Alex Acosta And His Epstein Interview With OIG Inspectors (Part 5)

0:00Warning, the following Zippercruder radio spot you are about to hear is going to be filled with F words. When you're hiring, we at Zippercruder know you can feel frustrated. For Lauren even, like your efforts are futile, and you can spend a fortune trying to find fabulous people, only to get flooded with candidates who are just fine. Fortunately, Zippercruder figured out how to fix all that. And right now, you can try Zippercruder for free at zippercruder.com slash zip. With Zippercruder, you can forget your frustrations. Because we find the right people for your roles fast, which is our absolute favorite F word. In fact, four out of five employers who post on Zippercruder get a quality candidate within the first day. Fantastic! So, whether you need to hire four, 40, or 400 people, get ready to meet first rate talent. Just go to zippercruder.com slash zip to try Zippercruder for free. Don't forget that zippercruder.com slash zip. Finally, that zippercruder.com slash zip.

1:01Finding great candidates to hire can be like, well, trying to find a needle in a haystack. Sure, you can post your job to some job board, but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along. Which is why you should try Zippercruder for free. At zippercruder.com slash zip. Zippercruder doesn't depend on candidates finding you. It finds them for you. It's powerful technology identifies people with the right experience and actively invites them to apply to your job. You get qualified candidates fast. So, while other companies might deliver a lot of, hey, Zippercruder, find you what you're looking for. The needle in the haystack. See why four out of five employers who post a job on Zippercruder get a quality candidate within the first day. Zippercruder, the smartest way to hire. And right now, you can try Zippercruder for free. That's right. Free at zippercruder.com slash zip. That zippercruder.com slash zip zippercruder.com slash zip. What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode,

2:04we're going to get right back to the Alex Acosta interview with the OIG investigators. Question. All right. So, did you have any doubt that you'd get a waiver if you applied for one? Answer. So, um, now speculating. I don't recall, but I'm not sure I would have said, is there a doubt that I'd get a waiver as opposed to, is this something I feel comfortable doing or not? Question. And this being the prosecution or this being the applying for a waiver answer, applying for a waiver. And so, you know, either main justice gives it or doesn't give it. That doesn't mean you don't apply for it. If you think that it's the right thing to do. So, for example, in the UBS case, which was one of our big tax, you know, prosecutions, we asked for a bank of Nova Scotia authorization to the bank of Nova Scotia. And I didn't think main justice would, you know, I push really hard and I got into the weeds in that case for that purpose. But I still thought, let's go for it. And we did. And main justice didn't give into it. And that's okay. That's how it

3:06works. Question. Okay. So they denied that request. Answer. They denied that request. And I say that as an example, as a typical matter, I don't think that's what main justice is going to say as opposed to how should we approach this matter? Question. I don't understand about what you mean by how should we approach this matter? Answer. So honestly, how do I explain this? So I think there's a difference in saying, let me predict how main justice will come out and follow that prediction versus folks. What do you all think? Okay. If we're comfortable with this, let's write it up. And let's see what main justice does. One is trying to predict what folks in this building are going to think. Another one is trying to predict. Another one is just saying, what do we do in Miami? What do we think? And let main justice figure it out? Question in which is the approach you typically took? Answer. And my point is the approach that I typically took is, what do we think? And let main justice give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down? Question. All right. And in this case,

4:09did you do that with regard to the petite policy? Answer. So in this case, we didn't get that far in that we didn't have to submit to DOJ. But we were approaching it, not based on what main justice was going to think. But do we feel is this the right outcome in this office? Question. So as I understand the bottom line is that you didn't, as I hear you, I believe you're saying that you didn't stand down or in any way sees your limit pursuing this case on petite policy grounds. Answer. So we went forward with the matter, although there were petite policy concerns in the background. So you're setting this up as a binary as a did was it as a binary. You did not limit yourself on petite policy grounds. And I'm pushing back a little bit because I don't think that it's part as opposed to when you look at the case. There are all sorts of factors. And it's a factor in, you know, how you think of a matter going forward. Question. If you had those petite policy concerns, you or your members or staff answer. I would say a combination of me and my

5:16management staff. Question. Who? Answer. I can't recreate gets cut off by the person asking the questions. But who are you dealing with on this case? Answer primarily, it would be my first assistant and criminal chief as I typically. So there is as you know, to sort of put it in main justice terms, you know, a line attorney and a deputy section chief and a DAG and an AAG and the AAG usually deals with the section chief or the DAG. And so I was dealing with my first assistant and my crime chief question. Right. And they were in Miami answer. And they were in Miami. Question. And by the way, redacted first line supervisor was redacted answer. Correct. Question. Do you know why she was not actively participating in the Janet command? Answer. I noticed that in the correspondence. And I couldn't speak to that question. All right. But it goes to the point that if you look at the she reported to her addicted, who reported to her addicted,

6:20who reported to her addicted, who reported to her addicted. And so as a typical matter, I tried to empower my first assistant and my criminal chief and my office heads and work through them. Not bypass them. Question. In this particular case with regard either to petite policy or any other aspect. Was there anyone other than the group of five? If you will in that chain from you down to redacted through redacted and redacted that you were dealing with answer. I can't recall. I can say as a general matter, it would not be unusual for me to walk down, walk down the hall and talk to someone that I trust and say, Hey, I've got this fact pattern. What do you think? Question. Do you recall ever doing that in connection with this case? Answer. I don't recall the specific briefings or who I talk to. I'm just saying as a general matter that there are folks on the eighth floor that were in management that I would often just walk down the hall. Question. But do you recall doing that? In this case, answer. I don't recall.

7:20Question. Okay. So we shared with you in exhibit three, a pretty lively exchange between redacted and redacted. We have no reason to believe you saw this before, but it makes some representations about you. And that's why we brought it to your attention. Question. Our answer. Okay. Question. Do you recall the email exchange? Answer. I don't recall the email exchange. Question. I mean, didn't you see it then? Do you recall having read it before today? Answer. I recall reviewing it. Yes. Question. All right. Okay. So starting from the end, redacted using redacted's blackberry, which is a little confusing to begin with, notifies redacted that a particular conversation he had with one of the defense attorneys. At this point, what I want to do is draw your attention to the comment and his response. And we're looking at page three. So in the third paragraph, it was made clear to you by the US attorney and the first assistant from the time when you were first authorized to investigate Mr. Epstein that the office

8:22had concerns about taking the case because of the petite policy and a number of legal issues. And then later he says that you were never given authority or authorization by anyone to seek an indictment in the case. And then on the first page, redacted presents her version of that original contact with you meeting with you at the bottom of the page halfway through the last paragraph. She says my recollection of the original meeting with Alex and redacted is quite different than your summary in that meeting. I summarized the case and the state attorney's office handling of it. I acknowledge that we needed to do work to collect the evidence establishing a federal nexus. And I noted the time and month that I'm sorry. I noted the time and money that would be required for an investigation. I said I was willing to invest time and the FBI was willing to invest the money. But I didn't want to get to the end of it to the end and then have the office be intimidated by the high-powered lawyers. I was assured that would not happen. Can you tell us which version of that initial version is correct answered. So again, I don't

9:28remember the initial briefing so I can't tell you which version is correct. I would also say that it's possible neither version is correct and that there's a little bit of truth. Now I'm just speculating that there's a little bit of truth in either one because it's certainly possible to say I hear you right just case go forward and investigate work on the federal nexus which is what exhibit three is saying go work on the federal nexus and find evidence for the federal nexus. But we have concerns about petite policy and legal matters so there's a lot of work to be done. Question so what kind of direction does that amount to for the line AUSA? What's her job then? Answer so the job would then be to go back and investigate develop facts and report back. Question and if she developed enough facts and supportive law to present proposed prosecution? Answer right and so a lot of times in this he said she said there's a little bit of truth on both sides of the discussion. I'm just saying as a general matter your questions are sometimes either

10:31or and sometimes it can be a combination of both answer all right. But in fact you don't recall answer I'm speculating question all right is there anything in either of those that to accounts two versions that you didn't say happen couldn't happen answer I can't because I don't recall. I can't speak to that I would speculate that there's probably a little bit of truth on both sides that if you read it closely you'll see that redacted acknowledges the need to work on a federal nexus so that goes to you know where or Mr. redacted I'm sorry I'm using first names question it's all right question this is an informal interview answer I'm going to just start using first names I don't mean that disrespectfully where you know redacted says you know because of a T policy and legal issues and redacted is acknowledging the legal issue because she's saying that they needed work to do to collect the evidence establishing the federal nexus question all right. Warning the following zippercruder radio spot you are about to hear is going to be filled with F words

11:36when you're hiring we at zippercruder know you can feel frustrated for Lauren even like your efforts are futile and you can spend a fortune trying to find fabulous people only to get flooded with candidates who are just fine fortunately zippercruder figured out how to fix all that and right now you can try zippercruder for free at zippercruder.com slash zip with zippercruder you can forget your frustrations because we find the right people for your roles fast which is our absolute favorite f word in fact four out of five employers who post on zippercruder get a quality candidate within the first day fantastic so whether you need to hire four 40 or 400 people get ready to meet first straight talent just go to zippercruder.com slash zip to try zippercruder for free don't forget that zippercruder.com slash zip finally that zippercruder.com slash zip finding great candidates to hire can be like well trying to find a needle in a haystack sure

12:37you can post your job to some job board but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along which is why you should try zippercruder for free at zippercruder.com slash zip zippercruder doesn't depend on candidates finding you it finds them for you it's powerful technology identifies people with the right experience and actively invites them to apply to your job you get qualified candidates fast so while other companies might deliver a lot of hey zippercruder finds you what you're looking for the needle in the haystack see why four out of five employers who post a job on zippercruder get a quality candidate within the first day zippercruder the smartest way to hire and right now you can try zippercruder for free that's right free at zippercruder.com slash zip that zippercruder.com slash zip zippercruder.com slash zip finding great candidates to hire can be like well trying to find a needle in a haystack sure you can post your job to some job board but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along

13:41which is why you should try zippercruder for free at zippercruder.com slash zip zippercruder doesn't depend on candidates finding you it finds them for you it's powerful technology identifies people with the right experience and actively invites them to apply to your job you get qualified candidates fast so while other companies might deliver a lot of hey zippercruder finds you what you're looking for the needle in the haystack see why four out of five employers who post a job on zippercruder get a quality candidate within the first day zippercruder the smartest way to hire and right now you can try zippercruder for free that's right free at zippercruder.com slash zip that zippercruder.com slash zip zippercruder.com slash zip back in 2006 and this exhibit number one redacted tells you in his email that the indictment target date is August 25th 2006 in other words very shortly thereafter within a month or so

14:44do you know why the line a USA redacted was keen on getting the federal case against Epstein brought on a fairly on a quick basis answer so I can't speak to that and I can I can ask based on your record was that the state indictment target date answer Epstein had already been indicted and arraigned on the indictment so that's federal question that's talking about a federal indictment answer all right the point is early on the investigative team the FBI and redacted were hot to trot to get this case moving from a federal standpoint that may well have been quite unrealistic giving all the issues that we've been discussing but the question is do you know why there was some urgency answer I haven't decided this idea when was it initially brought to the office question it was brought to the office in May of 2006 answer that would be a really really fast

15:45timeline question right so the question is aspirational though it may have been there was hope to get it done quickly so the question is can you think of factors that would have led a prosecutor to want to pursue this quickly answer I don't recall I can speculate that redacted was very hard charging and wanted to do a lot question what was your experience of her answer so based on this I see you know so exhibit two he gets interrupted excuse me would but just from your memory is that your recollection of how redacted operated hard charging answer yeah I'd say so a lot of really good prosecutors are hard charging that's part of the job description question okay did so in the child sex offender context are you familiar with the belief on the part of the people who do that kind of case as did redacted and redacted and others in your office that those offenders typically don't stop offending even after somebody's on to them so that there was a concern that he that in

16:50this case Jeffrey Epstein might be continuing to offend and therefore getting them off the streets was a priority answer I have heard that discussed recently in the media I don't recollect that back in well part of the discussion back in 2006 all right folks we're in a wrap-up right here and in the next episode dealing with the topic we're going to pick up where we left off all of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box the sun shining birds are singing and all feels right in the world until the season changes and suddenly you lose your motivation to get out of bed in fact one in five people experience some form of depression no matter the season or time of year at the American Psychiatric Association Foundation our vision is to build a mentally healthy nation for all because we want you to live your best life and be your best you all year round please visit mentallyhealthynation.org to learn more