wavePod

Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner And Their Harvard Adventures (4/12/26) - The Epstein Chronicles | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to The Epstein Chronicles

Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner And Their Harvard Adventures (4/12/26)

The Epstein Chronicles

Sun Apr 12 2026

Jeffrey Epstein, Glenn Dubin, and Les Wexner’s collective ties to Harvard University expose a deeply unsettling nexus of wealth, influence, and compromised morality within one of the world’s most prestigious academic institutions. Epstein, despite his...

Summary

The Epstein Chronicles: Mega Edition - Jeffrey Epstein, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner and Their Harvard Adventures (4/12/26)

Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: April 12, 2026

Overview

In this “mega edition” episode, Bobby Capucci delivers a detailed analysis of the murky and persistent ties between convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, billionaire donors Glenn Dubin and Les Wexner, and Harvard University. Centering on recent editorials and reporting from Harvard community members (notably Lawrence Lessig in the Harvard Crimson), Capucci calls out the lack of institutional accountability, highlights the complicity of elite figures, and examines the recent fallout as Dubin and Wexner are (finally) ousted from Harvard boards. Throughout, Bobby maintains a blunt, outraged tone, advocating for transparency, real consequences, and institutional reform.

Key Discussion Points & Timestamps

1. Lawrence Lessig’s Harvard Crimson Editorial ([00:30]-[38:12])

Lessig’s Critique of Harvard’s Epstein Ties

Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard Law professor, publishes an editorial taking Harvard to task for its mishandling of the Epstein scandal.
Capucci frames Lessig’s critique as overdue but significant:

“It’s about time someone at Harvard stood up and did the right thing.” ([20:12])

Institutional Reviews: Empty Promises

Summarizes Harvard’s self-review after Epstein’s 2008 conviction; calls the resulting report “absolute garbage” ([01:52]).
Only low-level participants (e.g., researchers directly funded by Epstein) face consequences, while senior administrators escape accountability.
Quote:

“None of these people have felt the full weight of what occurred. None of them have stepped down or lost their positions or lost tenure... Instead, a few of the people who were getting that money directly from Epstein ended up being the only people to take the fall.” ([04:01])

The Three Chapters of Academia’s Relationship with Epstein

Pre-2008:
Elites fawned over Epstein; media “had no idea” defense is transparent nonsense.

“Epstein didn’t wake up one morning and decide to become a scumbag. This is who he was.” ([06:20])
2008–2018 (After Conviction):
Ambiguous, complicit dance continues as universities rationalize ongoing ties, ignoring moral clarity for financial benefit.
- Faust bans future Epstein donations at Harvard, but leaves numerous loopholes for continued access and influence.
- The Program on Evolutionary Dynamics (PED) at Harvard, founded by Epstein money, maintains ongoing ties—including financial and social connections—despite the ban ([10:00]).
Post-2018 (Miami Herald Exposé):
Only mass media attention prompts elites to publicly sever ties:

“Everyone hates Epstein... But you should have hated him a long time before that.” ([07:24])

Harvard’s Enablers: Larry Summers, Nowak, and Loopholes

Former president Larry Summers features prominently as an Epstein enabler (“absolute scuzzball, and an absolute moron,” says Capucci at [13:13]).
Epstein turns his Harvard-linked office into a personal base (“second office in Cambridge”).
Despite bans, administrators continue to enable backdoor funding and allow Epstein continued access.
Donation laundering through friends (e.g., Leon Black) is encouraged by development staff ([17:54]).
Quote:

“We want Epstein’s money, but we don’t want the stink of Epstein on it.” ([17:07])

Scapegoating and Fake Accountability

Only Martin Nowak, PED’s director, faces discipline—while dozens of more powerful elites are untouched.
Quote:

“If they were to sanction everyone at Harvard who had a relationship with Epstein—those would be some empty ass halls, folks.” ([27:19])
Capucci: This is a Harvard-wide moral failing, not a rogue-individual case.

2. News Update: Dubin and Wexner Depart Harvard Leadership ([38:12]-[54:25])

Public Pressure Forces Harvard’s Hand

Based on a Crimson article, Capucci highlights the overdue resignations/removals of billionaires Glenn Dubin and Les Wexner from Kennedy School leadership.
Both men have deep, personal, and financial ties to Epstein—Wexner especially (described as Epstein’s main patron).
Capucci:

“These aren’t casual relationships. These guys were very, very close. And the fact that they were still sitting on this board … just goes to show you how much Harvard really cares.” ([39:04])
Applauds the growing student and public discontent:

“Their whole entire role within their elite society is in flux now and they’re losing face… and that’s a huge deal for these people.” ([59:04])

Lack of Transparency & Performative Reforms

Harvard staffers claim it’s “business as usual” for such names to disappear from websites—Capucci is incredulous.
No comment from Dubin or Wexner; Capucci rails against “elite impunity” ([45:40]).
Critiques Harvard for public facade vs. behind-the-scenes inaction:

“You can’t run around and act like you’re producing all of these leaders … when you have these disgusting ties to these people.” ([51:48])

Student Voices & Moral Contradictions

Students express discomfort, demand vetting and transparency.
Student Catherine Williams:

“It just struck me as a point of tension that we espouse all of those values as a school … But we have these ties.” ([53:36])
Students expected to vet donors themselves—a burden misplaced from administration.
Capucci: “The blame is not with the students… the blame is with the faculty and with the university for not vetting who these donors are.” ([50:14])

3. Larger Themes and Calls to Action

Elite Hypocrisy and Lack of Accountability

Capucci returns repeatedly to the theme of elite crime without consequences versus harsh punishment for ordinary people ([48:23]).
Quote:

“If we break the law… forget it, there’s consequences. Not for people like this.” ([47:08])

What True Institutional Courage Looks Like

Tarana Burke (founder of #MeToo) advises Harvard to own its mistakes, be transparent, and set an example ([56:55]):

“This is how you do this. You look it dead in the eye and say we made a mistake or we took too long or whatever the thing is. But here’s what we’re going to do going forward, and I hope that happens.”

Still Unresolved: Leon Black Remains

Despite mounting allegations, billionaire Leon Black is still listed on the Center’s Leadership Council ([58:29]):

“Right there is why we can’t trust Harvard folks. Leon Black, another enabler…”

Memorable Quotes

“Every single time one of these groups does an internal review, it always turns out to be absolute garbage.” ([02:13])
“The people who facilitated the Epstein money in the first place … all of those sons of bitches should have lost their jobs for sure.” ([04:31])
“We all know that’s garbage … you certainly didn’t say anything.” ([07:13])
“The Julie Brown article just got people to start paying attention … but people knew exactly what Epstein was.” ([07:35])
“Give me a break. I’m so sick of the ‘we had no idea’.” ([06:37])
“A new broom sweeps clean. What they should do is get Morgan Freeman’s character from that Stand By Me movie and have him show up at Harvard and whip these guys into shape.” ([20:08])
“If Harvard was doing the right thing, they would just remove (Wexner’s) name off of all of these buildings, too. Thank you for the donation, but we’re removing your name…” ([42:05])
“Never mind laundering money or being involved in a trafficking ring. Earlier this month, Harvard students called on the university…” ([48:23])
“Leon Black, another one of the billionaire enablers that helped Jeffrey Epstein be validated … All of these enablers, all of them played their role in helping Epstein get away with his crimes for so damn long.” ([59:04])

Conclusion / Takeaways

Bobby Capucci forcefully argues that Harvard and related academic elites still have not faced true accountability for their Epstein entanglements.
While the removal of Dubin and Wexner is positive, it is more PR than reform unless deeper, more meaningful transparency and cleaning house takes place.
The episode centers survivors, the need for moral clarity, and long-overdue institutional reckoning.
Capucci calls on listeners to remain vigilant and keep pressure on elite institutions to face the truth and enact real change.

Notable Segments & Timestamps

[00:30] Bobby introduces Lawrence Lessig’s editorial and Harvard's review charade
[04:01] Scapegoating and lack of accountability among Harvard leadership
[10:00] Loopholes in Harvard’s Epstein ban; continued enabling
[13:13] Larry Summers’ role and ongoing Epstein access at Harvard
[17:07] Laundering donations via Leon Black and others
[20:08] Capucci rails against Harvard’s failure to act (“A new broom sweeps clean.”)
[27:19] The absurdity of disciplining only Nowak
[39:04] Dubin and Wexner’s Harvard resignations—a reluctant, overdue move
[51:48] Students’ moral discomfort and integrity gap
[56:55] Tarana Burke’s call for transparency and courageous leadership
[59:04] Leon Black, elite impunity, and unresolved issues with Harvard’s gatekeeping

If you'd like to contact Bobby Capucci, email: bobbycapucciprotonmail.com. Find him on Twitter: @BobbyCapucci.

Loading summary...

Transcript

SpinQuest Announcer (0:00)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, Spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spinquest exclusives. Blackjack, roulette, baccarat and even live dice. With craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to. And right now, new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@Spinquest.com SpinQuest is a free to

SpinQuest Legal Disclaimer (0:24)

play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (0:30)

with VRBoCare. Help is always ready before, during and after your stay. We've planned for the plot twists, so support is always available because a great trip starts with peace of mind, everybody, and welcome to the program. We're gonna get right into it tonight. Considering this is a relatively long article, it's really an editorial that was posted by Lawrence Lessig over at the Harvard Crimson. Now, Lawrence Lessig is the R.L. fuhrman professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard, and he's taking Harvard to task in this editorial. Folks, I've been calling for this kind of rhetoric for quite some time, and very few people in academia were willing to stand up and say anything about this stuff. Dr. Stephen Delay was one of the very few. So it's nice to see Lawrence Lessig show up to the party. I mean, a little late, obviously, but still, what do I always talk about? If the people that are within these institutions aren't holding their peers and each other responsible for their behavior, then how can anybody on the outside ever expect for that to occur? So it starts on the inside, and seeing Lawrence Lessig pen this essay, this editorial here is certainly a step in the right direction. So let's jump right into it and let's see what he has to say. This appeared in the Harvard Crimson. Author is Lawrence Lessig. Harvard has apparently concluded its review of its relationship to the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey e. Epstein. In September 2019, after expressing that he profoundly regrets Harvard's association with Epstein, University President Lawrence S. Bakehouse promised to review how we prevent these situations in the future. And what did we get like usual when it comes to these internal reports? Or we're gonna have a real reflective look in the mirror and we're gonna see how we can be better. Whenever it's that kind of stuff, it usually falls flat on its face. At least with my experience here in the Epstein case. Every single time one of these groups does an internal review, it always turns out to be absolute garbage. The report found Harvard had taken no money from Epstein after his conviction, though there were further questions that merited study. Two weeks ago, after completing that study, Harvard determined to shutter the research center Epstein's money had founded and discipline its academic director. Yet in these steps, Harvard has still not given us a fair accounting of our past. And worse, in this latest step, it hides that account behind a scapegoat. And that is definitely the case. They have scapegoated from the jump over at Harvard. None of the people at the top, none of the trustees. Lawrence.

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (4:01)

None of these other people that are, you know, top dog at Harvard, people that are supposed to be responsible for this sort of thing. None of these people have felt the full weight of what occurred. None of them have stepped down or lost their positions or lost tenure or lost anything like that. Instead, a few of the people who were getting that money directly from Epstein ended up being the only people to take the fall. And while they should have, right, the people that facilitated the Epstein money in the first place, the scientists that he was collecting and that were taking money from him, all of those sons of bitches should have lost their jobs for sure. They should have lost tenure. They should have lost everything, honestly. But the same goes for the people above them. Is there no accountability when it comes to the management level, so to say, in this situation, Is it just the professors who should be sanctioned, who should lose their jobs or should Everybody who was around at that time, everybody who should have seen what was going on, who didn't, either willfully or because they're morons, all of those people should not be in the positions that they're in. There are plenty of capable position people to fill those positions. There are three chapters in the evolving relationship between academic institutions and Jeffrey Epstein. In the first, before his conviction in 2008, everyone loves Epstein. And that is the case. All of these people were gushing over Epstein. Remember the Vanity Fair article? You know, these people were gushing over Epstein. And they'll tell you now that, oh, we had no idea what Jeffrey Epstein was. We there. There was no signs. Nobody had any idea. Meanwhile, we know that's a bunch of bs, right? We all know that that's garbage. Epstein didn't wake up one morning and decide to become an absolute scumbag pervert. This is who he was. This is the kind of person he was. This was his character. All of those crass jokes while you guys are all around at a science conference that didn't ring a few alarm bells. I mean, come on already. There's a time and place for everything. You know, you're sitting around with the guys. It's a poker game. You want to have some crass language, I get it. Yeah, of course. That's what guys do. I get it. You're at a science conference. Why do you need to have girls with you? Why do you need to talk about disgusting topics that, you know, these. There's no place for it in the. In the, in the environment or the setting. And, and that didn't ring any alarm bells? Didn't go off for anybody. It didn't ring any alarm bells for any of these people. Please, give me a break. I'm just, you know, I'm so sick of the. Well, we had no idea. We didn't hear anything. We didn't see anything. Well, you certainly didn't say anything. In the third, after the 2018 article in the Miami Herald detailing his depravity. Everyone hates Epstein. Hey, hold on a second. You guys should have hated him. Long time before that. This stuff was out there. People were talking about who Epstein was. There was, you know, a lot going on in that realm of the atmosphere. People knew exactly what Epstein was. It didn't take the Julie Brown article to let people know what Jeffrey Epstein was. The Julie Brown article that got people to start paying attention. But in the second, there is an ambiguous dance between this generous funder pedophile and universities that recognize complexity and taking his money. See, and that was. That's one of my biggest problems with this. They knew it was wrong to take old boy's dough, but they did it anyway. And then when they're called out on it, they start with the whole nonsense of, well, what do you mean? We had no idea. You knew. Everybody knew. You took that money anyway. And what you thought was that Jeffrey Epstein was in the clear. He did his time. They. They weren't going to come get him again because of all of his connections. There was no way that was going to occur. So these dudes hopped right back into bed with him, had their hand out, and Jeffrey Epstein was handing out the hundreds of thousands. In 2008, former university president Drew G. Faust resolved that complexity with clarity, but incompletely. Unlike others such as mit, Faust determined that Harvard would take no more money from Epstein, according to the May 2020 report. Yeah, okay. But very much like others, including MIT, she gave no directive about how the many other ways that Epstein was connected to the university should be affected by her determination. Of course, she didn't go all the way. You know what that's called, Mr. Lessig? I'm pretty sure, you know, you're A very skilled lawyer, very intelligent man, well schooled. Much more well schooled than me, that's for sure. But the cynic in me says it was left there on purpose as a loophole so they could still get that money while retaining plausible deniability. In particular, she gave no guidance about how the center that Epstein's main contribution to Harvard had established, the Program on Evolutionary Dynamics, should negotiate its continued interactions with Epstein. And I'm sure that Mr. Lessig here

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (13:13)

From the beginning, Epstein treated that space as a second office in Cambridge. Epstein traveled to Cambridge regularly to meet with Harvard's most luminary, including Summers. Regularly, but not exclusively at ped. Those meetings are described as interesting and intellectual in Nowak's letter. There is no suggestion they involved any inappropriate behavior, well beyond, of course, the inappropriateness of including Epstein himself. So I'm certainly not laying out the charges that there is inappropriate behavior. As far as abusing girls here, I'll leave that to some of the other fantasists that are floating around. What I am saying, though, is Larry Summers is an absolute jerk, an absolute scuzzball, and an absolute moron. Larry Summers is the kind of guy that epitomizes everything that was wrong with academia and their relationship with Epstein. Politically connected, locked in at the university, top of his field, and the exact kind of guy Jeffrey Epstein loved hanging around. These soirees continued long after the 2008 ban on raising Epstein money. The question is why? Some thought the ban would be temporary. Some hoped Epstein's reputation might be restored. All right, well, hold on. Hit the brakes. Restored his reputation restored, huh? Again, we're not talking about somebody who was involved in a money, a money scam here. We're not talking about somebody who got into a fight in the bar and things went too far and the person he was fighting with got hurt severely. You know, you people make mistakes, right? You can forgive mistakes is what I'm trying to get at. But this is no gray area mistake. This is no, ah, man, I really, really screwed up this time. That's not what this was. This was human trafficking of children. Point blank, period. Some believed it morally obligatory to. To give a criminal a chance at redemption. And that's such BS too. All of these elites love to talk about that, but what have they done to really give people who need a second chance a second chance? The dude that got popped for selling some pot, guy on the corner who got nailed with some crack, who's doing a lot longer than the dude who had the same amount of powdered coke. Where are they to help these people out? Nowhere to be found, are they. They love to bloviate and they love the virtue signal, but they don't love to strap on their boots and get down to work. Nowak was told as much by his spiritual advisor, which he shared in his letter to the administration. His spiritual advisor, huh? I mean, are you really. Your spiritual advisor told you that you should help Jeffrey Epstein refurbish his image, huh? Talk about passing the buck. Talk about absolutely passing the buck. Whatever the reason, the reality is that there was no real change in the practical relationship that Epstein had to Harvard beyond his ability to write Harvard a check. The meetings continued. The relationships grew deeper. The conversations on and and near campus were many. And there are just tons and tons of people who have talked about this, who have witnessed it, and it's in their report itself. So there's no denying Jeffrey Epstein's presence on the campus and around these professors. What continued as well was PEDs need for money. Like Epstein's, PED's rent was substantial. Nowak reports that at first, after PFOS ban, Harvard had agreed to assume it. But after the financial crisis, Nowak was informed that he would have to raise it himself. So again, Harvard is not getting off the hook here. At least not with me. Some people might let him off the hook, but not me. They're the institution here. They're the ones where the buck stops. So after the financial meltdown, you clowns didn't have the money to fund this department, so you told this professor it's up to him to do it himself. And then there was no checks and balances. Like you had never seen Epstein's name before. All of it smacks of absolute bs. Foundations usually don't give academic grantees money to cover rent, so everyone knew those additional funds would have to be like Epstein's from private individuals. An FAS Development Office staff member encouraged Nowak as late as 2017 to ask Epstein to ask his friends to help, according to the May 2020 report. So we want Epstein's money, but we don't want the stink of Epstein on it. So let's have Epstein middleman it and get some of his rich a hole homies to, to fill the void and then that'll give us the COVID we need. Because we could say, well, Epstein didn't give us the money. Insert scumbag here did. As late as 2017 to ask Epstein to ask his friends to help Nowak followed Harvard's direction. Epstein obliged, securing substantial support from his friend. Oh, here's a name that all of you are going to. Leon D. Black, among others. So you see, the Leon Black story just keeps getting deeper and deeper, though quicksand has a hold. And we talked about this months ago, months and months and months ago, that Leon Black was in this up to his ears and that he has some explaining to do. Now you add on the new allegations against Leon Black. Oh yeah, old boy is up the creek right now without a paddle. There's no doubt about that. Throughout this period, apparently no one with any authority, certainly not the university, not its former president Summers, not its development office, not the dozen or so Harvard's most elite, saw any inappropriateness in, in this ongoing academic relationship. And that right there says it all. Everybody involved, everybody that was around.

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (20:08)

drawing these gigantic ass paychecks at this overpriced once great university, they should all be fired. A new broom sweeps clean. What they should do is get Morgan Freeman's character from that Stand By Me movie and have him show up at Harvard and whip these guys into shape. Despite the obvious harm that a sex offender could trigger in the members of our community who themselves might have been victims of sexual abuse, the elite of Harvard's elite continue to nurture a relationship with a sex offender. Yeah, because that's what the elite do. I hate to be the bearer of bad news for anyone who holds these people up on high, but the so called elite, yeah, that's a class of sick ass people. A whole group of people who literally have zero morals and who do not care about anything that does not increase their wealth or their power. And that's not just me saying it. Their actions bear it out. Despite the clarity of all of our views now, they apparently saw no wrong in what all of them were doing then. At least until chapter three, when all worked diligently to forget what had happened between 2008 and 2018. Yo, Lessig is going hard in the pain here. He's leaving. He's really shooting from the hip and giving all of these guys the business as he should. It's about Time someone at Harvard stood up and did the right thing. Harvard's May 2020 report celebrated Faust's moral clarity, but it identified some details that required further investigation. In March, Harvard completed that determination. It did not release any public accounting. Instead, its conclusions were shared internally by email to the affected departments. Predictably, that email was leaked. And in this day and age, if you have some sort of explosive email and you're in a situation like an institution like Harvard, you have to expect that the email is getting leaked. So you better be on your game, beyond your P's and Q's and say exactly what you want to say in that email. The effect was completely foreseeable. Airbrushed from the history are the many Harvard luminaries who participated in and encouraged the ongoing relationship with Epstein after 2008, left standing alone as Nowak Peds academic director, who is now to be disciplined. And disciplined as in quotes. He's not wrong. No act while should be why he should be disciplined and he should be

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (26:28)

Neither has he been punished because he asked Epstein to help him address PED's funding needs by securing donations from Epstein's friend Leon Black. How could he be when Harvard's development office itself asked Novak to ask Epstein for help? And there's the rub of it, right? And he gets to the heart of the issue, in my opinion. And that is everybody who is there, everybody involved. All of these people that are hitting us with virtuous signaling. Okay, the virtue signaling has to stop by these people. Somebody has to take responsibility for what occurred. You're all making big bucks. And with that big money comes big responsibility. Or it should. Rather, Nowak is being disciplined because of offenses that are plenty, not offenses at all, or that when committed, were not viewed as anything more than simple mistakes. The most extraordinary of these is the charge and Faculty of Arts and Sciences Dean Claudine Gay's notification to Nowak, which states that he exhibited profound negligence in misrepresenting the source of PEDs matching funds to one of his funding sources, the Templeton Foundation. This is a gross misrepresentation in itself. Yeah, I agree. Not a big fan of Claudine Gay or the way she handled this. And to make Nowak the scapegoat and the only one really getting punished is laughable, considering we know the relationship somebody like Larry Summers had with Jeffrey Epstein. If they were to sanction everybody at Harvard who had a relationship with Epstein, those would be some empty ass halls, folks. The May report had speculated this might have happened. But Noak's emails with the Templeton foundation reveal that the precise words used to report his funding were actually requested by the foundation. The Templeton foundation was neither confused or misled, meaning there could be no misrepresentation. So they knew nothing was misrepresented to them. They knew exactly what they were getting into. They knew what the money was for, and they knew where the money originated. They did not care. And that's really what it comes down to. That's what it boils down to. The balance is just as weak. From the very start, Harvard knew Epstein treated PD as a second office. According to the May 2020 report, Harvard knew as early as 2006 that Epstein even had his own phone. So again, Epstein is set up, got this office. Larry Summers sets that up, got himself a phone line. He's Mr. Big Shit on the campus of Harvard now. Yeah, I'm Jeffrey Epstein. Brr. College dropout. Drop out here, drop out there, but got myself a fellowship at Harvard. What an absolute joke. And what disrespect to the people who actually work hard for those fellowships. According to Nowak, Summers walked with Epstein as he secured access to ped's offices with his own key card. Not once did he or the university say that this access was wrong with or must end. But now Nowak is to be disciplined, in part because PED gave Epstein a different key card after the Harvard access system had changed. So even after they changed the system, the access system, even after, you know, they, they updated the, the locks, they had to make sure their boy Epstein was taken care of.

Podcast Host (Bobby Capuchino) (30:19)

They had to make sure their golden ticket was taken care of. They had to make sure Jeffrey was all right. Sure, I guess one could say that a university wide change in security protocols was meant to signal to PED that it should stop granting Epstein access to the PED offices. But wouldn't a memo from the administration have been a clearer way to send that message? Well, they got money to burn there, obviously. I mean, with the, the, the insane amount of money they charge the students, that every single toilet bowl should be gold plated. They should all be eating five star meals every night in the commissary. And you know, whatever the, the top Egyptian count sheets are, they gotta have Those. This is Harvard, after all. Finally, Nowak is to be disciplined because the center allowed Epstein's biography to appear on PED's webpage after Epstein's publicist requested it. Of course, the story of center benefactors commonly appear on center web pages. Of course they do. That's part of it, right? What do you think? These guys donate all of this money and they don't get anything on the flipback? Of course they do. But during a period in which Harvard was inviting Jeffrey Epstein to the launch of its capital campaign, and the most elite of the elite at Harvard were regularly meeting with Epstein at PED and around Cambridge. FAS blames Nowak for failing to recognize that it was a misuse of the harvard.edu domain to reveal Epstein as a friend of Ped. It wasn't wrong to take his money. Okay, Wasn't wrong to use him as a benefactor. Wasn't wrong to give him an office, but it was wrong to let everybody know that. All about saving face. It's never about the people who were affected. It's never about the girls who were abused or anything like that. You would think with as much involvement people from Harvard have that they'd start their own sort of program here where they'd offer free courses to these gals. None of these offenses would have even been noticed. But for Harvard's need to appear vigilant, if only against one of the very many who continued to engage Epstein at Harvard after 2008, that one its scapegoat. It was wrong for Harvard to continue any association with Epstein after 2008. No one should be forced to live or work in an environment that celebrates in any way a man who crossed this critical line, or a woman at that, for that matter. Let's be very clear. 38% of people who are engaging in trafficking are women. All right, we went through that report already. But the point stands. Nobody should feel uncomfortable at work. Nobody should feel uncomfortable at school and this environment. I'll tell you what, not an environment I'd want my people in, that's for sure. Sex abuse is permanent. Its survivors carry its costs forever. All of them are entitled, at the very least, to an environment that does not trigger retraumatization. To have suffered from the likes of an Epstein and then see Harvard's most elite, most elite hanging with Epstein is to add injury to insult. And that is a fact. That is definitely a fact. And it's no different. Let's be very clear. With Kamala Harris hanging out with Bill Clinton, we have to be Consistent here, right? None of these dudes should be given air to breathe if they're involved in this sort of thing. And this wrong is about much more than funding. It's about the continuing relationship with so many at Harvard. Our accounting for that is wildly incomplete, and it betrays the truth and a commitment to institutional integrity to allow Harvard to stand as innocent while one faculty member went rogue. And I. Look, I couldn't agree more with what he's saying here, folks. I think that no act needs to be disciplined, needs to be punished, but everybody does. I just want. I want to drive that point home. The story of chapter two at Harvard is not the story of one bad apple. It is of an institution blinded by what? Money? Brilliance? Celebrity? From what seems to us now as an obvious moral truth. Of course, we were right not to take Epstein's money after 2008, but we were deeply wrong to continue to celebrate him at Harvard in all the ways that so many of the most prominent, prominent among us did. That is powerful. And he's calling to account all of his colleagues on campus who took part in refurbishing this guy's image and helping him have this access. That wrong is not excused or hidden with a scapegoat. We need an honest accounting of that past and a plan for how Harvard will avoid this failure in the future. Should all criminals be banished always? Should particular criminals, those whose crimes particularly affect members of the Harvard community, be banished always? And by always, I don't mean for any purpose. An event at which a criminal was asked to reflect on at least some crimes or even offer his justification could be different, at least if properly framed from a workshop in which the criminal is just one more participant, celebrated only or especially because he happens to be rich. These are hard questions, no doubt, especially in an age of tweet length attention spans. Boy, can I get a clap from the back of the room there. That is exactly the age we're in. The attention Spanish of a tweet. But it betrays our tradition to hide from these more complicated questions, simply because some might misunderstand. We are a university that openly and eagerly engaged with a child sex predator, not just before he was convicted, but long after. How did our culture allow this to happen? And how can we now allow this failure to be obscured by scapegoating just one? Yes, Harvard's virtue has been signaled to anyone blind to what actually happened right here among us. But the vice of what happened, the open and regular engagement with a sex offender, has not been reckoned here. It is that which Harvard must finally account for openly, fairly, and honestly. Well, folks, there you have it. Somebody finally connected to Harvard. Somebody with a serious voice on campus calling his colleagues to account. If you'd like to contact me, you can do that@bobby capuchirotonmail.com that's B O B B Y C A P U, C c I@protonmail.com you can also find me on Twitter at Bobby Capuci. All of the links that go with this episode can be found in the

Commentator/Co-host (38:12)

description box today from the Harvard Crimson. And this article was written by Emma R. Schumer. And the headline is Epstein Link. Donors Dubin and Wexner depart from HKS Leadership Council. Donors and billionaires Glenn R. Dubin and Leslie H. Wexner departed from a Harvard Kennedy School board last month, foregrounding students concerns regarding Harvard's ties to donors who cultivated relationships with deceased sex offender pedophile Jeffrey E. Epstein. Well, better late than never for Harvard, huh? Considering their ties with Jeffrey Epstein. If they think we're going to forget just how much they were in bed together, well, they're wrong about that. But I will say that this is a promising sign. Now they're starting to try and clean up their reputation a little bit. This is definitely a step in the right direction. Nobody should be associated with Glenn Dubin and Leslie Wexner, considering what both of these clowns are accused of. I mean, you have, you have Virginia Roberts pointing the finger at Glenn Dubin, saying that he was involved in the trafficking ring and that she was trafficked directly to him. You have Leslie Wexner. We don't even need to get into the. The ties of his and Jeffrey Epstein. Right? I mean, we all know how deep those ties run, from money to being close as, you know, confidants from Jeffrey Epstein, being in charge of the guy's whole entire fortune. Pretty much. We understand how deep those ties are. These aren't casual relationships. These guys were very, very close. And the fact that they were still sitting on this board at Harvard, the fact that Harvard would even entertain having people like this on the board, well, it just goes to show you how much Harvard really cares. You know, again, you have a lot of these professors that come from these Ivy League schools, and they stand atop their ivory towers and they dictate down to the rest of us as if they know what's best for society, and they know what. What's what they. What. What's moral. But in reality, these people have been enabling people like Jeffrey Epstein for decades. Academia is just Littered with. With scummy people, folks. As early as February 11, Dubin and Wexner's names no longer appeared on a Harvard website listing members of the Advisory council of the center for Public Leadership, a scholarship and co curricular program affiliated with the Kennedy School. Wexner co chaired the council with his wife, Abigail S. Wexner, whose name has also been removed from the website. And you know what? Good for them. And good for Maria Farmer. All right. Good for my good friend Maria Farmer. You know, it's, it's. Wexner and his wife both knew exactly what was going on in New Albany. They knew what was up. They knew exactly what was going on. And they didn't say a word. They didn't try and help. They didn't try to intervene. Maria Farmer was left there in complete and utter terror on their property. And for them to run around and act like they're not complicit, for them to run around and act like they had nothing to do with any of this, it's. It's, it's obscene. It is absolutely obscene. And, you know, they might not be slammed in cuffs yet. They. Not. They might not have been called before prosecution yet. But folks, look at the blowback here. This is serious blowback on these people, and it's hitting them where it hurts them the most. Their social standing. When they can no longer have that social standing, when they're no longer entrenched in society, well, they no longer have the power. So this is one of the. One of the first steps to shaking them from their perch. And, and it's working well. If you see all of these bigwigs, you see how they're on the run, you see the fallout around them, and you see that nobody is letting them get off the hook at this point. It's. It's pretty awesome to see that they're really, really feeling the effects and feeling the heat. The Kennedy School also removed Dubin's name from the Dean's executive board, which boasts some of the most committed financial supporters to the school, who served trusted advisors to Kennedy School Dean Douglas W. Elmendorf, according to the board's website. It's like they bleach bit their names out of there. They went. They went the Hillary Clinton route and just got rid of all the information about who these people are. It's awesome to see, honestly. Right. I'm glad to see that they've been caught up in this fallout so completely that they can't even sit on these boards anymore. They can't have their Tentacles just entrenched in all of these parts of society anymore because they've been outed. Everybody sees who they are. Dubin and Wexner have each endowed fellowships in their names at the center, which provides funding for fellows to study at the Kennedy School and cultivates principled, effective public leaders, according to its website. Oh, I wonder why they would want to have their fingers involved in that pie. I wonder why people like Wexner and Dubin would want to help cultivate tomorrow's leaders. What are they looking for? Their next pupil? They're looking for their next Jeffrey Epstein? Is that what they're looking to do? Have their next guy come up, their next frontman, come front and center? I mean, these people shouldn't be around anybody in society, never mind the future leaders of the world, right? Sheesh. In 2010, Dubin donated $5 million to establish the Dubin Graduate Fellowship for Emerging Leaders at the center. Wexner, who. Who helped found the center in 2000 with his wife, had donated more than $42 million to Harvard as of 2012. He also boasts a building with his name on the Kennedy School's campus. Well, isn't that nice? Isn't that nice for Mr. Les Wexner? Mr. Elite himself has his name all over these campuses, huh? If Harvard was doing the right thing, they would just remove his name off of all of these buildings, too. Thank you for the donation, but we're removing your name off of the buildings now.

Commentator/Co-host (44:29)

That's what I would do if I was them. In addition to their ties to Harvard, Dubin and Wexner also had relationships with Epstein, the former Harvard donor and financier pedophile who earned national infamy for allegedly running a sex trafficking ring that solicited girls as young as 14. Last summer, Dubin became implicated in the Epstein scandal after a woman said Epstein forced her to have sex with Dubin, according to recent, recently unsealed court documents. And we've also talked about the young Swedish girl in the Dubin's kitchen. You know, look, the Dubins are very, very Very much involved in this. We know that Glenn, Glenn Dubin's wife Eva and Jeffrey Epstein were very, very good friends. We know that their daughter called Jeffrey Epstein Uncle Jeffy. And we also know that Jeffrey Epstein, his old perverted ass, had the sight set on perhaps marrying their daughter. And to tell you the truth, I wouldn't even be shocked if Eva Anderson was okay with it. That's how this, how weird and wacky she seems to me. She seems to be like, like the cult type. Like, you know, oh, my daughter and Jeffrey Epstein, perfect. That's the kind of marriage we want. It's like acceptable in their world or something. It's just. It's gross. These people are just gross. For decades, Epstein served as Wexner's personal financial advisor. Wexner has since asserted that he severed ties with Epstein once allegations surfaced in 2007 that Epstein solicited sex from a minor, allegations for which Epstein pleaded guilty in a Florida court. Aside from his ties to Epstein, Wexner, who served as CEO of Victoria Secret's parent company L Brands until February 20, allegedly created a workplace culture that enabled sexual misconduct to persist for decades, according to news reports. We read that article. It was in the Times, I believe, and it's obvious what was going on at Victoria's Secret. It's obvious what was going on in the whole entire company. We know that Jeffrey Epstein wasn't just, you know, somebody who was, you know, acting within a vacuum. We know that Les Wexner and his buddy Rezik were involved in creating an environment of sexual misconduct around the company. And it's just gross. They got away with it for so long, and the only reason they got away with it so long is because they're so powerful, as far as, you know, their finances go, that nobody in the media wanted to take them on. They didn't want to be destroyed. And that's what it all comes down to. The media has. They didn't have the courage to chase the story where they needed to chase it. They didn't have the inner fortitude to do it. Center for Public Leadership spokesperson Lael S. Harris confirmed in an email that Wexner and Dubin no longer serve on the Center's leadership council. She also indicated that scratching off the billionaires names from the website is nothing out of the ordinary. No, of course not. People that donate millions and millions and tens of millions of dollars to your, your, your school, they just always have their names scrubbed off of the website because that's just, you know, general standard operating procedure has Nothing to do with. You're embarrassed now all of a sudden, right? Has nothing to do with. You're trying to save face, right? Like I said, get rid of their names on the buildings. Give the money back. I'm sure there's plenty of other rich people looking to line up to have their name on a building. At such an elite university as Harvard, members of the advisory councils within the school often rotate out after a period of time. Harris wrote. The membership of those councils is posted publicly on the websites of the relevant research centers. Just business as usual, folks. Nothing to see here. There's no story here, folks. Business as usual. Keep it moving. Spokespeople for Dubin and Wexner did not respond to requests for comment for this article. Of course not. They never respond to requests. You know, it's. It's. Again, they're the. They. They believe that they can operate at a different level than the rest of us. They have no rules. They have no restraints. There's nothing there that keeps them on the same path, I guess you would say, as we're on, right, we understand that if we break the law, one of us breaks the law. Forget it. There's consequences. Not for people like this. They can have whatever kind of seedy associations they want. They can have all sorts of fraudulent money dealings, and nothing happens. They just go about their business for, you know, decades. Meanwhile, the average person doesn't pay their taxes. Forget it. You're. You're going to jail. The IRS is coming to garnish your wages. They're going to crush you. Your whole life is over. Never mind laundering money or being involved in a trafficking ring. Earlier this month, Harvard students called on the university to address its relationship to those donors in an article published by Business Insider. In the article, a student described the discomfort students who have. Excuse me. A student described the discomfort students who have their funding tied to those individuals harbor. Well, yeah, you know, you can't really blame these students, right? And you can't blame the people getting these endowments. These are people that are chosen for these scholarships or these endowments, and then they're funneled these funds. It's not like they. They chose. All right, well, I want Jeffrey Epstein and Glenn Dubin to donate money for my scholarship. So I don't really. The blame is not with the students. In my opinion, the blame is with the faculty and with the university for not vetting who these donors are. Like I said, there's an endless amount of money for places like Harvard. There's an endless amount of money coming into places like that. They do not need to be in bed with Dubin and Epstein and Wexner. Kennedy School student Catherine C. Williams told the Crimson that because Harvard did not publicly acknowledge Wexner and Dubin's departures from the council, she was left wondering if the change in leadership reflected Harvard's severing of ties to those donors or merely a surface level change. Again, like I said, Harvard looking to save face. If they really cared, they would have never been involved with these people in the first place. So the blame lies directly with Harvard. You know, this, this storied institution, this, this Ivy League school. All of these uppity point their nose up at the rest of us types that come out of this place, right? Meanwhile, they're all being funded. The whole school's being funded. All of the trustees are taking money and donations and gifts from an, from a pedophile. It's such a joke. It's so. It's. It's such a joke to see these people actually think that we should listen to what they have to say when all they do is be. They're involved with people like Epstein on a regular basis, never mind another, another piece of work that they produced in Alan Dershowitz out of Harvard. I'm starting to think that Harvard is just the kind of place that might maybe just shut it down, huh? Just shut this place down. How much, how many, how many illegal donations have they gotten from ill gotten gains? Maybe it should all be investigated, audit it all. At this point, does that mean that they are no longer funders? She asked. Does it mean that the school has meaningfully altered its relationship with these individuals? All good questions. Williams said she believes the Kennedy School's relationship with Wexner and Dubin run counter to its mission. HKS is all about public service. It's about leadership, ethics, integrity. She said. It just struck me as a concerning or like a point of tension that we espouse all of those values as a school and we seek to train and educate future public leaders. But we have these ties. Exactly what I was just saying. You can't, you can't run around and act like you're producing all of these leaders and all of these people that are supposed to come into public life and, you know, lead from the front and set policy for the rest of us when you have these, these disgusting ties to these people who are counterintuitive to all of that. So how can you possibly think that the rest of us, from the outside looking in, are going to believe that you're really sending out these great leaders into the world when your track record is what it is. And these students that are there right now, like this young lady who's speaking out, I'm sure there's going to be a ton of really well educated, smart kids that come out of Harvard, right? Why should they have to have the stigma of. Of Epstein and Wexner and Glenn Dubin hanging over their heads when there's a bunch of other donors from where Harvard could get this money? So why don't they just cut ties completely with these people? Another Kennedy School student who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation from the Kennedy School, said Harvard must realize the legitimacy it bestows individuals who donate to the university. The student called on Harvard to realize its own worth and put in place moral standards for donors. I mean, is that too much to ask? You don't have somebody sitting around when these donations are coming in, hops on DuckDuckGo and, you know, types in the name or punches it into one of those search engines to see what, what exactly this person's involved in or how this person gained the money that they are trying to donate. You don't think that that would be a good idea, Some basic vetting of the people that are donating to your school? Probably a good idea, right? And I'm sure that they do that. So how is it that Dubin and Wexner and Epstein slipped through the cracks, folks? Do you think that it was done by mistake? That they just weren't vetted correctly? Or perhaps the university didn't give a damn because we're talking about so much money? I'm gonna go with the university didn't give a damn. Williams also said she would feel reassured if Harvard administrators acknowledged questions regarding donors conduct. In an email sent on fellow sent to fellowship applicants on February 7th and obtained by the Crimson, the center relayed an expectation to applicants that they research the donors funding their prospective programs. That's what I just said. Remember, folks, I don't read these articles before we read them together here on the Daily Drop.

Commentator/Co-host (54:27)

I mean, how hard is it to vet these donors? Before submitting your applications, we expect that you have thoroughly reviewed all pertinent information related to the fellowships you have applied to to center for Public Leadership staff member Brandon Ward wrote in the email. That information he went on to specify includes the history and background of the donor. Basic stuff, folks. Basic stuff. If anyone's ever worked in politics, they know that they gotta vet whoever's donating. When big people are donating that kind of money, you have to vet where it's coming from or you end up like Pete Buttigieg, who gets money from Dubin and has to give it back. You have to know exactly where this money is coming from and that's no different for these big universities or else they leave themselves open to shit like this. Last month, discomfort about Harvard's ties to donors who cultivated relationships with Epstein came out into the public at the Kennedy School Institute of Politics at a forum honoring MeToo movement founder Tarana Burke. Williams, who attended the discussion, asked Burke how Harvard should grapple with those ties. During the questions and answers portion of the evening evening, Burke, sitting alongside the the event's moderator, center for Public Leadership Director Wendy R. Sherman, told the audience that Harvard should acknowledge donors ties to Epstein, according to a video stream of the event. 100% Harvard needs to validate these ties. They I mean, they need to acknowledge these ties because what it does is it shows that they're taking this seriously. They're taking the fact that these people are being, you know, credibly accused here, folks, credibly accused of some heinous crimes. It shows that they're taking that seriously because without them doing this, it's like a big joke to them. They don't care. They don't care where the money comes from, where the money comes comes from. As long as they're filling up their bank accounts, as long as they're just raking in the dough, the source of that dough does not matter.

Commentator/Co-host (56:55)

Courage in a lot of places, especially institutions, looks like transparency, she said. Harvard is an example for other institutions. This is how you do this. You look it dead in the eye and say we made a mistake or we took too long or whatever the thing is. But here's what we're going to do going forward and I hope that happens 100% that's the correct way to do this. Own up to it. Own up to the fact that the trustees and the people that were involved with taking this money were wrong, that they didn't Follow proper protocol and then purge them. All of them have to go. Anybody who was on the board, anybody who was involved, they have to go. Plenty of capable people of replacing them. University President Lawrence S. Baykal apologized for Harvard's past dealings with Epstein in a September email to university affiliates. Bacow or Bacow also announced the launch of a probe into Epstein's donations to Harvard. In addition to the recent removal of Dubin and the Wexners and the Wexners from the Center's Leadership Council, the updated website also admits reference to the Wexner couple as the founders of the center. It now includes a sentence explaining that council members often rotate out after a period of time. As Harris noted in her email. Well, I'm glad the Wexner shouldn't have validation. Who cares if they donated that money? Don't give them the validation that they're so deeply looking for. They need to be completely and utterly ostracized for their role in Jeffrey Epstein's trafficking ring. Leon D. Black, a graduate of Harvard Business School whose professional dealings with Epstein have also come under scrutiny, remains on the Center's Leadership Council, per its website. And right there is why we can't trust Harvard folks. Leon Black, another enabler, another one of the billionaire enablers that helped Jeffrey Epstein be validated, that helped Jeffrey Epstein be thought of as somebody who moved in those circles, as somebody who, who was very powerful, somebody that was amongst the elite. All of these enablers, all of them played their role in helping Epstein get away with his crimes for so damn long. And it's nice to see that Wexner and Glenn Dubin are facing the backlash from their behavior. Now. Again, it's not them in handcuffs, right? It's not them being subpoenaed yet by the authorities. But what it is, is it's movement. It's movement in the right direction. It's another slap in the face to these guys. And at the end of the day, we've talked about it a million times. Their whole entire role within their elite society is in flux now and they're losing face. And we know that's a huge deal for these people. It's a huge deal for these narcissists, these, these people with these gigantic egos that can't take even the littlest, slightest bit a slap. And that's exactly what's happening to all of these so called elites right now. They're being slapped collectively by the public. And, boy, is it enjoyable. If you'd like to contact me, you could do that@bobby capuchirotonmail.com that's B O B B Y C A P U C c I@protonmail.com if you'd like to find me on Twitter, you can do that at Boby Capu CCI. All right.