Aliens, Epstein, and the Gap in the Record

0:00There are two kinds of mysteries. The ones where nothing is there, and the ones where something is there, but we don't understand it yet. The problem is people treat those the same. In one case, they invent something to just fill the void, and in another case, they invent something to explain what is already real. In both cases, they move too fast. Tonight, we're looking at two completely different stories, UFO disclosure, and the Epstein records, and they have the same problem. It's not a lack of information. It's the failure to sit still with the information we actually have. Welcome to the 14 wins podcast, where we talk about high strangeness and the war for perception. I go by bones, and with us, as always, is ROMX. Hey, hey everybody! So we got a good episode, because you know what? I'm going to say it right off the bat. This episode is not about proving aliens exist, and it's not about proving a cover-up.

1:03We've been talking about a cover-up past few episodes. It's about something much simpler. So what does the record actually show before we start explaining this? Because in both of these cases, the pattern is pretty clear. In the UAP story, the data tells us there is a real phenomena. Objects tracked across multiple systems, behaving in ways we don't fully understand. But instead of staying there, the conversation jumps immediately to interdimensional beings, hidden civilizations, or finding an ultimate answer. So the explanation outruns the evidence, and in the Epstein case, we see the same structure. The record doesn't disappear. It continues within travel, finance, testimony, and infrastructure. But one layer, the email layer, drops out, and then it reappears. And that there is the anomaly with this Epstein case. And instead of sitting with that, people jump to conclusions and conspiracies. It's just like kind of a natural reaction.

2:08And then again, the explanation outruns the evidence. So in this episode, we're doing something different. We're not asking why yet. We're asking what is actually there and what is actually missing. Because what is actually there versus what is actually missing is the whole point of the first anomaly we're going to discuss. And I think we highlighted it well in our intro. But the whole point here is that the explanation can't outrun the evidence. So as we explore this gap, let's just try to focus on the fact of whether or not there is a gap. And by gap, I mean the same gap that I mentioned last time, which is a gap in Epstein's emails between 1999 and 2001. I know we weren't the first to mention it. And I know I've heard it. Submentioned several times. But I haven't heard anyone or seen it prove that there was actually a gap. I think there's an example of explanations outrunning the evidence because once it gets mentioned that that gap exists, the obvious implication of courses.

3:15Hey, that's right before 9-11. And since the Epstein files seem to include information on every conspiracy to happen over the last 20 or 30 years, like I think it's only natural that people have that question. I certainly have the question in my mind, but in order to get that information, we need to follow a process. And the process first involves identifying the gap, identifying data that supports the gap, and then going out and filling in that data with the actual emails or the actual evidence. So the primary question here is, they're a meaningful measurable gap in Epstein-related records between 1999 and 2001. Specifically in email communications, does that gap warrant an investigation, right? Exactly. What we would like to do is open up an investigation if one is warranted. If you find the information here valuable, I publish the report on my substack and I'll put a link to that down below.

4:18You're more than welcome to mention 14 wins in a positive light as you write or cite us in any way, shape or form. Please, I doubt you will. But hey, it'd be nice. And anyone connected to Congress who's looking into this stuff, if you can find this information valuable, then you're welcome to use it. And you can just drop us a note that says, hey, thanks guys, you're awesome. Maybe in the comments, you can drop in the comments like, hey guys, this is Senator Ted Lu and Tom Cotton. I just wanted to thank you for all your work on that. Yeah, sure. Just to be clear, we're talking about looking at gaps or the missing information instead of the information. You're not talking about interpretive jazz kind of way where you listen to the notes that aren't being played. Oh, interesting. I like that metaphor actually. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Funny. That's how I guess how musicians discover anomalies and that's the same way I do it.

5:22And I have a bunch of cool AI tools. Maybe we'll talk about in our AI episodes that work exactly the way I want them to, which is beginning with data. So I would compare parallel data sets over time. And that's exactly what my tools are designed to do. So we use the email archives. We track that against flight logs, financial transactions, victim testimony timelines, property infrastructure records, and document release boundaries that the DOJ had demonstrated over the last year of disclosures. And what that did was it allowed us to categorize that data. Like we've talked a lot about how we define and categorize data in order to analyze it. So this allowed us to categorize the data very cleanly by year and then type or category of evidence. So we have travel, finance, testimony, and email.

6:22Those are the main big buckets of evidence that has been disclosed through the Epstein file so far. And the Epstein file emails don't start in earnest until 2002. So the first question is why? What happened prior to 2002? Was he on different servers or is assistance doing emails? Why are there no digital records? So emails were definitely invoked in the 1990s, certainly by 1998. Most offices were using email. Most offices were on Microsoft. It was the big popular thing at the time. It was the first wave of digital transformation. And having calendars associated with email was a big deal. Because you had executives who were able to book their own appointments when they relied in the past and assistance. Right. And they had several sets of emails and one of them was Yahoo address.

7:22So Yahoo was around back in the 90s. I don't know when that email address began. And we need that information. Those things are important. When did that email start and when did it end? And why are we only seeing up till 2002? And if you're looking at a visual chart, which we have in the report, you would see black lines all the way through travel, finance, testimony, and then email, you'd see a big gap. Between 1997, when the other records begin and 2002, when the email becomes dense, there were some sporadic emails from 2001. So why do we think that there is specifically a gap between 1999 and 2001? Is because there were periods of high frequency and high activity in all of the other channels. So that was when the flight logs showed increased periods of him porting guests around. That was when the victim testimony said that a lot of the crimes were perpetrated against them.

8:24Right. And that was when his finances showed increasing activity and increasingly strange financial relationships. So his emails would have information about all of that. Now is it being held back because of some other form of secrecy maybe? But for that, we would need Congressman like Massey and Kanna to go in there, who have demonstrated that they're on the side of the public, and go in there and look at the emails from this time, and tell us what's in them. But this consistent lower boundary is another feature here that we have to call out, which is 2002. Because the journalism, the leaks, the official releases, it all seems to have that same lower boundary. Like what was happening during that period when all the allegations are happening? Let me be clear. We're not arguing that every missing document is proof of concealment. We're arguing something more defensible. We're saying that the public record appears continuous across multiple layers of Epstein's activity

9:26before, during, and after 1999 to 2001. Travel records continue, financial records continue, property and network expansion continue. The victim and investigative timeline increases. There's a period of high activity there. So that asymmetry is the point. That is the signal. Whether the cause is archival failure, recovery bias, incomplete release, intermediary communications, or something more deliberate. The gap is visible enough to warrant an investigation. But I think there is going to be a tendency here to lead to explain why those files are missing. Not if the files are missing. And that's everyone's right. But the importance of following a process here is that the next step is to get those emails. Not to start prosecuting against who you think may be in those emails. Or what may be behind those emails. The next step is to get the emails themselves and not allow the explanations to outrun the evidence.

10:31Because when you get to the final answer, you want it to be well-supported. And we want some real action to be taken in order to get justice. Right. Yeah, there is a gap. It is specific to one layer. It occurs during a period of otherwise visible activity. Its cause remains unresolved, though. And that's where the analysis should stop and the investigation should begin. I mean, this isn't interpretive jazz. We're not scatting a tonally. Don't do that. We need info. Exactly. And in classic 14 wins fashion, this episode is going to have a very strange seg. Because the first half of the show was about something in the record that doesn't line up. And the second half of the show is going to be about something in the sky that we don't understand. Those are different domains, but we see the same mistake. That's kind of the through line or the thematic element of today's episode.

11:32Because in both cases, the temptation is to solve the mystery too quickly. Right. But if you do that, you collapse the structure. And once the structure collapses, you can't tell signal from noise anymore. Right. And that's why we were talking about in the previous case. It's so important to just follow the process. We know what it implies, but we're not there yet. Is there a gap and can we get the evidence? Right. And it's amazing that it's taken us this long to even mention that the government has been talking about disclosing UFOs for the past few weeks. Right. And it was all the buzz. I mean, I think it's at least been a month now. But Lou Elizondo immediately went to Twitter and started thanking President Trump and taking a victory lap. And it was like, this is getting weird. And then, you know, it was the usual song and dance. There was a bunch of people getting ready to welcome our alien overlords. And then nothing.

12:32And they realize they really don't have to disclose anything. They just hit me to say a couple buzzwords. And it gets everyone talking and everyone speculating. And the noise machine starts up. And this is not the first time this administration promised disclosure. Like, Trump was campaigning on the mystery drones. He was saying, I cannot believe they're doing this to you. I cannot believe Biden won't tell you this. It's right. If I was there, I would tell you right away. And then he said, when I get in there, I'm going to tell you right away. And then he even said that after he got elected. And before he took office, he said, don't worry next week. I'm going to get in there. That's right. I forgot about that. And then he turned to Susie Wiles. And he said, hey Susie, look at this drone thing. And that was the end of it. Yeah. That was basically the end of it, right? They came out with some, oh, they were all FAA authorized. Oh, are these the same ones that are flying over Fort McNair right now? Right.

13:32Fort where your secretary of state and your secretary of defense are living? Yeah. Is that the same ones? And for some mysterious reason, they don't even attempt to down them. Or they can't down them. And I think there's been a number of drone detection experts in the news who have recently been talking about how it's impossible to patrol the whole sky. And that is 100% true. But you know what's possible is to patrol the sky over your friggin' airbase. Right above. That's entirely possible. Yes. That seems important. It seems like a priority number one. So you should ask yourself, if those were Iranian drones, why weren't they shot down? Where did they come from? Why couldn't they be tracked? Like, all of that's crazy. If you saw them, if you knew they were there, then you should have been able to track them. You should have been able to track them back to their source. You should have been able to send up planes. You should have been able to send up drone-busting drones.

14:33Yeah. I think we've heard a lot of the different anti-drone technologies that are out there. I know we've talked about a bunch. But why weren't they deployed? And why doesn't anyone ask that question? So what happened when you tried to track them? What altitude were they flying at? Like, maybe a few of those questions would go a long way towards establishing whether or not what was up there was UAP. And without that information, I can't say for sure either. But the open question of why they don't know more about what was flying up there. When they know it was flying up there, given the technology that's available to them makes no sense. Yeah, we got really strange feedback. I think it wasn't the FBI who said that they realized that they're showing up on a schedule. So they were predictable. So they knew that when they would come. And still no action. Yeah, this was a pretty big deal, right, with the mystery drones.

15:35Because they were showing up during the hours when they'd be most likely to be seen. Right. It was between 5 p.m. and 12 p.m. when people were coming home from work in school. And people were going to take a dog for a walk. They were making sure that they were up when people were awake. Yeah. So it sounds like it might be the same thing. But we need more evidence. And let's see if they actually disclose it. Now, as far as their teasing disclosure all the time, I think we've talked about UAP crash retrievals enough. And there's been enough evidence in the public to establish that there has been UAP crash retrievals. Look at the Virginia case. Watch James Fox's movie moment of contact. And then there's tons and tons of associated evidence with that case. Some that just came out recently. So we know that there was a crash in Brazil. And we know that the US went down there and picked up the crash from Brazil and brought it back to the US. If they're not going to tell us more about what the crap was, what it's made out of, what was in the craft,

16:38the beings that they collected from that site. If they're going to stop short of that, it's not anywhere near disclosure. Okay. And that's not even the full disclosure. Because this has already been reported in the news that there was pushback internally from the Pentagon, because people said it was too complex. Others were saying it was biblical. And we have others in the news right now, like Anna Plina Luna, openly saying that these things are interdimensional. She said that there's proof on video. That's right. These things being interdimensional and she wants it being shown to the public. I would love to see just evidence of the existence of dimensions. Like how do you even explain that and demonstrate that and ask her? Well, I appreciate the fact that she's saying interdimensional. I have said that interdimensional is a good placeholder word. And I did, to your point, see a recent video with Eric Weinstein and Eric Davis.

17:39Eric Weinstein being a big physicist. Eric Davis is also a physicist who's very familiar with UFOs. And Weinstein was saying, why are people calling it interdimensional? Why are people coming to me if you want to call it interdimensional? Slow down, man. They're calling it interdimensional because they don't know what else to call it. Right. Because it's not physical. Exactly. Because it's not behaving in a way that is familiar to our physics. And that's okay. I think that if in order to socialize it, scientists would never go for this. But I think in order to socialize it, they should have gotten on it sooner if they wanted to define it. Right. But in order to socialize this, we're going to have to allow people to say interdimensional for a little while. Until we can understand more exactly about what they are and if there is multiple phenomenon. And if there's multiple sub phenomenon underneath the larger phenomenon, which they're most likely is. So it's going to be pretty complex. I like that. That is fair, sub phenomenon.

18:39I just invented that, right? I like that. I'm going to remember that one. Nice. So the bottom line is across the last six months and across the last 60 years, the same pattern holds. Disclosure is repeatedly promised at the political level. It's expanded at the narrative level and then it's slowed at the institutional level. So in this case, Trump promises it to win points with the public and politics to distract from the Epstein files and his wildly unpopular war.

19:56I like that for something. You know what? Honestly, maybe with Trump, maybe for all the reasons we've discussed in the last six or seven episodes, like he has an unusual amount of power within the government. And it's never been possible before for a president to do this because they've always treated presidents as temporary employees. Right. Employees don't get the classified information and Trump doesn't have all the classified information on this. He said as much. Yeah. So when he's asked, Trump just keeps saying, uh, well, you know, I don't know if aliens are real or not. It's like it's still a question for him. He's not going to look at the data. It's just more of a feeling for him. Yeah. Yeah. Once we see alien-related or disclosure-related merch in a store, that's when we know it's common. So they did register a domain, aliens.gov, and everyone's kind of going nuts.

20:57And now they're saying stay tuned. And what I'm expecting there are just some blurry documents with some even blurier photos. I'm not expecting any form of great disclosure there, but they will see. I'm expecting a few more videos. What they want to do and what the phenomenon wants to do is always keep this at the level of, is it real or is it not? Mm-hmm. And if you actually take the time to look at the evidence, I don't know how you come away and say it's not real. Well, the interesting angle though is that so we're going to have a wartime president who's flirting with the idea of disclosure. And we all know that the phenomenon shows up during war, during conflict. Well, like we were talking about it's floating above Fort McNair probably, maybe. Yeah. I look, you know, right now that very well could be if only they had warned us. Yeah, right, right.

21:57But this pattern is not new. Yeah, this Jimmy Carter once promised UFO disclosure was part of his campaign. Yeah. And then he couldn't do it. He got to the CIA and he couldn't do it. This actually might be where Trump, they don't with project 2025, they've been acting on all these old officials. Maybe there's a shuffle that causes something to get out. But they're going to go to Trump and they're going to say, this is not going to be good for you. Because it could really be foundationally shaking. It's institutionally shaking. It's going to impact religion. They've already said that. Yeah. We've already prepared you for that. It doesn't have to. But yeah, you know, it's there. Yeah, it's a good point. And to go back to my past point with wartime can actually make disclosure a lot less likely, right? Because everyone's got the jitters.

22:57When there's something that the military or the government can't explain during wartime, like those drones over the base, they're not going to say a thing about it. They're not going to disclose that they don't know. You know what I mean? Agreed. It's a sign of weakness. Agreed. But that is what's different about this time too. Is that Trump actually has the need to distract from the war. Yeah. And he actually might have enough institutional power to get some stuff loose. But I think what they're going to do is they're going to get to him and look, he's not in good health. He's not in good mental health. He's in terrible physical health. I think, you know, he's got months of good health left. And that probably influenced Israel's decision to move when they did because they know that their ally was failing in his health. Yeah. But this is new. I mean, there is some intensity here that's new. There's anapolina Luna talking about the interdimensional angle openly and publicly is new.

24:00Yeah. And then the direct involvement of Trump and Project 2025 and the amount of power that they hold over the institution that's been causing us so many problems like holding back the Epstein files might be the thing that actually would allow them to disclose it. But these are the Project 2025 folks. They think these are demons. Yeah. This has already been reported. So they're going to stop it. They're going to be like, no, if you do this, the demons will win. And it'll be bad for you because people will question the church and you'll lose your base. And that's all he needs to hear. Because apparently this happened with the Kennedy assassination. According to reporting, this happened with Mike Pompeo. He told Pompeo to look into it. Pompeo looks into it. He comes back to Trump and he says, OK, I got the truth. But people aren't going to like it. And I think if you tell him, this is going to be bad for you. Interesting. So they buried it. Yeah. Everyone talks about the fog of war too.

25:01I mean, one thing is certain that chaos is going to be a level of chaos. And then the information that we get on anything is going to be put into question. It should be. Yes, there's going to be a lot of noise, no matter what happens. Yeah. And it's going to be hard to find signal in all of that. But it's funny how my mind has changed a little bit as we've been talking about it here on the show. Because I was kind of prepared to be like, look, don't expect much. But at the same time, because of his ailing health, because of his need for distraction, because he's been acting radically. If he has the ability to push something forward that normally wouldn't make it, even on all of these different variables, right? I have to say that maybe. Yeah. And I didn't expect to say that today. And it's not exactly optimistic in general, the madness.

26:01But you made a good point though, because I just thought of something. You know, isn't his most devoted segment of his base, the Christian right? I mean, and they're the ones who don't want to hear any type of disclosure at all. Like you said, they think they're demons. Yeah, you're right. I don't think it's going to happen. They're going to go to him and say, this isn't going to help you, because it's going to disturb your most loyal followers. That is going to be the most likely scenario, because that is most likely who the people around him will be. Now, I don't know exactly who the people around him will be when that happens, but that is most likely. And I can't think of too many people other than the people that we know who are Trump allies like Berchette, Anna Polina Luna, Berlison. These are people who would go into Trump's office and say, hey, you know, you really should disclose this. And I think he's taking them seriously, but their voices are going to get drowned out

27:04by a bunch of people who are saying, this will be bad for you. Yeah, for sure. Because they have incentives. And that's what we've been discussing as well. They have incentives to maintain information control. And they have incentive to keep the UAP phenomenon ambiguous, because this allows you to take in any new information and say, well, that might have happened. It might not have happened, right? The new case happens, a new video. Well, maybe that was a UFO. If you say UFOs don't exist, you're going to get shot down because they keep popping up everywhere. But if you can keep it in this ambiguous state, it never moves forward. Yeah. But there's political incentives. You can capture public attention. You can be transparent. You can show some sort of transparency while you're hiding the Epstein files. Right. And it gives you this position that he has lost, which is this idea that he's an outsider that's out for the people. And he's going to be this people's champion.

28:06And this would make him, you know, maybe get a little bit of that back. Yeah. I mean, UFO culture is part of our society. It's part of our lives now. It's been around for a long time. Yeah. And I think there's a bigger UFO audience on the right than the left. So you have mixed feelings there, because you have the UFO audience who wants UFO disclosure. And then you have a religious audience there that sees it as being religious. And they're interested in UFOs, but they also see it as part of their spiritual holidays. Right. But the pattern we're describing results in a behavior. So it keeps repeating. Political actors accelerate expectations. Disclosure is coming. Right. And then the intelligence community runs behind them and slows or reframes the output to make it seem ambiguous.

29:06So they get to have their cake and eat it too. The political actor gets some advantage by putting out some sort of information and then they keep it ambiguous by having the spies run behind them and make sure it all gets jetwashed. Right. And then the public steps in to fill those narrative gaps with reptiles, Anunnaki, Grey's versus leprechauns, whatever. Yeah. We need a future president that would just be like, I will be your alien president. But this same cycle of political blueballing followed by a slow drip of nothing. Did you say political blueballing? Yeah. Do you know what I mean? Is that kind of a fly on YouTube? I don't know. Let's just plow through. I think there are different interpretations of blueball. You're talking about an individual.

30:07A single baller. Or a part. Oh, okay. But you know what I mean. They keep teasing UFOs. They will put out a little of something. So this has happened over decades. And the structure remains intact. But only the surface narrative evolves. It evolves from aliens to interventional to whatever's next. But let me be clear. If they stop short of the physical evidence, this is nowhere near disclosure. Because if they're not going to tell us all of the information they have and intelligence on what the phenomenon is, then they can at least give us some of the tech, some of the material so that our scientists can start working on reverse engineering it, maybe making a better tomorrow. So if they're not going to give us any of that, this is nothing. Mm-hmm. Pretty much. Right. So we just have to be mindful of the pattern. You know, it's in its managed with three forces.

31:07You got, you know, political signaling, like we're talking about, like we will reveal it. And then you got speculative escalation. With the interventional beings would be an example. And then institutional control. So you got the constant tag of ongoing analysis and hopes for the future. Yeah, they're not resolving the problem. They're just continually restaging the problem. That's why you get this groundhog's day of UFO disclosure. And I'm starting to believe that some of the influencers in the UFO world and even some of the audience just want that. They don't really want this closure. They just enjoy the show and the theorizing. And I get it, you know. The excitement of not knowing. Yeah. That's a good way to put it. But the only question that really matters now is, will this cycle produce materially different evidence than the 1960s or 1990s cycles, which basically did the same thing.

32:08The signal is not what is being claimed here. It's the gap between what is being claimed and what is being shown. Right. They've yet to show anything, much like Epstein's missing emails before 2002, especially notable between 1999 and 2001. We could fill all that in with narrative, but I think that would be meaningless. Yeah, like you said, I mean, it's all about finding the evidence. You get to a point where you just need more evidence. That's right. So instead of looking for a story, we're going to continue to look for more evidence. And I think that that's the most interesting thing, even when we see a notable absence of evidence, right? Yep. Exactly. Oh, and hey, bones. We had a listener ask about the mid-break in the last episode, which I believe was a piece from your musical episode.

33:08Oh, yeah, the shadows. I love that. I love that too. The analog synth design. That was a good one. Yeah. So anyone looking for that episode on Spotify, unfortunately, Spotify denied it because it had too much music on it, and it's a podcast. So I guess they don't like that. Anyway, iTunes did not deny it. It's called Echoes Between Worlds, the 14-win sound experience. It's also on Amazon and YouTube, and a number of other places. So definitely check out bones as cool, little musical sware he did over the holidays. Musical collage, or whatever you want to call it. That was fun. And we just always want to say thank you for all your kind notes, comments, and votes. We really appreciate it. I think we've taken accountability for all of the reasons that we're not more commercial. However, the main reason is that we are suppressed

34:10on every single platform. Yeah. We are persona non grata everywhere, even on Twitter. Like, we are censored more than the neo-nazis who don't like us either. We don't like them. And yet, still, what are we saying? Oh, at this point, given this episode, yeah, I guess I could see that. I guess I could see the suppression. You know, it's your one good move that you've done. Suppress me. No, but you know, we'll keep fighting. The times we live in are important, and we're going to figure it out and find some answers. Yeah, we'll give it a shot. All your likes and ratings do help us with the algorithm. We appreciate that. And also, probably need to share it at this point if you want people to hear it, because I don't think we're getting out there any other way.

35:12But hey, we're still growing. I don't know how, but you know, it's been a good six months for us. It seems like people actually really enjoy us talking about the power stuff, even more than UFOs, which is kind of sad for UFOs. I mean, I really want people to be more interested in UFOs, but that is always going to be something that holds disclosure back politically, because Trump might weigh it out, and he'll be like, there's just not enough reason for me to do this, because there's not enough benefit to end disclosing it, or not enough people would be cheering for him. Yeah, there's going to be no story like, and like Carter, when he was present, remember that story of he shed a tear after hearing that aliens existed? You ever hear that? Oh, yeah. Because he was deeply devoted to Christian. And you know, who gave him that file that made him cry?

36:13He was like, George Bush senior. George Bush senior. What? Really? What do you mean? Yes. CIA or? Yeah. I didn't know that. Two of them were in that room, but anyway, that's a good discussion for another time. Thanks, y'all. Appreciate you. Yeah, so thank you, everyone. Till next time. Take care. Let's get dark.

37:27I love you, I love you, I love you.