Alex Acosta And His Epstein Interview With OIG Inspectors (Part 6)

0:00Omaha Steaks semi-annual sale is here. It's a sale so nice, they do it twice a year. Save 50% sight-wide on the world's best proteins, like legendary steaks, gourmet burgers, versatile chicken, pork, seafood, and more. Plus get an extra $35 off with code audio when you shop OmahaStakes.com today. Now is the time to save big on everything you need to serve up mouth watering flavor, like USDA certified tender steaks, perfectly aged to maximize tenderness, and hand cut by master butchers in America's heartland, and delivered right to your door. With unrivaled quality and variety, every bite is backed by their 100% satisfaction guarantee. Don't wait, shop now at OmahaStakes.com and save 50% sight-wide on steaks and more during the semi-annual sale. Plus get an extra $35 off with promo code audio at checkout. That's OmahaStakes.com promo code AUDIO. minimum purchase may apply, see site for details.

1:00Finding 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 Zip Recruiter for free. At ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Zip Recruiter 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, Zip Recruiter, find you what you're looking for. The needle in the haystack. See why four out of five employers who post a job on Zip Recruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. Zip Recruiter, the smartest way to hire. And right now, you can try Zip Recruiter for free. That's right, free at ziprecruiter.com slash zip. That ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Ziprecruiter.com slash zip. What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles.

2:03In this episode, we're going to pick up where we left off with the Alex Acosta interview with the OIG inspectors. Question, do you recall that, and this is just a do you recall that cheap periodically would give you in that early period of 2006 updates, written updates, answer, I don't. Question, do you think that it was appropriate for a line USA to be shooting emails, updating a case that was under investigation directly to you and your first assistant answer it was unusual. And so did I think of, look, I can't reconstruct what I would have thought, but you know, you're asking not just what did I know, but what I would have thought 12 years ago. But I can say based on the general practice, it would have been unusual, and my best guess as to how I would have reacted would have been, hey, redacted, this is unusual. Is the chain being fully informed? Are feathers being ruffled, figure it out? Because you know, you asked me early on to characterize redacted qualities.

3:04I think one of the things that I have said is that you was very good at smoothing things over and sort of the interaction because he was respected and so I might say that's kind of unusual. Go figure it out. Question, but you wouldn't necessarily jump on that chain yourself and be in direct communication. Answer, I tend to not to. Question, would she have sent this to you? Something unusual, if she thought that this was a case that you wanted to be involved in. Answer, even in those, I tried to be as general matter fairly sensitive to the chain because I had found that if you start jumping the chain too much, even if you become informed, managers feel, you know, out of the loop. And that's not conducive to sort of allowing them to do their job of supervising. It's a big enough office. You have to empower your folks to do their jobs. Question, so the concern on your part would not be that she was communicating directly to you, but that as long as all of the chain was informed as well, answer, yeah. I mean, if you are redacted or you know, if you're redacted

4:07or you know, you don't want to talk to the line attorney before the line attorney talks to your boss. And so it's not just informed, but it's respecting your supervisor. And it's a difficult balance because often, really good a USA's are also the ones, you know, that just want to get things done. Question, did you have any reason to believe during this investigative phase that redacted was not pursuing this case? This investigation adequately, appropriately and fully? Answer, no, I did not. Question, did you feel that she did not have appropriate oversight? Answer, not to my recollection. Question, okay, did you feel that she had any resource problems? That is, did she have as far as you know, sufficient resources available to pursue her investigation? Answer, to my recollection, yes. I noted her early, you know, I noted more recently the email where, you know, that was shared with me by redacted about resource concerns. And I would just note that I would allow the management chain

5:08to figure that out. Question, all right. Did you at any point consider based on what you then knew expanding the scope of the investigation? Did you ever suggest or propose that instead of simply looking at Epstein's conduct in West Palm Beach? This avied the girls that the federal authorities could use their resources to look at other aspects of Epstein's activity? Answer, so I think it's important to take a step back. And I was aware of any number of cases going on in the office and based on what that stage of case was at, I would get more involved for a time. It wasn't my practice to direct a USA's and how they should investigate or what the scope of a case investigation should be. The Miami office before I got there and after I left had a reputation for knowing their stuff. It's a large office. It's got good people. I would assume that the AUSAs and their management would follow their natural leads. Question, all right, were you aware that during this period and by this period I'm talking about the investigative period

6:08from the time that the case came in in mid 2006 up until May 1st when redacted, put forth her prosecution memo and proposed indictment. During the sort of 10 month period or almost a year where you were aware that defense counsel for Epstein were reaching out to redacted and redacted to pitch their view of how the case should proceed. Answer, so I don't have a specific recollection of who reached out at what time. I would assume as a general matter that defense counsel, defense counsel, were clearly involved before the case came to the office. And so I would assume that defense counsel would remain involved while the office was investigating. I say that not based on independent recollection, but why would they stop being involved? Question, and is it your experience as a US attorney that it was common or uncommon for defense counsel to approach the line prosecutor and supervisor to make whatever pitch they want with respect to a prosecution? Answer fairly common.

7:10Question, all right. And was it also common for those approaches to be entertained? In other words, for the line, AUSA and supervisor to meet with defense counsel. And did you view that as appropriate? Answer, as a general matter, it was typical. It happened before I got there. And it's probably happening now. Question, and you view it as an appropriate part of the process, do you? Answer, I think AUSA's need to have discretion to meet with defense counsel and defense counsel. Certainly should be able to present perspectives. Question, there's an outlook. This is Exhibit four, and this is something it's really sort of a point of information here. This is an outlook that shows you and redacted and redacted had a schedule meeting with Roy Black. Question, Roy Black, a prominent attorney, a local criminal defense attorney at the time in the Miami area. This was a meeting scheduled in your office for the 23rd of February, 2007. Do you have any he was?

8:12He at the time was one of Epstein's attorneys. Do you have any idea whether that this meeting related to Epstein or some other case? Answer, I don't. I noticed that I don't know whether it was this or another matter. Oh, I'm sure Mr. Acosta, you have no idea. Are you guys hip to the bullshit yet? And again, not even my own words. These people are syncing themselves with their own bullshit. Question, but you have not particular recollection of a meeting with him on Epstein and the Epstein matter. Answer, I don't. Question at this time. Answer, and let me note, I think most of the correspondence was from other attorneys and not him. And so yeah, another lie. There's a ton of emails from Roy Black and to Roy Black. Question, all right, are you okay? Do you want to take a short break? Answer, let's, what time is it? Oh, 11, question five minutes. Answer, yeah. So they take a five minute break, then they come back. All right, back on the record at 1112.

9:14Haven't broken out 11. Mr. Acosta, we're going to move on in the timeframe. I mentioned a moment ago, May of 2007, when redacted, submitted her prosecution memo of more than 80 pages and her proposed indictment, her initial proposed indictment, which was more than 50 pages. She submitted that by transmittal memo to her entire chain, redacted, redacted, redacted, redacted, and redacted, and you. Was that a typical way for an indictment and proposed prosecution, the memo to come? Answer, to my recollection, it was not. And I don't recall that happening in other cases. I'm trying, I'm hesitating, just because I'm trying to think through if there's, I don't have any recollection of it happening in another case. Question, why do you think it happened in this case? And who caused it to happen? Answer, I don't know, I don't know. Question, all right, all right. So when you, before you saw it, I don't know if you even knew about it by reference to exhibit six, you learned essentially from redacted

10:15that the FBI was planning to do a press conference two weeks after that and redacted, told, redacted, this office has not approved the indictment. Therefore, please do not commit us to anything in this time. Were you eventually in that email chain? And did it get to you? Apparently by blind carbon, because there is no indication you actually get it. Answer, right? Question, but you advise Alicia Valley, who I think was your oppressed person, that redacted hasn't even finished recommendation to redacted, i.e., we were a long way off. So did you have any idea why the FBI was planning a press conference on Epstein? 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, which is why you should try Zip Recruiter for free, at ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Zip Recruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you. It finds them for you. It's powerful technology identifies people

11:17with 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, Zip Recruiter finds you what you're looking for. The needle in the haystack. See why four out of five employers who post a job on Zip Recruiter get a quality candidate within the first day? Zip Recruiter, the smartest way to hire. And right now, you can try Zip Recruiter for free. That's right, free at ziprecruiter.com slash zip. That ziprecruiter.com slash zip, ziprecruiter.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, which is why you should try Zip Recruiter for free. At ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Zip Recruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you. It finds them for you. It's powerful technology identifies people with the right experience

12:18and actively invites them to apply to your job. You get qualified candidates fast. So while other companies might deliver a lot of, hey, Zip Recruiter finds you what you're looking for. The needle in the haystack. See why four out of five employers who post a job on Zip Recruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. Zip Recruiter, the smartest way to hire. And right now, you can try Zip Recruiter for free. That's right, free at ziprecruiter.com slash zip. That ziprecruiter.com slash zip, ziprecruiter.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, which is why you should try Zip Recruiter for free. At ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Zip Recruiter 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.

13:19You get qualified candidates fast. So while other companies might deliver a lot of, hey, Zip Recruiter finds you what you're looking for. The needle in the haystack. See why four out of five employers who post a job on Zip Recruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. Zip Recruiter, the smartest way to hire. And right now, you can try Zip Recruiter for free. That's right, free at ziprecruiter.com slash zip. That ziprecruiter.com slash zip, ziprecruiter.com slash zip. Answer, I don't know if I did. I don't recall if I did question. How typical was it for the FBI to plan a press conference on an indicted on a case that was being indicted at the time of an indictment or arrest without coordinating with you and your office? Answer under redacted highly atypical. Question, was he the sack at the time? Answer, he was the sack. He was the sack. I know he was the sack at the time as of September and I'm almost certain that he was the sack at the time.

14:22Question, all right. And when you said that we are a long way off and redacted hasn't even finished a recommendation to redacted, do you know whether you had any idea what she was actually submitted in her prosecution memo and that she made a recommendation to redacted? Answer, I can't recollect. But I'll take my words as reflective of. If I say she hasn't finished her recommendation, then I assume she hasn't finished her recommendation. Question, does that mean as you look at your own words, does that suggest to you that you were unaware as of that moment that she actually submitted her prosecution memo? Answer, that suggests that I would not have been aware that she submitted it. If you know, because it sounds like I'm saying she hasn't even submitted her memo. Question, all right. Answer, we're a long way off. But again, this is based on practice, not recollection. Question, all right. And when you said that you're a long way off, did that reflect if you recall an assessment of the length of time to get a prosecution memo,

15:25a recommendation, and an assessment of that or your expectation that even when you saw a prosecution memo and an indictment, it would be a long process before it was approved. Answer, so I would assume. And again, this is just based on speculating from the way that I write that I'm thinking she hasn't submitted her recommendation to redacted and redacted needs to review it. He may, you know, he probably want to talk to her, say it needs to be scrubbed, you know, this could be, this isn't happening next week, et cetera. Question, all right. Do you have any reason to believe that whatever that process is that you were describing would be any different in particular measure in this case from an ordinary complex case? Answer, so from my language, I would take it. That is the same process. But that there is a process and the process hasn't yet been followed. Question, all right, okay. Answer, so it would be the typical process in a typical complex case. Question, all right. And is it fair to characterize this

16:27as a relatively complex case given the legal issue? Answer, I think it is, yes. All right, folks, we're gonna wrap up right here and in the next episode we're gonna pick up where we left off. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.