Epstein's FINAL Interview! Something Doesn't Add Up! Body Language Analyst Reacts!

0:00 Do you think you're the devil himself? >> No, but I I do have a good mirror. >> It's a serious question. Do you Do you think you're the devil himself? >> I I know. Why would you say that? >> What's going on everyone? Welcome to the behavioral arts. My name is Spidey and I use my degree in sociology and psychology, my certifications in criminal interrogation and body language analysis, and my experience as an award-winning mentalist to teach people behavioral analysis and practical psychology on stage and television shows all over the world. After months of public outcry, just last week, the DOJ finally released a new batch of Epstein related documents and footage. One of the most talked about pieces to surface was a filmed conversation from 2019 between Jeffrey Epstein and former White House strategist Steve Bannon. Viewers

0:46 almost instantly noticed that the interview had a very bizarre vibe and some very interesting behaviors from Jeffrey Epstein that give us a bit of insight as to what kind of a person he was. And in this analysis, we're going to look at all of it. word choice, body language, facial expressions, and we're gonna try to figure out what the intention of this interview was and what it tells us about Jeffrey Epstein as a person. Let's dive right in. >> So, in jail, I was in a place what's called the special housing unit, which is for the roughest, toughest, meanest people. They had put me there, they said, for my own protection. So, I was in a 8 by10 cell with a little slit in the door where they would serve my food. on a on tray about nine inches by four inches. And one of the guards

1:33 said, "Do you understand? There's a cr there's Wall Street's crashing. I'm I'm worried about my pension fund. What should I do?" And I said, "Sorry, Wall Street's crashing. What's happened?" And he said, "There's some crisis and some companies are going bankrupt." I said, "Are you sure?" And he said, 'Yeah, it's all over the papers. Everybody's ter We're all terrified. We're going to lose our life savings because we have either a 401k or our pension funds. We don't know anything about money. Mr. Epstein, can you tell us like what's going on? Am I going to am I going to be able to afford my children's education? Am I going to be bankrupted like this company called Lehman Brothers? And there's another company in the front page today

2:19 called Bear Sterns. Oh, no. I said, "Why?" Because that's the company I was a partner in. And in fact, that was a company I had a very large investment in. So, as a great story, I I didn't have my Wall Street Journal, but in the early mornings, you're allowed to make two phone calls, collect. The person I had called was Jimmy Kaine, the president of Bear Sterns. And I said, "Tell me what's going on." >> Okay, this is a really great clip to start with. First, because of the narrative, second, because of the behaviors, and there's a master class here on a body part that I pay a lot of

3:04 attention to, and that is the eyebrows. There is a ton of research on how important the eyebrows have been throughout human history for communication and recognition. And socially, universally, when you see the eyebrows go up, this is called an eyebrow flash. And it typically falls into one of three categories. The first one is emphasis. We very often emphasize important things with the eyebrows. The second is some kind of social approval, acknowledgement or greeting. Pretty much everywhere in the world, we very typically see the eyebrows go up as we greet someone that we recognize. And the third one is surprise. Once again, universally, when something surprises us, the eyebrows go up. But you can condense all of these into one thing. We give something importance with the eyebrows. whether it's an idea, a

3:51 person, or an event. But timing is really, really important. The research shows that when we emphasize with the eyebrows, it happens milliseconds before the important idea. It's our non-verbal way of saying what I'm about to say is really important. So, pay attention. Now, with Jeffrey Epstein, the eyebrows are really, really interesting because he will go a very long stretch of time without the eyebrows budging at all. But when he's telling a story that's very involved, we see those eyebrows come to life in a couple of very interesting and different ways. The first one is that typical emphasis. So for example here when he said like this company Lehman Brothers as he said Lehman Brothers those eyebrows went up as he was saying it. So he's emphasizing that this is important for this story. >> This company called Lehman Brothers. >> The second one which is quite a bit

4:37 higher and more exaggerated is that eyebrow flash of surprise. So when he was telling his story here about how he found out by the guard that Wall Street was crashing, he goes, "Sorry." And he leans in and the eyes open up, eyebrows go up, and then he's taken it back. >> And I said, "Sorry, Wall Street's crashing. What's happened?" >> And this is a very consistent cluster with surprise. First, we have curiosity. So when we're curious, we approach and then he's taken a back from that surprise. But again, notice that the eyebrows go up with the sorry, like he's communicating that in that moment he was surprised. Eyebrows go up. However, Jeffrey Epstein uses the eyebrows in a pretty unique way that I don't see very often out there. And we saw it here a few times, and we're going to continue to see it. And it's after he said something, we see this very quick

5:22 eyebrow flash that's not as big and not as held as that big surprise one. And a good example of it was right in the beginning of this clip as he said that when he was in jail, he was in a place called the special housing unit. Notice how it's not. I was in a place called the special housing unit where it's like this is the important place that I was. He says it and as he's finishing the thought, we see this quick little eyebrow flash. >> It was called the special housing unit. >> And then he continues the sentence and says that this was for the roughest, toughest, meanest people, which we'll get back to in a second. But again, after the idea, it's not the roughest, toughest. He's not emphasizing those ideas. After he's done saying it, we see a quick and it's almost in two beats. It's almost like a flicker of the eyebrows. It goes up and down and up again like that. Like I can't even fake

6:07 it. >> The roughest, toughest, meanest people. >> Every single time I've ever seen this eyebrow flash after an idea, it was in a storytelling context. And I believe that with him, it's a storytelling tool that's letting us know, the listener or the interviewer, how we should feel about this. So he says an idea and it's this quick eyebrow flash to let us know like, think about that. Like take a second and really think about what I said there. That was important. Don't forget it. It has notes of emphasis, surprise, and social connection. In this case, for example, he's non-verbbally communicating that he was in a place called the special housing unit. That's a big deal. It's for the roughest, toughest, meanest people. Think about that. That's not nothing. So, it's these exclamation points. It's funny. I often say in the videos that the eyebrows are like the exclamation points of the face.

6:53 And in this case, he's quite literally placing them at the end of the sentence to say, "What I just said was a big deal." There's another really good example of this when he talks about how on the cover of the newspaper there was this other company called Bear Sterns and then the eyebrows go up as his hand comes up like this and chokes his own neck like this. Now, I've seen a lot of comments on this moment online, this handto- neck gesture and a lot of people are treating it like it's a moment of body language for analysis and breaking up what it could mean. You know, is it defensiveness? Is it vulnerability? And that's typically what netguarding would fall under. So, if you're talking to someone randomly and you suddenly see the hand go up like this and it starts guarding the neck, yes, it's reasonable to assume that something about the topic is making them feel defensive or vulnerable or protective because when we

7:40 get defensive, we protect vital areas of the body, the neck being one of them. But here's the thing, this is 100% intentional and communicative. In this case, he knows he's doing this. He's using this gesture to communicate an idea. In non-verbal communication, we call this category of gestures emblems. And what that means is gestures that replace words. So, for example, in western cultures, if I do this, instead of saying good job, that's an emblem. And in this case, with the way he's pausing, eyebrows up, hands come up to the throat, this is an emblem for saying when he heard about that company that he has history with, he realized, oh my god, I'm in big trouble here. Another thing with the body language is right in the beginning of this clip, you'll notice his hands are in a position we call the steeple, which is something we very often see in the corporate world where he's from. And it looks like this

8:25 when the fingers come together like this. Sometimes it's a lowered steeple by the waist, sometimes it's up here. And this is interesting because he wasn't doing this throughout the entire interview. Throughout the interview, especially towards the beginning, we see a lot of illustrators. His hands are up here and he's illustrating the things that he's saying, but at some point he goes into the steeple position. This is very often a display of confidence, whether we are actually feeling confident or trying to show confidence. And I think we start seeing it here a lot when he's talking about jail because he knows that it's not the best look. So, he's trying to summon some confidence there to match the confidence that he had when he was talking about finance and investments up until this point. But let's talk about the vibe of this first response because we're seeing something that we're going to talk about a lot in this analysis. And it's the

9:11 fact that he tells this whole story like it's the plot to some movie. There isn't a weight to it. There isn't a heaviness to it. Like it's almost being ignored that he was in jail for being a predator. And it's almost like he thinks he's Andy Draain in Shaw Shank Redemption, right? He's like, "The guard came and told me that the market crashed. You know, help me out. Am I going to go bankrupt? What do I do?" And then he's going to go on to talk about how like people were going to ask him for stock advice. And then we get this big name drop moment at the end where he only gets two phone calls and he called the president of Beer Sterns. And that's a collect call by the way and he's so important that the president of Beer Sterns stopped what he was doing to pick up this phone call from jail to talk to him. And in and of itself, that whole segment of the story is very deceptive and that it's hiding something very

9:57 important which we're going to talk about after this next clip. Did it strike you at the time how how all the threads of your life had come together and and and and put you in a position or you had put yourself in that position? >> No. You're telling me here truthfully that it never hit you at all of how you had ended up in a place where you had to make a collect phone call from a jail cell that was 6x9 with a steel bed and your food being passed into through a slot. >> The question you want to ask is who was the other call to? Okay. Who was the other call to? The other call was to my

10:43 friend at JP Morgan who was then I didn't know it at the time trying to buy Bear Sterns. So at one point I had two phones. It was difficult because they're afraid people are going to hang themselves with the phone cord. So they don't actually come together and they're pretty short. So I was actually going between two phones talking to Bass Sterns and JP Morgan at the same time. So I found it amusing. Okay, so much going on here all woven together. But let's start with the big important eyebrow flash. So Bannon here is asking him like, "Did it strike you? Did it hit you that you're in this horrible place?" And by the way, this is a question he's going to ask again and again throughout this interview like a broken record. But in this case, the first time he gives a very direct no. You know, it didn't hit me. And by the way, that's how he often answers this

11:29 question. Very direct denial, no qualifiers, no stress, which is interesting. But the second time when we asked, he does something very different. He says, "What you should be asking is, who was the other call to?" And only after that do we see the eyebrows go up again as he looks at him with a smile. >> The question you want to ask is who was the other call to. And that's again that classic Jeffrey Epstein of saying something and literally this time he's saying here's what you should be asking. Here's what your focus should be with this little bit of an eyebrow flash of saying I know something important here. You should be asking about that. So he's completely hijacking the narrative and turning it once again to his self-importance. So when Bannon is asking about this negative thing, you know, you were in these horrible circumstances, he's

12:15 completely drowning it with optimism and going, "No, no, no. Forget about that. Ask about the other person, the other really important person that I called, cuz I'm an important person. It doesn't matter if I'm in jail. I'm calling important people." Now, this is a really good point to talk about what this interview is. Because there are a lot of sources out there that are saying that this was for a documentary that Bannon was making that he never released. and others are saying that this is Bannon media prepping Jeffrey Epstein to work on his PR, to work on his image. He's kind of coaching him. I actually have a lot of experience in both of those categories because I've been on the sets of a lot of documentaries and reality shows, so I know what those interviews look and feel like, but I've also been media prepped for television appearances, and I myself have coached people non-verbally for interviews. And

13:02 what's really interesting about this is that it's like Schroinger's cat. It's neither of those things and it's both of those things. But let me tell you which one I'm leaning towards a little bit more and why. If we look at this through the lens of it's a documentary, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense because how are you going to have one of the most talked about names in the world in front of you and spend two hours talking about a market crash from two decades ago. It doesn't make sense. If you're filming a documentary with Jeffrey Epstein in front of you, you're going to ask the questions that we all want to ask. That's what you want to talk about. That's what everybody wants to talk about. Another reason it doesn't feel too documentaryy is because there are moments where they pause between questions and the whole vibe relaxes. They're friendly. They're joking with

13:48 each other and then we get back to the questions and there's a lot of these moments where Bannon is kind of like poking the bear. And he brings up the same question again and again and again, the one that we just looked at. So, it does have a bit of this element of like asking the tough questions to see how he handles it. Now, is this to get the truth out of him for a documentary or is this some kind of coaching tool? It's not very clear. Now, if we look at it as more of a coaching or training thing, there are a couple of things that stand out as well. For example, it's well framed, it's well lit, there's production behind him, like we hear, you know, some producers talking. And that's rarely the way coaching goes. Usually coaching is we set up a camera, it's more casual, one-on-one, there isn't all this lighting. So why would a coaching session be so well staged and lit? I'm

14:33 not really sure. The other thing is that it's missing the key element, the coaching. In most cases, not always, but most cases, these coaching sessions have this stopand go feeling where it's like, oh wait, that the way you answered that, try to do it this way. Or, oh no, you shouldn't say that that way. Let's try it this way. Or do you think we can do this? It's lacking that element. They're just sitting there talking for 2 hours. But it's possible that this is a simulation that he tried to set up something that looks like a real interview. That way he feels the pressure, it feels real, and then they look at it together. And that's what I'm leaning towards a little bit more because this is what Bannon does for a living. Because the questions are nauseatingly boring and because there's this nonchalantness where he's asking tough questions. And we're going to see so many more examples of this where

15:20 Epstein is completely unaffected by these difficult topics. I feel like there's an element here of some kind of simulation or coaching. Oh, and another huge reason that I think that there's some kind of cooperation here is because so far and for the rest of the interview they're ignoring something huge. And if you don't know this, it's going to blow your mind because look at the way they were talking up until now about how he was in these horrible conditions and he only had two phone calls to make. In fact, at some point he emphasizes how this was a big decision. He had to decide who are the two people that are going to get the phone call that day. >> Think how much better that was. I had to decide who was the right person to call. That was unusual for me. >> And throughout the entire thing, both Epstein and Bannon are ignoring the fact

16:06 that he had a work leave while he was in jail. I'm not misspeaking. This was a huge controversy. During the time in jail, he had the ability and the right to leave for 12 hours a day, 6 days a week where he could go to his workplace, conduct his work, and at the end of that day come back and sleep in the jail. And there's not even a whisper of that in this whole interview. Anyone filming a documentary trying to get down to the nitty-gritty would bring that up when Jeffrey Epste is talking about these conditions that he was living in. The fact that he had to decide who to call and you know, think about that. This is a big deal. I had to only call two people a day. They're completely ignoring the fact that no, he didn't. He could leave go to his workplace and make all the calls he wanted. And it's not even suggested. And this is really interesting. Not only because it sheds

16:53 some light on the context of this interaction, but because we're going right back to that Epstein storytelling, the fascinating movie plot, because it's not as interesting if the guy could leave for 12 hours a day. That's not Shashank Redemption anymore. So, he has to talk about the bad conditions of living and being locked up where the meanest, roughest, toughest people get locked up. And there's a lot more truth to that, by the way. So, he has to package this in a way that we're seeing someone who's very self-impressed telling us a story in a fascinating way and making sure we understand how interesting it is. Before we move on from this clip, there's a really interesting word choice that I just want you to put a pin in because it's going to tie into my conclusion at the end of this. And it's when he's talking about the phone cords and he says that they were very short because they were afraid

17:39 people are going to hang themselves. Those are his words. They are afraid that people are going to hang themselves. They're afraid people are going to hang themselves with the phone cord. >> And this is really interesting. I don't want to put too much weight on it, but that's distancing language. He's not saying they were afraid that we, you know, all the people in this jail are going to use these cords ourselves. People, not me, these other people. So, think about how I might tell you. When I went to school, there was a lock on the supply closet in the gym because they were scared that we were going to go in there and cause chaos. We the students of which I am a part of. And this is the way most people will tell it. Not everyone, different people speak in different ways, but most commonly when you feel part of a demographic, you use we. But in this case, it's they he's not part of this demographic. Obviously not.

18:24 He could leave for 12 hours a day. But besides that, just just put a little pin in that. The fact that he's not part of this demographic that they're scared are going to hang themselves with the telephone cords. Well, what I think the people find one of the reasons they wanted to keep me in solitary confinement was they're afraid that everybody would want to know which stocks to buy. This is BS. He knows it's BS and it's ironic that his friend is the president of Bear Sterns because in this clip Epstein is the president of BS. That is not why he was in solitary confinement. He keeps misrepresenting it. Even earlier when he said that, you know, this is where the meanest, roughest, toughest people are locked up. That's not the only people who get locked up in solitary confinement. Yes, it's true that in solitary confinement they put people who are at risk for the general population of the jail, but they also

19:11 put people in there who are at risk from the general population. This is a known thing. He knows people know this. Cararceral behavior is a big part of what we study in my degree, which is sociology. And there are four categories of people who are at very high risk for being, let's say, picked on in jail. The first is anyone charged with crimes involving children. The second is high-profile or famous inmates. The third is anyone worked in law enforcement or informants. And the fourth is anyone who's perceived as being physically vulnerable or weak. Jeffrey Epstein is three of those four things. He was there for crimes against children. He is physically I mean, let's be honest, he's not a big tough guy. He

19:56 is a very high-profile individual. He was not in solitary confinement because he was a mean, roughest, toughest person. He was there to protect him from the people who would demolish him in general population. Oh, and he certainly wasn't in there because they thought that people were going to ask him for stock advice. He knows that's not true. He knows we know that's not true. And that explains a lot of the behaviors and the difficulty of getting that sentence out. Usually, he speaks pretty clearly. Here, he's stammering, hesitating. His words are falling apart. We're getting a lot of what we call speech dysfluency. >> Well, what I think people find one of the reasons they wanted to keep me in solitary confinement. >> We're seeing these little flutters with the eyes. That blink rate is increasing a lot, which is consistent with increased cognitive load or stress. Very often happens when we're saying something that's not entirely true. So,

20:42 he knows. And he's going right back to this Andy Drain Shaw Shank Redemption where people are lined up to ask him questions about taxes. Now, mind you, he's not in a highsecurity prison. He's in a county jail where most people are either awaiting trial or serving shorter sentences. But nonetheless, these people aren't lining up to ask him about stock advice. That's not why he's in there to protect him from these advice seeking inmates. Now, we're going to look at a statement that for me just opened a Pandora's box of thoughts about this. And we're getting a big revelation about him. It's subtle, but really important. But before we look at it, do me a huge favor. Hit that subscribe button, turn those notifications on, and please take a quick second to like this video because it really does help with the success of the channel. >> You cannot tell me sometime during that

21:27 day, you did not have that conversation with yourself of how the did I do this to myself to put myself in West Palm Beach in a 6x9 cell with a metal bed with a brown shirt that said trustee spelled wrong. >> So, did I find it amazing that I was there? That's a >> not amazing. I don't want to say it was not funny. Oh, I thought it was >> I wasn't funny, >> right? >> Not amazing. >> It was incredible. >> Incred incredible in what way? >> Incredible. Like, how do I do this to myself? >> No, it's as incredible as me sitting here in this house. >> They are both just two sides of the coin. That's how I think about it. That my life today is incredible. >> Do you consider yourself a stoic? >> No, I consider myself a hermit.

22:16 Stoic's not very happy. >> Okay, I have to speak very carefully here because this has happened before. I don't want my words to be taken out of context to over sensationalize headlines. So, we're not exactly sure when this interview was conducted, but it was in 2019 and Epstein met his demise later that year in 2019 as well. So, I don't know what the time is between the two, weeks, months. And in psychology and human behavior, there are rarely absolutes. Uh there are rarely certainties. There are patterns. And if we stick to patterns, there is a lot going on in this clip and in the rest of this interview that is generally inconsistent

23:02 with someone who would take their own life. Now, my viewers know that I'm usually not someone who subscribes to conspiracy theories. In fact, I most often apply AAM's razor, which is the belief that the simplest explanation is often the correct one. And I'm not jumping to huge conclusions here. I'm not saying I know what happened. I don't have any theories. I'm just saying that behaviorally speaking, as a generalization, I've worked in mental health for a very long time. I used to specialize in emotional management and depression. I've called several of my psychologist friends, clinical psychologists, forensic psychologists, and there's very high agreement that there are specific behaviors that we're seeing here that are not typical with somebody who would take their own life. First off, he has a very grandiose sense of self. And the term that we usually

23:48 associate to that is narcissism, but that's a diagnosis. And in this case, I'm not using it as a diagnosis, but more as an adjective, a description of behavior. And with narcissists, there are three types. The first is the grandiose narcissist. That's the one you commonly think of when you hear narcissist. It's the big personality who's very impressed by themselves. The second one is the malignant narcissist, which is when the narcissism goes to a point of criminality because the person cares a lot about themselves and has very little regard for other people. It leads to a life of crime or an act of crime. And then the third one, which is the one that is the hardest to recognize and the one we talked the least about, is the covert or vulnerable narcissist, which is the same thing. And they're not big with personality. They're usually

24:34 very introverted. And they wonder why other people have things that they don't. And they should have all these things as well. They should have a better life than they do. So with covert narcissism, we often see depression. It it often goes hand in hand, but it's very rare that you see it with these grandiose people who are very self- admiring and think that their life is so interesting. And in this case, we have someone we just saw who refuses to put a negative spin on his experience and keeps spinning it into this positive thing. Like it's as interesting that he was in jail that he is sitting in this mansion right now doing this interview because his life is interesting. He's this movie character that we should all be fascinated by. Then he actually says the sentence, "My life is incredible."

25:20 with a lot of self-conviction with this little smile throughout this entire segment >> that my life today is incredible. >> Now, mind you, if this was 10 years ago, you can make the argument that, okay, some stuff happened since then that changed his perspective on life. But again, this is very, very close to when he went to jail and that's it. That was the end of him. So, my life is incredible doesn't exactly line up with that. And then when Bannon asks him, would you consider yourself a stoic? He goes, no, I'm a hermit. Stoic isn't happy. You'll also notice that again and again he puts an optimistic spin on negative things and just drowns it out with, oh no, it's not important that all these bad things were happening. Look at all these big important things that were happening as well. So we have all these things that don't necessarily align with

26:06 someone who very shortly after this would have taken their own life. It's not impossible. Nothing is impossible. He could have had a really bad low moment. Also, you can make the argument that someone who's so grandiose and cares so much about his image and reputation. The fact that he maybe felt that this is it, he's not going to recover from this, he might spend the rest of his life in jail. It's possible that he hit a low, it could be. All I'm saying is that the behaviors that we're seeing here typically as a pattern, not a certainty, are very far from what we would see with someone who has ideations of self harm. Now, the caveat to that is this, and and this is where I really wish we knew what this interview was. If this is media training, if this is Bannon training him or coaching him on

26:52 how to manage public perception, then it's possible that all these things did bother him, that he's not actually this happy, he's not this positive, but he's working really hard with Bannon to convey that because we're not seeing big stress here. We're not seeing him getting really nervous and defensive and saying, "Oh, no, no, it didn't bother me." And we see signs that it does. there's little signs of stress here and there. But he's throughout this interview in a very straightforward way saying, "No, I wasn't bothered by that. Look at all these interesting things that I was doing." And it's not just in the way that he's making sure to say certain things. It's in his general demeanor. It's in the way that he spins the stories. It does seem legitimately like he has a very big sense of self. It seems legit. >> There's no question to you that there is some animating life force within us that

27:38 leaves when you're dead. >> Yes. In fact, I refer to the soul this obviously a certain the questions in the past even during >> people would normally think you were soulless. So that to have you just no but have you talk about you actually believe in it >> and have done some thinking about it is pretty shocking in its own right isn't it >> well I again mathemat said >> you know Newton was at Cambridge and he was the head of the math department right he's a professor essentially >> but linenets who was lineness a German professor >> yes but what linenets said is the soul is so strange because god took chemicals which is simply the material like tables and he somehow made this

28:25 material able to have a thought. This is a really good clip because it gives us more insight about the type of person that Epstein is in more than one place. So in my seminars on human behavior, I talk about the source of confidence and how if you identify the source of someone's confidence, it really allows you to communicate with them more effectively. And there are a lot of different things that could provide confidence to someone. For example, someone who's very health consscious and goes to the gym and eats well, the source of their confidence could be their physicality. For a guy like Epstein, we could tell in the way that he talks. And we saw it right here. The source of his confidence is his intellect and his knowledge. So very often in this interview, he's asked a simple question and he gives a very long-winded answer with quotes and references and he goes into other

29:11 fields. He's being asked about finance. He keeps comparing it to the human body or to a car. Here at some point, Bannon says that people would normally think that he's soulless. And you notice that he brushes it off. He goes, "Thank you." with this little grin, very kind of muted reaction. And you'll notice in the beginning of this clip, he was very animated. The glasses came off. He's illustrating. At that point, he puts the glasses back and he goes into the steeple again. Not for very long, but I think what's happening here is he's in this high confidence place. He takes a little bit of a hit. He doesn't want to show it. He doesn't want to give the satisfaction of showing that it affected him. He just says the thank you steeple summons that confidence and then he goes to linenets and he goes to this quote and he goes to mathematically. So he goes this information right because that is his source of confidence and it's

29:57 balancing out this little hit that his ego took. He's brushing it off and he's moving on with information. Very good evidence that his confidence comes from his intellect. >> What percentage of people do you estimate? I understand you don't like probabilities. who you estimate would say, "I don't care. I want the money for my children." >> I would say everyone said, "I want the money for my children." >> Did they know where the money came from? >> If I think if you told them I told him the devil, the devil >> himself >> the devil himself said, "I'm going to exchange some dollars for you to your child's life." >> Do you think you're the devil himself? >> No, but I I do have a good mirror. >> It's a serious question. Do you do you think you're the devil himself? >> I I know. Why would you say that? because you have all the attributes. You're incredibly smart. You remember

30:43 the devil is somebody knows what the the devil's brilliant. You read Milton's you read Milton's Paradise Lost. >> No, the devil scares me. >> This Satan is okay. A lot going on here. Let's start with the non-verbal communication. So, there are three points where he addresses the idea of being the devil. The first one is when Bannon asks, "Do you think you're the devil himself?" And he says, "No, but I do have a good mirror." But before he answers that, in his eyes, we kind of see a mix of a slow blink or eye block. And that's whenever we close the eyes for a little bit longer than a blink and an eye flutter, which is these quick successions of blinks. And it's kind of like a mix of the two. Now, the research on eye blocking shows that we do it when we're either trying to hold on to a thought or exclude a thought. We don't want to think about something. And

31:28 fluttering, the research shows, happens in processing or accessing memory. So, in this moment, it's very likely that when he's asked this question, he doesn't want to face this accusation of being the devil because it doesn't line up with his sense of self. And this flutter is processing or trying to think of how to deal with this question. And he comes up with this answer, "No, but I do have a good mirror." And he's very impressed with himself cuz he smiles. Like, he's very happy about this response. Now, what he's doing here is what he does a lot, which is giving this little bit of what he thinks is a witty little comeback that has a bit of an element of mystery to it. Like, whoa, what do you mean by that? like it pulls you in with curiosity. Like, wait, what do you mean you have a good mirror? But also, I think what he's implying is, you know, he is self-inspective. He does look at himself and he knows the type of person he is and he doesn't think that

32:13 that's the devil. The other reason I think he thinks he's being funny and witty is cuz Bannon goes, it's a serious question. He goes, "Oh, sorry." And that little smile goes away like, "Okay, I'll be serious now." And now he's asked again and he goes, "I don't know. Why do you say that?" And in the eyebrows, we see curiosity. The eyebrows are furoughed like this, which is very consistent with negative feelings like anger. We see the eyebrows go down, but also with curiosity or confusion. And the hand comes up like this to scratch the head, which again is something we see either with stress or with deep thought. Right? Notice how very often when we're thinking about something, the hand comes up to the face like this. But what's really mind-blowing to me is the actual answer. He's going, "Why do you say that? Does he really need to be explained why somebody would say that or compare him to the devil? He knows what he's been charged with. He knows he's

32:59 been to jail. He knows what happened on that island. He knows what all the stories are. He knows that it's coming out. So, what do you mean? What is this? What is this curiosity as to why somebody would say something like that? If he in fact did have a good mirror, this would be a moment for him to go, look, I'm not proud of some of the things I've done. You know, obviously I' I've done some terrible things. But no, it's like throughout this entire interview, he's almost drowning out all the negative, not acknowledging the bad things that he's done, barely talking about the reasons that he was in jail in the first place. And here we have this opportunity where he's like confused by why anybody would compare him to the devil. So this is again either someone who has such a grandiose sense of self that he refuses to see any negative within himself or it makes sense that

33:45 this is some kind of media coaching where he's training himself to kind of brush off the negative and focus on the positive. And then there's this again this little cheeky thing going on where you know Bannon goes well the reason I'm comparing you to the devil is because the devil's smart not because you've done horrible things and I've been accused of horrible things. No, because you're smart. So he goes, the devil's smart. So he's again, he's being playful. He's redirecting. He's trying to get off the topic, trying to make light of the whole situation. And then he goes to, "No, the devil scares me." And we see this little smirk on the left side of the mouth. Now, typically when we see this kind of scrunching on one side, we go to contempt because contempt is universal and everywhere in the world, it's recognized as a scrunching or tension on one side of the face. But

34:30 if you look at this moment, it doesn't necessarily feel contemptuous. It can be. It can be that there's a moment here, maybe a little leak of self-contempt or contempt towards the devil or the idea of being compared to the devil, but it's more in line with this thing that he's doing throughout this whole segment where he answers with this little witty cheeky thing and then this little smile. And the reason I'm leaning a little bit more towards a self-satisfied smirk than contempt is because with contempt, usually the rest of the face doesn't have signs of happiness. It has signs of disgust or judgment or we call looking a scance like a bit of a side eye. So you get that scrunching but it looks more like this or this kind of thing. The rest of the face isn't happy with him. The rest of the face looks relaxed or pleasant. And although we see it more on the left side, the whole mouth kind of has this

35:16 little bit of a smile that we've seen throughout this entire response where he's being playful. So I think it's a little bit more of this self-satisfied smirk. So there it was certainly a lot going on. There's a lot more happening in the interview, but there's also a whole lot of nothing happening in the interview. I'll leave a link in the description if you guys want to go watch the whole thing. But a very important point that I want to make about this is the following. If I were to watch this interview with zero knowledge of who this guy is, some people would look at this and think that this is an interesting, very informed man on finance who kind of, you know, goes off topic a little bit, but also clearly has a lot of information on the financial world. Some would see a man who is very self-satisfied and who refuses to talk about anything negative and spins everything into this big positive and really wants you to think that he has a

36:02 very interesting life. And I think that with hindsight, a lot of people will look at it and go, "Oh, there are some moments here that are pretty creepy in the way that he's detached from emotion or telling that part of the story when we know there's more to it." But on the surface, I don't think that there are a billion red flags here of, okay, there is something seriously wrong with this guy. I think he has a lot of experience talking to people in that kind of schmoozy way where he has this kind of little humor that he throws in. And I think this experience is showing but also kind of indicating that maybe there is an element of here where he's being trained or coached on how to handle difficult questions and derail them to go towards the things that he does want to talk about. Another thing that I really quickly want to talk about that I didn't spend time on in the video at all is the fact that with the DOJ releasing all this information and then slowly

36:49 getting rid of some of it or taking some of it back, it just goes to show why the public is very suspicious of government. It's exactly for this reason because for such a long time we were all saying, "Look at the way they're behaving. Look at their answers. It's very ambiguous. There's information out there. Release the files." and they were saying there's nothing to release. We don't have anything. We've released everything that we had. And we did I did analysis videos where I said something doesn't add up here. And we were all kind of suspecting that there's something being hidden. Then all of a sudden all these things come out that have names that have information that have details that the public wanted to see just goes to show to what extent there was a lack of honesty and transparency. And they could have said, "Look, there are things that

37:35 we can't release. uh there are things that are sensitive because there are ongoing trials. They could have been open about that about the things they can't release. But to say that there's nothing to release, why are you guys still talking about this? All these different things that they said, there was a lot of stories that were conflicting. And it turns out there's all this information that people did want to see. But that's besides the point. Let me know in the comments what you think of this interview. And more importantly, by detaching yourself from what we know now, cuz hindsight is 2020. And I know that a lot of the times people say, "Oh, look at the way he scratched his nose at that time stamp. Obviously, this man has done some horrible things because only people who have done horrible things scratched their nose like that." That's not what I'm looking for. Completely detach yourself from what we know and tell me what you would think of him just based

38:20 on this interview. Is this someone that you think is really interesting, who has a lot of knowledge to share? Is it someone who has a really big inflated ego and that's all you can see? Is this somebody that you would think is at high risk for self harm? What do you see in this person? What are some of the things that gave him away for you? Let me know in the comments and I will see you on the next