand. I'm like, Bro, New York, 100 grand. You're like, rent poor. You know what I'm saying? Like, rent. You're poor as actually like, like on a bed.

[Akash Singh]

Like, I got legitimately eligible for the housing line.

[Sagar Enjeti]

No, like, like, guys making 50k in Iowa are way richer than we're making 100. Like post tax, post state, local, federal, 100, 100k in New York. Like, I'm like, you're not. Yeah, it's like, bro, you got multiple roommates, okay? You're like living in a three bed if you're like 25 and I don't know, the east Alphabet city or something like that. So, yeah, let's recalibrate for New York expectations.

[Andrew Schulz]

That's a good point.

[Sagar Enjeti]

My favorite videos that he would do is like the halal car video.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Hey, guys, like, I lost you a expensive. Let's make it eight bucks again. I loved whenever he walked across Manhattan. And the thing is, what he was able to do, he'd be like, no, you're obsessed about Israel. Yeah, you guys are the. I'm not spending all my time talking about this. I would stay here in New York and hear all my policies to try and to change that.

[Andrew Schulz]

Fantastic.

[Sagar Enjeti]

And if you've lived under Bloomberg, I mean, my criticism of this city is that they unfortunately kind of turned it into a playground of the rich as opposed to a place that people Lived. You know, when the stuff I would read about the 1980s in New York, I'm not saying it didn't exist.

[Andrew Schulz]

It's always been a playground for the rich.

[Sagar Enjeti]

It definitely has. But it has become the capital of the global financial elite for a certain. You know, I mean, when I walk around here. Yeah, but I mean, I don't know. I mean, when you walked around in the 80s, you barely even hear English on the streets here in the summer, Right. Half these people, they're from Dubai, Saudi Arabia, Germany, like, all over the world.

[Andrew Schulz]

Like, I don't know about that. Yeah, I think you're describing London.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Well, there's that, too.

[Andrew Schulz]

But. But in terms of. I think that the difference now is that everybody always came here for opportunity, right? That doesn't matter if you're an immigrant, you came here for opportunity. If you're from America and you moved here from, like, Wisconsin or Maine, you came here from opportunity. You think you're going to work at a big fund, you're thinking to be a graphic designer, you're thinking be a fashion designer, something. It's always opportunity. And I think that what's happening now is that kids or Gen Z feels like the only way to make it now is through TikTok.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah.

[Andrew Schulz]

And I don't begrudge them because when we were coming up, up, at least in entertainment, there was like, Comedy Central and tv, there are these things that you could get on that made it feel accessible. And even if it wasn't accessible for you, there was this idea that, like, next year they're going to do an audition, and maybe I'll get that right. This idea of, like, getting on snl, all these different things were possible. And one of the nice things about the, you know, decentralization of entertainment and making it go on the Internet is that it gave freedom for people like us who wanted to go after it and make it ourselves. The problem is not everybody wants to go after and make it themselves. They want institutions and structures that are established that they can hope to get accepted by and put on. And now that those have fallen apart and that's just entertainment now, I think people are like, so I just got to go viral on TikTok. And it's just like, I love that because I love the idea of, like, I'm in control of my destiny. Not everybody loves that. And I think even the illusion of opportunity is better than luck.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, definitely.

[Andrew Schulz]

And I think they're seeing that in not just entertainment, but you're probably seeing that in other spheres as well. And to go back to what you're saying about, like, you make $100,000 a year, but you have $300,000 worth of debt. I think that's why the rent freeze is so enticing to people, because if you're spending $700 a month, let's say, on your student loans, and that's just the interest, you're not even chipping away at them. That's your savings. So if you again, take your rent from $5,000 a month and you take it down to 3,300, now you have your savings again. And I think in a way, the program is kind of like punishing landlords for universities charging exorbitant prices.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Yeah, that's right.

[Andrew Schulz]

So you're just passing the buck to someone else. And it's like, landlord is a bad person, of course, because they own this property and there are shitty landlords. I get it. But, like, I think the core of the issue is the fact that these kids are saddled with this debt, with these degrees that offer them nothing in a city like New York. And they're paralyzed with this fear that there is no opportunity for upward mobility.

[Sagar Enjeti]

That's very well said. And we are getting to. We'll wrap here. Is like a structural issue, which is that America and our gener. I'm younger millennial. Like, I'm 33. And when I was coming up, it was, you go to college and you will be rewarded. And now I'm actually at the age where I get to look back at who made it and who did. And I'm telling you guys, my friends with the most debt, they didn't make it. It's up. And that you watch the choices that people have to make. Ah, we're going to delay having a kid. That breaks my heart, man. We're going to have to move wherever. Even though we want to live here, we have to go move somewhere else because we can't afford it. Even though this is the best place to make money. Right. This is the best place for my career. We. I can't have it all. You can't have to make serious choices.

[Andrew Schulz]

You can't take the risks necessary for success. It's almost impossible to become successful without taking on immense risk, quite literally.

[Sagar Enjeti]

When I started my business, I had $50,000 in credit card debt. I would have been. If breaking points didn't work. But, you know, I mean, I was like, you know, I'm young.

[Andrew Schulz]

I called you before.

[Sagar Enjeti]

I was like. I was like, I think. I think it'll work. You Know, it's like, I think so. And. But, you know, we would have been actually ho.

[Andrew Schulz]

But imagine somebody with $300,000 in debt.

[Sagar Enjeti]

They're not doing that.

[Andrew Schulz]

They have a.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

They have a job that actually pays for things. And they go, I can't risk leaving.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Or wife and kids.

[Andrew Schulz]

I mean, I mean, wife and kids is like. I think that's such a, like stratospheric in terms of. For people.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Exactly.

[Andrew Schulz]

So, yeah, I think that that like, contributes to the support from Mondani and specifically the demographic that seems to be really excited about what he's going to bring. And. But to me, there's a little bit of this passing the buck. It's like, okay, we have this thing we can't move, which are these loans, so we got to move it to another area to free up some economic mobility for these people. And I get. And if you're one of those people that saddled with that debt, like, you don't give a who got to pay for it, like, as long as it's not you. So I get that they're offering a solution that maybe in the long term will hurt people. And I want to talk to him about it because I want to see.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Like, how we grapple with that, like, what got to come on the show.

[Andrew Schulz]

No, I've been talking. No, I've been talking about them. I've been talking to. So it looks like that's going to happen. So. Because I genuinely want to ask earnestly, like, what are the downstream effects of some of these apostles. Policies. Policies. How does that work? But there is no question that they are enticing. And it's not to the poor. People think that. Oh, the poor love the socialist. No, no, no, no, no. It's the middle class that are entitled in their brains to a better life that they're not having that this is so enticing. They're like, wait, why am I same economic bracket as my parents? I was supposed to be rich.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Frankly, lower than that or lower.

[Andrew Schulz]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There is no middle class, in my opinion. You're materially much poorer than your parents. You're way materially poor and your parents. And that's fucked up. I think that's wrong. And that's a systemic problem that gets to the like very structure of our economy. I mean, one of the most important facts in the world from my friend Joe Weisenthal is that is Shanghai Stock Exchange has barely grown since 2009, but everyone in China, you are way more materially rich since 2009. In America, the number has to go up. Capital must return as specific. Specifically at 8 to 9%. Our whole retirement's banked on that. Our whole economy is banked on that. And it doesn't matter if the that we own is nicer or not. It must return. It must have dividends, it must have payoff. And in Shanghai and in Beijing and all of that, they're like, oh, we don't give a fuck about that. They're like, are we getting drone deliveries? Are our houses nicer? Are our electric cars the best vehicles in the world? Hands down. I'm telling you, if their ban was lifted, I would buy them tomorrow. They're so is no. There is no competition. I would throw the Tesla. I'm getting in the Yang wing like it's done byd. Let me in Huawei, Any of these other people, they have the best cars in the world. It's. It's genuinely not a question. Not best electric. Best cars in the world are in Chang or in Shanghai, Beijing, like the Chinese peasant or, you know, is materially much better off than the United States than it was then compared to the 2009. Than the average American from 2009 to 2025. So let's all spend some time asking why. And a lot of it is debt leverage projects, education being sold, badly structured debt. I mean, the way that people are even. How do you get rich in America today? For most people, it's like. Or even really filthy rich, it's to work in hedge funds and in finance and microtransactions for stuff that does not make this country better off. If you do know how you get rich in China, the government goes, you're allowed to get rich. You can do it by building the best electric cars in the world. Oh, the hedge fund, you're gone. You're. You're going to. You're going to the Gulag. Actually, we don't do that here. Right. And that I'm not advocating for that system. But in comparison to ours, it does work. And that's a deep question that we all have to ask. It's a structural. Who is better off today? I believe that the Chinese are better off as a result of their way of life, which is really up because I think we have a much better. We had. We had a path. We didn't always used to be like this. And we could go in another direction.

[Andrew Schulz]

Thanks, Reagan.

[Sagar Enjeti]

There you go. It's not just Reagan. They're all. They're all complicit now at this point.

[Andrew Schulz]

Sagar. Thank you so much, bro. We love you.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Appreciate it.

[Andrew Schulz]

Make sure you check out Sagar.

[Sagar Enjeti]

Breaking points.