Mega Edition: Alex Acosta And His Epstein Interview With OIG Inspectors (Part 4-6) (3/12/26)

President Barack Obama. Virginia, we are counting on you. Republicans want to steal enough seats in

Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years. But you can stop

them by voting yes by April 21st. Help put our elections back on a level playing field and let

voters decide not politicians. Vote yes by April 21st. Paid for by Virginians for fair elections.

Uncle laser here. America's built on fast cars fast food that even faster women photo

casinos built in America you know if they're fast out fast-cast cries redemption you see

only moto is us own and operate moto it's American made that's who we are and that's who we

care about. Play for free at moto.us. Moto casinos the social casino boy will prohibit it no

purchase necessary visit moto.us for more details must be 21 plus.

What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode we're

getting right back to Alex Acosta and his interview with the OIG inspectors. Turning to exhibit two

this is an email that was forwarded to you by redacted the original forwarded email is from redacted

copying redacted and it essentially relates to a dust up between redacted and redacted over the

chain of command and her workload but in the first paragraph she specifies that when I first heard

about the Epstein investigation I spoke with redacted about it redacted was not here redacted said

that she would back me up on the case but I knew what happened to the state prosecution and can

happen to the federal prosecution if the US attorney's office is an on board so I spoke with

redacted about the case and he spoke with Alex and they gave me the green light so that actually

appears to be initial contact with redacted that she's talking about prior to the briefing with you

so wait early when the case first came in in May of 2006 do you recall being contacted or having

a conversation with redacted about the case so early answer again the early recollection whenever

whenever it might have taken place was I was made aware of the matter it seemed a reasonable

matter to pursue and that's the level of detail that I recall question so if redacted said back

in the day that she got from you the green light did you understand her to be being authorized to

authorize maybe too strong of a word but answer to pursue question yeah answer to someone you know

I'm speculating here but there's a case and they want to know should we spend our time on this

and the answer is that it seems reasonable sure question okay and do you recall making that

explicit to her answer I don't and it wouldn't have been my practice to sort of make it explicit

yeah go spend your time as opposed to thank you for letting me know that sounds reasonable question

alright answer and whatever you know details it looks like based on exhibit one there was

subsequent follow up between her and redacted or with her and the management teams and they said

you know go back work on a b and c question do you know what redacted was talking about when she

referred to something happening to a federal prosecution if the US attorney is not on board

had there been a case in which you were not supportive of a particular prosecution that was

being proposed answer none none that I recall and I knew what had happened to the state prosecution

can happen to a federal prosecution if the US attorney is not on board I don't recall any federal

prosecution that I wasn't supportive of at least in this context question what do you mean by this

context answer it was my way of narrowing an answer so I didn't spend the time to go through

every office and every division for the most part as I sit here I'm sort of running through each

office I don't recall any and if I could use this based on exhibit two I'm not sure that she's

referring to a specific case as opposed to concerns that the state prosecution started at point

you know with charges that require gel time and ended up somewhere else it may have been

because management wasn't question but that's current reading of they get interrupted by a cost

of yeah an interruption again but this time by the person asking the questions this rather than

recollection answer that's my reading question all right based on the early description you got

of the case did you have any idea how many victims were involved answer I did not question did you

know what the name of the case was was the investigation name was you know cases get names answer

so I know based on the review of the correspondence I may have known that then I did not independently

recall it question that being operation leap year answer correct question all right and you know

where that came from answer well I mean other than February 20th yeah I don't know question

well the original allegations that came in involved 28 victims and then subsequently

redacted advised that she was uncovering more victims so there were over 30 question well over 30

answer I don't recall knowing that question but is it reasonable that the number of victims

would be one of the factors that you would have been informed about at the time answer I don't know

it all depends how detailed that briefing was again as a typical matter early on this is what is

being done I would trust my a USA's and my management staff to pursue it it wouldn't be here are all

the facts associated with the case just a heads up there's a high profile case involving a very

wealthy man abusing young women a state attorney is prosecuting but you know there's dissatisfaction

I wanted to give you the heads up both to inform me but also so that I'm aware am I interactions with

other Palm Beach officials question okay based on whatever information you got at the time

did you think that there was a federal interest to be served by pursuing a federal prosecution

potentially answer yes question and what was that answer so the exploitation of young women

he gets corrected now by the investigator girls he corrects himself girls the investigator I

want to be all right look I know for the sort of glossary convention that we are using is we

can use this in the interview as girls for the victims who at the time of the conduct were minors

and women for those who are not even though the girls at a later date became age of majority

Acosta responds fair question okay so here we're really talking about girls answer okay question

who are the victims Acosta yeah yeah question okay Acosta girls minor females I just don't

sometimes that term is viewed differently question right answer so yeah the exploitation of girls

or minor females and that certainly is an important federal interest question well and is the number

and the breadth of the scheme the scope of the activity also a factor there in other words it

wasn't one or two women on two occasions answer so there's several factors that probably go

into what's the federal interest the acts the sortiness of the acts the number the likelihood

or the importance of the registration was important to my mind because that goes to future

prevention to putting the community on notice question and where you are aware that the individual

in this case Epstein also add homes in other districts that were it was an interstate activity on

his part the interstate travel and so on to that Acosta's lawyer pipes in I'm sorry let me just

we're still in the original intake time frame misredacted yes Acosta yeah again for the intake time

I can I can't speak to the details because I don't remember what the extent of that that intake

briefing was Acosta asked if you can ask a question was there was there a clear briefing as opposed

to a heads up based on the record question yes that redacted came to Miami to conduct a briefing of

you and they get cut off by redacted question or again redacted in order to tell you about this

case and get from you a green light so that they could proceed with it answer I asked because I

recall in an email and I don't know what the time would have been where she's coming to Miami

and redacted says why don't you stop by my office first question right and I keep I would I would

speculate that why don't you stop by my office first is why don't you give me a bunch of details

and then we will walk across to the US attorney and fill him in and so that would have been almost

a two tiered discussion and I don't know if that if that timeline on that email is when you say

briefing Acosta continues I'm speaking just based on a review of the record not based on

recollection here question all right so you have to be clear you have no recollection of any specific

briefing in 2006 answer I accept that I was made aware of the matter president Barack Obama

Virginia we are counting on you Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to

raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years but you can stop them by voting

yes by April 21st help put our elections back on a level playing field and let voters decide

not politicians vote yes by April 21st paid for by Virginians for fair elections

Hi uncle laser here America's built on fast cars fast food and even faster women photo

casinos built in America you know if they're fast out fast cascries redemption you see only

moto is US own and operate moto it's American made that's who we are and that's who we care about

play for free at moto dot us auto casinos the social casino boy we're prohibited no

purchase necessary visit moto dot us for more details must be 21 plus

president Barack Obama Virginia we are counting on you Republicans want to steal enough seats in

Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years but you can stop them

by voting yes by April 21st help put our elections back on a level playing field and let

voters decide not politicians vote yes by April 21st paid for by Virginians for fair elections

question okay answer I can't say how or in what context or to what degree a detail question

or by home answer or by home I knew the matter it's easier to recollect at least for me

what I knew as opposed to who told me what question all right all right at this point

did you have if you at any point did you have any reservation about investigating and potentially

prosecuting Jeffrey Epstein a reservation stemming from his wealth and reported standing in the

community at all and influence answer no and we had prosecuted lots of influential folks in this

office so while he had wealth it's not unusual UBS was in the office at the time I mentioned

several high profile Palm Beach public corruption cases question so there was no concern about

possible negative blowback in the press or the community or even at main justice if he went if

you went after someone like Epstein answer there was no concern stemming from his wealth or his

status question what would have it stem from answer at some point I think there was concern

regarding the law and we'll probably get into that I alluded to that earlier in the overview

I don't know if that would have been developed this early on but that's not a function of his

wealth that's a function of the fact pattern question right okay so as you mentioned petite policy

concern petite policy could you tell us what your position was on the policy as it applied in this

case as you understood it from the beginning answer so the policy you know on its face doesn't

specifically apply based on exhibit one I'm now inferring not recalling it looks like either

redacted on her own or redacted as for a or mr. redacted as for a petite policy waiver memo to be

prepared in part on the assumption that the state prosecution may or may not have gone for it

I don't know but I do recall that early on this was unusual because it had been had been arrested

or arraigned it was going forward on the part of the state and so here's the big bad federal

government stepping in and on sovereign you know state saying you're not doing enough and to my

mind when you know the whole idea of the petite policy is to recognize that the the estate has you

know has independent entity and that we should presume that what we're doing is correct even if we

don't like the outcome except in the most unusual of circumstances question and what kinds of well

so the petite policy exists because there's a recognition that there are cases that are appropriately

pursued I mean you're the head of the civil rights division after all answer correct which is why

I say accept in the most appropriate of circumstance question right answer but let me add that based on

this I was comfortable you know saying let's go forward because the lack of gel time you know to

use to use petite policy language a plea that did not include gel time or registration would seem

like a manifest injustice all right folks we're going to wrap up this episode right here and in the

next episode dealing with the topic we're going to pick up where we left off all the information

that goes with this episode can be found in the description box what's up everyone and welcome

to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles in this episode we'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 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 works

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 did 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 are 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 or staff answer

I would say a combination of me and my management 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

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 cream 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 chain of 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 adapted who reported to

her adapted who reported to her adapted who reported to her adapted 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 question 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 or answer okay question do you recall this 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 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 had 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 answer so again I don't remember 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 righteous 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 or 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 two accounts two versions that you didn't say happened 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 mister redacted I'm sorry

I'm using first names here's golf legend john daily hell yeah these winds are pulling up faster

than my divorces I only spent on moto america's social casino you know I've won a couple of majors

and on moto I've won majors grads and epic jackpots on their classic Vegas slots with huge huge

bonus rounds moto casino adds new games and awards players three coins every single day grip it

and spend it on moto casino download the moto casino app today moto casinos the social casino

what we're prohibited to purchase this is moto dot us for more than 10

oh

president Barack Obama Virginia we are counting on you Republicans want to steal enough seats in

Congress to raid the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years but you can stop

them by voting yes by April 21st help put our elections back on a level playing field and let

voters decide not politicians vote yes by April 21st paid for by Virginians for fair elections

craving the coffee flavor you love but without the caffeine kachava's got you covered with

their newest coffee flavor this all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold authentic flavor crafted

from premium decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein six grams of fiber greens

and so much more treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves go to kachava dot com

and use code news new customers get 15% off their first order that's k a c h a v a dot com code news

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 the tea 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 back in 2006 in 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 do 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 timeline 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 a 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 this 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 gonna wrap up right here and in the next episode dealing with the topic 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 what's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles

in this episode we're gonna pick up where we left off with the Alex Acosta interview with the

OIG inspectors question do you recall that and this is just 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 our feathers being ruffled figure it

out because you know you asked me early on to characterize redacted qualities I 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 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 or 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 to 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 vis-a-vis 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 a USA's and their management would follow their

natural leads question all right where you will wear that during this period and by this period

I'm talking about the investigative period from 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 ten month period or almost a year where you will wear that defense counsel

for Epstein we're 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

question all right and was it also common for those approaches to be entertained in other words

for the line a USA 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 a USA'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 he 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 11 12 haven't broken out 11 mr. Acosta we're going to move on

in the time frame 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 that 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 where 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

you ain't heard about motocasino moto has real vagus slots any gang you can find on the floor in

vagus you can play it on moto I like my slots hot motos free to play like food stamps in line at the

grocery store at a funeral in traffic keep rise on the road hop on motocasino motocasino got jack

pints are the bigger than my belly moto america's hottest free to play social casino download the

motocasino app today motocasinos the social casino board were prohibited to purchase that story visit

motocasino dot us for more than 10

craving the coffee flavor you love but without the caffeine kachava's got you covered with their

newest coffee flavor this all in one nutrition shake delivers bold authentic flavor crafted from

premium decaffeinated Brazilian beans with 25 grams of protein six grams of fiber greens

and so much more treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves go to kachava dot com

and use code news new customers get 15% off their first order that's k a c h a v a dot com code

news craving the coffee flavor you love but without the caffeine kachavas got you covered with

their newest coffee flavor this all in one nutrition shake delivers bold authentic flavor crafted

from premium decaffeinated Brazilian beans quality nutrition shouldn't be complicated just two

scoops of kachavas all in one nutrition shake and you've got 25 grams of protein six grams of fiber

greens and so much more whether you're craving that coffee taste to kickstart your morning ritual

or as a nutrient packed reward to round out your afternoon kachava keeps you fueled and satisfied

wherever your day takes you plus it actually tastes delicious no fillers no nonsense just the good

stuff your body craves and for the times you feel like switching it up you've got seven flavors to

choose from all with the highest quality ingredients treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your

body craves go to kachava dot com and use code news new customers get 15% off their first order

that's k a c h a v a dot com code news that redacted hasn't even finished recommendation to

redacted i e we're a long way off so did you have any idea why the FBI was planning a press conference

on Epstein 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 question 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 a 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 as a relatively

complex case given the legal issue answer I think it is yes all right folks we're going to wrap

up right here and in the next episode 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.

Welcome to Motocasino where the excitement never ends with thousands of the hottest free-to-play

social casino games fastest payouts and the best promotions in the industry no tricks or gimmicks

owned and operated in the USA Motocasino is a free-to-play social casino no purchase

necessary 21 plus to play boy boy prohibited sign up today for a generous welcome bonus

download the Motocasino app today do you love romcoms do you wish you could talk about Christmas

movies year round then we have the perfect podcast for you home marquee's podcast throughout the year

we cover all things romance holiday and whole mark including recaps of every homework show

like when calls the heart and the way home you can also get loads of bonus content covering shows

like Bridgerton sweet magnolia's and and just like that we are an all female group of friends

who are passionate for these shows and movies and give our honest opinions as well as gosh

over what we love so much but that's not all every Monday there are interviews with all your

favorite actors writers directors and more check out home marquee's podcasts on all your podcast

providers and on YouTube that's home marquee's podcast wherever you listen to podcasts