BONUS CONTENT: Mike Baker & Jillian Michaels

Summary

---

The President’s Daily Brief — BONUS CONTENT: Mike Baker & Jillian Michaels

Date: December 14, 2025
Host: Mike Baker (Former CIA Operations Officer)
Guest: Jillian Michaels (Host of "Keeping it Real")
Main Theme: Unraveling the Jeffrey Epstein Enigma—Espionage, Influence, and Unanswered Questions

---

Episode Overview

In this bonus crossover episode, Mike Baker appears as a guest on Jillian Michaels’ podcast, “Keeping it Real,” for an in-depth discussion on Jeffrey Epstein’s shadowy network, his mysterious ties to power, and rampant intelligence community speculation. The conversation aims to separate fact from fiction, dispel conspiracy myths, and offer a seasoned intelligence perspective on what’s known, unknown, and likely unknowable about Epstein’s reach and influence.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

---

1. Setting the Stage: Epstein, Intelligence, and Scandal

Timestamp: 01:15 – 02:26

• Jillian Michaels opens with a rundown of pressing geopolitical topics, but zeroes in on Epstein, citing public confusion and suspicion over the details.
• Baker affirms the "nuance" required in discussing intelligence ties, warning against black-and-white thinking.

“There’s more complexity to it than just—there’s a lot of folks out there, everything for them is black and white. I’m just trying to be a little bit more nuanced.”
— Mike Baker [03:32]

---

2. Dissecting Intelligence ‘Ties’: Robert & Ghislaine Maxwell

Timestamp: 02:26 – 05:10

• Jillian refers to widely reported claims about Ghislaine Maxwell and her father’s Mossad connections.
• Baker explains the spectrum of intelligence involvement:
  • Recruited asset: Taskable, providing specific info on demand
  • Cooperative contact: Sometimes useful, but not controllable
  • Occasional/source: Provides info sporadically, little leverage
• Baker cautions against overstating what "confirmed intelligence ties" means, highlighting the lack of clarity around the Maxwell-Mossad narrative.

---

3. Was Epstein an Intelligence Asset? Speculation and Reality

Timestamp: 05:10 – 07:01

• Jillian asks if Epstein’s collection of powerful contacts was gathering material for an intelligence agency.
• Baker recounts backlash to his previous public skepticism and emphasizes there’s no direct evidence:
  • No official confirmations by agencies or declassified documents.
  • No proof of “honey trap” operations or government-orchestrated legal protection for Epstein.
  • No verified intelligence connections for Ghislaine Maxwell either.

“If I’m an intel service… Jeffrey Epstein is a real person of interest… Would I want him as a recruited asset? Well, sure… He’s collected all these interesting people around him.”
— Mike Baker [07:03]

---

4. Epstein’s Social Strategy: Fraudster Playbook or Asset Activities?

Timestamp: 07:01 – 12:55

• Baker describes Epstein as a "collector of people" with a classic fraudster tendency to leverage high-profile names for credibility.
• Jillian notes oddities in Epstein's career trajectory: unqualified for elite jobs yet inexplicably advanced, hired at Dalton School, then Bear Stearns, via powerful connections.

“Fraudsters, scammers, they have certain indicators… One of them is using entree from one person to get credibility with somebody else.”
— Mike Baker [10:58]

• Baker argues that powerful circles don’t do their due diligence and often fall prey to “groupthink” validations.

---

5. The 2008 Plea Deal: Power, Leverage, and More Questions

Timestamp: 15:16 – 18:31

• Jillian highlights the absurdly lenient plea deal for Epstein, referencing rumors that federal prosecutor Alex Acosta was told to back off because “Epstein’s above my pay grade.”
• She notes nothing is confirmed—but the arrangement still seems inexplicable.
• Baker posits the influence of Epstein’s network and speculates Epstein may have accumulated leverage over the powerful, facilitating such outcomes.

“I would assume that part of what Epstein was doing was, you know, he was probably looking at every opportunity to gain leverage on all these various individuals… That then served him pretty well, it looks like, because you’re right, he did almost no time.”
— Mike Baker [16:54]

---

6. Leveraging Dirt: Epstein, Congress, and Compromising Material

Timestamp: 18:31 – 21:07

• Discussion on recent reports that politicians (e.g., Virgin Islands’ congressional delegate) corresponded with Epstein for opposition research during high-profile testimony.
• Baker: Leverage and information exchange among the elite is “not normal,” but Washington isn’t normal either.

“He wanted to just pull everybody in that he thought could benefit him… or that he could gain influence or leverage over.”
— Mike Baker [20:26]

• Jillian expresses frustration: both parties weaponize the scandal for political points, but the public never seems to get real answers.

---

7. Redactions, National Security, and the Political Football

Timestamp: 21:07 – 33:34

• The hosts dissect politicians' rationale for withholding or redacting Epstein files on grounds of national security or system damage.
• Baker: The U.S. over-classifies—sometimes legitimately (to protect victims or investigations), sometimes as an excuse.
• He is cynical about meaningful accountability or closure.

“I’m very cynical about what happens in Washington D.C.… It’s the city where investigations go to die.”
— Mike Baker [32:41]

---

8. Was Epstein Running a Sloppy Spy Operation?

Timestamp: 26:06 – 28:51

• Jillian asks if Epstein’s alleged “honey trap” tactics align with conventional spy tradecraft.
• Baker: If Epstein ran a “honey trap” for a government, it was incredibly sloppy—the high visibility of his crimes contravenes clandestine traditions.

“If [Epstein’s operation] was a professional intel service, [they] would have done it in a much more discreet and clandestine fashion.”
— Mike Baker [27:00]

• Talks about intelligence services’ limits and debunks overestimation of their power—referencing public assumptions shaped by pop culture.

---

9. Will We Ever Know the Truth? Accountability Amid Political Games

Timestamp: 31:53 – 33:52

• Discussion winds down with Jillian’s frustration that focus drifts from the victims to partisan utility.
• Both hosts agree the real story is likely to remain out of reach as long as both political sides see more benefit in secrecy than in disclosure.

“Once it becomes something that’s not viewed as a potential two-by-four to hit the other political party… I think it just goes away at some point and we all get focused on something else.”
— Mike Baker [33:33]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the nature of intelligence relationships:
  “You have to be careful when they start talking about these things, because there's more complexity… It's not all black and white.”
  — Mike Baker [03:32]

• On Epstein’s utility to intelligence agencies:
  “Epstein’s going to be the sort of guy I’m going to look at… Would I want him as a recruited asset? Well, sure.”
  — Mike Baker [07:03]

• On the 2008 plea deal:
  “He did almost no time. It wasn’t really even time. Half of every 24-hour day he was allowed to walk.”
  — Mike Baker [16:54]

• On suspected ‘honey trap’ operations:
  “That would be very sloppy tradecraft… [A professional service] would have done it in a much more discreet and clandestine fashion.”
  — Mike Baker [27:00]

• On the public’s pop culture beliefs:
  “An intel service honestly couldn't organize panic in a doomed submarine… They’re given a lot more credit than they should be.”
  — Mike Baker [30:48]

• On Washington investigations:
  “It’s the city where investigations go to die.”
  — Mike Baker [32:41]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:32 — Maxwell/Mossad intelligence ties, nuanced breakdown
• 07:03 — Epstein as a person of interest for intelligence services
• 10:58 — Use of elite name-dropping as a social- and scam-strategy
• 16:54 — Epstein’s 2008 conviction and sentence, speculation on leverage
• 20:26 — Weaponizing Epstein’s material for political gain
• 27:00 — “Honey trap” theory critique: why it’s unlikely by tradecraft standards
• 32:41 — Endemic cynicism about Washington investigations

---

Conclusion

Mike Baker and Jillian Michaels deliver a sharp, skeptical, and unvarnished look at the Epstein mystery. Baker’s intelligence background debunks easy conspiracy narratives, urging patience, healthy skepticism, and recognition of how little is truly known. They highlight how power and influence seldom yield transparency—and suggest the Epstein case will linger, unresolved, so long as it remains a tool for political sparring rather than a quest for justice for the victims.

---

Transcript

[A]

This episode is brought to you by NBA on Prime. This Tuesday at 8:30 Eastern, it's the Emirates NBA Cup Championship game on Prime. This year's quest for the cup has been building to this, the championship game live from Las Vegas. Not a Prime member sign up for a 30 day free trial to get started today. The Emirates NBA cup championship game this Tuesday at 8:30 Eastern only on Prime. Restrictions apply. See Amazon.com amazonprime for details. Hey, Mike Baker here with some bonus content for you because after all, it is the gift giving holiday season. Well, have I got a gift for you. Look, recently I had the chance to sit down with the great Jillian Michaels on her excellent podcast called Keeping it Real. Now, happily, Jillian didn't put me through one of her famously tough fitness workouts, but it was a mental workout as she asked a whole series of smart, thoughtful questions on some very serious topics. In this portion of our conversation, we focus on Jeffrey Epstein. Yeah, him. How he built his influence, the shadowy network around him, and the unanswered questions about just how far his reach really went into politics and power. So here's my conversation with Jillian Michaels.

[B]

Keeping it Real with Jillian Michaels. Mike, how are you?

[A]

Doing good. Doing very well. Thank you very much and appreciate the opportunity to catch up.

[B]

Oh, my gosh, you're so kind for joining me. I got a lot on the docket for you today, from Venezuela, narco terrorism to what Trump is doing in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Gaza and the ceasefire. What do we do about Iran? I cannot help but begin with Epstein. So I'm sure, I'm sure you expected this. You know, I just recently heard of him, too. I want to start out by reading you what the average person is hearing about this guy and why the average person, of course, I'm, I'm referencing myself here. Can't help but think there's a lot of nefarious stuff going on. So I want to read you this list and then I just, just weigh in. Tell me what I'm getting right, what I'm getting wrong, and what we can make of the things that are actually true. So first thing you've got is Ghislaine Maxwell's father is Robert Maxwell, who had confirmed intelligence ties to Mossad. True or false?

[A]

Yeah, you know, it depends on what you mean by confirmed intelligence ties. Like there's this everything from recruited asset to cooperative contact. Right. To, you know, unwitting, you know, provider of information or insight. There's a range here. And so typically when somebody says, oh, he's, you know, you know, confirmed ties. You got to start defining. What does that mean? I don't know what Robert Maxwell's specific connections meant in terms of his ties to Mossad, but there's no doubt that, you know, that there were linkages. I just don't know. It would be speculation to say to what degree. Right. Was he did Mossad itself. Right. As an intel service. Because that's what you do. You categorize these people. Right? So if it's. If it's a CIA, for example, you would say, okay, this individual is a recruited asset. That means you can task them. You can say, here's what we want to know. You go out and get that information from your contacts, because, you know, I've recruited the deputy foreign minister of a country, right? Now, he's a recruited asset. He's on the hook. Right. So I don't have to beat around the bush. I can tell him I need the following information. There's the cooperative contact where, okay, you know, he's not disinclined to chat with me, but I can't direct him. I can't task him. Right. I can talk to him. And if I phrase my conversations correctly. Right. He may either wittingly or unwittingly, provide me with the insight that I'm looking for. You know, and then there's. Then there's just the occasional contact there that, you know, you don't. You kind of refer to them as a source, but they're not taskable. They're not controllable and not recruited. And so maybe, you know, you're hoping that one day you can strengthen that relationship and turn it in the direction of something that's more taskable. So that's. That's a long winded way of saying people have to be careful when they start talking about these things, because there's more complexity to it than just. And. And there's a lot of folks out there that just. It's. Everything for them is black and white. Yeah. Right. So I'm just trying to be a little bit more nuanced.

[B]

That's what. That's exactly what I'm wanting to know from you. That's exactly why you're the expert here. You talk about these different levels of recruiting, recruiting someone and being able to utilize them. Why would they cooperate? And then it kind of leads me to the question of, is that actually what Epstein was supposed to be doing? In jumping ahead, presuming he was an asset of some intelligence agency, would his gig be gain leverage to make them taskable? Whoever he has gotten access to.

[A]

Well, yeah, I've had this conversation before. I remember I was. I was talking with. With Joe Rogan one time about this, and, you know, I just got pilloried by one, like, slice of society that they're. They've got this unwarranted confidence that they know everything that's going on, right? So they, they, they. They say, well, of course, you know, Epstein was a, you know, recruited asset of Mossad. Well, okay, A, you don't know that. B, maybe he was, but, but, you know, just going out there and saying, black or white, this is what it was, this is what it was. And who knows? And the emails that have been released so far still don't really clarify much.

[B]

Yeah, there's nothing confirmed. Zero. I have a whole list of everything that is not confirmed as I jump ahead here. No government has ever confirmed Epstein was CIA, Mossad, M16, or an intelligence agent. No declassified document identifies Epstein as an intelligence operative. No proven evidence that he ran an official honey trap operation for any government. No proof intelligence agencies directed or inter. Intervened in his 2008 plea deal. No documentation that financial structures prove espionage activity, and no confirmed evidence that Ghislaine Maxwell herself was an intelligence officer.

[A]

Right. And yeah, if I were, what I would say is this, like, if I, you know, if I saw Jeffrey Epstein, he was a collector of people, right? And so either he did that because there are. There are people out there, right, that, that love to be close to people of importance. It makes them feel important, and then they start portraying themselves as movers and shakers and that's. And, and that's. So you, you know, again, carving this out and saying, okay, it could be one scenario or another. I'm not saying which. Which one it likely is because we don't have. Right? But.

[B]

Right.

[A]

If I'm an intel service, and I've said this before, if I'm an intel service, Jeffrey Epstein is a real person of interest, right. Would I want him as a recruited asset? Well, sure, because. Why? Because he's collected all these interesting people around him, right? Both in diplomatic circles and finance circles, government, media, all these people. From my perspective, some of them are probably people that I would like to know what the hell they're doing. Right? So, yeah, if I'm. If I'm Assad or I'm the Agency or I'm anybody, right, as an intel service, Epstein's going to be the sort of guy I'm going to look at. Right? So all we can do is look at the. The gnomes Here, which are coming out from the emails and hopefully they just go ahead and release everything. I don't think they will because they're not going to release things where there's an active investigation. But you look at it go. Sure. He had a lot of contact with Ehud Barack as an example, right? Well, yeah. And what did he do? Well, he had intelligence responsibilities there in Israel and IDF responsibilities. And if, you know. So unless Ehud Barack was just in touch with Epstein for his own prurient interests because of Epstein's, you know, abuse and, and trafficking of young women.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Then, you know, maybe was there was something more. Well, again, I can only go by what I would do if I was an intel officer and Epstein crossed my path. I'd say, damn it, you know, a lot of interesting people. Yeah, I'm going to push this relationship and see what this is all about.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Maybe one day all you are is an unwitting contact because you have this desire to surround yourself with people of interest. And there are a lot of people like that in financial circles who love to pal around with the elite in society. Right. So that's not unusual by itself.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

But again, you know, would an intel service be interested in them? Sure. Would Epstein be a recruited asset or just an unwitting contact or a winning, you know, source, you know, who knows? But there's a range there of possibilities.

[B]

At Capella University, learning online doesn't mean learning alone.

[A]

You'll get support from people who care.

[B]

About your success, like your enrollment specialist who gets to know you and the.

[A]

Goals you'd like to achieve.

[B]

You'll also get a designated academic coach who's with you throughout your entire program. Plus, career coaches are available to help you navigate your professional goals. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at Capella. Edu Havlas Espanol Spriest du Dzeud if you used Babbel, you would. Babbel's conversation based techniques teaches you useful words and phrases to get you speaking quickly about the. The things you actually talk about in the real world. With lessons handcrafted by over 200 language experts and voiced by real native speakers. Babbel is like having a private tutor in your pocket. Start speaking with Babbel today. Get up to 55% off your Babbel subscription right now at Babbel.com Spotify spelled B A B-B-E-L.com Spotify rules and restrictions may apply. Yeah, you got this guy with the director of the CIA, William Burns in 2014. Apparently they met multiple times. I'm going to butcher this woman's name. Katherine Rumler, former White House counsel for Obama, met with her, Ehud Barack, who you mentioned, Lawrence Summers, who everyone's talking about, former U.S. treasury Secretary. Like he. These are strange people that. Are you going to drop William Burns name at a party? I know a lot of these billionaires and they, they name drop just the way you're talking about. Oh, and you know, Bill and Hillary this and Barack and Michelle that. And I understand all of that, but I very rarely hear. I was hanging out with Katherine Rumler the other day and this is where.

[A]

You'Re just like, yeah, but in certain circles, that's got a lot of, a lot of weight. Look, in Washington D.C. if you're carrying the bags, even if you're the bag toady for, you know, some senior government official, you're an important person. In Washington D.C. everybody goes, oh, he's got FaceTime with, you know, whoever it is. So suddenly you're important. And look, people, fraudsters. I will say this. You know, I've got a company that does an awful lot of fraud investigations. Fraudsters, scammers, they, they have certain indicators. They do certain things over and over again. And one of them is using entree from one person to, to get credibility with somebody else that they're looking at or targeting or want to talk to or want to have pulled into their orbit. Right, of course, of course.

[B]

My business partner does it in business all the time. He's like, okay, this guy knows this guy. And if I let this guy know that I know this guy, it's going to give me like, I've been pre approved over here. I, I watch him utilize.

[A]

And nobody's doing their due diligence, right? Nobody's doing their due diligence because, hey, it was like, you know, it was like the crypto scam, right? Suddenly you had people like Tom Brady promoting crypto and then other people going, well, I got to get on board because, you know, I don't want to miss this train. And so I'm going to use somebody who, you know, for whatever reason is willing to vouch for me to gain credibility to this person who is not going to do any due diligence on me. Look, a lot of people were dealing with Epstein after he was already known to be, you know, a sex offender, right? And you would think that would be enough of a red flag to say, eh, you know what? I'm not going to go to his party or let's let's not have him come over to the office to me. But that didn't happen because other powerful or perceived as powerful people were vouching for him and he was using that to roll through and collect all these various people in his orbit.

[B]

Mike, what about this? This is super weird, right? The guy never graduates from college, but he ends up working at Dalton, which is where like the most elite families send their kids to school, high school. It's run by Donald Barr, who apparently used to work, used to run the oss, which was a precursor to the CIA. I think I loosely understand that connection. I'll let you clarify that for me. And he hires this guy who's not qualified to work at D. Dalton to teach math and physics. And through that connection a parent who sends their kids to Dalton hires him at Bear Stearns. Yeah, weird. Not weird.

[A]

Not really. Again, I, I, I'm, you know, on the surface it sounds very bizarre. Right. But I've been, you know, between, between a lot of, a couple of decades with the agency and, and more than a couple of decades running investigations and security services firm. You see a lot. And so that sort of activity, again I, I put that down to those are, those are certain traits that fraudsters and scam artists typically do. Right. They, they're inflating their, their cv, they're getting a door open and then using that to push their way through and get to a position where, because again, people for the most part, and this is where I think society is really going to fall down. Right. Because we're going, we're moving into this fast paced world of AI which is just accelerating. The problem with disinformation and misinformation. People are not naturally cynical, skeptical, curious, inquisitive, or they just don't have the time to be. Right.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And so Epstein fed off of that human trait and he knew that people weren't, once he got to a certain position, people weren't checking, you know, you would think they would, particularly after his conviction.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But it just doesn't happen that way. So you see people rising way beyond where you think they should be because they're living off of some very shaky foundation, some lies that they've told and they've been able to scam somebody and that person's vouched for them and then it just keeps on going.

[B]

What about this piece? So 2008, you've got this guy, he's convicted of having sex with minors and I believe running some sort of a prostitution ring involving these minors. And he does like no jail time and he's allowed to leave for 10 hours every single day. And there's a rumor, I guess it hasn't been confirmed that when Alex Acosta was being vetted during his, I guess, joining of the Trump transition team in 2016 and he was the guy going after Epstein in 2008, he basically apparently said, I was told to stay away from Epstein, he's above my pay grade. And made some sort of implication. He was told like, Epstein's one of ours, back off again now. Not confirmed as far as, like, as far as I can confine anything that said it was confirmed that, that he said that. Having said that though, he did get Epstein got no penalty. No. Yeah, Mike. Like this is where I keep, just keep looking at this going. I, I, I hate going down the rabbit hole because we've all become so vulnerable to these conspiracy theories after Covid that at some point I feel like I'm wrapping myself in tinfoil and waiting for the mothership to land outside. But this like, I'm like, Jill, come back to Earth and let's deal with reality. We don't know. Nothing's confirmed. But when you look at something like that, it's just so friggin bizarre and they just keep adding up. Like what would be any other reasoning for this guy walking pretty much with that kind of conviction in 2008?

[A]

Well, even by 2008, he had developed quite the cadre of wealthy, influential individuals and he had probably co opted some of them or felt that, look, you know, you kind of owe me, right? For whatever reason, that's probably how some of them felt, right? So I think you had people, because you did have people, you know, pressuring and pushing on his behalf. I think that, you know, in a normal world, I think that's, that's crazy. Why would you, why would you maintain your ties with somebody that's, that's now in this position? So, you know, it's not, it's speculation, but it's not, you know, uninformed speculation that you could say, yeah, these people felt some form of obligation beyond just, wow, I sure like Jeffrey. We had some great, great dinners together, you know, or he made me some money, right? So now I feel like I've got to vouch for a convicted sex offender. That doesn't make a lot of sense. So I, I would assume that part of what Epstein was doing was, you know, he was not, I, I, I guess is that he was probably looking at every opportunity to gain leverage on all these various individuals who he was drawing into his orbit. And that then served him pretty well, it looks like, because you're right, he did almost no time. It wasn't really even time. Half, half of every 24 hour day he was allowed to, to walk. Yeah.

[B]

So, okay, you mentioned leverage. Right. And now we're all hearing about, I think it's like Stacy Platnick, who's a congresswoman out of the Virgin Islands. I didn't even forgive my ignorance. I didn't even know they had congress people, Virgin Islands.

[A]

I was like, oh.

[B]

I'm like, I guess so, yeah. That's part of the. Sure. And it comes out that she's texting with Epstein to get information on Trump while Michael Cohen is testifying. And I'm thinking, as we all are, hold on a second. This guy's got dirt that you're going to use against Trump. So there's, there's clearly the leverage there. He was a collector of compromising material. Just.

[A]

Yeah, he could be. I mean they were texting back and forth during Michael Cohen's, you know, testimony and, and questions that Epstein was suggesting be asked did then end up getting asked.

[B]

Right. Is this normal again?

[A]

You wouldn't think it would be. We don't necessarily have normal times. You know, Washington D.C. is a very dysfunctional place now. But look, I, you know, the author, Michael Wolf was, you know, he's neck deep in these, you know, emails and texts with, with Epstein offering up suggestions, you know, and look, he's, Wolf is making money off of writing about Trump. So that's all self interest to, you know, work with Epstein and try to provide him with advice. Who the hell would be providing Epstein with advice and guidance? But there you have it. So it is, you know, which again is. It all kind of circles back to why people are just so fascinated with this. I would argue that, you know, the Trump administration, the first thing they should have done was release everything as just as transparent as possible. Just say again, if you've got an ongoing investigation, clearly from a law enforcement perspective you have to redact.

[B]

Right.

[A]

That the problem sometimes can be they throw out a big net in terms of what they're going to redact. Right. So you're never really sure whether all of that information classification we, we tend to over classify everything. Right. But I would have thought that some strategist in the White House Trump administration would have been smart enough to say, you know what, let's just release everything, you know, but that it turned out to be a bit of a self inflicted one. But it's A self inflicted wound for everybody. It's the Democrats, it's Republicans. Because Epstein didn't care. He wanted to just pull everybody in that he thought could benefit him in some fashion or that he could gain influence or leverage over.

[B]

So Mike Johnson said that releasing the files without redaction could pose a national security risk. And it's like, well, what the heck would that be? And then he said that Epstein disclosures have to be limited so we don't do permanent damage to the political system. Again, what the heck? And then I guess he let it slip and then kind of pulled it back. And I actually watched this clip. I can even insert it. It's so hard to believe that Trump once acted as an FBI informant in connection with Epstein, which has not been independently confirmed. And he's like, no, no, I. I didn't really mean it. And it's like, okay, all right, let's presume that this guy is intelligence and he's got compromising material on everybody. I mean, he's connected to frigging everybody in one way or another, whether it's Bill Clinton somehow, Donald Trump somehow, Barack Obama, Bill Gate. I mean, the list is so extensive, it's insane. And I'm an intelligence agency. What in the world am I doing with that compromising material? Mike again, let's go, tinfoil hat. What am I doing if I have dirt on the leader of the free world, what am I leveraging? Running a business comes with a lot of what ifs, but luckily, there's a simple answer to them. Shopify. It's the commerce platform behind millions of businesses, including Thrive Cosmetics and Momofuku. And it'll help you with everything you need, from website design and marketing to boosting sales and expanding operations. Shopify can get the job done and make your dream a reality. Turn those what ifs into Sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] specialoffer.

[A]

Limu amo and Doug. Here we have the Limu Emu in its natural habitat, helping people customize their car insurance and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual. Fascinating. It's accompanied by his natural ally, Doug Limu. Is that guy with the binoculars watching us. Cut the camera. They see us. Only pay for what you [e-mail] Liberty Liberty, Liberty. Liberty Savings Fairy. Underwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates. Excludes Massachusetts. Yeah, well, it depends. It depends on what that dirt is. It depends on, you know, the country that has it. You. You definitely want it, right? You want it in your back pocket. Maybe, you know, Maybe don't use it immediately or deploy it immediately, but you certainly would want that information.

[B]

What.

[A]

And, and again, look, if. To do. If I'm. If I'm. Pick a service, right? The fsb, the, you know, Chinese intel, Mossad Agency, UK Service, it doesn't matter. Pick any intel service that's got resources and, and the abilities and, you know, they look. What are they doing? They're looking for targets of opportunity. They're looking for. Looking for interest. If, if you see. I keep going back to the same thing. If you see somebody like Epstein who's got this big orbit, who's able to get in front of people. And Epstein himself is promoting this, right? The emails show, yes, that he was trying to posture himself, position himself as this guy who could talk to foreign, you know, authorities, whether it's the Russians. He offered to the Russians, said, I could talk to Sergey Lavrov, you know, and provide insight into how Donald Trump thinks. Because, you know, even though they didn't have a relationship at that point, I know Donald Trump, you know, because I had a relationship with him at one point. So he's putting himself in that position. If you're an intel service, you're going to look at that guy and go to guy. Yes, I'm going to do what I can to try to. And again, in an ideal world, he's a recruited asset. Right. Would Epstein have put himself in that position? Who knows? I don't know. But, you know, at worst, he's a unwitting source that you develop a relationship with, so you've got, you know, one or more of your people bumped up against him, and you can, you know, reach in and out and find, and then, you know, his contacts, maybe then you target those contacts directly and at some point you benefit from that. So, yeah, I mean, that's. That's all I can. I'd be speculating if I said, oh, and that's where I do love. I do love social media. I do love the world of, of social media experts, because there are people out there, God damn it. No, he was definitely working from a side. And. And you're thinking, okay, well, well, you know, good luck, Spanky. I, I have no idea how you have so much confidence in your opinion based on no experience, but I'm just saying, you know, could be a variety of them. And, and again, he had definite contacts with, with people who would have looked at him and thought, yeah, he'd make a. He'd make a really interesting contact. You know, intel services go after much less interesting Individuals for targeting and recruitment. Believe me, some of them you look at and go, why would you waste your time? But, you know, they do it because maybe one day it will turn into something valuable.

[B]

You know, I think it becomes a chicken and an egg conversation for people. And what I mean by that, is Zebstein a creep and a pervert who got compromising material for his own ego and to gain power and influence? Or was he a manufactured individual who set up this, I guess, honey trap, PETO ring to go? Okay, this is all going to be structured. What is something nobody can come back from? You know, these kinds of crimes against young kids. It's just disgust.

[A]

If that was the case, I would think. I mean, look, you know, are honey pots, honey traps a thing? Sure they are. Of course they are. They've been ever since, you know, somebody invented espionage.

[B]

If.

[A]

What. If. If what he was doing was, I'm setting up this whole trafficking thing at the behest of an Intel.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Server.

[B]

That's what people think.

[A]

That would be really. That would be very sloppy trade craft. Right. Because he's. He's a convicted sex offender. He's, you know, he wasn't hiding it necessarily. Right. People. People were talking about this for years. Right. But and, And. And now everybody's expressing outrage. It's like some of the Me Too people, people who were, like, just, you know, caught and castrated during the Me Too movement. People knew about their behavior for years, but it just. It didn't serve their purpose to. To complain about it at the time. And then it got, you know, enough of a head of steam that people suddenly could say, well, I'm outraged by this, which I've known about for years. Right. So, you know, it's. That would be my take on it. It would be. You would. You would. If you were going to do it, you would have done it. If it was a professional intel service in a much more fashion and discreet and clandestine fashion, that helps a ton.

[B]

Because I think people feel like, oh, my God, if our intelligence are willing to sacrifice children at the altar of, you know, geopolitical power, what does the world come to? But I didn't even occur to me that it would be sloppy, Spycroft, because I have no idea what that would even look like.

[A]

And that maybe, you know, that's probably one of my shortcomings is I, you know, I look at things from an operational perspective because my wheelhouse is not necessarily, you know, some grand geopolitical, you know, or. Or political, you know, strategic thing. But I can say from an operational perspective, he'd be a target of interest for absolute sure. And also, you probably wouldn't. I mean, you know, you, you'd be a lot more circumspect in how if you were going to do something like. And it's also just an awful, you know, I, I, you know, you wouldn't. He, he was, look, he was a horrible person.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Who was engaged in horrible activity and, you know, frankly deserved to die. That's still not quite clear, but I think, you know, I think he, if he was a, an intelligence asset, it's because he fell into or onto the radar, right?

[B]

Yep.

[A]

At a certain point. And like I said, I would have. Hell, I would. I would have, you know, worked to recruit the hell out of him because I would want to know everybody in his Rolodex. Of course. And, you know, but, you know, what you'd be looking for would be you'd be looking for those international contacts. Right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You know, okay, what, he's got contact with some Russians. Huh. Who's he dealing with? Right. He's got contact with a Chinese financier. Okay. Who is that? Right. Those are the targets I'm really interested in, but I'm using him to get to those individuals again. That's. If we're just talking operational strategy. That's, that's where you would have gone with it.

[B]

Of course, you know, the one conclusion that I did arrive at is why go through all the hoopla if he was intelligence and you wanted him gone, why put him in jail with two security guards? Like, it obviously is a very bizarre thing that he had two guards on him and nobody caught in, and the one guy supposedly fell. Whatever. But I imagine if you were intelligence, you could have just taken him out night night, couldn't you? Poison the underwear like Putin. I mean, like, Mike, I'm just thinking.

[A]

Yeah, you put some polonium in his, you know, like, he never makes it to a flight to his island or whatever, you know. Yeah.

[B]

Plane problems. I mean, why, why that. That's the one thing that, you know, I didn't, as mentioned, I did. It didn't stop to think about how if I was CIA or Mossad or MI6, whatever the heck, I would set up a honey trap operation. But I did think, this is a hell of a long walk to get a ham sandwich. Like, why not just take the guy out?

[A]

Yeah. And then, and the other thing about it is sometimes this is maybe it's apropos of nothing, but it kind of speaks to all the, like the, the Armchair quarterbacks on social media who sit and know everything that's going on. And you know, sometimes, you know, the, the truth is that an intel service honestly couldn't organize panic in a doomed submarine. Right. Regardless of which intel service you're talking about. Right. They, and by that I mean, it's oversimplifying, but I just mean that sometimes intel services are given a lot more credit than they should be. Right. Because of, you know, we're all used to films and beach books and we assume that, you know, they can, they're all knowing, all powerful, they're human run organizations and you know, there's sometimes they've got their limitations. So yeah, you know, it's, it is interesting. But yeah, Epstein. Is the Epstein problem going away? No, because it serves a political purpose too, you know, so we're going to be talking about this for quite some time because until it becomes something that one side or the other in Washington D.C. can't beat the other with. Right. It's, it's going to be a thing that's.

[B]

That I get to the end of this road and none of this is about the victims anymore. It's being weaponized by both sides who both have skin in the game. So I can't really wrap my head around that. You know, we've all seen the clip of Stephen A. Smith pointing out very passionately that the Democrats had four years to release these files. Didn't do it. Trump ran on it. He began the whole conversation in 2016 on stage with Hannity implying that Clinton was going to go down because of it. And you're, it's like, what? You guys are absolute idiots on both sides. Where does this go, Mike? Do you, what do you think we walk away from when all is said and done and do you think we will have ever gotten to the bottom of it? Will there be a sacrificial lamb? Is no one gonna go down? Is it like Kennedy, nothing ever comes out?

[A]

Yeah, no, I think it's, look, I'm, I'm probably the wrong person to ask. I'm very cynical about what happens in Washington D.C. it's the city where investigations go to die. So look, we'll get a bunch of files released. A lot of redactions because of legitimate reasons for, you know, active investigations or because of the, the, the victims were minors. You got to protect, you know, some of those identities. And so I think there will be redactions that will, you know, piss people off. But at the end of the day, like I said, I think if once it becomes something that that's not viewed as a, as a potential two by four to hit the other political party over the head with. I think it just goes away at some point and we all get focused on something else. We have a hard time multitasking. It's not the way it should be.

[B]

Right.

[A]

It should be that, you know, you'd have a serious investigation and, you know, the, you know, the cards fall where they fall and there are consequences, but there typically aren't consequences for bad behavior. When it comes to Washington, you I.

[B]

Can see why you would be cynical.

[A]

Well, that was my conversation with Jillian Michaels on Keeping It Real. Now I'll be sharing additional portions of our discussion on other topics here on the PDP feed in the coming days. If you enjoyed the conversation, I'd encourage you please check out and subscribe to Keeping It Real with Jillian Michaels. Each week she brings on terrific, interesting guests. Well, okay, and me and covers a wide range of topics with a no nonsense approach. So thanks for listening and as always, hey, stay informed, stay safe, stay cool. Introducing Meta Ray Ban Display the world's most advanced AI glasses with a full color display built into the lens of the glasses. It's there when you need it and gone when you don't. Send and receive messages, translate or caption live conversations. Collaborate with Meta AI and more. Be one of the first to try Meta Ray ban display. Visit meta.com metaraybanddisplay to book a demo and find your pair.