Podcasts about accusers

Attorney Tony Buzbee, representing over 120 individuals alleging sexual misconduct by Sean "Diddy" Combs, has announced plans to pursue legal action against high-profile individuals who attended Combs' notorious "freak off" parties. Buzbee asserts that these attendees, including celebrities and politicians, are "just as liable" for the alleged abuses, even if they did not directly participate. He emphasizes that witnessing or being aware of misconduct without intervening constitutes complicity.To address this, Buzbee has sent demand letters to several prominent figures, seeking to resolve matters privately. He warns that failure to respond will result in lawsuits. Buzbee's approach underscores his commitment to holding not only the primary perpetrator accountable but also those who enabled or ignored the alleged misconduct. He believes that exposing these enablers is crucial for justice and transparency.Also...Ray J has recently expressed concerns about the involvement of other celebrities in the allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs. He suggested that high-profile individuals are financially compensating alleged victims to keep their names out of Diddy's legal troubles, which include charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and prostitution. Ray J indicated that these celebrities are engaging in a "catch and kill" scheme to protect their reputations and avoid exposure. He also predicted that more celebrities and people in power might either step down or be exposed as the situation unfolds.(commercial at 9:24)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ray J claims celebs told him they are afraid of Diddy affiliation and have paid alleged victims to keep quiet | Daily Mail OnlineDiddy's Celebrity “Freak Off” Guests Facing Legal Action, Accusers' Attorney Claims  - AllHipHop

Send us a textGood morning! Thank you for taking a few minutes to listen. If you are interested in the Daily Bible Devotional, you can find it at the links below:Amazon - (paperback, hardcover, and Kindle)Spiritbuilding.com - (premium quality paperback)Youtube Video Introducing the ContentFeel free to reach out with any questions: emersonk78@me.comActs 24 Paul stands before Governor Felix to defend himself against accusations made by High Priest Ananias and a lawyer named Tertullus, who seeks to flatter the Governor. They charge Paul with causing dissension, leading a sect, and attempting to desecrate the temple. In his defense, Paul asserts that he worships the God of his ancestors, believes in the resurrection, and strives to maintain a clear conscience before God and all people. Felix postpones his decision, keeping Paul in custody while allowing him certain freedoms. Felix frequently calls for Paul, intrigued by his teachings on faith in Christ, righteousness, and judgment. However, Felix seeks a bribe from Paul, which he refuses to pay. Unfortunately, Felix does not respond to the gospel and, after being replaced by Festus two years later, leaves Paul imprisoned.  Accusers are adamant that Paul is a divisive man who deserves punishment. Considering this, Paul presents a compelling defense. He shows respect to the Governor and calmly recounts his recent actions in Jerusalem, asserting that the accusations are baseless. He directs attention to God, in whom he believes and places his hope. He points out that he and his opponents share a love for God and a belief in the resurrection of the dead. Paul emphasizes that he has acted with a clear conscience every step of the way. This sincerity resonated with Felix, who often invited Paul to teach about Jesus. This entire discourse is an example to us of how to testify about Jesus with integrity.  Dear Lord, please protect Your people from the unrighteous in this world. Some openly deny You, while others believe themselves to be righteous. We pray that You stop their ungodly actions and soften their hearts to know Jesus. Whenever we encounter such unbelievers, grant us wisdom and patience to share Your truth with the right attitude and intent. May it never be about ourselves but always about honoring You and opening the hearts of others to Christ. Create opportunities today to discuss righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come. Challenge us to live by these fundamental truths in our lives.  Thought Questions: -       Paul was labeled “a real pest.” While not the description Christians seek, are you willing to be labeled if it means standing up for God?  -       Is there an appropriate way to defend yourself against accusations? How do you do so while also honoring God in the process? -       Felix heard the truth but kept procrastinating. What is the danger of putting off important spiritual truths for a later time?

Sean "Diddy" Combs is facing two new sexual assault lawsuits filed in December 2024. The first lawsuit, brought by an anonymous Jane Doe, alleges that Combs drugged and raped her in 1991 during a charity basketball event in New York City. According to the complaint, the plaintiff was introduced to Combs at the event, where he offered her a drink that caused her to feel disoriented. She claims to have regained consciousness in a private room, where Combs allegedly assaulted her. Combs' legal team has denied these allegations, describing them as false and financially motivated.The second lawsuit was filed by LaTroya Grayson, who asserts that she was sexually assaulted at Combs' "White Party" in New York City in October 2006. Grayson alleges that after winning a radio contest to attend the event, she consumed a beverage provided by the event staff, after which she lost consciousness. She later awoke in a hospital with no memory of the events, missing clothing, and signs of assault. Grayson claims to have experienced significant physical and emotional distress following the incident. Combs' representatives have refuted these claims, maintaining his innocence and criticizing the lawsuits as opportunistic attempts to tarnish his reputation.(commercial at 9:53)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy hit with two more sexual assault lawsuits as claims against him mount ahead of criminal trial | Daily Mail Online

Prosecutors in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs have expressed concerns about revealing the identities of anonymous accusers, citing serious issues of witness safety and potential obstruction. They argue that early disclosure of these identities could expose witnesses to intimidation or harm, especially given Combs' influence and the nature of the allegations. This stance is in response to Combs' defense team's request for the accusers' names to prepare for trial, which prosecutors contend is premature and could jeopardize the integrity of the proceedings.Additionally, prosecutors emphasize that disclosing accusers' identities at this stage is tantamount to providing an early witness list, which is not customary in criminal cases. They maintain that protecting the anonymity of the accusers is crucial to prevent any potential interference with the judicial process and to ensure that witnesses can testify without fear of retaliation. This approach aims to balance the defendant's right to a fair trial with the necessity of safeguarding the accusers and upholding the integrity of the legal process.(commercial at 8:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy investigators raise ‘serious concerns' for victims' safety | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sean “Diddy” Combs is pushing for a gag order against the attorneys representing his accusers, alleging that their public statements are threatening his right to a fair trial. On the eve of his criminal proceedings, Combs' legal team filed a motion requesting the court to restrict what the opposing counsel can say to the media, citing a “media circus” and arguing that the consistent leaks and inflammatory commentary are prejudicing the potential jury pool. Diddy's lawyers claim the plaintiffs' attorneys, particularly those handling the civil suits tied to sex trafficking and assault allegations, are engaging in a coordinated PR campaign designed to sway public opinion before any evidence is formally presented in court.The request for a gag order comes amid mounting legal trouble for Combs, who faces multiple lawsuits and a federal criminal investigation that includes the possibility of RICO charges. His legal team is framing the issue as a matter of constitutional fairness, asserting that the relentless media attention—much of it fed by the accusers' attorneys—violates due process and could derail any hope of impartial proceedings. The court has not yet ruled on the motion, but if granted, it could significantly limit public discourse from key voices in the case, setting up a major legal battle not just over the facts, but over who gets to shape the narrative.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's legal team asks judge to place gag orders on victims' attorneys on eve of trial | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Allowing an accuser to proceed anonymously in civil lawsuits or criminal proceedings offers several advantages. It protects the individual's privacy, especially in cases involving sensitive matters like sexual assault, thereby reducing potential public scrutiny and emotional distress. Anonymity can also shield the accuser from possible retaliation or harassment, encouraging victims to come forward without fear of personal repercussions. This protection is particularly vital when the accused holds significant power or influence, as it helps balance the scales of justice.However, anonymity in legal proceedings presents notable challenges. It may hinder the defendant's ability to fully investigate the accuser's background and credibility, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial. The public's right to open judicial proceedings is also compromised, as transparency is a cornerstone of the legal system. Moreover, anonymity could inadvertently suggest that the allegations are more severe, potentially biasing jurors or the public against the defendant. Courts must carefully weigh these factors, often requiring compelling reasons to grant anonymity to ensure that justice is served equitably for all parties involved.The debate over anonymity for Sean "Diddy" Combs' accusers centers on balancing the accusers' privacy and safety with the defendant's right to a fair trial and the public's interest in transparent legal proceedings. Some accusers have sought to proceed under pseudonyms to protect themselves from potential harassment and public scrutiny. However, courts have ruled that allegations alone do not justify anonymity, emphasizing the importance of openness in judicial processes and the defendant's ability to investigate the accusers' credibility. This tension highlights the complexities of handling sensitive allegations against high-profile individuals.Let's dive in!(commercial at 9:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Most of Sean ‘Diddy' Combs's Accusers Are Unnamed. Can They Stay That Way? - The New York Times

Allowing an accuser to proceed anonymously in civil lawsuits or criminal proceedings offers several advantages. It protects the individual's privacy, especially in cases involving sensitive matters like sexual assault, thereby reducing potential public scrutiny and emotional distress. Anonymity can also shield the accuser from possible retaliation or harassment, encouraging victims to come forward without fear of personal repercussions. This protection is particularly vital when the accused holds significant power or influence, as it helps balance the scales of justice.However, anonymity in legal proceedings presents notable challenges. It may hinder the defendant's ability to fully investigate the accuser's background and credibility, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial. The public's right to open judicial proceedings is also compromised, as transparency is a cornerstone of the legal system. Moreover, anonymity could inadvertently suggest that the allegations are more severe, potentially biasing jurors or the public against the defendant. Courts must carefully weigh these factors, often requiring compelling reasons to grant anonymity to ensure that justice is served equitably for all parties involved.The debate over anonymity for Sean "Diddy" Combs' accusers centers on balancing the accusers' privacy and safety with the defendant's right to a fair trial and the public's interest in transparent legal proceedings. Some accusers have sought to proceed under pseudonyms to protect themselves from potential harassment and public scrutiny. However, courts have ruled that allegations alone do not justify anonymity, emphasizing the importance of openness in judicial processes and the defendant's ability to investigate the accusers' credibility. This tension highlights the complexities of handling sensitive allegations against high-profile individuals.Let's dive in!(commercial at 9:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Most of Sean ‘Diddy' Combs's Accusers Are Unnamed. Can They Stay That Way? - The New York Times

Attorney Tony Buzbee, representing over 120 individuals alleging sexual misconduct by Sean "Diddy" Combs, has announced plans to pursue legal action against high-profile individuals who attended Combs' notorious "freak off" parties. Buzbee asserts that these attendees, including celebrities and politicians, are "just as liable" for the alleged abuses, even if they did not directly participate. He emphasizes that witnessing or being aware of misconduct without intervening constitutes complicity.To address this, Buzbee has sent demand letters to several prominent figures, seeking to resolve matters privately. He warns that failure to respond will result in lawsuits. Buzbee's approach underscores his commitment to holding not only the primary perpetrator accountable but also those who enabled or ignored the alleged misconduct. He believes that exposing these enablers is crucial for justice and transparency.Also...Ray J has recently expressed concerns about the involvement of other celebrities in the allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs. He suggested that high-profile individuals are financially compensating alleged victims to keep their names out of Diddy's legal troubles, which include charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and prostitution. Ray J indicated that these celebrities are engaging in a "catch and kill" scheme to protect their reputations and avoid exposure. He also predicted that more celebrities and people in power might either step down or be exposed as the situation unfolds.(commercial at 9:24)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ray J claims celebs told him they are afraid of Diddy affiliation and have paid alleged victims to keep quiet | Daily Mail OnlineDiddy's Celebrity “Freak Off” Guests Facing Legal Action, Accusers' Attorney Claims  - AllHipHopBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Stephen's Speech Part 08 - Stephen Indicts AccusersSupport the show: https://www.tan.org.au/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

God's truth and righteousness silences our accusers and sets us free from the bondage of sin. Subscribe to daily devotions e-mails: https://wcm.link/ddsub

Click to Subscribe: https://bit.ly/Youtube-Subscribe-SoapDirt General Hospital's latest episode saw Lois Cerullo (Rena Sofer) and Lulu Spencer (Alexa Havins) in dire straits as they faced the backlash of their deceptions. Lois's decades-long lie about Giovanni Palmieri's (Giovanni Mazza) parentage and Lulu's decision to publicly confront her at the Nurses Ball led to Gio's shocking revelation on stage. He accused his biological parents, Dante Falconeri (Dominic Zamprogna)  and Brook Lynn Quartermaine (BLQ) (Amanda Setton), of abandoning him, causing a major stir in Port Charles on the ABC soap opera. General Hospital sees Dante, who had been kept in the dark about Gio being his son, was particularly devastated, especially since it was made public at the Nurses Ball. Lulu is set to face serious repercussions for her actions, as her meddling led to this public spectacle. Dante, who initially blamed Brooklyn, realizes that she was just a young teenager when she made the decision to give Gio up for adoption. Lois is likely to face the most backlash, with Brooklyn declaring her actions unforgivable and possibly facing eviction from the Q Mansion. The fallout from these revelations is set to reverberate throughout Port Charles, with both Lois and Lulu likely to be ostracized for their actions. Visit our General Hospital section of Soap Dirt: https://soapdirt.com/category/general-hospital/ Listen to our Podcasts: https://soapdirt.podbean.com/ Check out our always up-to-date General Hospital Spoilers page at: https://soapdirt.com/general-hospital-spoilers/ Check Out our Social Media... Twitter: https://twitter.com/SoapDirtTV Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SoapDirt Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/soapdirt/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@soapdirt Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/soapdirt/

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.Under RICO, individuals and organizations can be charged with racketeering if they are found to have engaged in a pattern of illegal activity, such as bribery, extortion, fraud, or trafficking. A "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering within a ten-year period.To take down a human trafficking network using RICO, law enforcement agencies would typically investigate the network's operations, identify key individuals involved, gather evidence of their illegal activities, and establish a pattern of racketeering. This evidence could include financial transactions, communications, witness testimony, and physical evidence linking the individuals to the trafficking activities.Once the evidence is compiled, prosecutors can bring RICO charges against the leaders and members of the trafficking network. If convicted, they could face significant criminal penalties, including imprisonment and forfeiture of assets.Additionally, RICO allows victims of the trafficking network to file civil lawsuits against the perpetrators, seeking damages for the harm they have suffered. This can provide victims with a means of seeking justice and compensation for their ordeal.In this episode we get some confirmation that there are witnesses cooperating with the federal government as far as their RICO investigation goes, and we also get more evidence that the timeline of the Lil Rod suit and the eventual raid was not coincidence, but in fact, connected.  We also get a look at the list of allegations against Puffy over the past few years.  Amidst Sean "Diddy" Combs' ongoing legal troubles, Ariel Mitchell-Kidd, the lawyer representing one of his accusers, disclosed that a "high-profile" individual was unknowingly recorded in a pornographic video at Combs' home. This revelation is part of a broader case involving multiple accusations of sexual assault and sex trafficking against Combs. The video, which is allegedly being offered for sale, has sparked interest due to the unknown identity of the prominent figure captured in it. The lawyer refrained from naming the individual but hinted at their higher profile than Combs.The case also includes disturbing allegations involving Combs' violent behavior, with reports suggesting that he assaulted one of his accusers with an inanimate object and directed others to commit further sexual acts against her. The incident is said to have occurred in 2018 but came to light only recently. Combs' defense team, while preparing for his sex trafficking and racketeering trial, is grappling with these additional accusations, complicating the legal landscape for the music mogul.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser's lawyer claims 'high-profile person' was present while 'pornographic' acts were performed at rapper's house | Daily Mail Onlinesource:Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged victims 'talking a lot,' feds claim 'concrete, detailed, explicit allegations of sex trafficking' (nypost.com)Diddy raided: Here are all the allegations made against Sean Combs | The Independent

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.Under RICO, individuals and organizations can be charged with racketeering if they are found to have engaged in a pattern of illegal activity, such as bribery, extortion, fraud, or trafficking. A "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering within a ten-year period.To take down a human trafficking network using RICO, law enforcement agencies would typically investigate the network's operations, identify key individuals involved, gather evidence of their illegal activities, and establish a pattern of racketeering. This evidence could include financial transactions, communications, witness testimony, and physical evidence linking the individuals to the trafficking activities.Once the evidence is compiled, prosecutors can bring RICO charges against the leaders and members of the trafficking network. If convicted, they could face significant criminal penalties, including imprisonment and forfeiture of assets.Additionally, RICO allows victims of the trafficking network to file civil lawsuits against the perpetrators, seeking damages for the harm they have suffered. This can provide victims with a means of seeking justice and compensation for their ordeal.In this episode we get some confirmation that there are witnesses cooperating with the federal government as far as their RICO investigation goes, and we also get more evidence that the timeline of the Lil Rod suit and the eventual raid was not coincidence, but in fact, connected.  We also get a look at the list of allegations against Puffy over the past few years.  Amidst Sean "Diddy" Combs' ongoing legal troubles, Ariel Mitchell-Kidd, the lawyer representing one of his accusers, disclosed that a "high-profile" individual was unknowingly recorded in a pornographic video at Combs' home. This revelation is part of a broader case involving multiple accusations of sexual assault and sex trafficking against Combs. The video, which is allegedly being offered for sale, has sparked interest due to the unknown identity of the prominent figure captured in it. The lawyer refrained from naming the individual but hinted at their higher profile than Combs.The case also includes disturbing allegations involving Combs' violent behavior, with reports suggesting that he assaulted one of his accusers with an inanimate object and directed others to commit further sexual acts against her. The incident is said to have occurred in 2018 but came to light only recently. Combs' defense team, while preparing for his sex trafficking and racketeering trial, is grappling with these additional accusations, complicating the legal landscape for the music mogul.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser's lawyer claims 'high-profile person' was present while 'pornographic' acts were performed at rapper's house | Daily Mail Onlinesource:Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged victims 'talking a lot,' feds claim 'concrete, detailed, explicit allegations of sex trafficking' (nypost.com)Diddy raided: Here are all the allegations made against Sean Combs | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a United States federal law enacted in 1970 that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.Under RICO, individuals and organizations can be charged with racketeering if they are found to have engaged in a pattern of illegal activity, such as bribery, extortion, fraud, or trafficking. A "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts of racketeering within a ten-year period.To take down a human trafficking network using RICO, law enforcement agencies would typically investigate the network's operations, identify key individuals involved, gather evidence of their illegal activities, and establish a pattern of racketeering. This evidence could include financial transactions, communications, witness testimony, and physical evidence linking the individuals to the trafficking activities.Once the evidence is compiled, prosecutors can bring RICO charges against the leaders and members of the trafficking network. If convicted, they could face significant criminal penalties, including imprisonment and forfeiture of assets.Additionally, RICO allows victims of the trafficking network to file civil lawsuits against the perpetrators, seeking damages for the harm they have suffered. This can provide victims with a means of seeking justice and compensation for their ordeal.In this episode we get some confirmation that there are witnesses cooperating with the federal government as far as their RICO investigation goes, and we also get more evidence that the timeline of the Lil Rod suit and the eventual raid was not coincidence, but in fact, connected.  We also get a look at the list of allegations against Puffy over the past few years.  Amidst Sean "Diddy" Combs' ongoing legal troubles, Ariel Mitchell-Kidd, the lawyer representing one of his accusers, disclosed that a "high-profile" individual was unknowingly recorded in a pornographic video at Combs' home. This revelation is part of a broader case involving multiple accusations of sexual assault and sex trafficking against Combs. The video, which is allegedly being offered for sale, has sparked interest due to the unknown identity of the prominent figure captured in it. The lawyer refrained from naming the individual but hinted at their higher profile than Combs.The case also includes disturbing allegations involving Combs' violent behavior, with reports suggesting that he assaulted one of his accusers with an inanimate object and directed others to commit further sexual acts against her. The incident is said to have occurred in 2018 but came to light only recently. Combs' defense team, while preparing for his sex trafficking and racketeering trial, is grappling with these additional accusations, complicating the legal landscape for the music mogul.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser's lawyer claims 'high-profile person' was present while 'pornographic' acts were performed at rapper's house | Daily Mail Onlinesource:Sean 'Diddy' Combs' alleged victims 'talking a lot,' feds claim 'concrete, detailed, explicit allegations of sex trafficking' (nypost.com)Diddy raided: Here are all the allegations made against Sean Combs | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In our latest edition of Words of Grace, Benjamin Winslett shares a recent sermon preached at Flint River Primitive Baptist Church, focusing on two false accusations made against Christ during His mock trials, before the crucifixion. Drawing from Isaiah 53:7-9, we explore the silence of Jesus before His accusers, the meaning behind the phrases “He … Continue reading "Answering Christ’s Accusers | Isaiah 53"

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdf

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Sean “Diddy” Combs is pushing for a gag order against the attorneys representing his accusers, alleging that their public statements are threatening his right to a fair trial. On the eve of his criminal proceedings, Combs' legal team filed a motion requesting the court to restrict what the opposing counsel can say to the media, citing a “media circus” and arguing that the consistent leaks and inflammatory commentary are prejudicing the potential jury pool. Diddy's lawyers claim the plaintiffs' attorneys, particularly those handling the civil suits tied to sex trafficking and assault allegations, are engaging in a coordinated PR campaign designed to sway public opinion before any evidence is formally presented in court.The request for a gag order comes amid mounting legal trouble for Combs, who faces multiple lawsuits and a federal criminal investigation that includes the possibility of RICO charges. His legal team is framing the issue as a matter of constitutional fairness, asserting that the relentless media attention—much of it fed by the accusers' attorneys—violates due process and could derail any hope of impartial proceedings. The court has not yet ruled on the motion, but if granted, it could significantly limit public discourse from key voices in the case, setting up a major legal battle not just over the facts, but over who gets to shape the narrative.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's legal team asks judge to place gag orders on victims' attorneys on eve of trial | Daily Mail Online

Sean “Diddy” Combs is pushing for a gag order against the attorneys representing his accusers, alleging that their public statements are threatening his right to a fair trial. On the eve of his criminal proceedings, Combs' legal team filed a motion requesting the court to restrict what the opposing counsel can say to the media, citing a “media circus” and arguing that the consistent leaks and inflammatory commentary are prejudicing the potential jury pool. Diddy's lawyers claim the plaintiffs' attorneys, particularly those handling the civil suits tied to sex trafficking and assault allegations, are engaging in a coordinated PR campaign designed to sway public opinion before any evidence is formally presented in court.The request for a gag order comes amid mounting legal trouble for Combs, who faces multiple lawsuits and a federal criminal investigation that includes the possibility of RICO charges. His legal team is framing the issue as a matter of constitutional fairness, asserting that the relentless media attention—much of it fed by the accusers' attorneys—violates due process and could derail any hope of impartial proceedings. The court has not yet ruled on the motion, but if granted, it could significantly limit public discourse from key voices in the case, setting up a major legal battle not just over the facts, but over who gets to shape the narrative.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's legal team asks judge to place gag orders on victims' attorneys on eve of trial | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sean “Diddy” Combs is pushing for a gag order against the attorneys representing his accusers, alleging that their public statements are threatening his right to a fair trial. On the eve of his criminal proceedings, Combs' legal team filed a motion requesting the court to restrict what the opposing counsel can say to the media, citing a “media circus” and arguing that the consistent leaks and inflammatory commentary are prejudicing the potential jury pool. Diddy's lawyers claim the plaintiffs' attorneys, particularly those handling the civil suits tied to sex trafficking and assault allegations, are engaging in a coordinated PR campaign designed to sway public opinion before any evidence is formally presented in court.The request for a gag order comes amid mounting legal trouble for Combs, who faces multiple lawsuits and a federal criminal investigation that includes the possibility of RICO charges. His legal team is framing the issue as a matter of constitutional fairness, asserting that the relentless media attention—much of it fed by the accusers' attorneys—violates due process and could derail any hope of impartial proceedings. The court has not yet ruled on the motion, but if granted, it could significantly limit public discourse from key voices in the case, setting up a major legal battle not just over the facts, but over who gets to shape the narrative.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's legal team asks judge to place gag orders on victims' attorneys on eve of trial | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this document, Sean Combs' legal team opposes the government's motion in limine that seeks to avoid disclosing the identities of certain witnesses in the criminal case against him. The defense argues that the government has not demonstrated any credible or individualized threat posed by Combs to justify withholding this information. They note that the government relies on generic assertions about witness safety without offering specific allegations of intimidation, coercion, or retaliation tied directly to Combs. The motion, they claim, lacks the evidentiary foundation required under legal precedent to support such an extreme restriction on the defendant's constitutional rights.Combs' attorneys also argue that shielding witness identities until just before trial would severely handicap the defense by preventing them from conducting thorough investigations, preparing cross-examinations, and assessing credibility—core components of a fair trial. They emphasize that protective measures, such as protective orders and redactions where necessary, already exist to mitigate genuine safety concerns without infringing on due process. Ultimately, the filing urges the court to deny the government's motion, framing it as an overreach that would tilt the trial unfairly in favor of the prosecution.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.266.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this document, Sean Combs' legal team opposes the government's motion in limine that seeks to avoid disclosing the identities of certain witnesses in the criminal case against him. The defense argues that the government has not demonstrated any credible or individualized threat posed by Combs to justify withholding this information. They note that the government relies on generic assertions about witness safety without offering specific allegations of intimidation, coercion, or retaliation tied directly to Combs. The motion, they claim, lacks the evidentiary foundation required under legal precedent to support such an extreme restriction on the defendant's constitutional rights.Combs' attorneys also argue that shielding witness identities until just before trial would severely handicap the defense by preventing them from conducting thorough investigations, preparing cross-examinations, and assessing credibility—core components of a fair trial. They emphasize that protective measures, such as protective orders and redactions where necessary, already exist to mitigate genuine safety concerns without infringing on due process. Ultimately, the filing urges the court to deny the government's motion, framing it as an overreach that would tilt the trial unfairly in favor of the prosecution.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.266.0.pdf

In this document, Sean Combs' legal team opposes the government's motion in limine that seeks to avoid disclosing the identities of certain witnesses in the criminal case against him. The defense argues that the government has not demonstrated any credible or individualized threat posed by Combs to justify withholding this information. They note that the government relies on generic assertions about witness safety without offering specific allegations of intimidation, coercion, or retaliation tied directly to Combs. The motion, they claim, lacks the evidentiary foundation required under legal precedent to support such an extreme restriction on the defendant's constitutional rights.Combs' attorneys also argue that shielding witness identities until just before trial would severely handicap the defense by preventing them from conducting thorough investigations, preparing cross-examinations, and assessing credibility—core components of a fair trial. They emphasize that protective measures, such as protective orders and redactions where necessary, already exist to mitigate genuine safety concerns without infringing on due process. Ultimately, the filing urges the court to deny the government's motion, framing it as an overreach that would tilt the trial unfairly in favor of the prosecution.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.266.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Hake Report, Tuesday, April 22, 2025 ADI Disavow tee https://hake.printify.me/product/19356961/i-disavow-monkey-covering-mouth-t-shirt-gildan-5000-heavy-cottonTIMESTAMPS* (0:00:00) Start* (0:03:21) Accusers* (0:11:38) Hey, guys! I Disavow mint green tee* (0:15:26) STEPHEN, IN: W. Bush, Austin-Karmelo theory* (0:28:45) BRIAN, NOLA: Tariffs? Trump for himself? Deported Abrego Garcia* (0:46:33) TERRI, OR: Earth Day: Ira Einhorn killed ex-gf. Activist misery. Nurses.* (1:09:39) MEADE, Richmond: Fort Bragg renamed but not to Braxton but Roland* (1:16:43) MEADE: Ride a horse, shoot a gun, girls invading!* (1:20:07) Super…* (1:21:08) Coffee: "ridiculous" that Karmelo cried self-defense?* (1:26:50) CHASE, TX: Women; Angels or Aliens* (1:35:11) HADEN, TX: Trump a criminal? "Self defense"? Jesus is God?* (1:47:31) Anchor Baby coming* (1:48:25) Covid dot gov redirect … No Ardene* (1:58:30) ALLEN, MI: Earth Day, Lenin's b-day; Commies marking their territory* (2:09:01) RICK, VA: Lose a fight right; The truth, Fox News, JLP* (2:19:18) Anchor Baby next; Joel Friday back tomorrow* (2:20:06) WAYNE, TX: Baptism of the Spirit* (2:24:40) WAYNE: Istanbul, tariffs… Ephesus* (2:30:31) ANTHONY, CA… Jesus is God question, Orthodox* (2:48:28) News: Robbie Williams anxious scurvy, FSU female students* (2:53:10) PastPresentFuture - "The Hake Report"LINKSBLOG https://www.thehakereport.com/blog/2025/4/22/the-hake-report-tue-4-22-25PODCAST / Substack HAKE NEWS from JLP https://www.thehakereport.com/jlp-news/2025/4/22/jlp-tue-4-22-25Hake is live M-F 9-11a PT (11-1CT/12-2ET) Call-in 1-888-775-3773 https://www.thehakereport.com/showVIDEO YouTube - Rumble* - Facebook - X - BitChute (Live) - Odysee*PODCAST Substack - Apple - Spotify - Castbox - Podcast Addict*SUPER CHAT on platforms* above or BuyMeACoffee, etc.SHOP - Printify (new!) - Spring (old!) - Cameo | All My LinksJLP Network: JLP - Church - TFS - Nick - Joel - Punchie Get full access to HAKE at thehakereport.substack.com/subscribe

On today's show we will look at a recent edition of Table Talk where Rick Renner is calling out podcasters as accusers of the brethren. Daystar Petition: https://tinyurl.com/ycxwe4ye Jonathan & Suzy Lamb GiveSendGo: https://www.givesendgo.com/GEBG9 Richardson Nutritional Center: https://tinyurl.com/mudzzy3n Zstack Protocol: https://zstacklife.com/?ref=LAURALYNN Antibiotics at: Sales@larxmedical.com Promo code: LLTT Need some Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine? Fast shipping with guaranteed delivery in Canada and the US. Contact Mia for more information. SozoHealth@proton.me ☆ We no longer can trust our mainstream media, which is why independent journalists such as myself are the new way to receive accurate information about our world. Thank you for supporting us – your generosity and kindness to help us keep information like this coming! ☆ ~ L I N K S ~ ➞ DONATE AT: https://www.lauralynn.tv/ or lauralynnlive@protonmail.com ➞ TWITTER: @LauraLynnTT ➞ FACEBOOK: Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson ➞ RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/LauraLynnTylerThompson ➞ BITCHUTE: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/BodlXs2IF22h/ ➞ YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/LauraLynnTyler ➞ BRIGHTEON: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/lauralynntv ➞ DLIVE: https://dlive.tv/Laura-Lynn ➞ ODYSEE: https://odysee.com/@LauraLynnTT:9 ➞ GETTR: https://www.gettr.com/user/lauralynn ➞ LIBRTI: https://librti.com/laura-lynn-tyler-thompson

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdf

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdf

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a motion filed on April 4, 2025, the U.S. government asked the court to implement protective measures for three key victim-witnesses expected to testify in the criminal trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. The government argued that Victim-2, Victim-3, and Victim-4 should be permitted to testify under pseudonyms to safeguard their privacy, dignity, and mental well-being. Unlike Victim-1—confirmed to be Cassie Ventura—who has agreed to testify using her full name, the other three requested anonymity due to concerns about harassment, stigma, and professional fallout. Prosecutors further requested that the defense be barred from revealing these individuals' personal details in open court and that any court exhibits containing their names be sealed, with redacted versions available to the public.The motion cited precedent from similar federal cases, including those involving sex trafficking and abuse, where anonymity was granted to protect victims from retraumatization and undue exposure. The government emphasized that these requests were narrowly tailored to balance the victims' privacy rights with the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. The motion was brought under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. § 3771), which ensures victims are treated with fairness and respect, and it stressed that denying these protections could discourage victim cooperation or inhibit truthful testimony. If granted, the court's decision would mark a significant procedural step in shaping how key testimony will be handled in Diddy's high-profile federal trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.211.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Psalms are a collection of 150 Songs carefully placed inside 5 books of Psalms:  Book 1:1-41, Book 2:42-72, Book: 3:73-89, Book 4:90-106, Book 5:107-150.  The first three books are primarily lament Psalms.  Sadness, anger, and bewilderment are prayed out.  The final two books include two very angry Psalms, 109 and 137, but these books are dominated by Praise.  The final six Psalms thunder with the praise of the "I Am "God. The five books of Psalms are clearly intended as responsive speech to the five books of the Pentateuch, Genesis - Deuteronomy.  The Pentateuch is the story of "I am" calling Israel to be His crisis relief for the entire creation. The Psalms are prayed from the time of David, 1000 B.C., from inside the story the Hebrew scripture tells.  The Psalter was not collected into its current form until the 4th century B.C.  By then Israel had been in exile for two hundred years.  Yet the Israel of the 2nd Temple, 530 B.C. to 70, AD., is singing her faith in the rebuilt temple and those living outside Judea are singing inside synagogues throughout the Roman empire.  The Psalms were Jesus' prayer book and were prayed by the early church.  (Matt. 27:46, Col. 3:16, Eph. 5:19) We will pray and praise a representative collection of the Great Psalms of the Psalter -Psalms 1, 2, 3, 8, 16, 19, 22, 23, 42, 51, 73-74, 88-89, 90, 104-106, 109, 110, and 139.  We will pray out to the Lord God our emotions and struggles, but we will continue praying through from confusion, doubt, and anger to more clarity, trust, and peace.  We will be encouraged, rebuked, and discipled by the ancient Songs of Israel, Jesus, and our Church Fathers and Mothers. The "I Am," the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, will bless us as we draw near to God together.  Come join us on the Way.

In Episode 161 of Not on Record, Diana and Joseph dissect a recent sexual assault case where their client was acquitted due to critical inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, which was undermined by dash cam footage and phone records. The complainant alleged a 12-minute assault, choking, and forcible confinement at her workplace, but the defense presented dash cam evidence showing the accused being waved into the office, another person entering during the alleged assault, and the accused leaving within a timeframe that contradicted her account; additionally, a five-minute phone call she made to her father during the alleged assault further weakened her timeline. Confronted with this evidence during cross-examination, the complainant was forced to admit details she previously denied, leading the defense to argue that the allegations were fabricated to preempt a racial discrimination complaint filed against her, and ultimately leading the judge to deem her testimony unbelievable and acquit the defendant. Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com #Podcast #law #MeToo

This audio recording from a church service on March 16, 2025, centers on a passage from John 8 about the adulterous woman brought before Jesus. The sermon uses this biblical story to illustrate God's grace and offer of second chances to those burdened by their sins, no matter how significant they may seem. It emphasizes that Jesus confronts accusers, leaving individuals to face their sin before a merciful savior. The message encourages listeners not to be intimidated by judgment and to recognize Jesus as Lord, offering forgiveness and the opportunity to live anew, free from the bondage of past mistakes. Ultimately, it conveys that God's grace is always available, providing endless chances for redemption and a life without continued sin.Support the showThanks for listening! Follow us on Facebook or Instagram more info colonialkc.org

The so-called "congressional hush fund" refers to the egregious misuse of taxpayer dollars to quietly settle sexual harassment and misconduct claims against members of Congress and their staff. Managed through the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR), this fund has been used for decades to pay off accusers, shielding politicians from public accountability while keeping their misconduct hidden from voters. Rather than forcing individual offenders to bear the financial and reputational consequences of their actions, this system has effectively allowed elected officials to use public money as a personal damage-control mechanism. The settlements, often accompanied by strict non-disclosure agreements, have ensured that the public remains in the dark about the full extent of misconduct within the halls of power.This corrupt and unethical practice highlights the deep rot within the political establishment, where lawmakers—who are supposed to represent the people—operate under a different set of rules, immune to the very standards they impose on others. Instead of facing criminal charges or public disgrace, offenders have been protected by a taxpayer-funded safety net, enabling repeat offenses and further entrenching a culture of impunity. The fact that these payouts were made with no transparency, and without the consent of the very taxpayers footing the bill, is a grotesque violation of public trust. Despite public outrage and calls for reform, only limited changes have been made, with many settlements still shrouded in secrecy, leaving Americans to wonder just how many powerful figures have escaped justice at their expense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Congress paid $17 million in settlements. Why we know so little about that money. | CNN Politics

The so-called "congressional hush fund" refers to the egregious misuse of taxpayer dollars to quietly settle sexual harassment and misconduct claims against members of Congress and their staff. Managed through the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR), this fund has been used for decades to pay off accusers, shielding politicians from public accountability while keeping their misconduct hidden from voters. Rather than forcing individual offenders to bear the financial and reputational consequences of their actions, this system has effectively allowed elected officials to use public money as a personal damage-control mechanism. The settlements, often accompanied by strict non-disclosure agreements, have ensured that the public remains in the dark about the full extent of misconduct within the halls of power.This corrupt and unethical practice highlights the deep rot within the political establishment, where lawmakers—who are supposed to represent the people—operate under a different set of rules, immune to the very standards they impose on others. Instead of facing criminal charges or public disgrace, offenders have been protected by a taxpayer-funded safety net, enabling repeat offenses and further entrenching a culture of impunity. The fact that these payouts were made with no transparency, and without the consent of the very taxpayers footing the bill, is a grotesque violation of public trust. Despite public outrage and calls for reform, only limited changes have been made, with many settlements still shrouded in secrecy, leaving Americans to wonder just how many powerful figures have escaped justice at their expense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Congress paid $17 million in settlements. Why we know so little about that money. | CNN Politics

The so-called "congressional hush fund" refers to the egregious misuse of taxpayer dollars to quietly settle sexual harassment and misconduct claims against members of Congress and their staff. Managed through the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR), this fund has been used for decades to pay off accusers, shielding politicians from public accountability while keeping their misconduct hidden from voters. Rather than forcing individual offenders to bear the financial and reputational consequences of their actions, this system has effectively allowed elected officials to use public money as a personal damage-control mechanism. The settlements, often accompanied by strict non-disclosure agreements, have ensured that the public remains in the dark about the full extent of misconduct within the halls of power.This corrupt and unethical practice highlights the deep rot within the political establishment, where lawmakers—who are supposed to represent the people—operate under a different set of rules, immune to the very standards they impose on others. Instead of facing criminal charges or public disgrace, offenders have been protected by a taxpayer-funded safety net, enabling repeat offenses and further entrenching a culture of impunity. The fact that these payouts were made with no transparency, and without the consent of the very taxpayers footing the bill, is a grotesque violation of public trust. Despite public outrage and calls for reform, only limited changes have been made, with many settlements still shrouded in secrecy, leaving Americans to wonder just how many powerful figures have escaped justice at their expense.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Congress paid $17 million in settlements. Why we know so little about that money. | CNN PoliticsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Big O is asked about Justin Tucker

On November 4, 2024, Sean "Diddy" Combs celebrated his 55th birthday at Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center. His day began with a standard prison breakfast at 6 a.m., featuring biscuits and gravy, oven-browned potatoes, bread, and oatmeal. Lunch at 11 a.m. included options such as cheese pizza, Italian pasta salad, and green beans. For dinner, served after the 4 p.m. headcount, the menu offered choices like chicken or tofu fried rice accompanied by black beans and carrots.These meals mark a significant departure from Combs' previous lavish birthday celebrations. In 2023, he hosted a star-studded party at LAVO restaurant in London, attended by celebrities like Janet Jackson and Naomi Campbell. His 50th birthday in 2019 featured a grand event at his Beverly Hills mansion with guests including Beyoncé, Jay-Z, and Kim Kardashian. Currently, Combs is awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and prostitution, having been denied bail since his arrest in September 2024.Prosecutors in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs have expressed concerns about revealing the identities of anonymous accusers, citing serious issues of witness safety and potential obstruction. They argue that early disclosure of these identities could expose witnesses to intimidation or harm, especially given Combs' influence and the nature of the allegations. This stance is in response to Combs' defense team's request for the accusers' names to prepare for trial, which prosecutors contend is premature and could jeopardize the integrity of the proceedings.Additionally, prosecutors emphasize that disclosing accusers' identities at this stage is tantamount to providing an early witness list, which is not customary in criminal cases. They maintain that protecting the anonymity of the accusers is crucial to prevent any potential interference with the judicial process and to ensure that witnesses can testify without fear of retaliation. This approach aims to balance the defendant's right to a fair trial with the necessity of safeguarding the accusers and upholding the integrity of the legal process.(commercial at 8:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy investigators raise ‘serious concerns' for victims' safety | Fox Newssource:Exclusive | Sean 'Diddy' Combs' birthday meal in prison revealed as he turns 55 behind bars

On November 4, 2024, Sean "Diddy" Combs celebrated his 55th birthday at Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center. His day began with a standard prison breakfast at 6 a.m., featuring biscuits and gravy, oven-browned potatoes, bread, and oatmeal. Lunch at 11 a.m. included options such as cheese pizza, Italian pasta salad, and green beans. For dinner, served after the 4 p.m. headcount, the menu offered choices like chicken or tofu fried rice accompanied by black beans and carrots.These meals mark a significant departure from Combs' previous lavish birthday celebrations. In 2023, he hosted a star-studded party at LAVO restaurant in London, attended by celebrities like Janet Jackson and Naomi Campbell. His 50th birthday in 2019 featured a grand event at his Beverly Hills mansion with guests including Beyoncé, Jay-Z, and Kim Kardashian. Currently, Combs is awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking, racketeering, and prostitution, having been denied bail since his arrest in September 2024.Prosecutors in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs have expressed concerns about revealing the identities of anonymous accusers, citing serious issues of witness safety and potential obstruction. They argue that early disclosure of these identities could expose witnesses to intimidation or harm, especially given Combs' influence and the nature of the allegations. This stance is in response to Combs' defense team's request for the accusers' names to prepare for trial, which prosecutors contend is premature and could jeopardize the integrity of the proceedings.Additionally, prosecutors emphasize that disclosing accusers' identities at this stage is tantamount to providing an early witness list, which is not customary in criminal cases. They maintain that protecting the anonymity of the accusers is crucial to prevent any potential interference with the judicial process and to ensure that witnesses can testify without fear of retaliation. This approach aims to balance the defendant's right to a fair trial with the necessity of safeguarding the accusers and upholding the integrity of the legal process.(commercial at 8:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy investigators raise ‘serious concerns' for victims' safety | Fox Newssource:Exclusive | Sean 'Diddy' Combs' birthday meal in prison revealed as he turns 55 behind barsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Justin Tucker ENTERS Deshaun Watson TERRITORY! More Accusers EMERGE as NFL Investigation LOOMS!

Women alleging they were assaulted by a group of infamous playboy brothers have come forward to share their distressing experiences on cameraSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, originally designed to dismantle organized crime syndicates like the mafia, has evolved into a powerful legal tool used to prosecute a wide range of criminal enterprises, including those involving high-profile figures in the entertainment industry. RICO allows prosecutors to target entire criminal organizations, holding leaders accountable for the actions of their subordinates by linking various crimes—such as fraud, drug trafficking, and sexual misconduct—into a broader criminal enterprise. This statute has been instrumental in cases like those of R. Kelly and Keith Raniere, where both men were convicted for operating criminal networks that exploited vulnerable individuals under the guise of legitimate businesses or celebrity status.Sean Combs now faces RICO charges, as prosecutors allege that he operated a criminal enterprise involving sexual misconduct and other criminal activities, with enablers supporting and facilitating his actions. The RICO charges mark a significant escalation in Combs' legal battle, and the potential for superseding indictments could further expand the scope of the case. As seen in previous high-profile RICO cases, this approach enables prosecutors to systematically dismantle the criminal network around the defendant. The outcome of Combs' case could set a new precedent for how the legal system addresses powerful figures in the entertainment industry, reaffirming that no one is beyond the reach of the law, regardless of their wealth or influence.At Sean "Diddy" Combs' October 10, 2024 hearing, he appeared in Manhattan federal court before Judge Arun Subramanian. The session mainly involved setting deadlines for both the defense and prosecution to file their legal arguments in preparation for the upcoming trial, which is expected to take place in May of 2025.Diddy remains in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. His defense continues to push for his release on bail, which has been denied multiple times due to concerns about witness tampering and flight risk. His legal team had previously offered a $50 million bail package, which included home detention and electronic monitoring, but it was rejected as the court considered him a potential danger to the community.During Sean "Diddy" Combs' October 10, 2024, hearing, his legal team addressed concerns about potential media leaks related to evidence in his case. His attorneys requested that the court impose a gag order to prevent further leaks from law enforcement, which they claim have already influenced public perception and could affect the fairness of the trial. Diddy's team alleges that government agents leaked sensitive material, including a 2016 surveillance video, to the media, compromising his right to a fair trial. The judge has asked the sides to draw up acceptable language for the order.The charges against Diddy include sex trafficking and racketeering, with allegations dating back to 2008. Prosecutors claim that he ran a criminal enterprise, coercing women with the help of his associates and using violence, blackmail, and other forms of intimidation to silence victims. The court appearance also allowed for both sides to discuss procedural aspects, such as evidence handling, and outline the next steps leading up to the high-profile trial. Diddy has pleaded not guilty to all charges(commercial at 14:00)to contact me:  bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:May trial date set for Diddy to face sex trafficking charges | AP News

Get Joel's Book: Https://amzn.to/48GwbLxAll Things STS: Https://linktr.ee/stspodcastSupport the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/SurvivingTheSurvivorCatch us live on YouTube: Surviving The Survivor: #BestGuests in True Crime - YouTubeWhat's up, STS Nation? Welcome to Surviving the Survivor, the podcast that promises to bring you the very best guests in all of #TrueCrime. Tonight, we're revisiting the shocking case of the Alexander Brothers, who are accused of serious criminal misconduct involving dozens of women. New developments include a civil lawsuit just filed against the brothers and a joint preliminary court hearing scheduled for this Wednesday. #BestGuests • Attorney Jordan Merson, representing several of the alleged victims, offering legal insights into the latest civil suit. • Maria, an alleged victim of the Alexander Brothers, bravely sharing her story anonymously. • Attorney Ronald Richards, closely following the case, analyzing what these new legal developments could mean. #STSNation, don't miss this in-depth discussion as we explore the latest updates in one of the most talked-about cases today.#AlexanderBrothers #CivilLawsuit #PreliminaryHearing #TrueCrime #SurvivingTheSurvivor #JusticeForVictims #LegalAnalysis #TrueCrimeCommunity #Podcast #TrueCrimePodcast #JordanMerson #RonaldRichards #VictimStories

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, originally designed to dismantle organized crime syndicates like the mafia, has evolved into a powerful legal tool used to prosecute a wide range of criminal enterprises, including those involving high-profile figures in the entertainment industry. RICO allows prosecutors to target entire criminal organizations, holding leaders accountable for the actions of their subordinates by linking various crimes—such as fraud, drug trafficking, and sexual misconduct—into a broader criminal enterprise. This statute has been instrumental in cases like those of R. Kelly and Keith Raniere, where both men were convicted for operating criminal networks that exploited vulnerable individuals under the guise of legitimate businesses or celebrity status.Sean Combs now faces RICO charges, as prosecutors allege that he operated a criminal enterprise involving sexual misconduct and other criminal activities, with enablers supporting and facilitating his actions. The RICO charges mark a significant escalation in Combs' legal battle, and the potential for superseding indictments could further expand the scope of the case. As seen in previous high-profile RICO cases, this approach enables prosecutors to systematically dismantle the criminal network around the defendant. The outcome of Combs' case could set a new precedent for how the legal system addresses powerful figures in the entertainment industry, reaffirming that no one is beyond the reach of the law, regardless of their wealth or influence.At Sean "Diddy" Combs' October 10, 2024 hearing, he appeared in Manhattan federal court before Judge Arun Subramanian. The session mainly involved setting deadlines for both the defense and prosecution to file their legal arguments in preparation for the upcoming trial, which is expected to take place in May of 2025.Diddy remains in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. His defense continues to push for his release on bail, which has been denied multiple times due to concerns about witness tampering and flight risk. His legal team had previously offered a $50 million bail package, which included home detention and electronic monitoring, but it was rejected as the court considered him a potential danger to the community.During Sean "Diddy" Combs' October 10, 2024, hearing, his legal team addressed concerns about potential media leaks related to evidence in his case. His attorneys requested that the court impose a gag order to prevent further leaks from law enforcement, which they claim have already influenced public perception and could affect the fairness of the trial. Diddy's team alleges that government agents leaked sensitive material, including a 2016 surveillance video, to the media, compromising his right to a fair trial. The judge has asked the sides to draw up acceptable language for the order.The charges against Diddy include sex trafficking and racketeering, with allegations dating back to 2008. Prosecutors claim that he ran a criminal enterprise, coercing women with the help of his associates and using violence, blackmail, and other forms of intimidation to silence victims. The court appearance also allowed for both sides to discuss procedural aspects, such as evidence handling, and outline the next steps leading up to the high-profile trial. Diddy has pleaded not guilty to all charges(commercial at 14:00)to contact me:  bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:May trial date set for Diddy to face sex trafficking charges | AP NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jessica Alba and Husband Cash Warren Separate After 16 Years of Marriage (PEOPLE) (19:47)Scott Disick joins Khloe Kardashian for launch of new podcast 'Khloe in Wonder Land' (24:22)Allison Holker Addresses Book Criticism, Says She Believes Stephen 'tWitch' Boss 'Would Choose' to Share His Story to Help Others (PEOPLE) (32:59)'School of Rock' child stars get married 22 years after meeting on Jack Black movie (NY Post) (41:43)'The Fall of Diddy' Docuseries to Feature On-Camera Interviews With Mogul's Accusers and Former Employees (PEOPLE) (48:13) Toast with Jackie (@JackieOshry) and Claudia Oshry (@girlwithnojob) Lean InThe Camper and The Counselor by Jackie OshryMerchThe Toast PatreonGirl With No Job by Claudia OshrySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Prosecutors in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs have expressed concerns about revealing the identities of anonymous accusers, citing serious issues of witness safety and potential obstruction. They argue that early disclosure of these identities could expose witnesses to intimidation or harm, especially given Combs' influence and the nature of the allegations. This stance is in response to Combs' defense team's request for the accusers' names to prepare for trial, which prosecutors contend is premature and could jeopardize the integrity of the proceedings.Additionally, prosecutors emphasize that disclosing accusers' identities at this stage is tantamount to providing an early witness list, which is not customary in criminal cases. They maintain that protecting the anonymity of the accusers is crucial to prevent any potential interference with the judicial process and to ensure that witnesses can testify without fear of retaliation. This approach aims to balance the defendant's right to a fair trial with the necessity of safeguarding the accusers and upholding the integrity of the legal process.(commercial at 8:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy investigators raise ‘serious concerns' for victims' safety | Fox News

Get Joel's Book: Https://amzn.to/48GwbLxAll Things STS: Https://linktr.ee/stspodcastSupport the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/SurvivingTheSurvivorCatch us live on YouTube: Surviving The Survivor: #BestGuests in True Crime - YouTubeWhat's up, STS Nation! Welcome to another episode of Surviving the Survivor, the podcast that promises to bring you the very #BestGuests in all of #TrueCrime! Breaking developments in the shocking case of real estate moguls Oren and Alon Alexander. In federal court today, one of the Alexander brothers was denied pretrial release, with the judge ruling them a significant flight risk. Meanwhile, Oren Alexander's bail hearing and potential removal to another jurisdiction have been postponed to Tuesday. This comes as a new civil lawsuit was filed by a Pennsylvania woman, alleging that during the 2017 X Games in Aspen, she and two friends were drugged and assaulted by the Alexander twins. The claims mirror disturbing allegations from over 40 women who have come forward accusing the brothers of sexual assault and sex trafficking over a decade. Stay tuned as we break down the latest legal battles, civil lawsuits, and shocking allegations surrounding the Alexanders. #AlexanderBrothers #TrueCrime #SexTrafficking #CivilLawsuit #FederalCourt #SurvivingTheSurvivor #TrueCrimeCommunity #BailDenied #BreakingNews #JusticeMatters 

Listen to this week's episode of the Dateline: True Crime Weekly podcast with Andrea Canning. Seven years after two middle school girls are found stabbed to death near the banks of an Indiana creek, spawning rumors of a pagan sacrifice, a local man stands trial. Across the country in San Francisco, testimony begins in the case of another stabbing: the 2023 death of tech mogul, Bob Lee. And details from six new civil suits filed against Sean Combs. Plus, Keith Morrison drops by to talk about his latest podcast, "The Man in the Black Mask." To get new episodes every Thursday, follow here: https://link.chtbl.com/dtcw_fdlw

On today's episode, Andy & DJ discuss the Biden-Harris administration being blasted for running out of money to deal with Hurricane Helene after blowing on migrants, Politico saying J.D. Vance's facial hair is about 'conveying aggression' and showing his hatred of feminism, and 13 bombshell revelations from lawyer filing suits on behalf of 120 Sean 'Diddy' Combs accusers.