January 1, 2026 • 43 mins
Les Wexner’s central role in Jeffrey Epstein’s rise—from obscure money manager to untouchable power broker—has been persistently minimized, softened, or outright ignored in much of the public narrative. Epstein did not ascend in a vacuum. His access, wealth, legitimacy, and institutional protection were built first and foremost through Les Wexner, who handed Epstein unprecedented financial authority, legal insulation, and proximity to elite political and social networks. That relationship was not incidental or brief; it was foundational. Yet over time, Wexner has been recast as a naive victim of betrayal rather than the primary enabler who created the conditions that allowed Epstein to operate with power, money, and perceived credibility for decades.
This whitewashing persists despite overwhelming evidence that Epstein’s reign of terror depended on the empire Wexner placed in his hands—control over vast assets, private aircraft, multiple properties, and the veneer of respectability that comes from being tied to one of the most powerful businessmen in America. While Jeffrey Epstein is rightly condemned as the predator at the center, the systems and patrons that empowered him are routinely excused, compartmentalized, or quietly absolved. Wexner’s narrative has been carefully laundered through selective reporting and legal distance, but the reality remains unavoidable: without Wexner’s patronage, Epstein never becomes Epstein, and the continued reluctance to confront that truth represents one of the most enduring failures of accountability in the entire scandal.
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
This whitewashing persists despite overwhelming evidence that Epstein’s reign of terror depended on the empire Wexner placed in his hands—control over vast assets, private aircraft, multiple properties, and the veneer of respectability that comes from being tied to one of the most powerful businessmen in America. While Jeffrey Epstein is rightly condemned as the predator at the center, the systems and patrons that empowered him are routinely excused, compartmentalized, or quietly absolved. Wexner’s narrative has been carefully laundered through selective reporting and legal distance, but the reality remains unavoidable: without Wexner’s patronage, Epstein never becomes Epstein, and the continued reluctance to confront that truth represents one of the most enduring failures of accountability in the entire scandal.
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. As
I make my way through the news on a daily basis,
we come across some real boneheaded takes on a whole
lot of things. But the article that we're going to
discuss today is certainly in the running for the top
prize because the take by the author of this article,
a guy named Ray Marcano, is straight up trash. And
(00:23):
I'm being kind when I say that. So let's get
to this article by Ray Marcano over in the Columbus Dispatch,
and let's see what he had to say about Les Wexner.
His friend Jeffrey Epstein was a scumbag. Does it mean
Les Wexner owes us a pound of flesh? And again,
the author of this article is Ray Marcano, And to
answer his question right off the bat, no, just because
(00:46):
you were his friend, that doesn't mean you owe anybody
a pound of flesh. But let's not conflate the issues here, Okay,
let's not act like Les Wexner was just a friend
to Jeffrey Epstein. That's not what we've heard from the survivors.
And in this whole entire piece, you'll notice he doesn't
even mention the fact that Les Wexner has been credibly accused.
(01:07):
If you have been credibly accused by anybody, never mind
somebody who has made these accusations against a guy like Epstein,
then there should be an investigation at the very least
right a deposition, and if there's evidence backing it up
and corroborating it, it should be a no brainer. And
there most certainly was evidence and corroboration that Les Wexner
(01:29):
was up to no good with Jeffrey Epstein. But mister
Marcano here will he doesn't even mention the fact that
that took place. Instead, what we get is a very
watered down picture of the relationship between Wexner and Jeffrey Epstein,
and the more of a woe is Me approach from
the author talking about how it's Wexner who's being wronged,
(01:50):
or like Wexner's a victim here, Wexter's no victim here.
Wexner went into his relationship with Epstein with eyes wide open.
Him and Epstein were very very close. In fact, he
gave Epstein the keys to the financial kingdom. Not only that,
but Epstein was able to use his relationship with Wexner
to get a lot of these women on board with
his abuse. So what we're getting from this author in
(02:14):
this article is not even a scratch of the surface.
All this comes off as is whining by somebody who
really doesn't know the full story. Oh why are you
going after Les Wexner. Well maybe just maybe because he's
been credibly accused of sexually assaulting a human trafficking victim
that was provided to him by Jeffrey Epstein. And if
(02:35):
that's not the case, why hasn't less Wexner suit anybody yet?
As we know it, Les Wexner, the New Albany billionaire,
had a very close relationship with the sex trafficking sleeves
Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein was Wexner's close business partner for decades
starting in the nineteen eighties, and participated in a number
of multimillion dollar deals with the owner of the L
(02:58):
Brands company. But when eppste sexual misconduct and brutality of
girls and women came to light, Wexner cut ties with them.
Oh well, yeah, that's exactly what happened. Wexner cut ties
with Epstein because you know, Epstein was some pervert. And remember,
Les Wexner had no idea what was going on. Never
mind the fact that Maria Farmer tells a different story,
(03:19):
never mind the fact that the facts really don't line
up with what Les Wexner has pitched us for all
these years. Let's just run with this narrative and say,
you know what, it was all Epstein and Wexner's just
another victim that happened to fall into Epstein's path. I
don't buy that shit. Sorry, you're gonna have to pitch
that to somebody else. And that kind of narrative is
(03:41):
always going to be challenged on this podcast. I mean,
you can believe that less Wexner is innocent, you can
believe that Les Wexner had nothing to do with any
of this, but you can't sit here and act like
there haven't been credible allegations. And the only thing that
people are upset about is that he was friends with
Epstein at one point, because that's certainly not the case.
There's a lot more to it than just that, and
(04:03):
we all know it. And what Marcano's doing is nothing
more than building a narrative that tries to paint less
Wexner as somebody who's a victim. Now, as release Core
documents highlight that relationship. Some want Wexer's name removed from
buildings at Ohio State University. Well, that's not a bad ask,
right And furthermore, with all the problems at Ohio State
(04:25):
with the wrestling team in the past, you really think
this is another scandal that the university needs, but they
don't care. Just like Harvard didn't care about Epstein OSU,
the Ohio State University doesn't care about Less Wexner. And
that's because he's funneling a bunch of dough to them.
So if he's going to be their benefactor and he's
(04:47):
going to funnel a bunch of dough to them, you
really think that they're going to come out and take
his name off these buildings, because you know, it's not
like they can't find another rich asshole with a bunch
of money to burn that wants to don't so he
could have his dumbass name emblazoned on a building in
a self ngrandizing manner. There's plenty of people out there
that want to, you know, tickle their own pickle, if
(05:09):
you will, So let's not act like Wesner is the
only person that's willing to donate money, but they don't
care these universities. They'll act like they care, they'll act
like they're you know, with it, but at the end
of the day, it's just another business. Some might be
a little generous. There's a change dot org petition that
has a little more than five hundred signatures, and OSU's
(05:31):
undergraduate student government passed a resolution during the twenty twenty
two twenty twenty three school year to remove his name. Well,
that would be nice, It's a good start. How many
of these people are gonna get away with their bullshit?
And look, I'm not gonna sit here and tell you
that I know exactly what went down, but what I
will say is what I say every single time. How
(05:51):
about a robust investigation all these people that have been
named and credibly accused, Bring them in, get them under oath,
let's hear their side of the story. If people are
so interested in the truth, and people are so interested
in finding out what really went on, wouldn't that mean
you want people to be put under oath to give
depositions so that we can really get to the bottom
(06:14):
of all of this. Because if not, what you're saying
is well, I believe Les Wexner, and anything else is
just BS. Now, that might be okay for you, and
that might be okay for mister Marconi over here, but me,
I don't buy that for a second. And unfortunately I'm
a trust and verify kind of guy. Oh I trust you,
but I need to verify your work. That's quite enough
(06:36):
of an uproar. There's no way OSU should or would
remove his name from its buildings. Let's start with the wood.
What's the chance OSU will remove less Wexner's names from
the Wexner Center for the Arts and the Wexner Medical Center.
Zero chance, not gonna happen. And that's because, like any
other group of scumbags and high academia, they don't care.
(06:59):
Academ has been gobbling up Epstein's bullshit for the whole
entire time. So what we're supposed to think that Ohio
State University is going to be different? Sorry, they're all
the same. OSU removing Wexner from say it's medical center
is as likely as Mitch McConnell and Mike Johnson holding
a joint news conference announcing there all of a sudden
(07:19):
backing NICKI Haley as the Republican presidential nominee. You don't
bite the hand that feeds you, and he just says
it right here, He just admits what he said. It's
all about money, right, It's all about a bag. And
if I was a trustee at Ohio State University, I'd
be fired up. I'd be demanding that this name gets removed.
(07:39):
And don't tell me for a second that Ohio State
University can't come up with another donor. They most certainly can.
We're talking about a very very famous university here, and
a place where a lot of rich and powerful people
have called home. So if you think they can't find
a donor or a multiple donors to fill the gap here,
you're wrong. They don't want to do it. They'd rather
(08:02):
just stick their head in the sand and say to themselves, well,
this never happened. These aren't credible allegations. But unfortunately for
Ohio State University and organizations like it, mister Marconi might
let them get off the hook, but we're not going to.
We're gonna keep talking about this because it's a point
that people are obviously still missing, that no real robust
(08:24):
investigation has ever occurred, and anybody asserting anything different is lying.
The should debate is one based on emotion, since he
has ties with a horrible, terrible, disgusting excuse of flesh,
Wexner should be punished for the sin of poorly picking
his friends. Now, imagine conflating the issue and rolling it
(08:44):
up into just this, and that's your delivery to the
readers of the Columbus Dispatch. Don't you owe them more?
And then they wonder why all these people in the
media are losing their jobs because they don't do their
job correctly. If they did, you wouldn't be listening to
this podcast. You'd be listening to mister more. But unfortunately
for him, he misses the point, like so many other
(09:04):
people when they're talking about this case, it's not just
about one single issue. It's about the whole totality of
what went on, and the fact that you're not even
willing to take a look at what's been said about
Les Wexner tells me everything I need to know about
you as a journalist. A real journalist would want to
get to the bottom of it. A real journalist follows
the story no matter where it leads, and a real
(09:27):
journalist doesn't have faves. Let's punish Wexner for bad judgment.
No concrete evidence has come forward that Wexner in any
way new supported or approved of Epstein's heinous ax. No,
not at all. It's not like there's been allegations against him.
It's not like Virginia has said she was trafficked to him.
I mean, for real, is this guy for real? Did
(09:49):
he set out today to end up on this podcast
getting absolutely eviscerated, Because if that was his goal, well, bravo,
Dick Nozzle, You've reached the promised land, because this take
right here is nothing more than hot trash. Rather, the
evidence suggests that in two thousand and seven, after Wexner
began to get wind that something was amiss, he told
(10:10):
Epstein to take a hike. Oh, is that it? He
told Epstein to take a hike. Hu. It had nothing
to do with that half baked money plot they had
going the fact that Wexner said that Epstein stole millions
from him. Yeah, right, that was all built in so
that if Epstein ever got nailed, Wexner had us out.
I can't believe people are still buying the bullshit that
(10:31):
these knuckleheads are selling them. But here we are, all
these years later, and the former head of the journalists
Union still doesn't get it. Now Here we are seventeen
years later and people want to extract a pound of flesh.
Why the proverb what's good for the goose is good
for the gander. That dates back to sixteen seventy and
means that what's good for one is good for all.
(10:53):
Talk about a bunch of word salad. What does that
even mean? What's good for the goose is good for
the gander? Buddy, you're leaving out a whole bit part
of the story, you know, the part where you're a
pal here less Wexner is credibly accused. Or how about
the fact that Maria Farmer says that she was on
his property as Epstein's guest when she was assaulted, and
Wexner and a security team kept her there. We're going
(11:16):
to talk about that, or we're just gonna ignore that too.
That's the proverb we should remind ourselves here. Unless you're
the saint of all saints, we've all had relationships we've
come to regret. We've associated with people we later found
to be untrustworthy, criminal, or perverted. Sometimes out of misguided loyalty,
we stick with them. Sorry, never happened for me, not
(11:37):
for perverted people other crimes, I can forgive. If somebody's
selling drugs, I can forgive them. If somebody has a
DUI forgiven. If somebody's truly looking to be remorseful, I
can forgive them. But when it comes to hurting women,
children and doing this bullshit, sorry, there's no forgiving that.
And if you're somebody who's playing a part in it,
if you're somebody who's assisting in mass wholesale trafficking operations, yeah,
(12:02):
I'm gonna have something to say about it. And according
to everything that we've heard, according to all of the
evidence that we've seen, Less Wexner most certainly should be
under oath and talking about what went down. Since we're
not billionaires in the public eye, we keep those associations
to ourselves because if people knew, they'd question our judgment,
think less of us, and might even cut ties. And
(12:25):
again he's inferring that this is guilt by association, which
it's not. This man with business partners with Epstein. Not
only that, but again, credibly accused. I think that's the
most important part here that needs to be brought up.
He's been credibly accused of taking part in the abuse.
So what about your answer to that, and if not
an answer, what about at least mentioning it to your readers.
(12:48):
Probably a good idea, right, Wexner doesn't have that luxury. Ah,
poor Wexner. He's an expert at living under a microscope
who in that position isn't and has a keen awareness
of how one slip can destroy decades of goodwill. So
when he found out that his friend and collaborator was
a world class deviant, he kicked him to the curb.
(13:09):
What else do you want? Well, I want him to
be aware. I want him to know what the fuck's
going on. I want him not to be in bed
with guys like Epstein. I want him not to be
credibly accused by Virginia Roberts. Is that a good place
to start, mister Marconi? And it pains me that this
dude's a Paisano? Are you fill with this bullshit? What
if it was your daughter, sir? How would that go
over on Sunday dinner? I know how it would go
(13:31):
over in my family, And it wouldn't be making excuses
for less Wexner. It would be more like, ay, Vinnie,
go get the bat. So this dude's over here talking
all kinds of reckless acting like Les Wexner is not
even being credibly accused. Meanwhile, we all know there's something
much darker, much more devious going on. Taking Wexter's name
off a building might make a few people feel better,
(13:53):
but what does that really do. It doesn't change what
happened to Epstein's victims, but it would obscure what we
as of now. No, Wexner took a stand against evil
that's worth the name on a building. That's how he
decides to finish the article. So, folks, I want you
all to know that we haven't really known the whole
story here, and Les Wexner is actually the hero. Les
(14:15):
Wexner is the hero of this story. And not only
should his name beyond the building in Ohio State, I
think that we should change the name of the White
House to the Wexner House. Why not? Everybody should have
a picture of Saint Wexner in their pocket. I mean,
is this fucking guy for real? Somebody must have slipped
some toad venom in his cheerios because this article is
one of the worst I have ever dug into. All Right, folks,
(14:39):
that's gonna do it for this one. All of The
information that goes with this episode can be found in
the description box big Is Guilay. Maxwell was very evasive
in her deposition. That was to be expected. Did anyone
really think that she was going to get up there
and incriminate herself in her they're hubris in her arrogance.
(15:03):
She never thought that she was ever going to have
to answer for lying in that deposition. She never took
it serious. Look at the way she referred to Virginia
throughout that deposition. Look at the way she got angry
and smashed her hand down on the table, Look at
the way she went about answering these questions. So she
(15:27):
was never going to be upfront. She was never going
to tell the truth here. But it's a huge piece
to the puzzle, right her own words, denying all of
the things that we have tons of circumstantial evidence for.
(15:49):
And if we have circumstantial evidence for it, how much
evidence do you think the federal government has compiled? And
the people who were now and in this deposition are
people that are names that have been thrown around in
this case for quite some time. Like I said, I
was not expecting any bombshells. But with the deposition out,
(16:15):
things like this article we're going to read tonight begin
to occur, and I think it's important that these kind
of outlets like Business Insider talk about Les Wexner and
the relationship he had with Jeffrey Epstein and Gilay Maxwell.
It's something that has not talked about nearly enough. Now,
(16:37):
I'm not one of these people that's gonna run around.
I don't think that Wexner was in charge of the
whole thing or anything like that, but he was certainly
part of it. He was most certainly an enabler, and
he most certainly was financing the operation. And he had
a lot of friends who were in intelligence as well.
(16:58):
So when I look at Les Wester in the grand scheme,
the big picture of this thing, he is definitely one
of the key financiers of Jeffrey Epstein. That is, without
a doubt. He was one of the main people to
get Jeffrey Epstein up and going, one of the main
people to fund this decade long crime spree. He was
(17:25):
very much, very much involved with Jeffrey Epstein personally, and
he is somebody who has intricate knowledge of what was
going on. And that's just going on the circumstantial evidence
that we have. I haven't even brought up the fact
(17:46):
that he is also being credibly accused of partaking in
the abuse himself. So Les Wexner is a figure that
definitely needs to be aired out, definitely needs to answer
so really hard questions. And he is somebody who most
certainly was in the upper atmosphere of Jeffrey Epstein's circle,
(18:11):
very powerful man, very well connected here and abroad, and
somebody who just thought that out of the blue, Jeffrey
Epstein would be a good investment, that Jeffrey Epstein, this
college dropout, would be the kind of guy that you
want to give complete power of attorney to. Well, that's
(18:35):
what Les Wexner did. And just like with Leon Black,
I am hard pressed to believe that of all the
people that Les Wexner could 'trust his money, to his companies,
to his life to, basically he would choose Jeffrey Epstein.
(18:57):
It's not because they were such good friends. It was
about the business. It was about moving things forward, and
all of these people that were in Jeffrey Epstein's close atmosphere,
in my opinion, all had their part to play. Be
it bagman, be it gopher and paper pusher like Indike
(19:22):
or be it one of the core four and their
roles within the criminal enterprise. Everybody had a role to
play that was around Epstein and Maxwell, and Wexner played
his role to a t. So let's jump into this
article by The Business Insider and talk a little bit
(19:44):
more about Les Wexner. Headline Unsealed Elaine Maxwell. Deposition appears
to show attorneys questioning Jeffrey Epstein's mysterious relationship with Victoria's
Secret founder Les Wexner. And I don't think think there's
anything too mysterious about it at this point, right. I mean,
we don't have all of the details, but I think
(20:08):
enough of the story has been written here in front
of our faces for us to understand that these dudes
were deeply connected. These dudes were very close the townhouse,
the keys to the kingdom, the ability to use Victoria's
(20:29):
Secret as a carrot to get girls into positions where
they're vulnerable so he could take advantage of them. All
of this was done because Less Wexner allowed it. All
of this was done because less Wexner enabled Jeffrey Epstein's behavior.
(20:50):
This article was authored by Kate Taylor. Attorneys appeared to
probe Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Victoria's secret founder Les Wexner
in a deposition of Gilan Maxwell, which was unsealed on Thursday.
So I'm sure most of you have read the unsealed
(21:12):
documents by now. I put two and two together and
understand obviously who they're talking about when they're mentioning less
Wexner in that deposition. It's pretty obvious, and the relationship
between Wexner and Jeffrey Epstein is one of the most
(21:34):
least explored aspects of this case. In my opinion, the
legacy media has not done nothing, nothing in regards to
uncovering the truth of this relationship. The deposition of Maxwell,
Epstein's confidant, co conspirator, fellow child abuser, general, all around
(21:55):
scusbag and bipedal serpent, is linked to a since settled
civil case that was brought against her by Virginia Roberts.
Roberts accused Maxwell of aiding Epstein and trafficking her for
sex with rich and powerful men, including Epstein himself, And
those accusations sure look like they're pretty strong, huh. If
(22:18):
you needed any more prodding to think that Virginia was
telling the truth. Well, all you have to do is
read the deposition and then decide for yourself why prosecutors
would bring those charges if Virginia was lying in that deposition.
It just that doesn't make sense. The prosecutors don't do
(22:39):
that kind of thing. They have to really believe they're
going to get a conviction if they're going to go
after people like this, and they obviously believe that they
have a very strong case. And two of the whole
charges that we have her under right now, will two
of those are because of a directors of her being
(23:01):
dishonest in this deposition, or the prosecution believing that Virginia's
story was authentic and Gilain Maxwell's story was Fugesi. Wexter's
relationship with Epstein has been under the microscope since Epstein's
arrest in July twenty nineteen. Well under the microscope by
(23:24):
independent content creators and people who are interested in the case,
investigative journalists, but not by the legacy media. Have they
done a full court blitz? Have they done a full
court press? I mean, of course not. We haven't seen
somebody chase down Wexner and demand answers. In fact, we
saw few puff pieces written about him, So I don't know.
(23:49):
Under the microscope, I think that's going a little bit
too far, considering we haven't seen a real expose on
the guy yet. The deposition appears to indicate that lawyers
were probe the relationship between Wexner and Epstein in twenty
and sixteen. Yeah, of course, definitely everybody knew what sort
(24:09):
of role Wexner played. At the very least, everybody understood
that he was enabling Jeffrey Epstein's behavior and enabling these
crimes because he was financing him, was basically bankrolling this
whole thing, him and Robert Maxwell. And that's certainly what
my opinion of it is that it was Robert Maxwell
(24:30):
and Les Wexner were the main bankrollers of Jeffrey Epstein.
And if a real investigation was underway, and if they
really wanted to get to the bottom of all of
this and really shatter this at the nexus, they'd be
going after people like this. They'd be looking into Wexner
(24:52):
with a team of forensic accountants. And again they might
be I don't know, none of us do, right, Anyone
who says they do who this isn't directly involved in
the case. On the prosecution side really is probably lying
to you unless they have a good source, which is possible.
But for the most part, nobody knows who those sealed
indictments are. Nobody knows who's gonna be next. But if
(25:16):
everything was fair and they really wanted to prove that
it's about justice and not about letting the rich get
off again, well people like Wexner and Black and Dubin
and the rest of the scoundrels, well they would be
caught up in the financial portion of this. At the
very least. All names in the deposition have been redacted
(25:39):
except Maxwell's and Epstein's. However, a number of clues indicate
that a certain person referenced ten times in the four
hundred and eighteen page document is likely Wexner, and we
discuss that in the slight article, and it's definitely Wexner,
not most likely, it's Wexner, Okay, that's who their redacted
name is no doubt about it. And when you look
(26:00):
at it in context, you understand that we didn't even
neither doubt to have it unredacted for us to understand
when we look at it in context, and why is that, Well,
because we've been following this story for so long. We
know the ins and outs. We know that he gave
who gave Jeffrey Epstein the townhouse, we know who ran
Victoria's secret, etc. Etc. It's not a mystery at this point,
(26:23):
is it. Do you know why redacted Les Wexner sold
the New York house or gave the New York house
to Jeffrey if you know? An attorney asked Maxwell at
one point in the deposition, and again, why would you
just give away that sort of house. We've all seen
that house now, we're all familiar with the dollar signs
(26:44):
attached to it. So you just give that house away?
Or was that house part of the operation? Was that
house part of the whole entire enterprise? And that was
just another way that Wexner could contribute, you know, Like
I said, everybody had their part to play. Jeffrey Epstein
had his part right, he was the guy who was
(27:07):
the front of the operation. Then you had Gillan Maxwell
behind the scenes manipulating shit, making sure that they were
able to access all of these social circles. Then you
had the core four. Well, their job was grooming, their
job was procuring. Their job was setting these girls up
to come and go from the mansion and elsewhere. Right, Well,
(27:33):
you don't think Wexner had a job. Of course he did.
His job was to provide this massive amount of fundage
and a place, a base of operations for all of
this to take place. Wester purchased a mansion in New
York City for thirteen point two million dollars in nineteen
eighty nine. He later sold or gifted the house to Epstein.
(27:56):
It was rumored that Wexner gave Epstein the house for
a single dollar, but The New York Times reported in
twenty nineteen that Epstein had paid twenty million dollars for
the home, citing a person with knowledge of Wester's finances. Yeah, okay, sure,
nobody believes that this was an operational move. This was
(28:16):
all part of the ongoing criminal enterprise that they had underway.
In my opinion, anyway, that's where the evidence has led me. Again,
like usual, I am most certainly willing to follow the
evidence wherever it leads. But as of now, there's no
way in my mind, and there is no way that
(28:41):
anything that I've seen so far can lead me anywhere.
But the fact that Wexner was just playing his part here, Folks,
just playing his part of Daddy Warbucks. Here's a couple
of bucks, here's a house, here's this get shit going. Remember,
we have people that are counting on us, and all
(29:02):
of these people that were involved with Epstein and again
in his orbit, his very close orbit, they're all suspect,
especially when you look at the whole story in context,
especially when you follow the evidence regarding Wexner and Epstein,
(29:23):
There's no other logical way to go about it other
than these two were very, very deeply connected. While the
name of the person who sold or gave the New
York home to Epstein as redacted, the deposition's glossary provides
further evidence that the lawyer was likely referring to Wexner.
(29:46):
The alphabetically ordered glossary places the redacted term between weave
and whats. So again, it's definitely Wester. It's not even
a question because when you know the story, well, you
don't need the decoder ring. You understand that when they're
talking about the mansion being passed, that that's Wexner. You
understand when they talk about New Albany, well, that's Wexner.
(30:07):
You understand when they talk about the princes or you know, etcetera, etcetera.
At this point, we all understand the players on the stage,
and we all understand the other. References to this person
as listed in the glossary reinforced that attorneys in Maxwell
were likely referring to Wexner. For example, an attorney asked
(30:28):
Maxwell about the business relationship between Epstein and the person Wexner.
I believe in the nineties when I was there, they
had a business relationship, Maxwell said, adding that the only
relationship between the two that she was aware of was
the business relationship. Yeah, you mean the money laundering operation
you guys were running. Yeah, that's probably considered a business
(30:50):
relationship in your world. So Maxwell has no idea. I mean,
come on, guys, she had no idea who Wexner even was.
Really just, you know, just two strangers passing in the night.
Nothing to see here, We don't know each other. Meanwhile,
we know Maxwell's dad and Wexner knew each other. We
(31:12):
know they had all the same contacts, we know that
they ran in the same circles. So please, for Gilaine
Maxwell to act like she doesn't know about the relationship
between Wexner and Epstein is laughable at best. A representative
for Wexner declined to comment bed beyond what the former
(31:35):
executive and his attorneys said in publicly available documents. Of
course they did. They're never going to respond. They never do.
It's the mum's the word crew, right. Let's you know,
we'll start with a marathon trying to distance ourselves from this,
and then when the fallout really starts to come, it's
time to go into sprint mode and we'll go and
(31:56):
hide at Balmoral, or we'll go and hide at our
huge match in somewhere. Meanwhile, they're not understanding that this
isn't going away. They're not understanding that they're gonna they're
not going to be able to sleep the sweep this
under the rug this time. Wexner, who founded Victoria's secret
parent company l Brands in nineteen sixty three, had a
(32:19):
close personal and professional relationship with Epstein beginning in the eighties.
For years, Wexner was Epstein's only known client. Yeah, that's
not weird, that's not like well, you know, uh, the
Corleones and Tom Hagen type shit. Nah, not at all,
just par for the course. One client, that's it. If
Jeffrey Epstein was so great at his job, he was
(32:42):
such a financial wizard. Why did he only have one client?
Why did he only have maybe a couple of clients
Leon Black two? And why is it always these people
that are in the financial world or these magnates that
are around Jeffrey Epstein, people that can you know, do
something for him. Wexter may soon be forced to share
(33:05):
more about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Attorneys also tied
the person to allegations that Maxwell groomed groomed Roberts and
other teenagers for sex work. Did you ever provide Virginia
Roberts with an outfit an outfit of a sexual nature
to where for redacted? An attorney for Roberts asked, referring
(33:25):
to the same person, So we're talking about Wexner again.
Maxwell responded categorically no, denying various other questions about providing
sexually charged outfits for girls who visited Epstein. Wexner has
denied ever meeting Roberts. Yeah, of course he has. So
did Prince Andrew. So did Prince Andrew. You know, I
(33:48):
only wish this was like like back in the day.
I wish it was like now with all the cell
phones and everybody taking pictures, because there would have been
no way. People wouldn't have been snapping sneak shots of
these scoundrels. I mean, we even got a few pictures
with the old school kind of cameras like Virginia used
for her picture. But imagine if we had cell phone
(34:08):
cameras back then. Boy, forget it, these people would have
been in big trouble. Allegations that Wexner and Roberts have
met have become an issue in another recent lawsuit between
the lawyer Alan Dershowitz and Roberts. As part of the suit,
mister I kept my underpants on. Dershowitz is attempting to
force Wexner and his lawyer to testify to'll bolster his
(34:31):
case against Roberts, whom he is suing for defamation. And
we've talked about that a lot. You know, it was dirty.
Dirsh made a very bold attempt to try and get
his hands on some documents in Presca's courtroom, and thankfully
Judge Presca gave him a nice elbow, a nice forearm
shiver to the face and told him to kick rocks.
(34:56):
He wanted to really get into those documents. He tried
to get Wexner involved, and I said at the time,
and I still believe him pulling Wexner into it was
a way to get the spotlight off of him and
focused on another so called member of polite society. Mister,
I kept my underpants on. Dershowitz alleges Roberts attempted to
(35:18):
shake down Wexner by claiming the retail executive had sex
with her when she was underage and that she had
knowledge of his sexual hang ups, another allegation Wexner denies,
so Dershowitz says that boys and Virginia Roberts, they were
all trying to extort Wexner, and Wexner says that's absolutely incorrect.
(35:41):
Once again, you're lying, mister Dershowitz. That's what Wexner's saying, basically, right,
And it sure looks that way to me. It certainly
looks to me that Alan Dershowitz will do anything to
get the spotlight off of him in this case and
put it somewhere else dirty. Dershowitz said in a mid
(36:04):
August filing that Roberts attorneys described in detail the alleged
sexual encounters between Roberts and Wexner, including an alleged demand
by Wexner that Roberts were a victorious secret type lingerie
during their encounters. Such an accusation, if made publicly, could
have massively damaged Wexner and his company. Dershowitz said alleging
(36:25):
that Roberts attempted to extort Wexner, based on his recollection
of a twenty fifteen conversation between himself and Wexner's attorney,
John Zeiger. And Zeiger came out and said that never happened.
We know that, and we know that Wexner has denied
it as well. So it's like pick your poison here, right,
(36:47):
who do you believe, mister I kept my underpants on
or less the dirty rat Wexner. Robert's attorney, David Boyce,
has said no such shakedown or settlement of any kind
was ever made or discussed with Wexner. Wexner has denied
ever meeting Roberts and said no such extortion attempt ever occurred.
(37:08):
In July, Ziger said in a filing, no extortion, no
extortion demand was ever made, no settlement was ever entered into,
and not a penny or other consideration was ever paid.
And that pretty much right there, shot Dershowitz, story to shit,
and you try and bring that kind of nonsense in
(37:28):
Presca's courtroom, and she's not having it. Obviously, despite denials
of the alleged shakedown on all sides, Dirty Dershowitz has
requested Wexner turnover documents that he said would bolster his
case against against Roberts. In August, US District Judge Loretta
Presca said the court sees no reason for that correspondence
(37:50):
to remain under seal. Ziger has agreed to testify in
the case, but attorneys for Wexner have said that the
former CEO does not possess disks information. So, in Layman's terms,
get fed. You were not talking to Wexner. No chance
he could talk to the lawyer. But Wexner is not
(38:11):
going to be deposed unless it's court ordered. Wexner said
he cut ties with Epstein more than a decade ago.
Wesner let l brands for nearly six decades before stepping
down in February, and it wasn't a coincidence he stepped
down because of his relationship with Epstein. He stepped down because, well,
(38:32):
the public was no longer willing to sit by and
let this slimy, smarmy bastard run these companies. So the
public outcry was so great that Wexner had no other
choice but to step down. Roberts described Wexner as Epstein's
best friend and mentor in her unpublished memoir, which was
(38:54):
unsealed this summer. Look, they were very close, right, There's
no doubt about that. I don't know one way or
the other about a friendship. Virginia would know better than me, obviously,
But from what I can see, it was just another
business relationship with Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein was using him as
just another tool to further his criminal enterprise. And that
(39:19):
was Wexner's role in this whole entire thing, right, Like
we discussed, he was the bagman. The New York Times
reported last year that Epstein attempted to involve himself in
recruiting lingerie models for Victorious Secret. One. Model Alicia Arden
filed the police report in nineteen ninety seven, saying that
she was attacked by Epstein, whom she met with after
(39:41):
he identified himself as a talent agent for the brand.
Epstein had significant control over Wexner's finances, philanthropy, and private life,
the Times reported, citing people who knew Epstein and Wexner
and court documents and financial records. Yeah, it's not even disputed.
Family doesn't dispute it either. The King of Columbus definitely
(40:04):
does not dispute it. They were great friends. Epstein was
in charge of all of his finances and the falling
out stuff. Yeah, pretty sure. That's a cover story in
my opinion. A representative for Wexner said last year the
executive had cut ties with Epstein more than a decade earlier.
Wexner condemned Epstein in a letter to his foundation in
(40:27):
August twenty nineteen, saying that his former financial advisor misappropriated
vast sums of money from him and his family. You
see the pattern here. All of these guys have to
send them first. It starts with sending the emails to
their investors, right first. It starts with sending emails to
the board members, and then comes well, I'm stepping down
(40:48):
because I have to spend more time with my family. No,
we know the deal. We know why you have to
leave Wexner. We know the fact of the matter is
you were under pressure to do so. You would have
never left that company of your own accord. Please, your
hand was forced I am embarrassed that, like so many others,
(41:11):
I was deceived by mister Epstein. Wexner wrote in the letter.
I know now that my trust in him was grossly misplaced,
and I deeply regret having ever crossed his path. A
representative for L Brands did not respond to Business Insider's
request for comment on the newly unsealed documents. Yeah, they
definitely don't want They have their hands full as it
(41:32):
is right. The retail industry is on its way out
as we know it, brick and mortar anyway, and L
Brand's and Victoria's secret especially is at the forefront of
getting shattered in that realm. So, yeah, they got bigger problems.
And Wexner himself, he's not going to answer shit. He
doesn't feel like he has to. He'll send his lawyers out,
(41:54):
he'll maybe, you know, his lawyer might give a canned
statement if if the pressure gets turned up too. But
Wexner is never going to go under oath about his
relationship with Jeffrey Epstein willingly. So they have a lot
of financial history together. Right with Jeffrey Epstein's criminality, it
(42:17):
would be easy, I would think, to tie them together
financially and then once that's the case, slap Wexner with
a criminal indictment. If he was involved in moving ill
gotten gains, if he was involved in receiving ill gotten gains,
(42:39):
if Jeffrey Epstein was in charge of his money and
Jeffrey Epstein was using his money for his crimes and
to cover up and to pay off these girls and
witnesses and whatever has have you, well that makes Wexner
certainly part of the conspiracy from a financial perspective, and
(42:59):
under let's hear from the back folks RICO laws, well
he'd be facing severe criminal penalties. Again, the question remains,
will the authorities and the prosecutors have the backbone to
do it. If you'd like to contact me, you can
(43:21):
do that at Bobby Kopuchi at ProtonMail dot com. That's
b O B B y c A p U C
c I at ProtonMail dot com. You can also find
me on Twitter at BO B B y underscore c
A p U C c I. All of the links
that go at this episode can be found in the
description by
Up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. As
I make my way through the news on a daily basis,
we come across some real boneheaded takes on a whole
lot of things. But the article that we're going to
discuss today is certainly in the running for the top
prize because the take by the author of this article,
a guy named Ray Marcano, is straight up trash. And
(00:23):
I'm being kind when I say that. So let's get
to this article by Ray Marcano over in the Columbus Dispatch,
and let's see what he had to say about Les Wexner.
His friend Jeffrey Epstein was a scumbag. Does it mean
Les Wexner owes us a pound of flesh? And again,
the author of this article is Ray Marcano, And to
answer his question right off the bat, no, just because
(00:46):
you were his friend, that doesn't mean you owe anybody
a pound of flesh. But let's not conflate the issues here, Okay,
let's not act like Les Wexner was just a friend
to Jeffrey Epstein. That's not what we've heard from the survivors.
And in this whole entire piece, you'll notice he doesn't
even mention the fact that Les Wexner has been credibly accused.
(01:07):
If you have been credibly accused by anybody, never mind
somebody who has made these accusations against a guy like Epstein,
then there should be an investigation at the very least
right a deposition, and if there's evidence backing it up
and corroborating it, it should be a no brainer. And
there most certainly was evidence and corroboration that Les Wexner
(01:29):
was up to no good with Jeffrey Epstein. But mister
Marcano here will he doesn't even mention the fact that
that took place. Instead, what we get is a very
watered down picture of the relationship between Wexner and Jeffrey Epstein,
and the more of a woe is Me approach from
the author talking about how it's Wexner who's being wronged,
(01:50):
or like Wexner's a victim here, Wexter's no victim here.
Wexner went into his relationship with Epstein with eyes wide open.
Him and Epstein were very very close. In fact, he
gave Epstein the keys to the financial kingdom. Not only that,
but Epstein was able to use his relationship with Wexner
to get a lot of these women on board with
his abuse. So what we're getting from this author in
(02:14):
this article is not even a scratch of the surface.
All this comes off as is whining by somebody who
really doesn't know the full story. Oh why are you
going after Les Wexner. Well maybe just maybe because he's
been credibly accused of sexually assaulting a human trafficking victim
that was provided to him by Jeffrey Epstein. And if
(02:35):
that's not the case, why hasn't less Wexner suit anybody yet?
As we know it, Les Wexner, the New Albany billionaire,
had a very close relationship with the sex trafficking sleeves
Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein was Wexner's close business partner for decades
starting in the nineteen eighties, and participated in a number
of multimillion dollar deals with the owner of the L
(02:58):
Brands company. But when eppste sexual misconduct and brutality of
girls and women came to light, Wexner cut ties with them.
Oh well, yeah, that's exactly what happened. Wexner cut ties
with Epstein because you know, Epstein was some pervert. And remember,
Les Wexner had no idea what was going on. Never
mind the fact that Maria Farmer tells a different story,
(03:19):
never mind the fact that the facts really don't line
up with what Les Wexner has pitched us for all
these years. Let's just run with this narrative and say,
you know what, it was all Epstein and Wexner's just
another victim that happened to fall into Epstein's path. I
don't buy that shit. Sorry, you're gonna have to pitch
that to somebody else. And that kind of narrative is
(03:41):
always going to be challenged on this podcast. I mean,
you can believe that less Wexner is innocent, you can
believe that Les Wexner had nothing to do with any
of this, but you can't sit here and act like
there haven't been credible allegations. And the only thing that
people are upset about is that he was friends with
Epstein at one point, because that's certainly not the case.
There's a lot more to it than just that, and
(04:03):
we all know it. And what Marcano's doing is nothing
more than building a narrative that tries to paint less
Wexner as somebody who's a victim. Now, as release Core
documents highlight that relationship. Some want Wexer's name removed from
buildings at Ohio State University. Well, that's not a bad ask,
right And furthermore, with all the problems at Ohio State
(04:25):
with the wrestling team in the past, you really think
this is another scandal that the university needs, but they
don't care. Just like Harvard didn't care about Epstein OSU,
the Ohio State University doesn't care about Less Wexner. And
that's because he's funneling a bunch of dough to them.
So if he's going to be their benefactor and he's
(04:47):
going to funnel a bunch of dough to them, you
really think that they're going to come out and take
his name off these buildings, because you know, it's not
like they can't find another rich asshole with a bunch
of money to burn that wants to don't so he
could have his dumbass name emblazoned on a building in
a self ngrandizing manner. There's plenty of people out there
that want to, you know, tickle their own pickle, if
(05:09):
you will, So let's not act like Wesner is the
only person that's willing to donate money, but they don't
care these universities. They'll act like they care, they'll act
like they're you know, with it, but at the end
of the day, it's just another business. Some might be
a little generous. There's a change dot org petition that
has a little more than five hundred signatures, and OSU's
(05:31):
undergraduate student government passed a resolution during the twenty twenty
two twenty twenty three school year to remove his name. Well,
that would be nice, It's a good start. How many
of these people are gonna get away with their bullshit?
And look, I'm not gonna sit here and tell you
that I know exactly what went down, but what I
will say is what I say every single time. How
(05:51):
about a robust investigation all these people that have been
named and credibly accused, Bring them in, get them under oath,
let's hear their side of the story. If people are
so interested in the truth, and people are so interested
in finding out what really went on, wouldn't that mean
you want people to be put under oath to give
depositions so that we can really get to the bottom
(06:14):
of all of this. Because if not, what you're saying
is well, I believe Les Wexner, and anything else is
just BS. Now, that might be okay for you, and
that might be okay for mister Marconi over here, but me,
I don't buy that for a second. And unfortunately I'm
a trust and verify kind of guy. Oh I trust you,
but I need to verify your work. That's quite enough
(06:36):
of an uproar. There's no way OSU should or would
remove his name from its buildings. Let's start with the wood.
What's the chance OSU will remove less Wexner's names from
the Wexner Center for the Arts and the Wexner Medical Center.
Zero chance, not gonna happen. And that's because, like any
other group of scumbags and high academia, they don't care.
(06:59):
Academ has been gobbling up Epstein's bullshit for the whole
entire time. So what we're supposed to think that Ohio
State University is going to be different? Sorry, they're all
the same. OSU removing Wexner from say it's medical center
is as likely as Mitch McConnell and Mike Johnson holding
a joint news conference announcing there all of a sudden
(07:19):
backing NICKI Haley as the Republican presidential nominee. You don't
bite the hand that feeds you, and he just says
it right here, He just admits what he said. It's
all about money, right, It's all about a bag. And
if I was a trustee at Ohio State University, I'd
be fired up. I'd be demanding that this name gets removed.
(07:39):
And don't tell me for a second that Ohio State
University can't come up with another donor. They most certainly can.
We're talking about a very very famous university here, and
a place where a lot of rich and powerful people
have called home. So if you think they can't find
a donor or a multiple donors to fill the gap here,
you're wrong. They don't want to do it. They'd rather
(08:02):
just stick their head in the sand and say to themselves, well,
this never happened. These aren't credible allegations. But unfortunately for
Ohio State University and organizations like it, mister Marconi might
let them get off the hook, but we're not going to.
We're gonna keep talking about this because it's a point
that people are obviously still missing, that no real robust
(08:24):
investigation has ever occurred, and anybody asserting anything different is lying.
The should debate is one based on emotion, since he
has ties with a horrible, terrible, disgusting excuse of flesh,
Wexner should be punished for the sin of poorly picking
his friends. Now, imagine conflating the issue and rolling it
(08:44):
up into just this, and that's your delivery to the
readers of the Columbus Dispatch. Don't you owe them more?
And then they wonder why all these people in the
media are losing their jobs because they don't do their
job correctly. If they did, you wouldn't be listening to
this podcast. You'd be listening to mister more. But unfortunately
for him, he misses the point, like so many other
(09:04):
people when they're talking about this case, it's not just
about one single issue. It's about the whole totality of
what went on, and the fact that you're not even
willing to take a look at what's been said about
Les Wexner tells me everything I need to know about
you as a journalist. A real journalist would want to
get to the bottom of it. A real journalist follows
the story no matter where it leads, and a real
(09:27):
journalist doesn't have faves. Let's punish Wexner for bad judgment.
No concrete evidence has come forward that Wexner in any
way new supported or approved of Epstein's heinous ax. No,
not at all. It's not like there's been allegations against him.
It's not like Virginia has said she was trafficked to him.
I mean, for real, is this guy for real? Did
(09:49):
he set out today to end up on this podcast
getting absolutely eviscerated, Because if that was his goal, well, bravo,
Dick Nozzle, You've reached the promised land, because this take
right here is nothing more than hot trash. Rather, the
evidence suggests that in two thousand and seven, after Wexner
began to get wind that something was amiss, he told
(10:10):
Epstein to take a hike. Oh, is that it? He
told Epstein to take a hike. Hu. It had nothing
to do with that half baked money plot they had
going the fact that Wexner said that Epstein stole millions
from him. Yeah, right, that was all built in so
that if Epstein ever got nailed, Wexner had us out.
I can't believe people are still buying the bullshit that
(10:31):
these knuckleheads are selling them. But here we are, all
these years later, and the former head of the journalists
Union still doesn't get it. Now Here we are seventeen
years later and people want to extract a pound of flesh.
Why the proverb what's good for the goose is good
for the gander. That dates back to sixteen seventy and
means that what's good for one is good for all.
(10:53):
Talk about a bunch of word salad. What does that
even mean? What's good for the goose is good for
the gander? Buddy, you're leaving out a whole bit part
of the story, you know, the part where you're a
pal here less Wexner is credibly accused. Or how about
the fact that Maria Farmer says that she was on
his property as Epstein's guest when she was assaulted, and
Wexner and a security team kept her there. We're going
(11:16):
to talk about that, or we're just gonna ignore that too.
That's the proverb we should remind ourselves here. Unless you're
the saint of all saints, we've all had relationships we've
come to regret. We've associated with people we later found
to be untrustworthy, criminal, or perverted. Sometimes out of misguided loyalty,
we stick with them. Sorry, never happened for me, not
(11:37):
for perverted people other crimes, I can forgive. If somebody's
selling drugs, I can forgive them. If somebody has a
DUI forgiven. If somebody's truly looking to be remorseful, I
can forgive them. But when it comes to hurting women,
children and doing this bullshit, sorry, there's no forgiving that.
And if you're somebody who's playing a part in it,
if you're somebody who's assisting in mass wholesale trafficking operations, yeah,
(12:02):
I'm gonna have something to say about it. And according
to everything that we've heard, according to all of the
evidence that we've seen, Less Wexner most certainly should be
under oath and talking about what went down. Since we're
not billionaires in the public eye, we keep those associations
to ourselves because if people knew, they'd question our judgment,
think less of us, and might even cut ties. And
(12:25):
again he's inferring that this is guilt by association, which
it's not. This man with business partners with Epstein. Not
only that, but again, credibly accused. I think that's the
most important part here that needs to be brought up.
He's been credibly accused of taking part in the abuse.
So what about your answer to that, and if not
an answer, what about at least mentioning it to your readers.
(12:48):
Probably a good idea, right, Wexner doesn't have that luxury. Ah,
poor Wexner. He's an expert at living under a microscope
who in that position isn't and has a keen awareness
of how one slip can destroy decades of goodwill. So
when he found out that his friend and collaborator was
a world class deviant, he kicked him to the curb.
(13:09):
What else do you want? Well, I want him to
be aware. I want him to know what the fuck's
going on. I want him not to be in bed
with guys like Epstein. I want him not to be
credibly accused by Virginia Roberts. Is that a good place
to start, mister Marconi? And it pains me that this
dude's a Paisano? Are you fill with this bullshit? What
if it was your daughter, sir? How would that go
over on Sunday dinner? I know how it would go
(13:31):
over in my family, And it wouldn't be making excuses
for less Wexner. It would be more like, ay, Vinnie,
go get the bat. So this dude's over here talking
all kinds of reckless acting like Les Wexner is not
even being credibly accused. Meanwhile, we all know there's something
much darker, much more devious going on. Taking Wexter's name
off a building might make a few people feel better,
(13:53):
but what does that really do. It doesn't change what
happened to Epstein's victims, but it would obscure what we
as of now. No, Wexner took a stand against evil
that's worth the name on a building. That's how he
decides to finish the article. So, folks, I want you
all to know that we haven't really known the whole
story here, and Les Wexner is actually the hero. Les
(14:15):
Wexner is the hero of this story. And not only
should his name beyond the building in Ohio State, I
think that we should change the name of the White
House to the Wexner House. Why not? Everybody should have
a picture of Saint Wexner in their pocket. I mean,
is this fucking guy for real? Somebody must have slipped
some toad venom in his cheerios because this article is
one of the worst I have ever dug into. All Right, folks,
(14:39):
that's gonna do it for this one. All of The
information that goes with this episode can be found in
the description box big Is Guilay. Maxwell was very evasive
in her deposition. That was to be expected. Did anyone
really think that she was going to get up there
and incriminate herself in her they're hubris in her arrogance.
(15:03):
She never thought that she was ever going to have
to answer for lying in that deposition. She never took
it serious. Look at the way she referred to Virginia
throughout that deposition. Look at the way she got angry
and smashed her hand down on the table, Look at
the way she went about answering these questions. So she
(15:27):
was never going to be upfront. She was never going
to tell the truth here. But it's a huge piece
to the puzzle, right her own words, denying all of
the things that we have tons of circumstantial evidence for.
(15:49):
And if we have circumstantial evidence for it, how much
evidence do you think the federal government has compiled? And
the people who were now and in this deposition are
people that are names that have been thrown around in
this case for quite some time. Like I said, I
was not expecting any bombshells. But with the deposition out,
(16:15):
things like this article we're going to read tonight begin
to occur, and I think it's important that these kind
of outlets like Business Insider talk about Les Wexner and
the relationship he had with Jeffrey Epstein and Gilay Maxwell.
It's something that has not talked about nearly enough. Now,
(16:37):
I'm not one of these people that's gonna run around.
I don't think that Wexner was in charge of the
whole thing or anything like that, but he was certainly
part of it. He was most certainly an enabler, and
he most certainly was financing the operation. And he had
a lot of friends who were in intelligence as well.
(16:58):
So when I look at Les Wester in the grand scheme,
the big picture of this thing, he is definitely one
of the key financiers of Jeffrey Epstein. That is, without
a doubt. He was one of the main people to
get Jeffrey Epstein up and going, one of the main
people to fund this decade long crime spree. He was
(17:25):
very much, very much involved with Jeffrey Epstein personally, and
he is somebody who has intricate knowledge of what was
going on. And that's just going on the circumstantial evidence
that we have. I haven't even brought up the fact
(17:46):
that he is also being credibly accused of partaking in
the abuse himself. So Les Wexner is a figure that
definitely needs to be aired out, definitely needs to answer
so really hard questions. And he is somebody who most
certainly was in the upper atmosphere of Jeffrey Epstein's circle,
(18:11):
very powerful man, very well connected here and abroad, and
somebody who just thought that out of the blue, Jeffrey
Epstein would be a good investment, that Jeffrey Epstein, this
college dropout, would be the kind of guy that you
want to give complete power of attorney to. Well, that's
(18:35):
what Les Wexner did. And just like with Leon Black,
I am hard pressed to believe that of all the
people that Les Wexner could 'trust his money, to his companies,
to his life to, basically he would choose Jeffrey Epstein.
(18:57):
It's not because they were such good friends. It was
about the business. It was about moving things forward, and
all of these people that were in Jeffrey Epstein's close atmosphere,
in my opinion, all had their part to play. Be
it bagman, be it gopher and paper pusher like Indike
(19:22):
or be it one of the core four and their
roles within the criminal enterprise. Everybody had a role to
play that was around Epstein and Maxwell, and Wexner played
his role to a t. So let's jump into this
article by The Business Insider and talk a little bit
(19:44):
more about Les Wexner. Headline Unsealed Elaine Maxwell. Deposition appears
to show attorneys questioning Jeffrey Epstein's mysterious relationship with Victoria's
Secret founder Les Wexner. And I don't think think there's
anything too mysterious about it at this point, right. I mean,
we don't have all of the details, but I think
(20:08):
enough of the story has been written here in front
of our faces for us to understand that these dudes
were deeply connected. These dudes were very close the townhouse,
the keys to the kingdom, the ability to use Victoria's
(20:29):
Secret as a carrot to get girls into positions where
they're vulnerable so he could take advantage of them. All
of this was done because Less Wexner allowed it. All
of this was done because less Wexner enabled Jeffrey Epstein's behavior.
(20:50):
This article was authored by Kate Taylor. Attorneys appeared to
probe Jeffrey Epstein's relationship with Victoria's secret founder Les Wexner
in a deposition of Gilan Maxwell, which was unsealed on Thursday.
So I'm sure most of you have read the unsealed
(21:12):
documents by now. I put two and two together and
understand obviously who they're talking about when they're mentioning less
Wexner in that deposition. It's pretty obvious, and the relationship
between Wexner and Jeffrey Epstein is one of the most
(21:34):
least explored aspects of this case. In my opinion, the
legacy media has not done nothing, nothing in regards to
uncovering the truth of this relationship. The deposition of Maxwell,
Epstein's confidant, co conspirator, fellow child abuser, general, all around
(21:55):
scusbag and bipedal serpent, is linked to a since settled
civil case that was brought against her by Virginia Roberts.
Roberts accused Maxwell of aiding Epstein and trafficking her for
sex with rich and powerful men, including Epstein himself, And
those accusations sure look like they're pretty strong, huh. If
(22:18):
you needed any more prodding to think that Virginia was
telling the truth. Well, all you have to do is
read the deposition and then decide for yourself why prosecutors
would bring those charges if Virginia was lying in that deposition.
It just that doesn't make sense. The prosecutors don't do
(22:39):
that kind of thing. They have to really believe they're
going to get a conviction if they're going to go
after people like this, and they obviously believe that they
have a very strong case. And two of the whole
charges that we have her under right now, will two
of those are because of a directors of her being
(23:01):
dishonest in this deposition, or the prosecution believing that Virginia's
story was authentic and Gilain Maxwell's story was Fugesi. Wexter's
relationship with Epstein has been under the microscope since Epstein's
arrest in July twenty nineteen. Well under the microscope by
(23:24):
independent content creators and people who are interested in the case,
investigative journalists, but not by the legacy media. Have they
done a full court blitz? Have they done a full
court press? I mean, of course not. We haven't seen
somebody chase down Wexner and demand answers. In fact, we
saw few puff pieces written about him, So I don't know.
(23:49):
Under the microscope, I think that's going a little bit
too far, considering we haven't seen a real expose on
the guy yet. The deposition appears to indicate that lawyers
were probe the relationship between Wexner and Epstein in twenty
and sixteen. Yeah, of course, definitely everybody knew what sort
(24:09):
of role Wexner played. At the very least, everybody understood
that he was enabling Jeffrey Epstein's behavior and enabling these
crimes because he was financing him, was basically bankrolling this
whole thing, him and Robert Maxwell. And that's certainly what
my opinion of it is that it was Robert Maxwell
(24:30):
and Les Wexner were the main bankrollers of Jeffrey Epstein.
And if a real investigation was underway, and if they
really wanted to get to the bottom of all of
this and really shatter this at the nexus, they'd be
going after people like this. They'd be looking into Wexner
(24:52):
with a team of forensic accountants. And again they might
be I don't know, none of us do, right, Anyone
who says they do who this isn't directly involved in
the case. On the prosecution side really is probably lying
to you unless they have a good source, which is possible.
But for the most part, nobody knows who those sealed
indictments are. Nobody knows who's gonna be next. But if
(25:16):
everything was fair and they really wanted to prove that
it's about justice and not about letting the rich get
off again, well people like Wexner and Black and Dubin
and the rest of the scoundrels, well they would be
caught up in the financial portion of this. At the
very least. All names in the deposition have been redacted
(25:39):
except Maxwell's and Epstein's. However, a number of clues indicate
that a certain person referenced ten times in the four
hundred and eighteen page document is likely Wexner, and we
discuss that in the slight article, and it's definitely Wexner,
not most likely, it's Wexner, Okay, that's who their redacted
name is no doubt about it. And when you look
(26:00):
at it in context, you understand that we didn't even
neither doubt to have it unredacted for us to understand
when we look at it in context, and why is that, Well,
because we've been following this story for so long. We
know the ins and outs. We know that he gave
who gave Jeffrey Epstein the townhouse, we know who ran
Victoria's secret, etc. Etc. It's not a mystery at this point,
(26:23):
is it. Do you know why redacted Les Wexner sold
the New York house or gave the New York house
to Jeffrey if you know? An attorney asked Maxwell at
one point in the deposition, and again, why would you
just give away that sort of house. We've all seen
that house now, we're all familiar with the dollar signs
(26:44):
attached to it. So you just give that house away?
Or was that house part of the operation? Was that
house part of the whole entire enterprise? And that was
just another way that Wexner could contribute, you know, Like
I said, everybody had their part to play. Jeffrey Epstein
had his part right, he was the guy who was
(27:07):
the front of the operation. Then you had Gillan Maxwell
behind the scenes manipulating shit, making sure that they were
able to access all of these social circles. Then you
had the core four. Well, their job was grooming, their
job was procuring. Their job was setting these girls up
to come and go from the mansion and elsewhere. Right, Well,
(27:33):
you don't think Wexner had a job. Of course he did.
His job was to provide this massive amount of fundage
and a place, a base of operations for all of
this to take place. Wester purchased a mansion in New
York City for thirteen point two million dollars in nineteen
eighty nine. He later sold or gifted the house to Epstein.
(27:56):
It was rumored that Wexner gave Epstein the house for
a single dollar, but The New York Times reported in
twenty nineteen that Epstein had paid twenty million dollars for
the home, citing a person with knowledge of Wester's finances. Yeah, okay, sure,
nobody believes that this was an operational move. This was
(28:16):
all part of the ongoing criminal enterprise that they had underway.
In my opinion, anyway, that's where the evidence has led me. Again,
like usual, I am most certainly willing to follow the
evidence wherever it leads. But as of now, there's no
way in my mind, and there is no way that
(28:41):
anything that I've seen so far can lead me anywhere.
But the fact that Wexner was just playing his part here, Folks,
just playing his part of Daddy Warbucks. Here's a couple
of bucks, here's a house, here's this get shit going. Remember,
we have people that are counting on us, and all
(29:02):
of these people that were involved with Epstein and again
in his orbit, his very close orbit, they're all suspect,
especially when you look at the whole story in context,
especially when you follow the evidence regarding Wexner and Epstein,
(29:23):
There's no other logical way to go about it other
than these two were very, very deeply connected. While the
name of the person who sold or gave the New
York home to Epstein as redacted, the deposition's glossary provides
further evidence that the lawyer was likely referring to Wexner.
(29:46):
The alphabetically ordered glossary places the redacted term between weave
and whats. So again, it's definitely Wester. It's not even
a question because when you know the story, well, you
don't need the decoder ring. You understand that when they're
talking about the mansion being passed, that that's Wexner. You
understand when they talk about New Albany, well, that's Wexner.
(30:07):
You understand when they talk about the princes or you know, etcetera, etcetera.
At this point, we all understand the players on the stage,
and we all understand the other. References to this person
as listed in the glossary reinforced that attorneys in Maxwell
were likely referring to Wexner. For example, an attorney asked
(30:28):
Maxwell about the business relationship between Epstein and the person Wexner.
I believe in the nineties when I was there, they
had a business relationship, Maxwell said, adding that the only
relationship between the two that she was aware of was
the business relationship. Yeah, you mean the money laundering operation
you guys were running. Yeah, that's probably considered a business
(30:50):
relationship in your world. So Maxwell has no idea. I mean,
come on, guys, she had no idea who Wexner even was.
Really just, you know, just two strangers passing in the night.
Nothing to see here, We don't know each other. Meanwhile,
we know Maxwell's dad and Wexner knew each other. We
(31:12):
know they had all the same contacts, we know that
they ran in the same circles. So please, for Gilaine
Maxwell to act like she doesn't know about the relationship
between Wexner and Epstein is laughable at best. A representative
for Wexner declined to comment bed beyond what the former
(31:35):
executive and his attorneys said in publicly available documents. Of
course they did. They're never going to respond. They never do.
It's the mum's the word crew, right. Let's you know,
we'll start with a marathon trying to distance ourselves from this,
and then when the fallout really starts to come, it's
time to go into sprint mode and we'll go and
(31:56):
hide at Balmoral, or we'll go and hide at our
huge match in somewhere. Meanwhile, they're not understanding that this
isn't going away. They're not understanding that they're gonna they're
not going to be able to sleep the sweep this
under the rug this time. Wexner, who founded Victoria's secret
parent company l Brands in nineteen sixty three, had a
(32:19):
close personal and professional relationship with Epstein beginning in the eighties.
For years, Wexner was Epstein's only known client. Yeah, that's
not weird, that's not like well, you know, uh, the
Corleones and Tom Hagen type shit. Nah, not at all,
just par for the course. One client, that's it. If
Jeffrey Epstein was so great at his job, he was
(32:42):
such a financial wizard. Why did he only have one client?
Why did he only have maybe a couple of clients
Leon Black two? And why is it always these people
that are in the financial world or these magnates that
are around Jeffrey Epstein, people that can you know, do
something for him. Wexter may soon be forced to share
(33:05):
more about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Attorneys also tied
the person to allegations that Maxwell groomed groomed Roberts and
other teenagers for sex work. Did you ever provide Virginia
Roberts with an outfit an outfit of a sexual nature
to where for redacted? An attorney for Roberts asked, referring
(33:25):
to the same person, So we're talking about Wexner again.
Maxwell responded categorically no, denying various other questions about providing
sexually charged outfits for girls who visited Epstein. Wexner has
denied ever meeting Roberts. Yeah, of course he has. So
did Prince Andrew. So did Prince Andrew. You know, I
(33:48):
only wish this was like like back in the day.
I wish it was like now with all the cell
phones and everybody taking pictures, because there would have been
no way. People wouldn't have been snapping sneak shots of
these scoundrels. I mean, we even got a few pictures
with the old school kind of cameras like Virginia used
for her picture. But imagine if we had cell phone
(34:08):
cameras back then. Boy, forget it, these people would have
been in big trouble. Allegations that Wexner and Roberts have
met have become an issue in another recent lawsuit between
the lawyer Alan Dershowitz and Roberts. As part of the suit,
mister I kept my underpants on. Dershowitz is attempting to
force Wexner and his lawyer to testify to'll bolster his
(34:31):
case against Roberts, whom he is suing for defamation. And
we've talked about that a lot. You know, it was dirty.
Dirsh made a very bold attempt to try and get
his hands on some documents in Presca's courtroom, and thankfully
Judge Presca gave him a nice elbow, a nice forearm
shiver to the face and told him to kick rocks.
(34:56):
He wanted to really get into those documents. He tried
to get Wexner involved, and I said at the time,
and I still believe him pulling Wexner into it was
a way to get the spotlight off of him and
focused on another so called member of polite society. Mister,
I kept my underpants on. Dershowitz alleges Roberts attempted to
(35:18):
shake down Wexner by claiming the retail executive had sex
with her when she was underage and that she had
knowledge of his sexual hang ups, another allegation Wexner denies,
so Dershowitz says that boys and Virginia Roberts, they were
all trying to extort Wexner, and Wexner says that's absolutely incorrect.
(35:41):
Once again, you're lying, mister Dershowitz. That's what Wexner's saying, basically, right,
And it sure looks that way to me. It certainly
looks to me that Alan Dershowitz will do anything to
get the spotlight off of him in this case and
put it somewhere else dirty. Dershowitz said in a mid
(36:04):
August filing that Roberts attorneys described in detail the alleged
sexual encounters between Roberts and Wexner, including an alleged demand
by Wexner that Roberts were a victorious secret type lingerie
during their encounters. Such an accusation, if made publicly, could
have massively damaged Wexner and his company. Dershowitz said alleging
(36:25):
that Roberts attempted to extort Wexner, based on his recollection
of a twenty fifteen conversation between himself and Wexner's attorney,
John Zeiger. And Zeiger came out and said that never happened.
We know that, and we know that Wexner has denied
it as well. So it's like pick your poison here, right,
(36:47):
who do you believe, mister I kept my underpants on
or less the dirty rat Wexner. Robert's attorney, David Boyce,
has said no such shakedown or settlement of any kind
was ever made or discussed with Wexner. Wexner has denied
ever meeting Roberts and said no such extortion attempt ever occurred.
(37:08):
In July, Ziger said in a filing, no extortion, no
extortion demand was ever made, no settlement was ever entered into,
and not a penny or other consideration was ever paid.
And that pretty much right there, shot Dershowitz, story to shit,
and you try and bring that kind of nonsense in
(37:28):
Presca's courtroom, and she's not having it. Obviously, despite denials
of the alleged shakedown on all sides, Dirty Dershowitz has
requested Wexner turnover documents that he said would bolster his
case against against Roberts. In August, US District Judge Loretta
Presca said the court sees no reason for that correspondence
(37:50):
to remain under seal. Ziger has agreed to testify in
the case, but attorneys for Wexner have said that the
former CEO does not possess disks information. So, in Layman's terms,
get fed. You were not talking to Wexner. No chance
he could talk to the lawyer. But Wexner is not
(38:11):
going to be deposed unless it's court ordered. Wexner said
he cut ties with Epstein more than a decade ago.
Wesner let l brands for nearly six decades before stepping
down in February, and it wasn't a coincidence he stepped
down because of his relationship with Epstein. He stepped down because, well,
(38:32):
the public was no longer willing to sit by and
let this slimy, smarmy bastard run these companies. So the
public outcry was so great that Wexner had no other
choice but to step down. Roberts described Wexner as Epstein's
best friend and mentor in her unpublished memoir, which was
(38:54):
unsealed this summer. Look, they were very close, right, There's
no doubt about that. I don't know one way or
the other about a friendship. Virginia would know better than me, obviously,
But from what I can see, it was just another
business relationship with Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein was using him as
just another tool to further his criminal enterprise. And that
(39:19):
was Wexner's role in this whole entire thing, right, Like
we discussed, he was the bagman. The New York Times
reported last year that Epstein attempted to involve himself in
recruiting lingerie models for Victorious Secret. One. Model Alicia Arden
filed the police report in nineteen ninety seven, saying that
she was attacked by Epstein, whom she met with after
(39:41):
he identified himself as a talent agent for the brand.
Epstein had significant control over Wexner's finances, philanthropy, and private life,
the Times reported, citing people who knew Epstein and Wexner
and court documents and financial records. Yeah, it's not even disputed.
Family doesn't dispute it either. The King of Columbus definitely
(40:04):
does not dispute it. They were great friends. Epstein was
in charge of all of his finances and the falling
out stuff. Yeah, pretty sure. That's a cover story in
my opinion. A representative for Wexner said last year the
executive had cut ties with Epstein more than a decade earlier.
Wexner condemned Epstein in a letter to his foundation in
(40:27):
August twenty nineteen, saying that his former financial advisor misappropriated
vast sums of money from him and his family. You
see the pattern here. All of these guys have to
send them first. It starts with sending the emails to
their investors, right first. It starts with sending emails to
the board members, and then comes well, I'm stepping down
(40:48):
because I have to spend more time with my family. No,
we know the deal. We know why you have to
leave Wexner. We know the fact of the matter is
you were under pressure to do so. You would have
never left that company of your own accord. Please, your
hand was forced I am embarrassed that, like so many others,
(41:11):
I was deceived by mister Epstein. Wexner wrote in the letter.
I know now that my trust in him was grossly misplaced,
and I deeply regret having ever crossed his path. A
representative for L Brands did not respond to Business Insider's
request for comment on the newly unsealed documents. Yeah, they
definitely don't want They have their hands full as it
(41:32):
is right. The retail industry is on its way out
as we know it, brick and mortar anyway, and L
Brand's and Victoria's secret especially is at the forefront of
getting shattered in that realm. So, yeah, they got bigger problems.
And Wexner himself, he's not going to answer shit. He
doesn't feel like he has to. He'll send his lawyers out,
(41:54):
he'll maybe, you know, his lawyer might give a canned
statement if if the pressure gets turned up too. But
Wexner is never going to go under oath about his
relationship with Jeffrey Epstein willingly. So they have a lot
of financial history together. Right with Jeffrey Epstein's criminality, it
(42:17):
would be easy, I would think, to tie them together
financially and then once that's the case, slap Wexner with
a criminal indictment. If he was involved in moving ill
gotten gains, if he was involved in receiving ill gotten gains,
(42:39):
if Jeffrey Epstein was in charge of his money and
Jeffrey Epstein was using his money for his crimes and
to cover up and to pay off these girls and
witnesses and whatever has have you, well that makes Wexner
certainly part of the conspiracy from a financial perspective, and
(42:59):
under let's hear from the back folks RICO laws, well
he'd be facing severe criminal penalties. Again, the question remains,
will the authorities and the prosecutors have the backbone to
do it. If you'd like to contact me, you can
(43:21):
do that at Bobby Kopuchi at ProtonMail dot com. That's
b O B B y c A p U C
c I at ProtonMail dot com. You can also find
me on Twitter at BO B B y underscore c
A p U C c I. All of the links
that go at this episode can be found in the
description by
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Burden
The Burden is a documentary series that takes listeners into the hidden places where justice is done (and undone). It dives deep into the lives of heroes and villains. And it focuses a spotlight on those who triumph even when the odds are against them. Season 5 - The Burden: Death & Deceit in Alliance On April Fools Day 1999, 26-year-old Yvonne Layne was found murdered in her Alliance, Ohio home. David Thorne, her ex-boyfriend and father of one of her children, was instantly a suspect. Another young man admitted to the murder, and David breathed a sigh of relief, until the confessed murderer fingered David; “He paid me to do it.” David was sentenced to life without parole. Two decades later, Pulitzer winner and podcast host, Maggie Freleng (Bone Valley Season 3: Graves County, Wrongful Conviction, Suave) launched a “live” investigation into David's conviction alongside Jason Baldwin (himself wrongfully convicted as a member of the West Memphis Three). Maggie had come to believe that the entire investigation of David was botched by the tiny local police department, or worse, covered up the real killer. Was Maggie correct? Was David’s claim of innocence credible? In Death and Deceit in Alliance, Maggie recounts the case that launched her career, and ultimately, “broke” her.” The results will shock the listener and reduce Maggie to tears and self-doubt. This is not your typical wrongful conviction story. In fact, it turns the genre on its head. It asks the question: What if our champions are foolish? Season 4 - The Burden: Get the Money and Run “Trying to murder my father, this was the thing that put me on the path.” That’s Joe Loya and that path was bank robbery. Bank, bank, bank, bank, bank. In season 4 of The Burden: Get the Money and Run, we hear from Joe who was once the most prolific bank robber in Southern California, and beyond. He used disguises, body doubles, proxies. He leaped over counters, grabbed the money and ran. Even as the FBI was closing in. It was a showdown between a daring bank robber, and a patient FBI agent. Joe was no ordinary bank robber. He was bright, articulate, charismatic, and driven by a dark rage that he summoned up at will. In seven episodes, Joe tells all: the what, the how… and the why. Including why he tried to murder his father. Season 3 - The Burden: Avenger Miriam Lewin is one of Argentina’s leading journalists today. At 19 years old, she was kidnapped off the streets of Buenos Aires for her political activism and thrown into a concentration camp. Thousands of her fellow inmates were executed, tossed alive from a cargo plane into the ocean. Miriam, along with a handful of others, will survive the camp. Then as a journalist, she will wage a decades long campaign to bring her tormentors to justice. Avenger is about one woman’s triumphant battle against unbelievable odds to survive torture, claim justice for the crimes done against her and others like her, and change the future of her country. Season 2 - The Burden: Empire on Blood Empire on Blood is set in the Bronx, NY, in the early 90s, when two young drug dealers ruled an intersection known as “The Corner on Blood.” The boss, Calvin Buari, lived large. He and a protege swore they would build an empire on blood. Then the relationship frayed and the protege accused Calvin of a double homicide which he claimed he didn’t do. But did he? Award-winning journalist Steve Fishman spent seven years to answer that question. This is the story of one man’s last chance to overturn his life sentence. He may prevail, but someone’s gotta pay. The Burden: Empire on Blood is the director’s cut of the true crime classic which reached #1 on the charts when it was first released half a dozen years ago. Season 1 - The Burden In the 1990s, Detective Louis N. Scarcella was legendary. In a city overrun by violent crime, he cracked the toughest cases and put away the worst criminals. “The Hulk” was his nickname. Then the story changed. Scarcella ran into a group of convicted murderers who all say they are innocent. They turned themselves into jailhouse-lawyers and in prison founded a lway firm. When they realized Scarcella helped put many of them away, they set their sights on taking him down. And with the help of a NY Times reporter they have a chance. For years, Scarcella insisted he did nothing wrong. But that’s all he’d say. Until we tracked Scarcella to a sauna in a Russian bathhouse, where he started to talk..and talk and talk. “The guilty have gone free,” he whispered. And then agreed to take us into the belly of the beast. Welcome to The Burden.