By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Despite U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s assertion of “limited interactions” with Jeffrey Epstein, newly released documents reveal a business partnership as recent as 2014. Signatures from both men appear on a 2012 contract to acquire stakes in the advertising technology company Adfin, with Lutnick signing for CVAFH I and Epstein for Southern Trust Company, Inc. While Lutnick had previously stated he cut ties with Epstein in 2005, emails show continued contact and shared plans for drinks and a visit to Epstein’s island in 2011 and 2012, respectively, just before their Adfin deal was finalized. Correspondence regarding Adfin continued until at least 2014, involving Cantor Ventures, a subsidiary of Lutnick’s former firm Cantor Fitzgerald.
Read the original article here
Howard Lutnick, currently serving as U.S. Commerce Secretary, has publicly stated his interactions with Jeffrey Epstein were minimal, yet the recently unsealed Epstein files paint a different picture. These documents indicate a business relationship between Lutnick and Epstein that extended as recently as 2014, directly contradicting Lutnick’s claims of limited engagement.
The files reveal that both Lutnick and Epstein, acting on behalf of limited liability companies, entered into an agreement on December 28, 2012, to acquire stakes in Adfin, an advertising technology company that has since ceased operations. This documented business transaction places Lutnick squarely within Epstein’s business dealings, underscoring a connection that goes beyond casual acquaintance.
Further details from the Epstein files suggest a closer proximity than Lutnick has acknowledged. Reports indicate Lutnick was, at one point, Epstein’s next-door neighbor. This close geographical proximity, coupled with the documented business ties, raises questions about the extent of their relationship and Lutnick’s assertion of limited interactions.
Lutnick has previously spoken about visiting Epstein’s New York townhouse and feeling “creeped out,” claiming he was only six steps away from Epstein’s home and decided to cease contact thereafter. However, the timing of the Adfin business deal in 2014, which occurred well after the alleged 2005 interaction that prompted his supposed revulsion, calls into question the sincerity of his statements. Emails also show continued contact, including arranged calls and planned drinks in 2011, further challenging his narrative of cutting ties.
The revelations about Lutnick’s business connection with Epstein, particularly in light of his prominent government role, have ignited significant public concern and scrutiny. The Epstein files, a complex web of connections involving numerous influential figures, continue to expose individuals who maintained relationships with the convicted sex offender.
The sheer volume of names appearing in connection with Epstein, especially those holding positions of power, has led to widespread speculation about the nature and extent of his influence. The notion that these connections might have been leveraged for political or personal gain is a recurring theme in public discourse surrounding the files.
The implication that Donald Trump may have utilized the Epstein files as a form of vetting or leverage for his administration’s appointments is a deeply unsettling one. If such a practice occurred, it would suggest a chilling mechanism of control, where individuals with documented associations with Epstein could be subjected to undue influence or blackmail.
This alleged use of the Epstein files as a hiring database for individuals connected to Epstein, as posited by some observers, would create a situation where appointees are indebted to Trump and potentially compromised. The concern is that this would ensure absolute loyalty and complicity, especially if Trump himself possessed damaging information on these individuals.
The pattern of influential figures, including those in high-ranking government positions, appearing in the Epstein files has fueled a broader discussion about corruption and accountability within powerful circles. The sheer breadth of documented contacts, spanning political figures, tech moguls, and entertainment industry leaders, suggests a deeply entrenched network.
The juxtaposition of Lutnick’s public statements with the documented evidence from the Epstein files highlights a broader concern about transparency and the vetting process for individuals appointed to sensitive government roles. The continued unfolding of these revelations underscores the enduring impact of the Epstein scandal and the ongoing questions it raises about the individuals who were associated with him.