MTracey podcast - SPECIAL COMMENTARY: My blowout Epstein debate on Piers Morgan

Episode Date: February 17, 2026

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.mtracey.netEnjoy, lol.

Join Michael and me as we watch his beautiful and inspiring Nambla-endorsed performance. No, I won't do the NAMPLA-endors thing. Performance. Performance on Pierce Morgan, live stream now. Okay? So we've got... All right. All right, Michael.

You're going to try out the share screen? Okay, so I just tweeted out as well, share screen. Let's see. So I'm going to share my... Make sure you don't show us your porn. No, there's nothing. Believe me, I check my hard drives. Don't worry.

Make sure, yeah, you know exactly what you're sharing to the world. There we go. So I already, I really only have to for this, for this, at this point, share my Twitter feed because I went through and clipped the, the Peers Morgan. appearance. So just a little bit of background. Okay, so I had been on the Pierceworth Morgan show once before in October, and I have to credit them because even if I'm under fire and I'm obviously teamed up on by every other panelists who are just shocked. They never even conceived that a view or a perspective along these lines to be articulated,

much less on a fairly prominent platform. Yeah, I was expecting Pierce Morgan. to be a little more open-minded. I don't know. I don't pay much attention to him. But no, he was like, you've had your chance, Michael. Like, he was like, be very kind of unhappy with you.

Well, I mean, I think he was open-minded, if only insofar as they had me on in the first place. And they gave me a lot of time, actually, to speak. Yeah. So I'm not complaining. I'm not complaining. He gave you a lot of time and then acted angry. And then it was like,

that's okay. Everybody's angry now it is. But, yeah, I've been on once before. I had been asked, intermittently to come on since October, but for whatever reason, it doesn't pan out. But then this time they asked me to come on, like, pretty well in advance, so it was clear that it was something that was happening. And I actually got one of, like, the mobile studio thing sent, which was pretty nice, so that I don't have to worry about the professionalism of my

apartment appearance. Those are nice. And initially, I was told that I was going to be on with Dave Smith. Comic Dave Smith, that is. That's what he calls himself. I know. It's a funny name. I mean, I frankly never heard him say anything funny, so I'm not sure where that moniker comes from exactly.

I've been meaning to watch a Dave Smith stand-up routine. Yeah, I've never seen. I don't know what makes him like. Like Tim Dillon, for instance. I know him to be a comedian and he is actually funny. Now, he has. You want to watch, you want to look up some Dave Smith? Want to look up at Dave Smith?

Do you watch it? Let's see if it makes us laugh. not at this moment let's let's do what we came to do first um but then dave smith was apparently dropped off and uh they replaced him with it seemed this guy mike bens who i mean i can't even follow what his view supposedly is on i i have a history with uh not a history but like bends is a very big conspiracy theorist like it is kind of incoherent kind of all over the place but was in the service of some kind of MAGA thing. Yeah, I mean, I told that Lomaz guy, I would debate him because he was,

Lomaz was asking, who is the best representation of the more Epstein Maximil's position that could competently debate Tracy? Like, who's the equivalent of Tracy on the other side? And I guess people settled on Ben. So I'll do it. I just don't, I mean, I've struggled to actually follow what his. Yeah, it's all like that. I saw where he's talking about how American invented feminism in Myanmar in order to, like,

destabilized it's just nonsense it's just right-wing nonsense whatever and then I have this other guy John Kyriaku who is the guy

who I think was probably wrongfully in prison for a while I forget the exact details now but it was something to do with his maybe possession of classified information

or dissemination of it something to do with his service and the intelligence agencies and now he's a big podcast pundit of course and he was on a panel with me a few months ago on the Mario Noffel X panel series

and none of these guys knew I was going to be on so they were all kind of blindsided, but he was arguing to me that there's no distinction between a 17-year-old and a four-year-old in terms of them both being children and therefore susceptible to equal severity of sexual abuse or sexual abuse of them or sexual activity with them is equally morally like reprobate

but anyway, so I don't know what that has to do with his intelligence service expertise. But then the one that I was most thrilled by, to be told that I was going to be on with, was definitely Tara Palmary, who I know you've been on with Richard in the past, too, so you could give like, here's what's going on in MAGA. Like, wow, okay, thanks, Richard. Tara, thought that you were the expert on that. Sorry, and that sounded insulting. Yes, it did.

It's like not being invaluable work. I'm inclined to, like, just have an insulting tone, discuss like anything to do with her. So you're tarnished by You wanted me to challenge her. You wanted me to say, why won't you, why won't you face Michael Tracy?

Well, because she, I mean, people can go to my substack. This was from July, where I very politely, and generally, we know the story. Okay, but she came on.

She cut off the live stream. She accused me of being, accused me of being an Asian of Dershowitz. Then I see her again at that September of Survivors press conference in D.C. We were both that. And she, confronts me again for, you know,

belittling survivors and says, who do you work for? I'm like sub-sacks Tara, Tara, I guess, just like you. So, but anyway, and she, like, runs away from me if she's ever notified that, like, I'm in the vicinity. Like, literally, she physically,

we were physically in the same place at one point in New York, a few in, like, maybe October, and she, like, immediately ran out and left. So I was amazed that she would even agree to be on. Maybe she didn't know. I'm not sure, but we were, we were on.

And so I took the opportunity to initiate, let's say, a lively exchange. And it was made even better because they brought in David Boyes, who is the, one of the extortionist lawyers in this little cabal representing the quote unquote victims, who is in the process of attempting to extort Bank of America. The judge actually threw out their attempt to extort Bank of New York, but the Bank of America extortion effort is still ongoing. and they're trying to replicate their success and having extorted J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank, obviously the Epstein estate, and then a bunch of other individualized lawsuits, many of which are still secret,

which I wish I could have gotten an opportunity to ask him about in more depth. But anyway, so let's begin watching, and one of the challenges of this is, like, there's such an abundance of material that I could have addressed or brought up, but you're only given a very limited period of time, and I have to say, like, I was,

even though it was definitely a hostile environment, I definitely was given the ability to like... You did well. You hit Virginia Gufrey. You did that well. You responded good. And it wasn't just like a random slam

against Virginia Gufrey. People won't be tired about me hearing about that. But it's because of Tara's direct role as her PR agent, essentially. And then Boy's role as her lawyer. Like Virginia Roberts Graffrey was... I think you could have gone a little bit less

about Tara and her collusion with Virginia... Yeah, maybe Virginia I think of free facts are bad enough. You can just distracts you. I know.

Maybe I went a little, maybe I described that a little too much. But let's just watch it and then I'll give some commentary as we go along. I'm hearing a lot of conspiracy theories, but they're all coming out of your mouth.

Oops. Let me start. He called your conspiracy theories because you said the, because you were saying the attorneys had a financial interest. That was, that was a conspiracy theory.

That's not what I meant to show. That's not the full. That's not the beginning. Yeah, that's a three minute one. Yeah, that's a stupid clip that they pulled up. They want to see Dave Smith. All right.

This is 11 minutes. Michael Tracy, you've been, you know, a relatively lone voice. How does that, is this audio okay? Can you hear it? That sounds fun. I'm going to pull it. I'm going out there arguing with a lot of the public debate about this, especially around hidden elite networks, intelligence links, and so on.

It's mythologized beyond the evidence that we've seen from courts, documents, official records, and so on. This is not a popular view, but there are some who share it. Isn't it great that they have the fake Freedom Tower from the New York City skyline behind him? I guess indicate that I'm in the New York area. Yeah, that's nice. Why do you feel so convinced of your position on this? Because the central tenets of what I've taken to calling the Epstein mythology have simply never been supported by anything close to the degree of credible evidence that would justify the United States, Great Britain and the world, now being embroiled in this gigantic pedophilia.

crisis where people like Tara Palmeri and your next guest, David Boys, are convincing untold millions that there was some enormous child rape atrocity that was perpetrated and covered up at the highest levels of government. So I don't know why I've started using the sort of term child, like giant child rape atrocity recently. Well, I do know why. Because it kind of hammer is home like what people are being told that they ought to believe occurred. And it's taken for granted that this happened. And I do actually think that there is a danger, as I say later, that the mentally ill will. Did you see the story that I posted about the, and it was in the UK, there was like these people who set up a date between a 16 year old girl and a 49 year old man?

And then these, they were like these teens who were like around 15 or 16. and they, like, beat him to death because he was a pedophile? No. No. And it was, he was 16 as age of consent in Britain. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But remember, we've had at least two mass shootings or, like, mass casualty events in which the perpetrator invoked Epstein. Which were these?

What were these? What were shootings? The first one was, remember, there was that shooting at a church in Minneapolis, or St. Paul was it? Maybe in August where the guy, like, genuinely, like, insane. phrase like 23 year old scribbled all kinds of messages on his like on his firearm on writing and so forth and he opened fire on a churchful people and he wrote release the files some or something like that and then you had also remember the day where the guy tried to burn down a Mormon church in Michigan that same day there was another shooting in was it South Carolina either

South Carolina or North Carolina where a guy on his boat pulls up to like an outdoor bar opens fire. And if you look at his, uh, yeah, real funny. And the guy is and, and, out of finals. Well, if you look at his like manifesto, he was making all kinds of crazy statements about like pedophilic conspiracies and so forth in relation to Epstein. So we only all right too. I'm not saying if we have another one tomorrow, it might as Aramary or David boys are personally culpable. Yeah. But I'm just saying like the. The firmament that we're now in that stems from this story, clearly the shooting at the skating. I don't think he was, I don't know if he was motivated by pedophiles, but do you see this guy at the ice rink who shot his wife and kids and then shot himself?

He was like a trans, but like retweet him all day and like retweeted Thomas Snessy. Yeah. Oh, okay. Like a trans like right wing conspiracy. See, there you go. I mean, to precisely identify what any of these people's motives are, like or if like one motive that they might have expressed could be. higher than another. I'm like the ladder of potential motives that have yeah, but like I'm just saying I mean can you think of an issue that would be more

conducive to it already mentally unwell person taking like crazed homicidal action than to tell them that like there was this mass trial rape atrocity that was covered up and it's the content the cover up continues and it's being perpriced you know carried out by the highest levels of government and everybody's implicated. because the email Jeffrey in like 2015. Anyway, let's continue. This is crazy making stuff. And in fact, it wouldn't be surprising

if people who come to believe this stuff and might already have a disposition toward mental illness could enter into a kind of homicidal mania. And so Tara Palmeri, I mean, I would agree with her in that there is a lot more to investigate on this subject, namely the journalistic malfeasance that's been so shockingly rampant, it's incredible.

Tara Kalmeri journalistically collaborated with Virginia Roberts Goufrey. Didn't just use her as a source or as an inspiration, but essentially shared a byline effectively with her on the podcast series that she produced in 2020. They went around. Okay, so if you find this hard to believe, I invite everybody, look up the Broken podcast. It's called Broken.

That's the title. Tara was basically the narrow, or the showrunner, you know, whatever the equivalent would be for a podcast in its second season. The first season showrunner was, of course, Julie K. Brown. And, yes, this was Tara's big project, and it wasn't just like a minor,

you know, throwaway podcast. It was funded by Sony Music Studios under the, and produced by the production company of this big Hollywood director, Adam McKay, who did like the don't Lookup movie and others.

I like how she's looking at you. Like, I like this. I like this. She's like, yes, Michael. And look at you. This is just a perfect moment. She is just like. Yeah, like she's like she's in deep contemplation of what I'm saying. She's having patience with you.

She, she, you don't believe victims. And she's very disappointed. They were just innocently on this truth seeking mission to find out all that Jeffrey Fetton did to all his innocent victims. And they told the listeners, don't worry. None of this is about bringing any further lawsuits or criminal charges against anybody. So all these men were trying to track down, they have no reason not to speak to us. Meanwhile, about a year or two later, Virginia Roberts Goufrey, who by the way...

Okay, so here's where I screwed up. I mean, I sort of didn't fully complete my thought in that I was, I meant to say a year later, contrary to the assurance that Tara and Virginia jointly gave on that podcast that no evidence that they, acquire would be used for any additional lawsuits or criminal charges. About a year or later, that's when the Prince Andrew lawsuit happens. And that's when they join the lawsuits against the estate and against other banks. I think that's too complicated for TV. It's too complicated, but like I still sort of screwed up in that I didn't fully complete the point, but it didn't really matter.

Is one of the most egregious serial fabulous who's ever walked the earth? I know that's really controversial, but all the claims that she had to retract the trail of destruction she left in her. awake. But I wanted to establish that Tara collaborated with her. No, but you stop attacking Tara. I mean, Tara is, that's like, people don't care about Tara. They're going to think about just to think about Tara. Well, I do what I care about. Powered by people like David Boyce. And Bradley Edwards, who, by the way, if you want to know what the impediment is, the full disclosure of the Epstein files, just look at what David Boy's colleague, Bradley Edwards, has been frantically arguing for the past several months in federal

courts in the Southern District of New York about the supposed terror and nightmares that have been unleashed if we have the Epstein files released. On the one hand, they're all sloganeering about release the Epstein files. On the other hand, they don't just want to redact the quote, victims' names. And by the way, what happened to saying alleged victim or purported victim, virtually none of these people have actually ever been adjudicated as victims? The only criteria that's required by the DOJ to abide by what the frantic victim lawyers are demanding is mere self-identific Okay, so this is what I'm writing on now for the next thing that's hopefully coming out. I mean, it is amazing.

Like the Jay Quentin, I guess this big tough guy, right winger, or Trump loyalist who got appointed U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, he actually has said explicitly in his submissions to judges Engelmeyer and Berman that the criteria that they're using for determining whether a certain individual is entitled to have redactions to the files imposed in their behalf is simple, self-idential. No further steps are taken to verify whether the person self-identifying as a victim was actually victimized by any. Tom Chomsky should just identify as a victim. I identify him as a victim.

Of victimhood. Does the media make any of this clear? And does the media have a specialized that when Pam Bondi is protesting, last point, peers, when Pam Bondi is being protested last week and everybody's going wild saying, oh, all these benighted Epstein victims are standing up and demanding truth and justice, how come it's never pointed out? Okay. See, people tell me that I yell too much. I mean, I guess I was. What can I say?

I'm a passionate guy. That, you mean, the vast majority of the people who are visible there, the victims, were adults at the time of their claimed victimization. This is a good point, too. And yet, this is supposed to be some massive pedophile crisis. You should have said when they met up. So David Boyce is the case, right? That's add to his, when they met up state is even more extreme than when they were.

victimized because if they met Epstein, obviously, they were already adults. There's no prehistory of him grooming them. Yeah, all the ones I'm referring to here, in addition to being adults at the time of their claim victimization, that's my coinage people, if anybody wants to steal it. But, yeah, they also met Epstein for the first time as adults. Yeah, that's a stronger point, though. They should use that if you could only use one of those. I don't know.

I think it kind of conveys it. Because if you say they were adults when they were victimized, you could say, oh, he met them when he was when they were eight, and he groomed them. true. Extortion of the British royal family and now extort JP Morgan for another couple hundred million dollars. Just like you did.

So I don't know. I made like a quick final point there, but I guess they cut it off, but it's not really material. They made an 11, like they made an entire 11 minutes of like, I thought you put together that clip because like you're like 80% of that.

Oh, you did? Yeah. I mean, the full segment was like 48 minutes. Yeah. Okay. So if you want to watch the full show, it's, you know, much more than this.

Why is there a commercial in that? There's a commercial in here, isn't there? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't know. Why didn't we get together a clip with a commercial? Because just to separate the segments, to, you know, identify that like there's a new segment, I don't know. Today's show is sponsored by Oxford and David,

great to have you back on on the censored. It's been six months. Okay, so like about, I guess maybe 10 or 15 minutes into the panel, they bring in David Boys. I had thought that he was going to come on before us. Wait, this is David. Boyce? I thought the guy next to Benz was David. Who's the guy next to Benz?

That was John Kyriaku. David Boyd wasn't on the panel officially. That's the guy who says the four-year-olds and seven years ago. Yeah, yeah, yeah. He's former, I think he was CIA guy. Okay. No, this is David Boys. And, you know, he has been inter-rolled to the whole Epstein legal saga.

I wish he was actually on the panel or I could have addressed him directly, but I end up addressing him indirectly because Pierce starts off this little interlude interview by asking him to address what I said. And people can go look up the full episode if they want to see the full exchange between Pierce Morgan and David Boyce. To my knowledge,

it's the only time, at least that I'm aware of, that David Boys has ever been challenged on anything, at least in a public venue. And so let's hear a little bit of ways. Since I last, so much has happened since then. In relation to what we've just heard from another panel member,

which is that Virginia Dufray was one of the least reliable witnesses imaginable. What is your response to that? Look, okay, sorry. Let me see what it says. You can always find somebody to deny anything. The evidence is just overwhelming. The idea that anybody can, with a straight face, deny that this was a massive sex trafficking scheme,

is between absurd and pathetic. Michael Tracy, was there anything... No, I just wanted to put my own parts on this clip, okay, that I generated. People can go find the rest if they want. Wait, that's, okay, that's your own part. Okay, so he made some arguments beyond that. Yeah, yeah, yeah, he said more stuff. I mean, yeah.

I clipped out my own parts of this like 48 minutes. Well, what did he say? I wanted to know what he was going to say. Nothing really. It was just so generic. Like, he didn't address anything specific. that I said. That was basically, he said,

he just kept repeating variations of how the evidence is overwhelming. You know, that might have been nice for peers to ask him, hey, weren't you like literally representing Virginia when she recanted the allegations against Dershowitz?

Like, Broys is the one who rogered that settlement with Dershowitz, in which the allegations of eight years, which were extremely vivid and graphic, were recanted. And yet he's just, he laughs off the idea

that maybe there could be a credit ability issue. And, you know, some emails have come out where he's talking about how he had, like, rarely come to believe in Virginia, but then he, like, seems to hedge. And the prosecutors are, like, a bit worried about how much to incorporate him into their prosecution. Like, it's amazing how much these civil lawyers, like Boys and Edwards and others, and Sigrid McCauley, boys' colleague at his firm, were just, like, essentially, like, deputized as de facto prosecutors, like, that's not supposed to be allowed, especially since they have a

profit motive. But, like, they're all over these files in, like, constant communication with the prosecutors and sending back and forth evidence and, like, even strategizing amongst themselves. Like, what is that? Yeah. Okay. Let's go on.

David's Boy said, giving you pause for thought. And one more thing. Okay, I couldn't have included this, but people should, if they haven't read it before, please, Google right now, New York Times David Boy's hoax blackmail.

Something like that, and you'll find this incredible New York Times article from 2019 in which David Boys is caught having been hoaxed by this guy who claimed that he was in possession of the much-awaited,

long-awaited blackmail videos that he somehow Milford from Epstein's houses that depicted all these prominent people in sexually compromising situations. Boys believed him. Why is that? Why is that wrong? I mean, he believed some guy who hoaxed him gave him.

It shows how hypercredulous he was about all this in terms of, and wanted to use it to pursue financial interests. Because they had plotted, because he followed up on something. Their whole strategy was him and Stanley Pottinger, his co-counsel, was

that they were going to use this blackmail video to obtain secret settlements from all the men, even though this is supposedly about getting justice for victory and exposing everybody who was in the Epstein network, but they were going to use it just to enrich themselves. Hmm. Okay.

But it turned out to a hoax. Yeah, I know, but he just fell for a hoax. That's just like, so what? I have to say, peers. So what? He's supposed to be the most like seasoned, wise criminal. He fell for him. He believed someone said of something and he believed it.

And then that's true. Don't challenge me, Richard. Or also, I'll go out for you too. Who's paying you? I'll take you through the wood chipper, too. A bit disappointed that you didn't ask him a single challenging question. I invite you to ask me any challenging question you'd like. And you'd think that given David Boy's stature and him being hailed as this.

Tara, actually, she's going to cry now. That maybe he could tolerate one or two probing questions. The funniest thing here is that so when I went after Tara, I guess the producers decided that now is that then was the time to bring in boys. So Tara really didn't get a chance to even respond to me for like 20 minutes. So it just left hanging there that I had been. Yeah.

She just sat there looking very. concerned. That might be outstanding, such as among these files that have been produced as of January 30th are a memo that memorializes internal deliberations amongst prosecutors in the Southern District of New York in which they frankly convey that they are stunned as to how outlandishly non-credible Virginia Roberts Cuffray was when they interviewed her in September 2019. This memo is December 2019. David Boyes represented Virginia, including as to the lawsuit that was brought against Prince Andrew.

And yes, it was an extortionist lawsuit, but the British royal family is incredibly feckless. They are not going to challenge any of the premises that are being marshaled against him. So people always tell me, doesn't it, doesn't it prove that something really bad went on in terms of child sex abuse? Look at all these institutions that we really wanted to settle or apologize or fire somebody. I'm like, no, that's just a moral panic. It's not a concession to anything in terms of the reality of the underlying allegations. Foment this mass hysteria and moral panic. And therefore, everybody takes the resolution of that lawsuit to mean that that there was some concession to Prince Andrews' guilt.

Even if we want to stipulate that he did have some sort of sexual contact with Virginia. your Roberts Goufrey when it was alleged to have taken place, she would have been above the legal age of consent in England, and yet we're told this is a giant pedophilic sex trafficking crisis. But you know what the file shows? You offended that guy. That guy who thinks 17-year-old. Yeah.

I mean, do you think, has this point, has that point ever been made anywhere, like in any venue that might reach any member of the British public? I doubt it. But I don't know. It seems relevant. Her path at this point against Epstein and then Maxwell, discovered no credible evidence of any pedophilic sex trafficking or any sex trafficking at all to any third-party individuals, which was the crux of the mythology that Virginia Roberts Goufrey incubated, that Tara Palmeri amplified so lamentably credulously.

I don't know how that came out. Lamentably credulously? Yeah, you look for words at a few points. That's fine, but you do come through that. Boyes actualized in the legal filings that he carried out on her behalf. This is outrageous. All right. This is a fraud that's been perpetrated on the public by a conspiracy.

You know what the conspiracy is? The conspiracy is this unthinking brainless hysteria combined with journalistic pruduli, combined with an unwillingness to do any actual research as to the facts and evidence, and to treat David Boyce like you just did. Now, why didn't you ask you about the 30%? in attorney's fees that he convinced Judge Rakoff in the Southern District of New York to reward him for his almost $350-plus million lawsuits against Deutsche Bank and J.P. Morgan that he's now trying to extract even from Bank of America, which is why he's...

Okay. You may just close. She's got a point. I was waiting for this. I was like, she must have something. Yeah, I don't know if people fully, I don't know if people fully understand that last point I was making, meaning so he had those prior lawsuits and he has a current one now of the same ilk with Bank of America and why is that especially relevant now because they're simultaneously

or his colleague is Edwards demanding not just that files be redacted right but they're actually removing tons of files thanks to these frantic pleas by the alleged victims because and there's a direct intersection with this Bank of America lawsuit because it's an anonymous James Doe, right, who is the class actor or the class action plaintiff. And they are desperately trying to see to it that no countervailing information that might be in the files come out that could undermine their ability to proceed with the lawsuit. And in that lawsuit, they assert, you know, that, you know, Epstein is the Messiah. I think I told you that. Or Epstein convinced his victims that he was the Messiah.

And also that there were thousands of victims. And I couldn't, I didn't get a chance to make this point. But that's just another lie as shown by the EPSC files that we're all clamoring for because that number, I don't know if you saw my substack from last week, did we talk about this? I forget. But the number that the DOJ and FBI introduced in their memo last July that has been repeated ad nauseum across the political spectrum, including as recently as the Bondi hearing last week, and I'm assuming up to this day, that there were over a thousand victims harmed by Epstein. That was just a concoction of the PR people at the FBI and DOJ, Kash Patel and Pam. Bondi. You want some government propaganda to oppose from Casper tell him Pan Bondi. Oppose that because that number was

shown to be this absurdly gross inflation that includes the family members somehow of alleged victims. Like Epstein went around raping all their fathers and uncles. Yeah. But then boys upgrades it and says there are thousands of victims. Where does he get

that? He makes it up. And he makes it up to try to extort Bank of America just like he extorted the prior institutions and individuals for hundreds of millions of dollars that they can throw into the slush fund that then further inflates the number of alleged victims because then the victims want to cut.

So he's been absolutely central to the propagation of this bogus mythology, the mass hysteria, and moral panic. And I so wish he was on the panel instead of these jokers, bends, and kirokia, added nothing. I mean, I don't even, they really made no contribution whatsoever. Yeah, I thought terrible, by the way,

when she said, can I ask just one thing? I thought she was waiting there for 20 minutes. I thought she had a bomb. She was waiting for a while. She was waiting for a long time. That's what I thought. Yeah, I thought. I said, okay, here's the hammers.

Here's the here's the here's. Here's the here's going to. Okay, yeah, go ahead. Tell what? I'm hearing. I'm hearing. I'm hearing. I'm hearing a lot of conspiracy theories,

but they're all coming out of your mouth. And let me give the final word to Tara because it keeps. What do you do? That I postulate. It keeps like when he's not. When he's not. When he's not. So I asked him, okay, what conspiracy theory did I postulate?

Maybe I shouldn't have used the word postulate because it's a little bit highfalutin, but like, okay, what conspiracy theory did I express it all there? It doesn't make any sense. I use sort of like an ironic turn of phrase to say, if there's any conspiracy, it's X, Y, Z. No, it's because, yeah, it's because the, yeah, it's the financial interest of the lawyers. That's a conspiracy theory, a very, very broad definition of conspiracy theory. I'm lecturing me about my interview skills.

he's lecturing you about your journalistic skills. So your response to that and to what David Boyes have to say. Please, Tara, go ahead. Defend it. I don't know, Michael. Have you ever actually listened

to any of the tapes at the Palm Beach? See, she thought she had you. The police and Palm Beach, the detective. Have you listened? Yeah, she nailed me. I couldn't have possibly looked through the Palm Beach County investigatory file or the records. I guarantee you at this point,

I look through them more extensively than she has. That I can guarantee you. So actually, I have watched these things that she's asking me so accusatorily as though it's obvious to her that I never had to see them. To any of the girls that they interviewed that were as young as 14?

Yeah, and you think that they're not credible. I've listened to it all, Tara. You don't think that entire pyramid scheme and in a high school in nearby? Do you think Virginia Roberts, Guffrey, it's credible? She had nothing to do with that initial Palm Beach investigation. We're talking about your former journalist the collaborator who had to recant allegations

against Dershowitz. This is one she has a talk to you. That has been... That has been costly. recanted against John Luke Brinell. So you've... Michael versus Tara thing. Okay, so here's an amazing wrinkle that I hadn't been aware of until maybe a month

and a half ago. And I'm amazed that for all that I do know for like the enormous volume of information that I've absorbed on this subject, I didn't know this until maybe like late December, which is that, you know, John Luke Brunel, he's a key sort of figure in this whole thing. Do you know who that is? He's like the modeling mogul who it's claimed... You said me something about him. Somebody sent me something about him.

He was, oh, he also, yeah, I just found this out. He, he, maybe you told me, he killed himself too. Yeah, he died in a Paris prison because he was arrested under U.S. pressure after the arrest of Epstein in 2019. Later on, there are materials that have come out showing U.S. law enforcement officials, pressuring French officials to arrest John Luke Brunel, before any real charges had been seriously articulated that related to Epstein. They came up with other stuff from the past that really had no connection to Epstein. But the sole reason, ultimately, that he was arrested and in prison were the allegations of Virginia Roberts Kufre. Okay. And then eventually, by 2021, Virginia Roberts Kufre is summoned to

Paris to give evidence against John Luke Brunel. It's a different legal system, obviously. So there's a phase where the accuser shows up and is basically, has to do a colloquy with both the prosecutors and the defense attorneys. And over the course of that, it's found that she made up her allegations against him too. Yeah. And the guy killed himself. He was guilty of nothing.

And he was going to be freed from prison, but then they decide to keep him in prison, and then he ends up dead. So he's suicidal depressed. There's no credible reason to think this guy did anything wrong. I don't think there's any credible evidence that he raped Virginia Roberts Goufrey or child sex trafficked her, which was the whole allegation that,

caused him to be put into prison. How could he still be in prison, though, if there was no evidence. That's the way the French system works. I don't know. They just told you indefinitely, some French scholar should explain it to me. Okay, well, let me look at the Wikipedia page. What's this guy's name? Jean-Luc Brunel, J-E-E-A-N-H-U-R-U-N-E-E-L.

He was, let's see. And I only learned that she had to retract her statements against him because I actually made a special effort to go read some of the French. language press that was produced around the time. None of this has penetrated any of the U.S. coverage at all. I just manually translate it. There was a 60-minute investigation that said, you know, whatever, he was going around, drug, a converting environment where women are drug dead and sexually assaulted.

That was older stuff. That had nothing to do with why he was really not, had nothing approximately. He was listed as one of Epstein's 10 co-conspirators. Brunel went into hiding. French police began to investigate him. His Paris Holman office... He didn't go into hiding. He didn't go to hiding.

That's not right. They arrested him... Well, that's wrong. I mean, I'm sure that's Wikipedia just making stuff up. They arrested him when he was on his way to go on holiday with a friend at the airport. Yeah, that's what it says. After that, he was arrested at the... When he was about to go to Senegal, he was taken into custody.

He was charged with drugging and raping a 17-year-old girl in the 1990s. Brunel said he... Like, how could you prove this? Unrelated Epstein, right? Yeah, yeah, of course. The proximate. cause of why he was arrested them was the pressure from the U.S. around the Epstein investigation.

And it all hinged on this allegation from Virginia. He drugged and raped a girl in the 1990s in 22, 35. Like, how do you, how do you prove that? That's like bullshit. Like, unless you have something like solid on that. But anyway, but anyway, I mean, the, I'm just mentioning that because like, I'm still always just staggered with the new stuff that I find out continuously. And so it's good in this context, because.

because if you just cite Dershowitz, then people will, like, quibble with the wording of the settlement, but then I get now have to have already two additional examples of people that it's proven, demonstrably that she made like sensational heinous allegations against, and then was forced to retract while represented by the likes of boys in Edwards and while she was being amplified and collaborating with era. But he was still in jail. He wasn't in jail for Gufrey at that point.

He was in jail for the supposed 17-year-old girl. No, but, but they were, he was. being charged with this 17-year-old girl in the 1990s. I know, but the impetus for why they would have just... I know, I believe you. Yes, I agree. But just factually. And then the credit...

That must be your own, your journalist and collaborator. Go ahead. Do you work? Who do you work for, Michael? Because I've never met anyone in my entire life. Okay, so at this point, I swear to God, this is true. I don't know what happened.

Maybe because I was flailing around. He told them he'd cut you. I mean, maybe they were just listening to Pierce. Maybe. Well, I don't know that my mic was cut, but my audio feed was nearly cut in that all of a sudden, like when Tara's addressing me, I can barely hear what she's saying. It's incredibly faint. I have to, I hear like every other word, maybe. And I don't know if like I screwed up some things.

Yeah, I'm glad you were covered though. I was worried they were going to, I was worried they were going to end. I thought I was worried he was going to be like, oh, how convenient, Michael, goodbye. And that would have been really. Yeah, I know. I was thinking to myself, okay, people are going to think that I, you know, I made that up so I didn't have to address who I was being paid by. You gotta be kidding me. Yeah. who would so, yeah, like, who's paying you? Let her speak, please.

Let her speak. Be a gentleman. Let her speak. Let her speak. John Luke Brunel. So you defend the credit. So I actually really, I guess maybe I couldn't hear peers there. Were he saying let her speak?

Let her speak. You're all caught your mind. Your journalist and collaborator. Do you work? Who do you work for, Michael? Because I've never had anyone in my entire life. Every hear the activist? She kind of reminds me of Tucker.

Who do you work for, Michael? Have heard the activist? Who do you protect? Who do you serve? It's sort of like a left-wing protest chant. Who do you protect? I've never seen that. Anyway, that reminds me of her question here.

So, yeah, like who's paying you? Who do you work for? I think a lot of people are wondering this, because I've never seen anyone quite like you. Many people are saying she should have quoted Donald Trump. Going after victims of sex crimes and attacking them like this. So you must be being paid by someone in power. I can hardly hear her right now.

I know. I believe you. No, I'm narrating for the people. Well, they're going to see. They're going to hear you say that. Who does not like these accusations that have been made against them. And I think it's fair to ask, are you being paid by any of the men who've been accused by Jeffrey Epstein? I'm having trouble hearing right now.

I wish I could respond to whatever nonsense she just worded out. I'm just saying if you have been paid. counsel. What the defecatory nonsense? Maybe somebody can Astonishing an astonishing coincidence

that you suddenly lost your hearing when you were asked a very difficult question. Lost your hearing. I swear it. I'm not saying you didn't get care. I'm just saying. If he can hear you, can you ask him that question?

Because he can't hear me, but maybe he can hear you asking that question. I think it's a... Tara thinks the problem is that I deliberately filter out the voices of women. Mm-hmm. Your face is frozen right there, isn't it? When they were talking, you were frozen.

Michael, can you hear me? No, no. It's not frozen. Did you hear you very faintly? Did you just allege that I'm somehow implicated in the Epstein criminality, or did I miss you? Too much time on Twitter. I asked you're being paid by anybody to smear the victims of the Epstein scandal. See, rather than defend the merits of her journalistic output,

but which she can't because it's indefensible. What does she do? She tries to impugn me personally, tries to imply or... You're not answering... What's the answer to the question? Of course I'm not being paid by anyone. I'm paid by my readers on substack, you idiot.

You just can't engage on the merits, Tara. You're beautiful idiot. You're sexy idiot. Should I use the C word? I thought...