The whistleblower who told the FBI that Howard Lutnick was laundering money through Cantor Fitzgerald lost his case against Lutnick in August of this year, and died in September....just weeks later. The court never ruled on whether he was right. Instead, it threw the case out because he filed it too late, and then Lutnick and BGC asked the court to make him pay their legal fees.
His name was Simon Andriesz. He was a managing director at BGC, the Cantor Fitzgerald brokerage Lutnick ran. The FBI filed his money laundering complaint in its Epstein case file, where it sat until the files were released this year.
2015 to 2016: He raised complaints about accounting irregularities. BGC suspended him twice and ordered him to undergo medical exams.
January 2017: BGC fired him.
2019: The CFTC fined BGC $3 million for supervision and recordkeeping failures. He said his tip led to it.
October 2020: He called the FBI and reported money laundering, fraud and Lutnick's links to Epstein. The FBI's complaint form is titled "Alleged Money Laundering by Howard Lutnick via BGC Financial and Cantor Fitzgerald."
November 2020: BGC opened an investigation into its own UK tax adviser and a senior London broker. A UK court later found they stole about £23.5 million, mostly money owed to UK tax authorities, between 2015 and 2020.
January 2025: While Lutnick was being vetted for Commerce Secretary, an FBI memo said the Bureau "did not open an investigation" into his allegations.
2026: He searched the Epstein files for "HWL," Lutnick's initials, and found 2018 emails between Lutnick and Epstein about a company they both invested in. House Oversight used them when it questioned Lutnick in May.
August 11, 2026: A UK tribunal threw out his case against BGC and Lutnick personally because it was filed years after the deadline. He argued that trauma kept him from filing sooner, and the judge rejected that. A hearing was set for November 24 on whether he should pay their legal costs.
Late September 2026: He died at a trauma treatment centre in the UK at 57. People close to him say he took his own life but no coroner's finding has been released.
Simon Andriesz spent nine years telling regulators, the FBI and Congress what he saw inside Lutnick's company. Some of it turned out to be true, some of it was never checked, and the man who could have told us which was which is gone....
Ana in her ground breaking live yesterday alluded to that the 9/9 meeting at Fort Huachuca was for a final live demo of something
I agree. The data agrees. And that live demo seems to have included the spy plane
The data suggests the live demo at Fort Huachuca was just before 9am at which time the spy plane did the exact same maneuver as it did the next day by UVU
It was also a live demo the day before while at Fort Carson.
https://t.co/g0zFbKvEbr
Just got done watching @AnaEscobarShow on YouTube.
My jaw on the floor. I can't believe the people who showed up at Ft Huachuca while Charlie was in South Korea. Im speechless right now.
I honestly feel more betrayed by and disgusted with Bobby than anyone else in this administration.
Guess what’s still being recommended to children and infants while this disgrace upon his family’s name licks the feet of a foreign spy?
Just so everyone knows, this is fake.
Battalion metals is owned by Tucker Carlson.
I absolutely did NOT lose them as a sponsor today because of this psycho (who routinely harasses Tucker Carlson as well). 😂
I was going to get to this on the @piersmorgan interview but sometimes it was hard to talk over the other respected guests interruptions.
One of Charlie’s closest friends and one of his family's most trusted TPUSA executives called me over the phone and asked me to ask Candace @RealCandaceO to keep investigating a key individual at Turning Point.
They told me also that there was an immediate attempted power grab of the control points of TPUSA shortly after Charlie’s execution.
They asked me to pass their message on to Candace.
We hope that helps you understand.
As this person, who called, was so extremely close and loyal to the family and so very, and wonderfully, trusted by them and by Turning Point, we assumed - rightly or wrongly - that the family and other executives and board members would be aware of this private telephone request to Candace.
Although this was not explicitly stated that time this was a reasonable assumption.
Not least as it was a surprising request. We were quite shocked by it.
Due to what we also discussed on that call which included potentially arranging positive warm meeting between Candace and the family there was no reason to think otherwise.
It's was not a stretch to assume that the this request was not solely the wish of the person but also the wish of the family.
The spirit of the conversation and at it heart was most certainly the desire to get to the truth about what happened on the day of Charlie's execution and to discover and uncover internal dishonesty that the person seemed to be already aware of relating to the running of and operations of TPUSA in the lead up to Charlie’s execution.
We also discussed the extraordinarily unlikely ballistic probability of Charlie being killed by a 30-06.
As we care about Charlie. His family, and we cared and care about this person - and Charlies Legacy - and we cared about the good people at Turning Point that we helped to fund and factually created jobs for them for years by introducing many donors and tens of millions of dollars to Charlie, naturally we passed on this persons urgent message to Candace as they had requested.
This is why I think now that the suggestion from Turning Point that Candace should NOT now be investigating is rotten form and is in fact the height of bad manners.
It is disingenuous.
Consider this.
First a close friend of Charlie and the family executive of an organization asks a person (Candace) to investigate your organization from the outside and then that organization complains when Candace does it.
You really, honestly could not make it up.
Although to be fair to this person
I have NOT personally heard the person that made the request, yet themselves we ask that Candace’s investigation does not continue to its conclusion.
This person was loyal to Charlie and his family.
Or Charlie and his family most certainly thought they were and so did we.
We thought that this person was well intentioned.
We have spoken at length positively since the occasion of that phone call. When they called us to ask our advice on other matters relating to the leadership of TPUSA.
I think we would have noticed if there was any such request from this person to stop. But as I said so far there has not been.
We concluded then as we do now that at that time this person was acting in Charlie’s TPUSA’s and the family’s interest posthumously.
I hope this helps.
John and Irina