 |
|
|
|||||
The consequences from being associated with Jeffrey Epstein are mostly playing out behind closed doors rather than in courtrooms. Despite the release of millions of documents and photos that seemingly include damning evidence of impropriety and even potential criminal activity, the Epstein files havent yet resulted in further criminal charges. Thats not altogether surprising as an unsigned memo from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) last year indicated that no further investigation into uncharged parties was warranted based on an exhaustive review of evidence that confirmed Epstein had harmed more than 1,000 victims. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has often frustrated lawmakers and advocates who continue to seek justice for Epsteins victims. During her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last week, Bondi said that the Justice Department is actively investigating individuals who might have conspired with the convicted sex offender, without specifying who those individuals are. On Saturday, Bondi sent a letter to Congress indicating that the DOJ has released all records, documents, communications, and investigative materials required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That letter also contained a list of 300-plus prominent individuals whose names appear in the files, though she cautioned that their names appear in a wide variety of contexts. Even if the highest law enforcement agency in the country ultimately decides not to dive back into this case to bring charges, consequences have been rippling through Hollywood, Wall Street, academia, and beyond. Some prominent figures named in the files have faced a reputational reckoning that has forced them to step down from high-profile roles, while others will likely escape unscathed from the scrutiny. Resignations from Epstein fallout The list that Bondi shared over the weekend includes the names of dozens of prominent U.S. politicians, including many who have served in either the first or second term of President Donald Trumps administrations. But politicians in Europe have thus far faced more pressure to resign. In the United States, elected officials haven’t faced the most severe consequences as of yet. Rather, people beyond the Capital Beltway are reckoning with having their personal correspondences with Epstein aired out in public, though the severity of the fallout has ranged widely. Here are some business leaders who have resigned from prominent roles in recent weeks. No one on this list has been accused of a crime, but many are facing business consequences due to the reputational damage of communicating with Epstein. Casey Wasserman In a company-wide email he reportedly sent on Friday (per CNN and other media outlets), Hollywood agent Casey Wasserman announced that he is selling his talent agency after his flirtatious emails with Ghislaine Maxwell appeared in the Epstein files and high-profile clients like Chappell Roan started to jump ship from his agency. Wasserman has thus far resisted stepping down as chair of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, though L.A. Mayor Karen Bass on Monday joined a growing chorus of people calling for his resignation. Kathryn Ruemmler The now-former general counsel for Goldman Sachs reportedly resigned last week after emails and other materials revealed her personal relationship with Epstein that included providing legal counsel and calling the disgraced financier by pet names. Ruemmler will remain with the bank until June 30 to provide a smooth transition. In a statement confirming her resignation to The New York Times, Ruemmler said: My responsibility is to put Goldman Sachss interests first. Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem On Friday, Dubai-based DP World announced in a regulatory statement that Bin Sulayem had resigned as chairman and CEO of one of the worlds largest logistics companies, where hed been at the helm since 2019and that his replacements had already been named. The Epstein files revealed a close relationship between the two men that remained long after Epstein was first convicted in 2008. Kimbal Musk The fallout from the Epstein files may be the way that many people are learning for the first time that theres a board of directors behind Burning Man, the annual desert party. Members of the Burning Man community called for the resignation of Elon Musks younger brother Kimbal Musk after his correspondence with Epstein appeared in the last trove of files. But he had apparently submitted his resignation before the latest files were released, according to The San Francisco Standard. Kimbal Musk still sits on the boards of Tesla and SpaceX. Larry Summers In November, Harvard University announced that its former president Larry Summers would immediately leave his role as an instructor as the university investigated his ties to Epstein. Summers, who also served as U.S. Treasury Secretary, was seen in photos on Epsteins private plane. Leon Black When his ties to Epstein first surfaced several years ago, Leon Black resigned from his role as CEO of investment firm Apollo Global Management and chairman of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). Even though hes largely out of the public eye now, the billionaire private equity investor surfaced again after the latest drop of Epstein files. There have been reports that some school districts have dropped plans for class pictures because of a link between Apollo, which Black led for more than three decades, and Lifetouch, which photographs students each year. Ken Murphy, CEO of Lifetouch, said in a statement that neither Black nor any of Apollos directors or investors ever had access to Lifetouch photos. Resisting calls to resign Even as some powerful figures have faced career-altering consequences stemming from their relationships with Epstein, other associates have resisted the pressure to resignfor now. That wait-and-see approach may ultimately mean that many of Epsteins associates dont face any consequences, though they may be in a period of professional limbo as the public and their respective organizations weigh the evidence. The latest release of files has been particularly reputationally damaging, though the fallout remains uneven. Without the threat of legal action by the Justice Department, some prominent people are banking on a strategy of apologizing for their links to Epstein and then vowing that they partook in no criminal activity. Whether that strategy ultimately saves them from facing consequences, only time will tell. Les Wexner The billionaire business mogul led Victorias Secret for more than a decade and most recently served as chair emeritus of Bath & Body Works, the company he cofounded. But he severed ties with these retailers several years ago, and will face questions from lawmakers this week about his relationship with Epstein. Though Wexner claims to have cut ties with Epstein by 2008 and has denied any knowledge of Epsteins offenses (as reported last week by WOSU Public Media), the FBI named him as a “co-conspirator” of Epsteins in 2019. Howard Lutnick The latest Epstein files revealed that Howard Lutnick maintained communications with Epstein more than a decade after he claimed to have cut off all contact. Lutnick testified before Congress earlier this month that he did have lunch with Epstein in 2012, years after he claimed to have cut off contact and after the financier was convicted for soliciting prostitution from a child. But hes thus far resisted calls from a bipartisan group of lawmakers who want to see Lutnick resign or be fired. Bill Gates Things must surely be a bit awkward at the Gates Foundation lately, as the organization issued a statement following the latest release of Epstein files, while the Financial Times reported that its chief executive told staff he feels sullied by the foundations association with the disgraced financier. But Gates hasnt stepped aside as chair and finally addressed what he called false allegations in an interview with an Australian TV network. Every minute I spent with him, I regret, and I apologize that I did that, Gates said. Steve Tisch Steve Tisch, co-owner of the New York Giants and the Hollywood producer behind Forrest Gump, claims to have had only a brief association with Epstein. Meanwhile, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has promised that the league will review all the facts about their relationship. In a statement (as reported in January by the Athletic and other outlets), Tisch said that he now deeply regrets his association with the convicted sex offender, but he has thus far ignored the calls for his resignation as co-owner of the Giants. Riding it out . . . Many more prominent people are simply riding out the storm caused by their inclusion in the Epstein files, with no apparent consequences for them in sight. While many supporters of President Trump called for the release of the Epstein files during the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election, Trump’s name was mentioned in the files some 38,000 times, along with several of his cabinet members and close associates, like billionaire Elon Musk. But its a topic that continues to divide voters. Trump has repeatedly rejected that he had any knowledge of Epsteins criminal activity, but a majority of Americans dont buy his story. In fact, 52% say the president is trying to cover up Epsteins crimes, while 30% say he isnt, according to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted earlier this month. While Trump recently said its time to turn the page on the Epstein scandal and Bondi has said that there are no more files to come, the reputational toll may continue to play outthough largely outside of Washington, D.C.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sandisk Corporation has announced plans for a secondary public offering. The data storage company will open up 5,821,135 common stock shares (Nasdaq:SNDK) at $545 a pop. The shares are currently owned by Western Digital Corporation (WDC), Sandisks former parent company. Sandisk separated from WDC nearly a year ago to the date, and subsequently joined the S&P 500 in November. Now, WDC is furthering that split. It will be left with 1,691,884 shares of common stock, but it plans to get rid of those as well. WDC intends to complete a debt-for-equity exchange with J.P. Morgan Securities LLC and BofA Securitiesboth of which will act as selling stockholders. Sandisk says it will not personally sell any of its shares or profit from the secondary offering. The offering should close tomorrow, Thursday, February 19. Sandisk is benefiting from an AI-fueled chip memory shortage In response to the news, Sandisks shares have fallen over 3.5% during premarket trading on Wednesday. However, theyre still sitting very comfortably. Sandisks shares have risen about 148% in 2026 and nearly 1,184% in the past 12 months. Sandisks dramatic upward trend mirrors many of its fellow memory chip makersincluding WDCs shares (Nasdaq:WDC). WDC is up around 1.68% in premarket trading and about 422% year-over-year (YOY). Micron, another manufacturer, is up about 283% YOY. Sandisk and Macron have both benefited tremendously from this years global memory chip shortage. They have AI companies to thank for the extreme demandand subsequent shortagethat makes these companies products extremely valuable and their respective shares skyrocket.
Category:
E-Commerce
As Big Tech faces criticism for the environmental impact of artificial intelligence, companies have said the technology will actually help solve climate change. But those claims often lack scientific evidence, a new report finds. And when touting the climate benefits of AI, tech companies conflate traditional AI with the more environmentally harmful generative AI, a form of bait-and-switch that amounts to greenwashing. The report, commissioned by a group of environmental organizations including Beyond Fossil Fuels, Friends of the Earth, and Stand.earth, analyzed 154 statements from tech companies, including those from Google and Microsoft, which purported that AI will have a net climate benefit. Most of those comments relate to traditional AI, the analysis found, which has a smaller environmental footprint than the generative AI tools that are spurring a boom in data centers. Tech companies, however, tend to lump these technologies together, the report says, blurring the differences and presenting the climate benefits and environmental harms as a “package deal. But whether those climate benefits are real is also unclear. Only 26% of those statements cite published academic papers, the research found, and 36% dont cite any evidence at all. Of the remaining statements, 29% cited corporate publicationsthe majority of which did not include peer-reviewed or published academic workand 8% cited media, NGOs, or unpublished academic papers. Questionable AI evidence The rapid expansion of AI has come under fire for its potential environmental harms. Reports on generative AIs climate impact vary, but the tech has been linked to intense energy and water use. Tech companies have justified their AI expansion by pointing to AIs climate benefits. One of the most widespread claims is that AI could help mitigate 5% to 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Google has repeated that statistic, including in its 2024 environmental report. That figure, however, comes from a 2021 blog post by consulting firm BCG which attributes it to the firm’s own experience with clients. This questionable extrapolation of massive global climate benefits justified on seemingly anecdotal evidence was the first clear instance of what has become a longer-term trend of overstating the climate benefits of AI, the report reads. In reality, the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects total data center consumption, driven by AI, will double by 2030and Bloomberg New Energy Finance estimates that this increase will grow total global power sector emissions by 10% over the coming decade. In another example, Googles 2025 environmental report said that rooftop solar power installations assisted by an AI mapping tool would help enable partners to reduce around 6 million metric tons of lifetime GHG emissions. Google also said that figure would be “around 6,000 times greater” than the service’s operation in 2024. But the Beyond Fossil Fuels report says that Google’s footnotes reveal that the 6 million figure is an estimate of the total emissions avoided by rooftop solar because they produce low-emissions energy, not the additional reductions from the AI mapping tool. This detail could create the impression, the report notes, that the climate benefits are attributed to the AI tool. In response to a request for comment, a Google spokesperson told Fast Company that it stood by its methodology, “which is grounded in the best available science. And we are transparent in sharing the principles and methodology that guide it.” (That methodology does not mention AI.) Microsoft, also cited in the report, declined to comment. What even counts as ‘AI’? To many, any mention of AI has become synonymous with generative AIexamples of which include large language models like Claude, ChatGPT, and Copilot, and image or video generating services like Midjourney and Sora. But not all AI is generative. Traditional AI, an umbrella term that covers subsets like machine learning, has been powering all sorts of technology for years, from search engines and recommendation algorithms to medical imaging. Generative AI consumes more energy and is associated with more emissions than traditional AI. When tech companies talk about AIs climate benefits, though, they can conflate the two terms, or position them like a package deal. Most AI climate benefits will come from traditional AI, the report found. In its analysis, the researchers said that at no point did they uncover examples in which consumer generative systems were leading to a material, verifiable, and substantial level of emissions reductions. So climate benefit claims are attributed to traditional AI, but the majority of energy consumption comes from generative AI. The surge in data center demand is largely driven by the exploding demand for generative AI. Those data centers are also directly spurring more natural gas in the U.S. The confusion between these terms matters, the report says, because it amounts to a bait-and-switch type of greenwashing: Tech companies are justifying their data center expansion by touting AIs climate benefits, though most of those data centers will not be processing climate-beneficial computation on their servers. Big Techs AI hype is distracting users from the rapid and dangerous expansion of giant, energy and water-intensive data centers, while the tech industry’s huge energy demands are throwing the fossil fuel industry a lifeline, Jill McArdle, international corporate campaigner from Beyond Fossil Fuels, said in a statement. There is simply no evidence that AI will help the climate more than it will harm it, she added. We cannot bet the climate on these baseless claims.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||