Here we go!

Jeffrey Epstein Bragged Bill Barr was in Charge, Not Trump

The pedophile told Ehud Barak he had “direct knowledge” that Barr was in charge in DC, according to a new book that also claims Steve Bannon gave Epstein advice on his PR strategy.

Lachlan Cartwright
The Daily Beast, October 15, 2021

A controversial new book from the journalist Michael Wolff claims that the pedophile Jeffrey Epstein bragged that Bill Barr was the man in charge during Trump’s time in office and that the president “lets someone else be in charge, until other people realize that someone, other than him, is in charge. When that happens, you’re no longer in charge.”

The tome, Too Famous: The Rich, the Powerful, the Wishful, the Notorious and the Damned, also claims that Steve Bannon and former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak tried to help Epstein rehabilitate his image, even suggesting that he try to get favorable coverage on Rachel Maddow or 60 Minutes.

According to Wolff—who reportedly tried to buy New York Magazine with Epstein and disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein—Barak asked Epstein the million-dollar question of who was in charge at the White House. “‘What I want to know from you all-knowing people is: Who is in charge, who is,’ [Barak] said, putting on an American accent over his own often impenetrable Israeli one, ‘calling the shots?’ This was a resumption of the reliable conversation around Epstein: the ludicrousness and vagaries of Donald Trump—once among Epstein’s closest friends. ‘Here is the question every government is asking. Trump is obviously not in charge because he is—’”

Wolff claims that Epstein interrupted the former politico and called Trump—his former playboy party pal—a “moron,” then confided, “At the moment, Bill Barr is in charge.” The pedophile financier continued: “It’s Donald’s pattern...he lets someone else be in charge, until other people realize that someone, other than him, is in charge. When that happens, you’re no longer in charge.”

Barak allegedly pressed, “But let me ask you, why do you think this Barr took this job, knowing all this?”

“The motivation was simple: money,” Epstein replied. “Barr believes he’ll get a big payday out of this ... If he keeps Donald in office, manages to hold the Justice Department together, and help the Republican Party survive Donald, he thinks this is worth big money to him. I speak from direct knowledge. Extremely direct. Trust me.”

Continues...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/epstein-bragged-barr-was-in-charge-not-trump/

Rea$on$.

Last edited Sun Jun 7, 2026, 06:07 PM - Edit history (1)

It's been known from Day 1 that they did. The sweetheart deal happened while Bush was President, and the US Attorney who approved it was blatant partisan Republican Alex Acosta. Acosta's boss (US Attorney General) was Bush appointee Michael Mukasey. Of course Mukasey had to know that Acosta offerred Epstein the deal and approved it.

Which, for an administration of child sexual abusers, is also convenient.

Alexander Acosta — When serving as a US Attorney, former Secretary of Labor Acosta arranged a most lenient plea deal that served to protect child sexual predator Epstein from his accusers and justice.

https://www.vox.com/2019/7/10/20689416/jeffrey-epstein-alexander-acosta-labor-secretary-deal



The more complete story, courtesy of US Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Massachusetts):

Salon: After giving Epstein "deal of a lifetime," Alex Acosta tried to slash anti-trafficking program

July 10, 2019

Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, the former federal prosecutor who gave financier Jeffrey Epstein a light plea deal when he was first accused of sex-trafficking children, tried to cut a program that combats human trafficking by nearly 80 percent.

Acosta is facing numerous calls to resign after Epstein was charged with running a child sex trafficking ring in New York and Florida. Acosta previously served as U.S. attorney in Miami, where his office identified 36 underage victims and issued a 53-page indictment against Epstein in 2007. Rather than face life in prison, Epstein cut the “deal of a lifetime” with Acosta, as the Miami Herald reported, allowing Epstein to plead guilty to two state prostitution charges and serve just 13 months in county jail, where he was allowed to leave to work from his office six days per week. The deal also granted the well-connected billionaire who investigators believed hosted underage sex parties for affluent menimmunity for any unnamed “potential co-conspirators.” A federal judge later found the deal was illegalbecause Acosta did not consult the alleged victims of Epstein's crimes before agreeing to the deal.

Rep. Katherine Clark, D-Mass., says this was not the only time Acosta turned a blind eye to child trafficking.

Acosta’s Labor Department budget proposal for fiscal year 2020 proposed slashing the budget of the International Labor Affairs Bureau (ILAB) by nearly 80 percent. The agency is charged with combating human trafficking, child labor and forced labor in the United States and around the world.

“This is now a pattern,” Clark told the Guardian. “Like so many in this administration Mr. Acosta chooses the powerful and wealthy over the vulnerable and victims of sexual assault and it is time that he finds another line of work.”

Clark grilled Acosta about the proposed cuts during a hearing in April.

After Clark and Acosta both agreed that more needed to be done to combat trafficking, Clark pointed out that Acosta had also “proposed a budget cut, almost 80 percent, 79 percent to ILAB where this work is done, bringing its budget from $68 million to just $18.5 million.”

“I’m sure you’ve come prepared to justify this cut to us but it doesn’t go unnoticed that this isn’t the first time that you’ve ignored human trafficking,” Clark said. “Your office found that there had been a sexual abuse pyramid scheme that involved at least 36 underage girls. … Mr. Epstein raped and recruited these girls … and there is evidence that he allowed his friends to do the same.”

“Epstein should have been looking at a sentence of 366 years at a minimum. But that’s not what happened,” Clark continued. “How can we expect you, the labor secretary, to fight for American workers if you couldn't even fight for these girls?”

The proposed ILAB cuts were not the only Acosta decision to come under fire from human rights advocates. Earlier this year, the Labor Department rolled back Obama-era protections for some human trafficking victims and will now deny certain visas to victims of trafficking or other workplace crimes unless they first consult with another law enforcement agency like the FBI.

Erika Gonzalez, a lawyer for the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking, told the Daily Beast that the new rule will force victims to jump through “a lot more hoops,” often after they have endured devastating ordeals.

“What the Epstein case shows is when these policies around human trafficking are implemented, they’re not necessarily considerate of the impact on the victims themselves,” Gonzalez told the site. “With the Department of Labor asking the FBI to look into [workplace violations] first, they’re adding another barrier for victims of trafficking to access the services the Department of Labor has.”

While the visa rule change will be implemented by the Labor Department, Democrats are fighting back against the proposed ILAB cuts. In their own 2020 budget proposal, Democrats called for expanding ILAB funding from from $68 million to $122 million.

Acosta’s future at the department remains unclear after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called for him to step down following Epstein’s arrest.

President Trump, a longtime friend of Epstein, meanwhile tried to distance himself and Acosta from Epstein’s alleged crimes Tuesday. Trump claimed he was “not a fan” of Epstein, despite previously having praised him as a “terrific guy” with a penchant for women “on the younger side.” Trump said that Acosta had done a “fantastic job” and insisted, “I do hear that there were a lot of people involved in that [Epstein] decision.”

Asked about the Epstein case on Tuesday, Trump had nothing to say about the victims but lamented the criticism of the prosecutor who let Epstein get off with a slap on the wrist more than a decade earlier.

“I feel very badly actually for Secretary Acosta because I’ve known him as somebody who works so hard and has done such a good job. I feel very badly about that whole situation,” Trump said. “But we’re going to be looking at that and looking at it very closely.”

Source with links any incorruptible Assistant DA can follow:

https://katherineclark.house.gov/2019/7/salon-after-giving-epstein-deal-of-a-lifetime-alex-acosta-tried-to-slash-anti-trafficking-program

Alan Dershowitz, we must remember, to this day, blames the victims.

Shocking stuff. It's clear Epstein's had extensive connections at the highest levels of government running interference for him. What a cesspool of corruption.

It was the Federal government.

'Cesspool' indeed.

was President. More fuel for the fire.

Someone from the DoJ came to him and told him to drop the (local) case on Epstein because he had contacts with the CIA and Mossad. Supposedly the stuff Epstein was involved in were spy network stings and the local law enforcement had to leave him alone.

So Reiter turned his evidence over to someone in DoJ and it became Alex Acosta's problem. But all Acosta did was treat the entire thing with kid gloves, and he allowed Epstein to plead to a minor charge with no trial. They shut down the discovery and no victims or potential witnesses were told until after it was litigated and closed. Epstein got a slap on the wrist, and told "Naughty boy, don't do this again."

"I'm a member of a Secret Society, a society so secret, I can't even talk about it!" Any doubt?

Kudos to the dogged investigators who won’t let this go.

Peace I

Skull and Bones always seemed like some creepy cult group for rich people. Like the Illuminati or the Masons

The "Bush and Franklin sex scandal" refers to two separate controversies linked in alternative history and conspiracy theories: the Omaha-based Franklin child prostitution ring that began in 1988, and a 1989 Washington, D.C. callboy ring. Both controversies touched the fringes of the Reagan and Bush administrations.The Franklin ScandalThe Franklin child prostitution ring allegations surfaced in 1988 in Omaha, Nebraska, centering around the failed Franklin Federal Credit Union and its president, Lawrence E. King Jr.The Allegations: Witnesses claimed the ring involved powerful Midwestern political and business figures in child trafficking, satanic ritual abuse, and money laundering.National Expansion: Theories suggested the operation expanded to Washington, D.C., allegedly implicating elite figures and elements of the CIA.Official Findings: State and federal grand juries in 1990 and 1991 concluded that the allegations of a high-level pedophile ring were a fabricated hoax.The 1989 D.C. Callboy RingIn June 1989, a Washington, D.C. male escort ring tied to prominent Republican lobbyist Craig Spence made national headlines.The Scandal: Investigations revealed that Spence ran a prostitution ring that catered to Washington's political elite, including military officers, congressional aides, and minor officials in the Reagan and Bush administrations.White House Access: Reports indicated Spence's clients took unauthorized, "midnight tours" of the White House, which prompted Secret Service investigations.Blackmail Claims: It was widely alleged that Spence secretly recorded sexual encounters in his home to build compromising "control files" on politicians.Intersection with the Bush AdministrationAlternative researchers and critics later attempted to bridge the two events, suggesting that the Washington, D.C. callboy ring and the Franklin network were part of a vast, politically protected pedophile ring operating in the highest levels of the U.S. government, including George H.W. Bush's inner circle.However, official investigations, including those by the FBI, dismissed the high-level conspiracy theories. Mainstream media, such as ⁠The Washington Post, characterized the claims regarding widespread government complicity as an unverified "bombshell".

Above is a Google recap...below is my non-AI comment.

So Epstein-Bush connection? No Shocker.

And that the money was used to some weapons in the Iran Contra scheme.
I believe this is well known in DC. I often wonder when someone like Obama gets into government and learns these secrets, they have had to keep the secret because, of course threats of death, but also because it looks like it could bring down the whole country if people knew the government was this horrific and not the shining city on the hill.

In a Gore administration. Another reason Bush v. Gore was necessary (for the billionaire elites/Epstein class).

So we got:

9/11
Kissed the surplus goodbye
Environmental disaster
Epstein coverups

.....all because rightfully cast ballots were not counted 🤷‍♂️

If you're rotten enough like the Bushes to kill American democracy to steal and election in 2000 then you're rotten enough to protect wealthy and powerful pedophiles.

Thanks for the thread BumRushDaShow

https://thiswillhold.substack.com/p/merrick-garland-and-the-octopus

Though the information on how Reiter was treated is new.

Franklin Scandal and GHWBush

in the White House in 1989 Was Poppy a playmate of Epstein?