I just caught the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the DOJ EFTA team in a massive in a massive coverup related to Epstein's death. They hid the existence of a third jail employee in the SHU and tried to redact his name from the records. But they screwed up. Read this.
After Epstein's death on the night of August 9th - 10th, 2019, during Trump's first term, then Attorney General William Barr appointed the OIG to conduct a review into Epstein's death. It was a highly flawed review, which I covered here: open.substack.com/pub/johnjackso…
However, that was based on evidence that was known at that time: (1) the lies about him being suicidal, (2) the removal of his required cellmate the day he died, (3) the new video showing an orange-clad figure going to his cell at 10:39 p.m. that OIG gave an absurd excuse for,
claiming it was "probably" on of the guards carrying linens to someone on Epstein's tier 39 minutes AFTER lights out, (4) the hard drive failure on the surveillance system for the facility the day before he died, (5) the OIG lying that the tape did not show the stairs to L Tier
where Epstein was housed, (6) the guards ignoring a bright orange directive from the watch commander at their guard desk saying "Check on Epstein every 30 minutes AS PER GOD!!!!", (7) the video released by DOJ in 2025 missing several minutes and being altered, and more.
Well, guess what? In the OIG report, it claims only two jail employees were on duty the night Epstein died, Michael Thomas and Tova Noel. Well guess what? That was a blatant lie.
In reality there was a THIRD EMPLOYEE, Ghitto Bonhomme on duty during the critical time of 4 p.m. to midnight.Combined with the orange-clad figure at 10:39 p.m., this is a HUGE omission, and nothing less than a lie.
But, on top of that, there's another HUGE fact: the "it was probably Noel carrying linens" narrative has been blown out of the water, for several reasons. will get back to that in a moment, because there is a COVER UP related to Ghitto Bonhomme.
In the initial Epstein files drop, CBS News reported that there was an interview with him in the files. Now, it is GONE. DOJ removed it. More importantly, with a trained eye, as someone who has taken over 150 depositions, it is everywhere. cbsnews.com/news/epstein-f…
Deposition/interview transcripts are supposed to be a word index at the end. In most of the transcripts I have seen, it is missing. This is key, because look at this transcript of an unknown supervisory corrections officer. See how it says "Ghitto" at 56:14? Oops.
Guess what happens when you go to page 56 line 14? It says "if I mispronounce the name" because Ghitto Bonhomme is an unusual name to most English-speaking Americans. Also, they are going down the list of guards, and IT IS REDACTED. This means DOJ forgot to redact the index.
This is all over the place. Look at Noel's interview transcript. She's being asked about who was there during her 4 p.m. to midnight shift on the night Epstein died. Well, yet again, Ghitto's unique name saves the truth. See where it says "phonetic" spelling?"
In a transcript like this, identical to a deposition transcript, that means when something is strangely spelled or hard to understand, the questioner is spelling it out, letter by letter. It's Ghitto Bonhomme, as confirmed by the SHU at MCC schedule, below:
The DOJ was not through attempting to cover up Bonhomme's name. Remember the unknown supervisory corrections officer transcript where the DOJ mistakenly forgot to redact Ghitto from the word index? They redacted his last name, Bonhomme. See below. Oops.
There are more futile redactions. In Thomas's transcript, Bonhomme is redacted, yet again according to the alphabetical order. In various parts of the transcript, it's clear they're having trouble pronouncing someone's name, likely Bonhomme's.
As you can see here, they're talking about someone they cannot pronounce correctly. Multiple points in the Thomas interview like this correlating with the size of the index space where Bonhomme would fit.
So the OIG lied about who was on duty that night. A huge omission. You know why? Thomas and Noel both were charged for falsifying records relating to counting the inmates at specific times. But Bonhomme, although not signing the fake count sheets, saw it happen also,
but was not charged as far as we know. Another reason why his removal from the original Epstein Files production and current website is critical is because his interview undermines hugely the OIG narrative for the mystery orange-clad figure going up the stairs to
Epstein's cell at 10:39 p.m. seen on the video that was released by DOJ in 2025 that's missing several minutes and is not the raw footage, even thought Pam Bondi promised it was the raw footage. Bonhomme apparently said based on CBS reporting of the transcript now missing from
the DOJ Epstein Files website that it couldn't have been a jail employee because that would violate the rules at MCC. Also, Noel claimed she doesn't take linens to inmates, that's the prior shift's responsibility. cbsnews.com/news/epstein-f…
Notably, the FBI disagreed with the OIG that it was in fact a guard. They are in the wrong clothing, they are going up 39 minutes after lights out for an incomprehensible reason, and guess what else? Noel was so lazy she did NONE of the counts after 10:00 p.m. on August 9th,
But she was so diligent she took linens up to Epstein's tier? People are lazy or they are not. She pled guilty to falsifying records as did Thomas. The OIG's reasoning disagrees in a document where the FBI says it is an inmate. The OIG was part of Bill Barr's DOJ at this time.
Other FBI agents also think Epstein was likely murdered. The FBI agents are the ones with world-class investigative skills at this time, not the DOJ. Look at these entries.
But there's another critical fact that destroys the "orange figure dressed as an inmate was really a guard" narrative. The OIG failed and refused to get EITHER Noel, Thomas, or apparently, Bonhomme, the only three jail employees in the SHU that night to admit it was them.
OIG did not ask them. And Thomas was asleep most of his shift, and Noel was either asleep or too lazy to move more than a few times, as this testimony makes clear. I am at the end of this thread, so I will fill in the conclusion here.
The OIG lied about who was present in the MCC Special Housing Unit (SHU) where Epstein was housed on L Tier. That is a MASSIVE lie. Not a small one. It also LIED about what could be seen on the surveillance tape, by claiming that you couldn't see the stairs going to L Tier.
That was a MASSIVE lie. You could see the orange figure at 10:39 p.m. going up, easily. The OIG failed to even ask Noel or Thomas if it was her, and was in possession of her statement she doesn't deal with linens. Now the DOJ EFTA Team is trying to cover up Bonhomme's name in the files, to continue that fraud. Searching the index does not show his interview referenced in the CBS reporting.
But put all that aside, the fact Bonhomme was omitted during a critical period when the orange-clad figure was heading up the stairs is a big deal. It calls into question the entire OIG report.
Combined with everything else, there must be a House Committee on the OIG Report and Epstein's death, once Democrats take power in November 2026, like the House Select Committee on Assassinations. This cannot stand.
I will have more content on this today or tomorrow. But wanted to get this out now. Keep the pressure up.
Quick update, the OIG report lie on the stairs was that you could see the whole stairwell, and no one could go up them without being seen, when in fact you could only see the far left side, but even that was enough to see the orange-clad person at 10:39 p.m. More to come!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here is a comprehensive thread on why, both legally and practically, the 28-point plan is shockingly awful. It excuses the 2022 invasion, gives Trump access to endless power over Ukraine even after he leaves office, and is totally one-sided. It even violates the US Constitution.
"1. Ukraine's sovereignty will be confirmed"
This is meaningless. It is a truism, not a concrete statement backed with enforcement mechanisms. It says a conclusion, but not how it is achieved. Further, the whole document contradicts it. Not a good start.
"2. A comprehensive non-aggression agreement will be concluded . . . All ambiguities of the last 30 years will be considered settled."
Yes, Budapest 1994 again, but look deeper: it hides Russia's intentional breaches of prior agreements behind the veil of "ambiguities" and treats the US and Europe as equal threats to Russia.
How Ukraine worked a masterpiece in its Minerals Agreement with the United States: a thread 🧵:
To summarize, Ukraine placated Trump with a vague, unenforceable document with no specific obligations whose described purpose is Ukraine's security and prosperity.
Link at end.
The "Agreement to Agree." This is the quintessential structure of the document. It sets forth only general understandings and puts off any specific duties, rights, and obligations to a later contract, the Fund Agreement.
Why is this critical? Because any enforcement tribunal, whether a court, arbiter, or UN or EU panel, will ask the basic question? How can specific performance be ordered? What specifically are the parties obligated to do?
The first class action related to DOGE's mishandling of personal sensitive information (PSI) has been filed. In this thread, I will discuss what the lawsuit alleges and claims involved. In the next thread, I will explain class actions. Complaint link:
The Plaintiffs, both individually and as proposed class representatives, are employees of the federal government, including the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, the Bureau of Prisons, Navy, USAID, and the Forest Service. Their PSI was held by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
The Complaint asserts 1 claim for relief: a federal statutory cause of action for violation of the Privacy Act of 1974. More specifically, Plaintiffs allege that their PSI, comprised of their health, financial, address, disability status, SS #, and Passport # were disclosed.
Short thread for those who are considering the concealed carry of a handgun after the election. I have carried for 10+ years. I am just going to address the basics, such as choice of caliber, weapon, ammunition, and the importance of training and practice. DM me with questions.
Caliber choice. 9mm is recommended. It is what the FBI and most police departments use. With modern ammunition, the terminal performance is excellent. Shot placement is the most important component of neutralizing a threat quickly, not caliber choice.
Ammunition choice. This is crucial. Hollow-point ammunition from a large manufacturer, I recommend the following:
-Federal HST 124 grain
-Speer Gold Dot 124 grain
-Hornady Critical Duty 135 grain
-Hornady Critical Defense 115 grain
-Remington Golden Saber 124 grain
Recently, a dispute arose over the Georgian Legion and its fundraising practices. From this focused beginning, the dispute expanded, broadly, into an array of personal attacks, doxing, harassment, and accusations of foreign influence. This thread will address the key issues.
More specifically, I intend to identify in order of importance importance transparency and its connection to modern Ukrainian history, how we can avoid a repeat of this situation in the future, where donation monies are unaccounted for, and how to move forward to victory.
First, why transparency matters. Let me say that any attack upon transparency in fundraising is an attack upon the soul of the 2014 Revolution of Dignity and the Ukrainians' brave struggle for freedom across many decades. Let me explain why.
Why is the Purdue Pharma decision one of the most important pro consumer-protection cases to be handed down in the 21st century, if not decades? How close did we come as a nation to a devastating and dangerous result? I will simplify and summarize, short 🧵
First, a quick primer on how bankruptcy is used by corporations who commit fraud, sell defective products, or otherwise engage in malfeasance that causes broad public harm.
The Bankruptcy Code is intended to give people and corporations who incur debts beyond their means to repay a "fresh start," to collect lawsuits pending in multiple states into one federal forum, and ensure that a debtor's (the person or company who declares bankruptcy) assets