Howard Lutnick And His Trip To Congress (Part 4)
The transcripts from Howard Lutnick’s closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein’s townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein’s private island alongside Lutnick’s family
The transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to get right
back to the Howard Ludnik deposition that he gave to
Congress Mister Emmer. We discussed your emails earlier, Sir, is
this HWL email yours? Answer? Yeah? Question, and the email
chain begins with mister Epstein asking you what do you
think the prospects for adfin are. Why would mister Epstein
be emailing you directly about prospects for adfin? Answer? I
don't know. Adfin was a company that's objective was to
become an exchange for Internet ads. So it was pursuing
companies that put out ads like banks do a lot
of ads, you know, big advertisers and websites. So it
was marketing to everyone it could possibly find to use
their services to buy their ads cheaper, you know, for
the advertiser to not use an ad agency and get
the money directly, and you know the advertisers are more efficient,
and so it would have been out talking to everybody,
So I wouldn't be surprised or it wouldn't surprise me
that people knew about it. I was not, but it
wouldn't have been unusual. It was out there trying to
make to get attention. Question and given your previous testimony,
as it relates to the emails that you sent, is
it safe to assume that this response was you personally? Answer?
This was this was me because it says, hwo question
and for the record, can you please read the email
that you sent back? Answer? Yeah, but this stems on
another note, so it must have stemmed from something else.
But it says you just want me to read it?
Answer producing revenue. Finally, this is their year next twelve
months they need to become economically self sufficient. Question And
mister Epstein replied to your email and said, thanks, how
long until Sherry's ready? And can I buy my guesthouse?
To which you responded probably four years in parentheses Pierre?
What is Pierre? Answer? So he made a joke that
he would buy my house as his guest house because
I had bought the top of the Pierre hotel. It
was an apartment. It still is a large again unfinished,
unfinished apartment. So he just got the hotel wrong. Question.
It wasn't a serious offer by Epstein to purchase your
town home? Answer it was sort of a snarky joke
or a joke question. The Committee understands, though public reporting
and records, that an Epstein affiliated trust had owned that
townhome that you moved into prior to you. Did Epstein
during your acquisition of the property. Did Epstein have any
role in the sale of that property to you? Answer? No,
I bought my townhouse from someone named Charles de Gunsberg
who owned it, so Epstein did not own the house.
So I don't know what that's reference to. Charles de
Gunsberg owned the house, and I bought the house from Charles. Now,
mister Spector jumps in. You testified earlier about having one
distinct four part email exchange with Jeffrey Epstein. Ever, is
this that email chain, Lutnik, This is two of it.
It may have been like disconnected. Sorry I can I'm
holding my hand separate now, Turwilger, the lawyer jumps in,
mister Emmer on that point, I do think, for the
sake of completeness, I would just profer to the Committee
that if we were to look at document EFT Alpha
zero one five zero seven one eight, you'll see that
there was a prior communication between Secretary Lutnik and Jeffrey
Epstein around the building of the Frick expansion. And that's
how we go from the subject to another note initiated
by mister Epstein. Mister Emmer, Thank you, mister Emmer. At
this time, I'd like to introduce what will be marked
as majority Exhibit number five. And for the record, it
appears that you are not a recipient of this email.
And this is an email from Jeffrey Epstein to or
adapted dated oct Job nineteenth, two thousand and nine, and
it's bates marked EFTA two four three eight eighty six,
and it appears to be a message passed along to
mister Epstein from Rich Barnett about you wanting to speak
to mister Epstein. Secretary Lutnik. Who is Rich Barnett? Answer?
He was someone that worked for me at counter Fitzgerald
so on my staff question, and we're reviewing an email
from October of two thousand and nine. Do you have
any recollection of why you would have been trying to
get in touch with Epstein? Answer? I don't have any recollection,
but Rich Barnett was responsible for my sort of construction
and things associated with that, so it may have been
that I was doing something at my house, but I
shouldn't speculate. I don't know and I did not speak
to him. Question. Thank you. At this time, I'd like
to introduce what will be marked as majority Exhibit six
and seven. Majority Exhibit six is an email dated Monday,
April fourth, twenty eleven from Leslie Groff, Jeffrey Epstein's secretary,
sent to mister Epstein, saying, Howard Lutnick returned your call
and the Bates number EFTA sixty five four five five two.
Majority Exhibits seven is a calendar reminder dated the very
next day, April fifth, which appears to show a schedule
callback between you and mister Epstein. The reminder states Jaye
to call Howard Lutnik today call Matthew to organize and
that is Bates mart EFTA zero two one nine one
two four five. For the record, it appears as though
you are not a recipient of either one of these exhibits.
Secretary Lutnick, do you know who miss Leslie Groff is? Answer?
I do not. Question. According to the email you returned
Epstein's call, we are early April twenty eleven. Do you
have any recollection of why you'd be returning a call
from mister Epstein. Answer, as I think I said my
opening statement, he had something to tell me, or so
I was told, is the best of my recollection from
fifteen years ago. So I must my office must have
suggested that I call him back to hear what he
had to say, and we were unable to connect by phone,
and that led to my second encounter with him, with
my best recollection being I rang his bell, walked into
his foyer with my dog. My wife waited outside with
my other dog, the one that one wouldn't be good
to bring into someone's house. I waited for him to
come down. He told me what he had to say,
and I remember this is a long time ago, but
my best recollection was it had to do with scaffolding.
Mister spector question, when you say scaffolding, are you talking
about the construction on your property or his answer yes, question.
So it was a discussion between neighbors about work that
might affect one another answer. I think my best recollection
is he was planning on doing scaffolding, which would sort
of be annoying to my property. So he was sort
of telling me he was something. This is my best
recollection of an inconsequential and meaningless conversation fifteen years ago.
So I'm not I'm just saying that's my best recollection.
Was it the topic of scaffolding? I can't give you more.
Something else I'll tell you would just be speculating as
to what it was about. So generally, when you say
in consequential and meaningless, in this case, you mean it
was just kind of a mundane conversation that would be
normal between neighbors of any sort. Answer write, and then
he had some sort of plan that he in his house,
and he was letting me know that it would be annoying. Question.
Thank you, mister Emmer. And this meeting that you referenced
during your hearing with the Senate Appropriations Committee last year,
you discussed your interaction with Jeffrey Epstein and mentioned an
hour long meeting at Epstein's home in twenty eleven. Is
this the same interaction that you just described related to scaffolding?
Lut Nick. Yeah, his documents, the documents in these files
had set aside an hour, which is what I was
referring to. The only interaction I recall was the one
I just articulated. I didn't have another interaction his schedule
said other things that was wrong. The only interaction that
I've ever had. I'm here describing to you accurately what
my best recollection, literally to my recollection could be. Specter.
Did the topic of massages ever come up again besides
that first interaction that you had with Epstein? Answer by Lutnick, No,
mister Emmer. At this time, I would like to introduce
what will be marked as majority Exhibit eight. While we're waiting,
I understand another member is joined. Can you please identify
yourself for the record, mister James Walkinshaw, Virginia eleven and ROCNNA, California, seventeen. Emmer,
this is Bates marked EFTA four to seven five seven,
four to two. This is an email chain from May
of twenty eighteen. Mister Lutnik or Secretary Lutnick, do you
recall sending this email? Secretary Lutnick knows I've told you
if it's say, this is Howard Lutnik. It was sent
by Matthew Gilbert, and he's the one who sees them,
meaning I don't I don't see them. They're not literally
on my computer screen, they're on his spector. I'm sorry
if you said this earlier, but just for the record,
who is Gilbert to you? Answer by Lutnick. Mister Gilbert
is my longtime assistant in my office. He's worked for
me for like twenty years, Spector, so this would be
the normal way that he would handle emails from all
sorts of people, not just Jeffrey Epstein. Lutnick correct. The
point was if you email that email it was to
Matthew Gilbert. Everyone learned that he would respond to them.
Sometimes he would do it on his own, sometimes he
would do it in mind, but it was always just him.
I didn't even read them. I didn't see them, Spector.
Thank you, Emmer. Question and this relates to the blocking
of the views of the park from your town home.
Is that right? Answer? Yeah. The Frick is an architecturally
important structure built around the turn of the century or
something like that, and it was beautiful and they the
museum had wanted to knock down parts of it and
build a high rise, which we found unusual and Bothersome
question and you may have discussed this in your opening statement,
but why did you reach out to Epstein related to
the Frick? Answer? So, the way the block works is
there's a multi unit co op. That is the first
building inside the number one or number three, and then
there is Jeffrey Epstein's townhouse and then mine on the
other side. And on the other side there was a
group of owners, tenants, people who lived in that building
who were fighting the frick building it. They contacted me
after a while, and then at some point they asked
me if I could contact Epstein to have him be involved,
but it was just neighbor. They contacted me, asked me
to contact them. But by asking me, they asked effectively
Matthew Gilbert, who then contacted him. Question Secretary Lutnik, the
majority's hour is coming to an end. I want to
ask you some general questions as it relates to mister
Epstein's crimes. For the record, did you ever witness me,
mister Epstein have sexual contact of any kind with any
young woman or girl? Answer no question. Did you ever
witness mister Epstein receive a massage from a young woman
or a girl? Answer no. Question during your interaction with
mister Epstein, did mister Epstein ever discuss sexual acts of
any kind with you? Answer no, other than which he
said the right kind of massage. Question did you ever
see or meet any young women or girl at mister
Epstein's office or residence, Answer no question. Did you ever
have any sexual contact with any young woman or a
girl in the presence of Epstein, Answer no question. Did
you ever receive a massage from any young woman brought
to you by or introduced to you by mister Epstein
or Miss Maxwell, Answer no. Mister Emmer, we will go
off the record. All right, folks, We're going to wrap
up right here, and in the next episode we'll pick
up where we left off. All the information that goes
with this episode can be found in the description box.