Podcasts about Epstein

Tonight on The Last Word: Donald Trump's Iran war is at a stalemate with 64 days until midterms. Also, the Supreme Court allows Trump to continue his ballroom construction. Plus, Trump prioritizes vanity projects as Americans struggle. And a new discharge petition on the Epstein files goes live. Sen. Chris Coons, Joyce Vance, Rep. Joyce Beatty, and Rep. Ro Khanna join Jonathan Capehart. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In the first weeks after the murders of Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin, Moscow police repeatedly pushed back against the flood of rumors, amateur theories and outright misinformation spreading online. Chief James Fry and other investigators stressed that the department was receiving thousands of tips but warned the public not to confuse speculation with evidence. Police addressed rumors involving people seen at the food truck, the victims' friends and acquaintances, a private driver, a dog found at the residence and other individuals who became targets of intense online suspicion. Fry made clear that investigators were following evidence rather than social-media narratives and repeatedly said that people who had been publicly accused or scrutinized had been investigated and, in many cases, cleared. The department also warned that false information was consuming investigative resources because detectives had to spend time sorting legitimate leads from internet-generated noise.Fry was especially firm about the harm caused when online sleuths publicly identified people as suspects without evidence. Moscow police said rumors could damage innocent people, interfere with the investigation and create unnecessary fear in the community. The department urged anyone with actual information to send it directly to investigators instead of posting theories publicly, and it regularly updated its website to correct false claims and clarify what investigators did and did not know. Fry acknowledged the intense public interest in the case but emphasized that police could not release every detail simply to satisfy speculation because doing so could compromise the investigation. The message from Moscow police was consistent throughout those early weeks: investigators understood that people wanted answers, but they believed the constant churn of rumors, accusations and amateur detective work was more likely to hinder the search for the killer than help it.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

There was an eerie institutional parallel between Jeffrey Epstein and Larry Nassar even though the two men operated in completely different worlds. Both were serial sexual predators whose abuse continued after authorities and powerful institutions had received credible warnings, and in both cases the FBI became a central part of the eventual accountability story. In Nassar's case, the Justice Department inspector general found that FBI officials failed to respond to abuse allegations with the urgency required, made fundamental investigative errors and failed to alert other authorities, allowing Nassar to remain a threat for months afterward. Epstein survivors later made strikingly similar allegations, arguing that federal authorities had received information about Epstein's conduct, failed to adequately investigate or stop him, and thereby allowed additional women and girls to be harmed. The oddest symbolic connection came when a purported letter from Epstein to Nassar surfaced in a government Epstein-file release, only for the Justice Department to later say the letter was fake, an episode that further blurred two already notorious stories about institutional failure.The survivors' lawsuits followed remarkably similar logic. Nassar survivors argued that the FBI had a duty to respond once it learned what he was doing, failed to do so competently and should therefore be held responsible for the abuse that occurred after those failures. The Justice Department ultimately agreed to pay $138.7 million to resolve 139 claims arising from the FBI's handling of the Nassar allegations. Epstein survivors have pursued the same basic theory against the federal government: that agents received warnings and information about Epstein, failed to act adequately, and left victims exposed to a predator who continued operating for years. In both cases, the lawsuits shifted attention away from the perpetrators alone and toward the institutions that had opportunities to intervene but allegedly failed to use them. That is what makes the comparison so powerful: Nassar and Epstein were different predators in different environments, but their survivors ended up asking essentially the same question of the FBIto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Allison discusses the probability of Justice Department lawyers being held in contempt over the possible refusal to hand over handwritten FBI interview notes about Donald Trump in the Epstein files. Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Watch every episode ad-free & uncensored on Patreon: https://patreon.com/dannyjones Jon Ronson is a gonzo journalist, author, and filmmaker who famously infiltrated Bohemian Grove & the Bilderberg group. He is best known for works such as Them: Adventures with Extremists, The Men Who Stare at Goats, and The Psychopath Test. SPONSORS https://mengotomars.com - Get 50% off for life plus free shipping & 3 free gifts. https://butcherbox.com/danny - Get $20 off your first box, plus your choice of free ribeye, new york strip, or filet mignon in every box for a year. https://blueprint.bryanjohnson.com - Use code DANNY for 20% off + free shipping. https://mod.com - Use code DANNY for 10% off your first order PLUS free shipping. https://whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off. EPISODE LINKS Jon's new book - https://amzn.to/3V4g2Op https://jonronson.com *NEW* DJP MERCH https://dannyjonespodcast.com FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/dannyjones https://twitter.com/jonesdanny OUTLINE 00:00 - UK's police culture war 05:59 - The Castle & "101 Princesses" 14:04 - "Them" & learning from Islamic extremists 18:53 - The Shadow Cabal ruling the world 26:50 - Members of the Bilderberg Group 34:14 - Pizzagate was a distraction from Epstein 39:18 - Jon's visit to Uri Geller's house 41:36 - Military's Project Jedi 44:14 - Sense of being stared at & haunted houses 48:19 - UFO hunting in Nevada 49:48 - General Stubblebine & secret military tech 53:26 - Remote viewing & the Heaven's Gate connection 01:01:31 - Jon's experience with Scientologists 01:05:05 - Visiting the Broadmoor psychiatric hospital 01:08:41 - How to detect a psychopath 01:16:49 - Itzhak Bentov's theory of consciousness 01:21:05 - Eleanor Longden's schizophrenia 01:26:45 - Death of industry 01:28:27 - Attending UFC 250 at the White House 01:35:33 - Josh Hokit's comments at UFC 250 01:40:54 - Photographer behind Trump's Butler assassination attempt photo 01:46:30 - Feminization of the world vs. the Manosphere 01:52:43 - The unraveling of manhood 01:59:56 - Greg's story from blue collar worker to "Bad Baby" 02:11:07 - Free speech 02:15:31 - Infiltrating Bohemian Grove 02:26:09 - Satanic owl imagery in Bohemian Grove 02:30:00 - Dick Cheney was at Bohemian Grove 02:36:03 - The Epstein conspiracy could be "anything" 02:45:13 - The mystery of Epstein's prostate 02:50:44 - Randy Weaver & the Ruby Ridge standoff 02:59:12 - The Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy 03:03:22 - Jon's visit to Aryan Nations Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On today's MJ Morning Show:Eagles in CaliforniaNY BigfootEx-Barclays boss denies Epstein-related accusationsMorons in the newsWoman stuck with payments on stolen car she had purchased from dealerPeople are using less of thisMJ InstagramCanal St. in NYC raid on sellers of counterfeit bagsBartender suggests fa-JIE-tasE-mail - recommendation for carbon monoxide detectorsGuy walks out on date who wanted him to pay for her nail salonHow dangerous are 'Claw clips'?Michelle wants to learn to....Reddit - Tampa International Airport - Terminal C Starbucks PSAHow fast did the Nepal disasaster take?Clearwater woman charged after breastfeeding while drunkMJ wants to know why a chopper was flying overhead this morning2 Georgia women charged with fraudHVAC tech kicked a dog, caught on cameraA father tripped a 9-year-old football player on the field during a gameDog owner wanted dog on a hot surfaceBryan Stern of Grey Bull Rescue on the Nepal situationSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 non-prosecution agreement remains one of the most consequential documents in the entire scandal because, despite years of litigation attacking the way it was negotiated, it was never formally rescinded. In 2019, a federal judge found that prosecutors in South Florida violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act by secretly negotiating the agreement with Epstein's lawyers without first conferring with his victims and by later misleading victims into believing the federal investigation was still active. The survivors sought extraordinary relief, including rescission of the NPA, but Epstein's death in August 2019 fundamentally changed the posture of the case. The district court ultimately declined to void the agreement, and the survivors' broader effort to obtain relief under the CVRA was later rejected on appeal. The Justice Department itself eventually concluded that Alex Acosta exercised poor judgment in resolving the investigation through the NPA, but it did not declare the agreement invalid. The result is a deeply unusual legal reality: a deal negotiated in secrecy, found to have been handled in violation of victims' rights, and condemned even within the Justice Department still remains part of the legal record rather than having been formally erased.That reality has become even harder to reconcile with newly surfaced evidence showing that federal prosecutors themselves documented repeated breaches of the agreement by Epstein. A June 2009 letter from then-acting U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman described several violations and referenced five separate warnings, including Epstein's failure to meet plea deadlines, interference with victim notification, resistance to efforts to identify additional victims, and false or threatening representations involving his work-release eligibility. The NPA expressly provided that a breach of even one condition allowed the United States to terminate the deal and prosecute Epstein and potentially others covered by its protections. Yet prosecutors never exercised that option. Epstein continued enjoying the central benefit of the bargain, immunity from federal prosecution in South Florida, while the government acknowledged internally that it was not receiving the finality, cooperation and other benefits it expected. So even after victims challenged the agreement, a judge found their rights had been violated, the Justice Department criticized how the deal was handled, and prosecutors' own records showed Epstein repeatedly breached it, the NPA was never formally voided. That is precisely why it remains such a powerful symbol of the extraordinary latitude Epstein received from the federal justice system.to ocntact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

The transcripts from Jes Staley's July 24, 2026 interview with the House Oversight Committee revealed just how deep and personal his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became, while also exposing contradictions in the way Staley had described that relationship publicly. Staley acknowledged visiting Epstein's Manhattan townhouse dozens of times, traveling to Little St. James on multiple occasions and exchanging roughly 1,200 communications with Epstein between 2008 and 2012. He admitted that he had shared confidential and potentially market-sensitive JPMorgan information with Epstein, including details about the bank's business, client relationships, pending transactions and even communications involving the Federal Reserve during the 2008 financial crisis. Staley also told investigators that he had discussed his own compensation with Epstein and sought his advice, despite previously portraying Epstein as having little or no connection to his professional life after the 2008 conviction. He further acknowledged having a sexual encounter with one of Epstein's assistants after meeting her through Epstein, while insisting that Epstein did not arrange it and that he had no knowledge that the woman had later accused Epstein of abuse.The committee also pressed Staley on some of the strangest and most troubling material in his correspondence with Epstein, including the notorious “Snow White” emails and other references to Disney characters. Staley denied having sex with a woman dressed as Snow White and said he could not explain the meaning of some of the messages, even when investigators confronted him with contemporaneous emails and photographs. He maintained that he did not know Epstein was continuing to abuse girls after his 2008 conviction, calling that revelation “incredible,” yet the transcripts also showed that Staley personally argued for JPMorgan to keep Epstein as a client even as internal concerns about Epstein's cash withdrawals and potential trafficking activity were mounting. Staley also said he had spoken with Jamie Dimon about Epstein, something Dimon and JPMorgan have disputed. Taken together, the testimony painted a picture of a relationship that was far closer, more intertwined with Staley's professional life and more difficult to reconcile with his earlier descriptions than he had previously acknowledged.to contact me:bobbycapuci@protonmail.com

The transcripts from Jes Staley's July 24, 2026 interview with the House Oversight Committee revealed just how deep and personal his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became, while also exposing contradictions in the way Staley had described that relationship publicly. Staley acknowledged visiting Epstein's Manhattan townhouse dozens of times, traveling to Little St. James on multiple occasions and exchanging roughly 1,200 communications with Epstein between 2008 and 2012. He admitted that he had shared confidential and potentially market-sensitive JPMorgan information with Epstein, including details about the bank's business, client relationships, pending transactions and even communications involving the Federal Reserve during the 2008 financial crisis. Staley also told investigators that he had discussed his own compensation with Epstein and sought his advice, despite previously portraying Epstein as having little or no connection to his professional life after the 2008 conviction. He further acknowledged having a sexual encounter with one of Epstein's assistants after meeting her through Epstein, while insisting that Epstein did not arrange it and that he had no knowledge that the woman had later accused Epstein of abuse.The committee also pressed Staley on some of the strangest and most troubling material in his correspondence with Epstein, including the notorious “Snow White” emails and other references to Disney characters. Staley denied having sex with a woman dressed as Snow White and said he could not explain the meaning of some of the messages, even when investigators confronted him with contemporaneous emails and photographs. He maintained that he did not know Epstein was continuing to abuse girls after his 2008 conviction, calling that revelation “incredible,” yet the transcripts also showed that Staley personally argued for JPMorgan to keep Epstein as a client even as internal concerns about Epstein's cash withdrawals and potential trafficking activity were mounting. Staley also said he had spoken with Jamie Dimon about Epstein, something Dimon and JPMorgan have disputed. Taken together, the testimony painted a picture of a relationship that was far closer, more intertwined with Staley's professional life and more difficult to reconcile with his earlier descriptions than he had previously acknowledged.to contact me:bobbycapuci@protonmail.com

The transcripts from Jes Staley's July 24, 2026 interview with the House Oversight Committee revealed just how deep and personal his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became, while also exposing contradictions in the way Staley had described that relationship publicly. Staley acknowledged visiting Epstein's Manhattan townhouse dozens of times, traveling to Little St. James on multiple occasions and exchanging roughly 1,200 communications with Epstein between 2008 and 2012. He admitted that he had shared confidential and potentially market-sensitive JPMorgan information with Epstein, including details about the bank's business, client relationships, pending transactions and even communications involving the Federal Reserve during the 2008 financial crisis. Staley also told investigators that he had discussed his own compensation with Epstein and sought his advice, despite previously portraying Epstein as having little or no connection to his professional life after the 2008 conviction. He further acknowledged having a sexual encounter with one of Epstein's assistants after meeting her through Epstein, while insisting that Epstein did not arrange it and that he had no knowledge that the woman had later accused Epstein of abuse.The committee also pressed Staley on some of the strangest and most troubling material in his correspondence with Epstein, including the notorious “Snow White” emails and other references to Disney characters. Staley denied having sex with a woman dressed as Snow White and said he could not explain the meaning of some of the messages, even when investigators confronted him with contemporaneous emails and photographs. He maintained that he did not know Epstein was continuing to abuse girls after his 2008 conviction, calling that revelation “incredible,” yet the transcripts also showed that Staley personally argued for JPMorgan to keep Epstein as a client even as internal concerns about Epstein's cash withdrawals and potential trafficking activity were mounting. Staley also said he had spoken with Jamie Dimon about Epstein, something Dimon and JPMorgan have disputed. Taken together, the testimony painted a picture of a relationship that was far closer, more intertwined with Staley's professional life and more difficult to reconcile with his earlier descriptions than he had previously acknowledged.to contact me:bobbycapuci@protonmail.com

Monday, August 25th, 2025 The DOJ has released the audio and transcripts of the witness tampering meeting between Todd Blanche and Ghislaine Maxwell; the government has threatened to deport Kilmar Abrego to Uganda if he doesn't plead guilty to the two charges against him; John Bolton's house has been raided in search of classified emails sent on a private server; a federal judge orders the dismantling of the Florida concentration camp; Fort Bliss - where the Japanese were interned during WWII - is operating as an internment camp again; the White House lists Smithsonian exhibits it wants to erase from history; the Justice Department's release of the Epstein files to House Oversight is a joke; the Pentagon plans to deploy the military to Chicago; Homeland Security is violating the law by refusing to retain text messages; Illinois announces a first of its kind legal hotline for the LGBTQ community; residents keep repainting the Pulse nightclub rainbow sidewalk after the city keeps removing it; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News. Guest: Joyce Vance Preorder Giving Up Is Unforgivable by Joyce Vance - 10/21/2025 Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance | Substack #SistersInLaw - Podcast - Apple Podcasts, The Insider Podcast - CAFE @joycewhitevance.bsky.social on Bluesky Live with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | Joyce Vance Substack Live with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | MuellerSheWrote Substack Stories Justice Dept. Sent Congress Epstein Files That Were Already Public, Democrats Say | The New York Times National Security Counselors - Donate Pentagon plans military deployment in Chicago as Trump eyes crackdown | The Washington Post Homeland Security Tells Watchdog It Hasn't Kept Text Message Data Since April | The New York Times Japanese American groups blast use of Fort Bliss, former internment camp site, as ICE detention center | NBC News White House Lists Smithsonian Exhibits It Finds Objectionable | The New York Times Florida ordered to dismantle Alligator Alcatraz over environmental impact | The Washington Post Pritzker announces 'first of its kind' legal hotline for LGBTQ+ Illinoisans | Chicago Sun-Times Rainbow crosswalk repainted outside Pulse; Florida troopers seen standing by | News 6 Orlando Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Send us Fan Mail Today's show is one I could not wait to record because Page Six genuinely pissed me off this week and I need to walk you through exactly why. Page Six blocked me without any warning and I wouldn't have noticed unless Kim D had sent me some of their gossip. I dug into what they did that crosses the line from gossip into fabricated lies including one very specific Milania Giudice story I have receipts on. I break down the whole Page Six structure — who really owns them, how NBC controls them, why they had to walk down the hall to Andy Cohen's Sirius XM studio to publish this and why I think their numbers are so bad they had to become a Bravo puppet to survive. Then I do a full drag-a-thon of Real Housewives Ultimate Girls Trip Roaring 20th Episode 3 SHADE SHOW — Kyle Richards white party — and I break down every single OG who should have been in that room and wasn't including Lisa Vanderpump, Alison DuBois, Kim Richards, Kathy Hilton, Carlton Gebbia, Jennifer Tilly and Taylor Armstrong. The shady iconic clips Bravo chose for everyone including one Erika Jayne moment they never fully aired at the reunion, a genuinely dangerous Luann de Lesseps step ladder stunt, and how Kyle Richards actually cast Camille Grammer all those years ago that I never knew until I watched this. Plus Eileen Davidson, Adrienne Maloof, Lisa Rinna, Meredith Marks, Bronwyn Newport, Whitney Rose and Gizelle Bryant all make appearances and I have thoughts on every single one. 

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Ghislaine Maxwell's family says she intends to continue fighting her conviction even after U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer rejected her latest effort to overturn it. In a statement released after the ruling, her relatives called the decision “disappointing and shocking” and accused the judge of using a tone they believed showed sarcasm and disdain toward Maxwell's arguments. Engelmayer rejected all 10 of the principal claims Maxwell raised in her pro se petition, describing them as frivolous, meritless and, in some instances, based on speculation or outright falsehoods. Maxwell had argued that documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act exposed constitutional and legal violations that undermined her 2021 conviction, including alleged suppression of evidence, false testimony and improper involvement by attorneys representing Epstein's victims. The judge rejected those claims without granting the evidentiary hearing Maxwell had requested and also declined to certify the case for appeal, finding that she had not made a substantial showing that her constitutional rights were violated.Maxwell's family nevertheless says she is not finished and is encouraging her to seek a certificate of appealability so she can take the case back to the Second Circuit. They maintain that Engelmayer's ruling contains specific legal errors that deserve further review and say Maxwell will continue pursuing every available avenue. The judge, however, strongly defended the legitimacy of the prosecution, rejecting Maxwell's claim that she had been selectively targeted as a substitute for Epstein after his death and writing that the evidence at trial established her knowing participation in enabling Epstein's abuse of underage girls. Maxwell remains sentenced to 20 years in federal prison, her conviction has already been upheld by the Second Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court has previously declined to hear her case. Her latest challenge therefore leaves her in much the same legal position as before, but with her family making clear that they intend to keep pushing for another round of appellate review.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Judge John Judge said he would not ban cameras from Bryan Kohberger's courtroom proceedings, but he made clear that he intended to impose tighter controls over how they were used. Both the prosecution and defense had raised concerns about media coverage, with Kohberger's attorneys arguing that cameras repeatedly focused on him in ways that could prejudice potential jurors, while prosecutors also supported restrictions in certain circumstances. Judge said he was trying to balance the public's right to observe the proceedings with Kohberger's constitutional right to a fair trial, and he warned photographers and media organizations that the courtroom was not a place for spectacle. He specifically objected to cameras focusing excessively on Kohberger, capturing attorneys' notes or recording during times when the court was not officially on the record.The ruling reflected the broader tension that surrounded one of the country's most closely watched murder cases. Judge emphasized that he wanted the case tried in the courtroom rather than in the media, while also recognizing the enormous public interest in the prosecution. Instead of removing cameras entirely, he chose to retain greater control over where they were positioned and what they were permitted to record. That left media access intact for the time being, but under stricter judicial supervision and with a warning that continued misuse could result in further restrictions. The dispute over cameras became another major pretrial battle in the Kohberger case, alongside the gag order, discovery fights and arguments over how much information should reach the public before a jury was ever seated.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Tova Noel, one of the two correctional officers assigned to the Metropolitan Correctional Center's Special Housing Unit on the night Jeffrey Epstein died, told the House Oversight Committee that she failed to conduct the required inmate checks and later signed records falsely indicating that the rounds had been completed. Noel described an understaffed, poorly managed facility in which she was exhausted, inadequately trained and assigned duties beyond her normal responsibilities. She maintained that she last saw Epstein alive during the evening medication round and observed nothing that made her believe he was preparing to harm himself. Noel also testified that Epstein received unusual accommodations, including extra bed linens, a CPAP machine and access to medication that appeared different from the treatment ordinarily given to other prisoners.Noel denied having any role in Epstein's death, receiving money in connection with him or knowing anything about an alleged payment to facilitate access to his cell. She also rejected claims that she was the unidentified orange-colored figure seen moving toward Epstein's tier at approximately 10:39 p.m., insisting that she never returned to the area and could not explain what—or who—the surveillance image showed. Although Noel said she believed Epstein died by suicide because he was supposedly alone inside the cell, her testimony did little to resolve the most important unanswered questions: why required checks were abandoned, why Epstein remained without a cellmate, who or what appeared near the tier, and how so many security procedures failed simultaneously. Instead, her account reinforced the picture of extraordinary negligence, special treatment and institutional dysfunction surrounding the death of the most consequential prisoner in federal custody.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Tova-Noel-Transcript.pdf

Tova Noel, one of the two correctional officers assigned to the Metropolitan Correctional Center's Special Housing Unit on the night Jeffrey Epstein died, told the House Oversight Committee that she failed to conduct the required inmate checks and later signed records falsely indicating that the rounds had been completed. Noel described an understaffed, poorly managed facility in which she was exhausted, inadequately trained and assigned duties beyond her normal responsibilities. She maintained that she last saw Epstein alive during the evening medication round and observed nothing that made her believe he was preparing to harm himself. Noel also testified that Epstein received unusual accommodations, including extra bed linens, a CPAP machine and access to medication that appeared different from the treatment ordinarily given to other prisoners.Noel denied having any role in Epstein's death, receiving money in connection with him or knowing anything about an alleged payment to facilitate access to his cell. She also rejected claims that she was the unidentified orange-colored figure seen moving toward Epstein's tier at approximately 10:39 p.m., insisting that she never returned to the area and could not explain what—or who—the surveillance image showed. Although Noel said she believed Epstein died by suicide because he was supposedly alone inside the cell, her testimony did little to resolve the most important unanswered questions: why required checks were abandoned, why Epstein remained without a cellmate, who or what appeared near the tier, and how so many security procedures failed simultaneously. Instead, her account reinforced the picture of extraordinary negligence, special treatment and institutional dysfunction surrounding the death of the most consequential prisoner in federal custody.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Tova-Noel-Transcript.pdf

Judge Steven Hippler lifted the gag order in the Bryan Kohberger case after Kohberger pleaded guilty and was sentenced, concluding that the circumstances that originally justified the sweeping restrictions on public statements had fundamentally changed. The order had been imposed during the pretrial phase to protect Kohberger's right to a fair trial and reduce the risk that lawyers, investigators, law enforcement officers, witnesses and others connected to the case could influence the jury pool through public commentary. Once there was no longer going to be a trial, Hippler found that the strongest constitutional justification for keeping those restrictions in place had largely disappeared. His ruling therefore removed the broad limits that had governed public discussion of the case for years and allowed attorneys, investigators and others previously bound by the order to speak publicly again, subject to the ordinary ethical and legal rules that still applied.The decision marked the end of one of the most contentious transparency battles in the Kohberger case. News organizations, victims' families and other interested parties had repeatedly challenged the gag order or argued that it restricted too much information from reaching the public, while the defense had consistently emphasized the need to protect Kohberger from prejudicial publicity. Hippler's order reflected the reality that those competing concerns looked very different after a guilty plea eliminated the need to seat an impartial jury. Lifting the gag order did not automatically unseal every document or make every piece of evidence public, because separate sealing orders and privacy protections could still remain in effect, but it removed the extraordinary speech restrictions that had surrounded the prosecution since its earliest stages. In practical terms, the ruling opened the door for many of the people directly involved in the case to finally discuss their experiences and the investigation without violating the court's pretrial publicity order.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

FreshEd will be back next week with new episodes! Not a member? Join us! https://freshedpodcast.com/support/ -- Today we put the field of comparative and international education in conversation with film studies. With me is Irving Epstein, emeritus Professor at Illinois Wesleyan University. Irving Epstein's new book is entitled Education, Affect, and Film: Visual Imaginings and Global Explorations Through a Comparative Lens. It will be published in June by Bloomsbury. freshedpodcast.com/epstein/ -- Get in touch! Twitter: @FreshEdpodcast Facebook: FreshEd Email: info@freshedpodcast.com Support FreshEd: www.freshedpodcast.com/support/

TONIGHT-CONTENTS-8-26-2026California Swells Weather And Nevada CasinosJeff Bliss discusses a massive southern ocean swell creating rare surfing conditions at Newport Harbor's channel. Driven by an intense tropical storm off Mexico, California is experiencing unprecedented humidity and a nearly five-degree Fahrenheit rise in ocean temperatures, prompting a surge in marine life including hammerhead and great white sharks. Turning to Nevada, Bliss describes the K-shaped economy, where Las Vegas strip casinos profit from wealthy international tourists, while local traffic declines. He details In-N-Out's slow, quality-controlled eastward expansion and concludes with Berkeley's controversial, permissive approach toward housing campus homeless encampments, noting they receive government-funded clean needles and glass pipes. (1)Separation Of Powers And Election FraudRichard Epstein discusses a federal ruling by Judge Indira Talwani blocking the Trump administration's postal mail-in voting regulations for the 2026 midterms. Epstein asserts the administration overstepped, as the Constitution explicitly delegates election regulation to Congress, not the executive. He criticizes Chief Justice John Roberts's defense of the unitary executive, calling his opinions a disgrace that allows executive power to swamp both the legislature and the judiciary. Lastly, Epstein references Paul Krugman's views on Trump's destructive physical and institutional teardown of Washington and laments how flawed standing doctrines prevent ordinary citizens from legally challenging executive overreach in federal court. (2)Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus Center details the alarming surge of the United States gross national debt to record heights, exceeding forty trillion dollars. She argues that the country suffers from an out-of-control spending problem rather than a lack of tax revenue, citing massive unpaid pandemic spending. De Rugy blames both political parties for avoiding structural reforms and warns of the critical 2032 deadline when Social Security and Medicare funding will face automatic, severe cuts. She predicts that Congress will resort to further debt and inflation, which will heavily penalize the public, while indebted European nations face similar struggles. (3)Economic Boom In Idyllic Lancaster CountyJim McTague details the thriving post-pandemic economy of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Tourism remains robust, with attractions like the Renaissance Faire drawing two hundred thousand visitors annually. The local real estate market is red-hot, with retirees purchasing existing homes with cash and bid-ups creating million-dollar McMansions. McTague notes that rising inflation has packed Costco aisles with middle-class shoppers seeking the famous five-dollar loss-leader rotisserie chickens. He also discusses local commercial resistance to data centers, explaining how the impoverished borough of Columbia rejected a lucrative data center deal that would have solved its fiscal deficits, while baby boomers power local restaurants. (4)Small Business Growth And AI IntegrationGene Marks reports on his travels, conversing with host John Batchelor about a Quebec credit union conference where executives discussed loans, competitiveness, and adopting AI in front and back offices. Due to high mortgage rates, credit unions are shifting focus toward commercial loans. In Atlanta's thriving steel industry, tariffs have boosted competitiveness, and companies are deploying AI-powered robotic arms, gloves, and dogs to improve safety. Finally, a recent Pew Research survey indicates that Gen X is leading AI adoption because older, established professionals feel more secure than younger generations, though Marks calls the fear of job loss an urban legend. (5)French Resistance And World War ExileJane Rogoyska, author of Hotel Exile: Paris in the Shadow of War, Part Two: Rogoyska details how German anti-fascists and French Jews fled Paris for Marseilles and Spain in 1941. While Heinrich Mann escaped successfully, philosopher Walter Benjamin tragically committed suicide at the Spanish border. Rogoyska notes that Samuel Beckettjoined the resistance after Paul Léon's arrest. The Abwehr, aided by the treacherous priest Robert Alesch, infiltrated resistance networks, but was sidelined as the Gestapo's brutality worsened. Post-war, the Lutetia hotel became a repatriation center processing concentration camp survivors. Beckett survived and wrote literary masterpieces, while Alesch was executed. (6)Nuclear Politics And Precision Guided WarfareHenry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, discusses the unpublicized nuclear cooperative agreement between the United States and Saudi Arabia. He warns host John Batchelor that keeping side agreements secret from the American public prevents Congressional oversight. Saudi Arabia refuses to sign the additional protocol for inspections, claiming it violates sovereignty. Sokolski also highlights Poland's conflicting stances on hosting nuclear weapons, Germany's interest in funding the United Kingdom's Trident submarine program, and how Russia uses precision-guided munitions to target civilians and demoralize Ukraine, moving nuclear weapons further into the background, concluding that this is the new reality. (7)Debating Environmental Politics Of Data CentersKevin Frazier leads a roundtable with Jim McTague and Simon Constable discussing the political and environmental backlash against data centers. Frazier details how Lancaster City welcomed data centers to erase its school district's deficit, while the poorer borough of Columbia rejected a lucrative deal due to local protests. Frazier argues that data centers are vital national infrastructure, defending the construction jobs they create and noting that blocking them harms the digital economy. Finally, Constable shares trivia from his Wall Street Journal quiz, revealing that Virginia leads the United States in data centers, followed globally by the United Kingdom. (8)V

Richard Epstein discusses a federal ruling by Judge Indira Talwani blocking the Trump administration's postal mail-in voting regulations for the 2026 midterms. Epstein asserts the administration overstepped, as the Constitution explicitly delegates election regulation to Congress, not the executive. He criticizes Chief Justice John Roberts's defense of the unitary executive, calling his opinions a disgrace that allows executive power to swamp both the legislature and the judiciary. Lastly, Epstein references Paul Krugman's views on Trump's destructive physical and institutional teardown of Washington and laments how flawed standing doctrines prevent ordinary citizens from legally challenging executive overreach in federal court. (2)

Ralph speaks with Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff for Colin Powell, about the fall of the American Empire and self-proclaimed Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth. Then we welcome the CEO and co-founder of the Canadian-based organization Corporate Knights, Toby Heap, to break down Trump's unprecedented trade war with our closest ally. Plus, Ralph has some choice words for Hakeem Jeffries and his meeting with Jared Kushner and for Hillary Clinton and her take on the war with Iran.Lawrence Wilkerson is a retired U.S. Army colonel. Over his 31 years of service, Colonel Wilkerson served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's Chief of Staff from 2002 to 2005, and Special Assistant to General Powell when he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1989 to 1993. Colonel Wilkerson also served as Deputy Director and Director of the U.S. Marine Corps War College at Quantico, Virginia, and for fifteen years he was the Distinguished Visiting Professor of Government and Public Policy at the College of William and Mary. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Eisenhower Media Network, senior advisor to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and co-founder of the All-Volunteer Force Forum.Two-thirds of the world now thinks that we are an enemy of their state. Two-thirds of the world. And it happens to be the two-third that has the greatest amount of the GDP in the world.Colonel Lawrence WilkersonI've lived for 81 years, almost 82, and I've watched my country go to hell right in front of my face… And the billionaires who want all of this to happen, they do not want a democracy. A democracy is fallible. A democracy can't beat China. A democracy can't beat Russia. A democracy can't even beat Iran. They want a technocracy that is run by them, armed by them, technical revolution by them. They want all of this, and oh by the way they want to live to 150 while they're doing it too.Colonel Lawrence WilkersonEvery freaking hour they create a series of war crimes in Iran. Every freaking hour they perpetrate war crimes in the Persian Gulf. Every freaking hour they perpetrate war crimes in Lebanon with Israel. “What's new?,” I want to say. We are a criminal state. There is no other way to describe it. We are a criminal state. We pay no attention whatsoever to domestic or international law. Only when it benefits the person who is doing the deed do we pay any attention at all.Colonel Lawrence WilkersonToby Heaps is the CEO and co-founder of Corporate Knights, and Editor-in-Chief of Corporate Knights magazine. He spearheaded the first global ranking of the world's 100 most sustainable corporations in 2005, and in 2007 coined the term “clean capitalism.”What we're seeing is a sort of political physics—for every action is an equal and opposite reaction. Canada has in many ways benefited and rallied around our nationhood. We're often not the most boisterous or loudest type of folks. But this continued disrespect for our statehood and the continued attacks and the unreasonableness and the unfair play, our prime minister said something to the effect of: when the United States signs something, it's in pencil. It's really denigrating the United States' reputation globally and in Canadians' minds.Toby HeapsNews 8/28/26* This week, the left-wing insurgency in the Democratic Party scored several new victories. First, NBC reports that in Oklahoma, N'Kiyla Jasmine Thomas won the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Markwayne Mullin, who Trump selected to lead the Department of Homeland Security following the resignation of Secretary Kristi Noem. Thomas will go up against Republican Congressman Kevin Hern in November. Unfortunately, Thomas stands little chance of winning the state, which has not elected a Democratic Senator since 1990. Thomas is a member of the Chickasaw Nation and identifies as a Democratic Socialist, but is “not yet” a member of DSA.* Next, in California, Democracy Now! reports progressive state lawmaker Aisha Wahab has prevailed in the special election to fill the seat vacated by disgraced former Congressman Eric Swalwell. This piece notes that Wahab “overcame a flood of attack ads from pro-Israel groups,” which sought to bolster her Democratic primary rival, Melissa Hernandez. In an interview, Wahab said that she “appreciates” voters in her district for “seeing through” the “lies that were spread by AIPAC.” Wahab will make history as the first Afghan American in Congress and has called for the United States to engage with the Taliban government and attempt to “[steer] them in the right direction” on human rights.* In Georgia, the Hill reports another progressive – Everton Blair – won the special election to fill the seat of Congressman David Scott, who passed away in April during his 12th term in the seat. Blair, the former chair of the Gwinnett County School Board, defeated Scott's daughter Marcye Scott. However, Blair will only represent this seat until the end of the year. Beginning in January, State Rep. Jasmine Clark, who won the May primary, will fill the seat for the 120th Congress.* Meanwhile, in the Cornhusker State, the Nebraska Examiner reports that the “Legal Marijuana NOW U.S. Senate candidate Mike Marvin announced he can't put more ‘energy' into the Senate race because of health issues and endorsed nonpartisan U.S. Senate candidate Dan Osborn.” Marvin will remain on the ballot, but is “urging all who supported [him] to now support…Osborn.” This piece notes that this announcement comes on heels of reporting by Flatwater Free Press showing that two staffers from Osborn's 2024 independent Senate campaign joined the Legal Marijuana NOW executive board and sought to dissolve the party from the inside. This, combined with the fact that former Democratic Senate nominee Cindy Burbank paid Mike Marvin's $1,740 candidate filing fee and dropped out of the race one day after the secretary of state verified Osborn's signatures to be on the fall ballot has fueled speculation that these were coordinated efforts to clear the field for Osborn. Marvin for his part disputes this and says he never planned to leave the race. Osborn is quoted saying “We hope to earn the support of the LMN voters and hope that we can represent their concerns well in the US Senate.”* In more third party news, Trump has launched new broadsides against the emerging ex-MAGA clique – consisting of Tucker Carlson, Congressman Thomas Massie, and former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. According to the Hill, Trump attacked the group, said to be exploring the possibility of founding a new right-wing party, calling Carlson “a loser,” Greene “a highly neurotic woman” and Massie a “real JERK” on Truth Social. The president added, “What a team this would be, THREE LOSERS, and a pocketful of change!...The only chance they have is to join the Radical Left Dumocrats, and try breaking into the Primary System. To all of them I say, PRAISE BE TO ALLAH!” The proximate cause of this latest flare-up between the camps is Trump's decision to allow in 300,000 metric tons of ground beef to be imported in the next 90 days, a move Massie called “worse than socialism.” Greene, who has been perhaps the most vocal defector from the MAGA camp, said “He attacks us with such vitriol because we actually are everything he claimed to be…he has proven as President that he is nothing more than a neocon puppet for Israel, corporations, big donors with special interests, and his dear friends in the Epstein class…We never changed, Trump did.”* Another story from this side of the aisle comes to us from NOTUS, which reports that an “unknown actor” has stolen over $16,000 from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). This incident, alternatively characterized as a “theft” from a “foreign country” or simply a “fraud,” occurred in early July, when the NRCC “attempted to pay a bill from Ranger Wi-Fi Consulting, a Texas-based firm that specializes in helping clients ‘optimize their wireless networks while ensuring healthy security measures are in place.'” Seeking to assuage the fears of donors, NRCC spokesman Will Kiley told the press that “Protecting donor funds is a top priority for the NRCC,” and vowed that the committee is “working to recover the funds, and…taken steps to ensure it can't happen again.” Listeners might remember that in July, the DNC admitted that they had fallen prey to a scammer, losing almost $30,000 in the process. It would seem that these committees do not have functional safeguards against such schemes.* Our final stories this week all deal with the Middle East. First up, Axios reports that while AIPAC was gearing up for a major ad blitz in Michigan against Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed and on behalf of Republican Senate nominee Mike Rogers, those plans have apparently been iced at the behest of the Rogers campaign. According to this story, Rogers believes that AIPAC spending in the Democratic primary – over $30 million on behalf of El-Syed's rival Haley Stevens – actually helped boost El-Sayed's candidacy, making his opposition to AIPAC a “centerpiece of his…campaign, using the group's spending against him to portray Democratic opponent Haley Stevens as beholden to the pro-Israel lobby.” Rogers fears the same fate, so he has sought to keep his distance from AIPAC while his allies are urging AIPAC to “get involved without putting the group's name front and center.” However, Rogers' attempts to put some daylight between his campaign and AIPAC has resulted in the latter turning cold towards the Republican candidate. Republicans now worry that AIPAC will “sit out the general election entirely.” As for the perception of AIPAC in Michigan, a recent poll found that “55% of Michigan voters oppose continued U.S. aid to Israel.”* On the other end of the Michigan political spectrum, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib has sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio demanding that he “ensure the immediateand permanent release of U.S. citizen Sama Safi, a 20-year-old university student with a severe complex chronic health condition, who the Israeli military has arbitrarily and wrongfully detained since June 2nd.” This letter goes on to describe how “armed Israeli soldiers raided her family's home in the occupied West Bank in the middle of the night and tore her from her family,” and that since then, she has “suffered under appalling conditions in Israeli military detention including “frequent physical assault, shackling, and the throwing of gas and stun grenades into already overcrowded and poorly ventilated cells,” among other horrors. 40 more members of Congress signed this letter, including six senators, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey and Chris Van Hollen among them. 85 civic groups also signed onto this demand, ranging from faith-based groups to human rights organizations and beyond.* In the region itself, a broad coalition of Muslim states – including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and, perhaps most notably, the United Arab Emirates – have issued a categorical condemnation of Israel's new “E1” settlement plan. This plan relates to new settlement activities east of occupied East Jerusalem and the signatories decry the plan as constituting “a dangerous escalation that further advances settlement expansion and annexation and undermines the geographical contiguity of the Occupied Palestinian Territory…thereby threatening the viability and realization of an independent, contiguous Palestinian State based on the 1967 lines with East Jerusalem as its capital.” The UAE was the most significant state in the region to sign onto the Trump-brokered Abraham Accords in 2020, which sought to normalize relations between Israel and its neighbors at the expense of the Palestinians. Saudi Arabia was said to be on the verge of signing the accords prior to October 7th and Israel's subsequent genocidal military campaign in Gaza. The UAE taking a new stand against Israel on behalf of the Palestinian cause is widely seen as the final death knell of the Abraham Accords and the beginning of a new era of relations in the Middle East.* Finally, the Economist reports that a group of seven top officials within the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is consolidating power in Iran. The man rumored to be leading this junta is Mohsen Rezaei, the new national-security adviser, former presidential candidate and the longest-serving chief of the IRGC, having led the corps though the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s. Others include the head of the navy, currently overseeing Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the IRGC's commander-in-chief and founder of the Quds Force. Notably absent from this group is Mojtaba Khamenei, the new Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic. This piece judiciously avoids making any definite predictions about whether this new clique will rule as hardliners or pragmatists, but emphasizes that the late Ali Khamenei expertly “balanced the competing interests of his realm” while these military men favor action.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

JOIN PATREON FOR EARLY UNCENSORED EPISODE RELEASES: https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey CLIPPERS DISCORD: https://discord.gg/8QmWEKJ3BT FOLLOW JULIAN DOREY IG: https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey/ X: https://x.com/juliandorey FOLLOW JOEY DEEF IG: https://www.instagram.com/joeydeef/ X: https://x.com/TokeMalone JULIAN YT CHANNELS - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Clips YT: https://www.youtube.com/@juliandoreyclips - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Daily YT: https://www.youtube.com/@JulianDoreyDaily - SUBSCRIBE to Best of JDP: https://www.youtube.com/@bestofJDP ****TIMESTAMPS**** 00:00 - Joey Deef speaks on behalf of his fellow Chinese diaspora 1:31 - Julian thinks something will break here soon 2:28 - Deef's drone attacks 3:01 - Meta 5:02 - Bari Weiss covers up CBS Epstein Story 7:39 - Leon Black testimony coming 8:18 - Bari Weiss kamikaze bomber 9:26 - Hugh Hefner tried to expose Epstein to FBI (and they ignored him) 14:23 - The “Clout” of Epstein Files, according to British Socialite 15:54- Royal Fergie reached out to Kash Patel…in 2025 18:29 - Epstein funded Fergie's debts 20:16 - Fergie-Patel connection details 22:06 - How the Fergie Patel email went down (PURE SPEC) 25:14 - Guest Spotting in the Epstein Files 27:23 - What British Socialites do 28:32 - Kubrick's “Eyes Wide Shut” Dark Backstory & Theory 37:44 - Stanley Kubrick was tapped into another dimension 39:23 - CIA Director goes to Russia with Love 44:01 - Lindsey Graham's Afterlife 45:41 - Russia's “Human Rights Commissioner” 46:48 - “Semi-Routine” Trip to Russia amid Ukraine escalation 48:36 - Erik Prince bombing trap houses in Haiti & Hillary Clinton dance-a-thon 52:12 - CIA Galapagos Fishing Boat Drone Strikes 57:45 - The “Cool” Dictator & his relationship w/ human rights 59:10 - Christopher Nolan predicted society in Batman Trilogy 1:00:48 - Chinese cyberhack of DOJ, NASA, The Fed & US Government (DETAILS) 1:04:37 - The China-Nepal Food Disaster 1:07:08 - Meta $17.1 Billion Lawsuit settlement & New Rules for Kids Online 1:14:06 - The Slippery Slope Question & Constitutional Rights of Kids vs. Parents 1:17:36 - The 1990s AT&T Bill Precedent 1:18:56 - Flock CEO Doxxed 1:21:55 - Flock CEO Garrett Langley's Hilarious Privacy vs. Safety “Compromise” Proposal 1:26:34 - Alessi Allaman's City Council Moment vs. Flock in Florida 1:28:54 - Benn Jordan (Brilliantly) Spies on Flock 1:32:44 - The Dark Peter Thiel Ties to Flock 1:36:15 - Peter Thiel's Clavicular Ties & Deef tells Lee Cronin why Thiel is so shiny 1:38:24 - Hitting the Road CREDITS: - Host, Editor & Producer: Julian Dorey - COO, Producer & Editor: Alessi Allaman - https://www.youtube.com/@UCyLKzv5fKxGmVQg3cMJJzyQ - In-Studio Producer: Joey Deef Julian Dorey Podcast Episode 469 - Julian Dorey Music by Artlist.io Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week: Bill Gates published a new essay warning that the AI industry is crossing the safety lines it set for itself, and that nobody is preparing for what's coming. At 70 years old, he also uses AI more than most people half his age, and he finds it enthralling, as you'll hear in highlights from our interview with Gates about the memo. Along the way this week, we dig into his three proposals: new institutions for managing the transition, a category of jobs reserved for humans, and a tax on the use and purchase of AI and robots. With Todd Bishop and John Cook. Edited by Curt Milton. Music by Daniel L.K. Caldwell. Related headlines and links The turbulent AI era is here. The choices we make now are critical. — Bill Gates, Gates Notes 'I am very concerned': Bill Gates says the world needs a plan to deal with AI, and he has three ideas to start Bill Gates says there's 'no upper limit' on AI, citing opportunity and risk Etzioni on AI: Bill Gates has the right diagnosis but the wrong prescription Dwarkesh Podcast: Ryan Greenblatt — What happens once AI can automate AI research? New York Times: Bill Gates is warning that A.I. is more dangerous than Big Tech will admit Wall Street Journal: Three takeaways from Bill Gates's 5,784-word warning on AI: 'There is no plan' MIT Technology Review: Bill Gates says we've passed AI's danger thresholds. Now what? Axios: Gates confronts the Epstein questions hanging over his AI push Transcript: Here's what Bill Gates told lawmakers in his recent Epstein testimony See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Tova Noel was one of the two correctional officers assigned to the Special Housing Unit at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan on the night Jeffrey Epstein died in August 2019. Along with fellow officer Michael Thomas, Noel was responsible for monitoring Epstein and the other inmates housed on the unit, including conducting required inmate counts and rounds. Federal investigators later charged Noel and Thomas with falsifying prison records after concluding that they had signed logs indicating checks had been completed when, in fact, required rounds had been missed for hours. Noel ultimately avoided trial through a deferred prosecution agreement that required her to cooperate with the Justice Department's investigation and complete community service, after which the charges were dismissed. She later became an important witness in congressional scrutiny of Epstein's death because she was among the last people known to have seen him alive, was present when his body was discovered and had firsthand knowledge of the conditions inside the MCC that night.When Noel finally testified before the House Oversight Committee in May 2026, she largely portrayed herself as an inexperienced, exhausted employee trapped inside a catastrophically understaffed prison rather than someone responsible for Epstein's death. She said her poor performance resulted from inadequate training, mandatory overtime and the crushing workload at the MCC, telling investigators that she had earned roughly a full year's base salary in about six months because she was working so much overtime. Noel denied sleeping during the shift, although she acknowledged browsing the internet, and said she could not remember specifically searching for news about Epstein shortly before his body was discovered. She also acknowledged that Epstein received treatment other inmates did not, including extra linens, a CPAP machine and other accommodations, describing exceptions as being made essentially because he was Jeffrey Epstein. Perhaps most strikingly, Noel insisted that her only connection to Epstein's death was that she happened to be forced into overtime that night, distancing herself from responsibility despite being one of the officers specifically assigned to monitor him and despite admitting that the system around him had broken down. She denied knowing anything about an unidentified orange-colored figure captured on surveillance footage, rejected allegations that she participated in any cover-up and maintained that years of suspicion surrounding her role had devastated her life.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Idaho's death penalty had a long history stretching back to the territorial era, with capital punishment established there in 1864, decades before statehood. Executions were originally carried out at the county level and were sometimes public, before the state centralized them at the penitentiary in 1901; Idaho's final hanging took place in 1957. Like the rest of the country, Idaho's capital punishment system was disrupted after the U.S. Supreme Court's 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia, but lawmakers reinstated the death penalty under a revised statute the following year. In the modern era, Idaho has used lethal injection and has carried out only a small number of executions since capital punishment resumed nationally in the 1970s. More recently, the state moved aggressively to preserve its ability to execute prisoners when lethal-injection drugs became difficult to obtain, authorizing the firing squad as an alternative in 2023 and later making it the primary method of execution effective July 1, 2026. That history made Idaho one of the states that not only retained the death penalty but continued expanding the mechanisms available to carry it out.Bryan Kohberger became part of that history when prosecutors announced they would seek the death penalty for the murders of Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin. For more than two years, the possibility of execution shaped nearly every major strategic battle in the case, including fights over aggravating factors, expert testimony, discovery, mitigation evidence and repeated defense efforts to have the death penalty removed. Kohberger's case also unfolded while Idaho was strengthening its execution laws, making the firing squad a particularly striking backdrop to a prosecution already carrying enormous public attention. Ultimately, however, Kohberger never reached a capital trial. In June 2025, prosecutors agreed to take the death penalty off the table in exchange for guilty pleas to four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary, and he was sentenced the following month to four consecutive life terms without parole. That resolution placed Kohberger in an unusual position within Idaho's death-penalty story: he spent years facing the possibility of becoming one of the state's most notorious condemned prisoners, only for the capital case to disappear through a plea agreement just before trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bryan Kohberger's defense team assembled a wide-ranging group of experts as it prepared for trial, signaling that it intended to challenge the prosecution on virtually every major category of evidence. The defense brought in specialists in DNA, genetic genealogy, digital forensics, cellular data, crime-scene analysis, bloodstain interpretation, pathology and other technical fields that could bear on the state's case. DNA experts were particularly important because prosecutors had relied heavily on genetic evidence connected to the knife sheath recovered at the King Road house, while specialists in investigative genetic genealogy were positioned to scrutinize how authorities identified Kohberger through family-tree research. Digital-evidence experts were also expected to examine cellphone records, location data, computer evidence, online activity and other electronic material that prosecutors intended to use to reconstruct Kohberger's movements and behavior before and after the murders.The unusually large expert roster reflected the defense strategy of attacking the case piece by piece rather than allowing the prosecution's evidence to be presented as a seamless narrative. Cell-site and geolocation specialists could challenge claims about where Kohberger's phone had been, forensic experts could question how physical evidence was collected and interpreted, and DNA specialists could probe the reliability, handling and statistical significance of the genetic evidence. The defense also retained experts capable of reviewing surveillance footage, vehicle identification and other digital or visual evidence tied to the white Hyundai Elantra that investigators associated with the crime. Taken together, the expert disclosures showed that Kohberger's attorneys were preparing for a highly technical trial in which they planned to contest not only what the evidence appeared to show, but also the scientific methods, assumptions and investigative procedures used to produce those conclusions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bryan Kohberger's defense said that during the early morning hours of November 13, 2022, when Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were killed, Kohberger had been alone in his car driving through the countryside south and west of Moscow rather than inside the King Road house. His attorneys described nighttime driving as something Kohberger regularly did and said he often traveled to remote areas to hike, run or look at the moon and stars. The supplemental alibi filing identified cell-site expert Sy Ray as a witness who could partially corroborate that account by analyzing Kohberger's phone data and attempting to show that he had been traveling away from Moscow during portions of the night. The defense did not claim that another person had been physically with Kohberger and could verify his whereabouts, instead relying largely on his driving habits and anticipated expert analysis of digital location evidence.Prosecutors reacted by arguing that the so-called alibi was not really an alibi at all because it failed to establish where Kohberger had been during the critical window when the murders occurred. The state emphasized that Kohberger's phone had stopped reporting to the cellular network before the homicides and did not reconnect until afterward, meaning the very period in which he most needed location data was the period for which the phone provided none. Prosecutors also argued that saying Kohberger had been somewhere south and west of Moscow looking at the night sky was too vague to satisfy Idaho's alibi requirements, which called for specific locations and information identifying witnesses who could verify the defendant was somewhere else when the crime occurred. The state therefore asked the court to restrict or exclude the proposed alibi evidence, arguing that Ray's anticipated testimony might describe Kohberger's movements before or after the murders but could not establish that he had been somewhere else at the precise time the four students were killed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

The claim that the Jeffrey Epstein scandal is somehow a hoax becomes increasingly difficult to square with the enormous sums major financial institutions are paying to resolve claims brought by survivors. JPMorgan agrees to a roughly $290 million settlement, Deutsche Bank agrees to pay $75 million, and Bank of America later reaches a $72.5 million settlement, bringing those survivor-related agreements alone to hundreds of millions of dollars. These settlements are not criminal convictions and they do not prove that every allegation surrounding Epstein is true, but they show that some of the most sophisticated banks and law firms in the world treat the underlying litigation as serious, costly and dangerous. That reality clashes directly with the political rhetoric that dismisses scrutiny of Epstein's network as conspiracy theory or fabrication. The contradiction becomes even harder to ignore because Epstein remains financially connected to major institutions even after his criminal history is widely known, while regulators and civil litigation expose troubling questions about compliance failures, suspicious transactions and institutional decision-making.The larger point is not that every person associated with Epstein is guilty or that every theory about his operation has been proven. It is that the documented record is already damning enough without exaggeration. Survivors use civil courts to obtain answers, records, testimony and financial accountability that the criminal justice system never fully produces, especially after Epstein dies before trial. In that sense, civil litigation becomes one of the few mechanisms capable of forcing powerful institutions to confront their relationships with him. Calling the entire scandal a hoax requires ignoring the settlements, the regulatory findings, the banking records and the repeated willingness of major institutions to pay enormous sums rather than continue fighting these cases. If someone still wants to dismiss Epstein as a fabrication, they are left with one brutally simple question: if there is really nothing there, what exactly are all these banks paying for?to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Tova Noel, one of the two correctional officers assigned to the Metropolitan Correctional Center's Special Housing Unit on the night Jeffrey Epstein died, told the House Oversight Committee that she failed to conduct the required inmate checks and later signed records falsely indicating that the rounds had been completed. Noel described an understaffed, poorly managed facility in which she was exhausted, inadequately trained and assigned duties beyond her normal responsibilities. She maintained that she last saw Epstein alive during the evening medication round and observed nothing that made her believe he was preparing to harm himself. Noel also testified that Epstein received unusual accommodations, including extra bed linens, a CPAP machine and access to medication that appeared different from the treatment ordinarily given to other prisoners.Noel denied having any role in Epstein's death, receiving money in connection with him or knowing anything about an alleged payment to facilitate access to his cell. She also rejected claims that she was the unidentified orange-colored figure seen moving toward Epstein's tier at approximately 10:39 p.m., insisting that she never returned to the area and could not explain what—or who—the surveillance image showed. Although Noel said she believed Epstein died by suicide because he was supposedly alone inside the cell, her testimony did little to resolve the most important unanswered questions: why required checks were abandoned, why Epstein remained without a cellmate, who or what appeared near the tier, and how so many security procedures failed simultaneously. Instead, her account reinforced the picture of extraordinary negligence, special treatment and institutional dysfunction surrounding the death of the most consequential prisoner in federal custody.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Tova-Noel-Transcript.pdf

Veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh says a longtime, well-informed international source told him that significant Jeffrey Epstein material remains inside government files and has not yet been made public by the Justice Department. According to Hersh, the withheld material includes evidence concerning Epstein's connections to both foreign and domestic intelligence services, particularly Israel's Mossad and the FBI. Hersh describes his conversation with the source as “distressing” and says the undisclosed records could create problems for current and former members of the Trump administration if they are eventually released. The report comes as questions continue to mount over whether the government has fully complied with demands for transparency surrounding the Epstein files and whether intelligence-related material has received anything close to the congressional or media scrutiny applied to Epstein's social and financial relationships.The claims remain allegations attributed to Hersh and his source, not independently established facts, but they add another layer to the broader fight over what the federal government is still withholding. Hersh's reporting suggests that Epstein may have had relationships or performed services involving several foreign governments, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Russia, while lawmakers have separately begun examining the possibility of intelligence connections. The most politically significant portion of the report is the suggestion that unreleased information could implicate or embarrass people associated with Trump's past and present administrations, particularly because the Justice Department has already faced intense criticism over redactions and withheld Epstein material. If Hersh's account is accurate, the central question is no longer simply what remains hidden in the Epstein files, but why intelligence-related records allegedly sitting inside government archives have remained outside the public release and largely beyond serious congressional examination.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:'Distressing discussion' on withheld Epstein files reveals 'problems' for Trump: report - Raw Story

Margaret Hoover sits down with former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, once one of Donald Trump's fiercest loyalists—and now one of his most outspoken defectors.Greene resigned from Congress in January after a spectacular and very public break with Trump over the war in Iran and the Epstein files. Now she says Trump “betrayed us all” and “lied” to the country.But why is she surprised?Greene reflects on what she failed to see in Trump, why she believes the Republican Party has failed its voters, and whether she and Tucker Carlson are building a new political movement outside the two-party system.She also faces questions about her own record. After Trump called Greene a “traitor,” she says his words triggered death threats against her son. But Greene herself once accused Nancy Pelosi of treason—a crime punishable by death. Hoover presses her on her apology for participating in “toxic politics,” whether she has done enough to make amends, and why she believes Trump now owes her an apology.Greene also makes a striking claim about what Trump told her privately about the Epstein files and explains why she believes women are not respected in the Republican Party.After the conspiracies, the lies and the violent rhetoric she once embraced, Greene is asking the public to see her differently.Why should anyone trust Marjorie Taylor Greene now?

Story of the Week (DR):Meta settles social media addiction case with California, other states for $16.7 billion MM5 Reasons to Be HappyAn $18 billion payout sets a historic legal precedent against Big Tech, directing billions in state funding toward youth mental health, counseling, and digital literacy programs.Instagram and Facebook must enforce default two-hour daily usage limits and completely block account activity between midnight and 6 a.m. for users under 18. Teens and parents gain the explicit right to disable addictive engagement algorithms in favor of a non-personalized, chronological feed.The settlement prohibits harmful beauty filters (such as cosmetic surgery simulators), hides "like" counts by default, and silences app notifications during school hours.Meta tied $5.3 billion of the payout to whether TikTok and YouTube adopt similar safety rules, forcing an industry-wide overhaul rather than penalizing just one app.5 Reasons to Be AngryPaid out over 10 years, the settlement amounts to roughly 10 days of Meta's annual profit, meaning Mark Zuckerberg's financial empire remains virtually unscathed.Meta's $17 billion child-safety settlement is the biggest tech payout ever—or 3x what it paid to acquihire a 28-year-old AI superstarTo put it in perspective, the $17.1 billion number is a little more than three times the roughly $5 billion personal stake that Alexandr Wang held in Scale AI, a data-labeling company that supplies the human-annotated training data AI models are built on. Last year, Meta paid $14.3 billion for a 49% stake in the company and brought in Wang to lead its AI efforts of its new Superintelligence Labs, reporting directly to Mark Zuckerberg.Meta legally denies all wrongdoing, dodging true legal accountability for intentionally engineering addictive, mentally harmful features.The agreement alters user interface features and screen time, but leaves Meta's underlying data-harvesting business model completely untouched.Critical safeguards—like switching off algorithmic feeds—are opt-in settings rather than permanent defaults, shifting enforcement onto parents.Meta only pays 70% ($12.7 billion) upfront; the remaining $5.3 billion is contingent on competitors settling on identical terms, giving Meta a potential financial discount if rivals refuse. Worst headline of the week: Meta's $17.1 billion settlement will be over 12-times larger than the second largest big tech privacy settlement in the past four yearsMeta's $18 billion settlement leaves out the child protections New Mexico already won at trial, its Attorney General says: including a direct ban on romantic and sexualized AI chatbot interactions with minors and stronger safeguards against adults targeting kids in private messagesMM: Settlement gapsAge assurance:Meta may elect to use one or more Proprietary Age Assurance Methods. In such event, Meta shall not benefit from the presumption of compliance set forth in Section II.A.3.a. Additionally, Meta will maintain continuous oversight of any Proprietary Age Assurance Method sufficient to ensure that the method is functioning as intended.Tax deductibleThe Settling States shall cause to be completed and timely filed a Form 1098-F with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) that identifies not less than 50% of the amounts paid to the Settling States as compensatory restitution and remediation within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)THEY BUNDLED CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA INTO THE SETTLEMENT$459m of the $17bn is the “Cambridge payout” - they can now put that behind them tooIs there a reason not to literally take Meta all the way? Why settle at all! Midterm elections? TAKE EVERYTHING! Meanwhile, while you settle this: Meta's creepy smart glasses are part of a much bigger plan“At the same time, Meta is using the content generated across its ecosystem to support Mark Zuckerberg's vision of a pervasive, AI-driven future. Zuckerberg's 2026 manifesto describes a world where personal AI agents will do your bidding. But building those systems requires more than conventional AI models. It also requires enormous amounts of data about human behavior, much of it generated and shared through Instagram, Facebook, and other Meta apps, or captured through hardware such as phones, smart glasses, and EMG Neural Band devices.”“We become “algorithm chow,” feeding the models intended to realize Zuckerberg's vision.”'We Know We Got This Wrong': Target Apologises and Pulls 'Offensive' Halloween Costume After Racist BacklashAn apology from us: We pulled an offensive Halloween costume that should never have been part of our assortment. It is no longer for sale. As a company, we got this wrong, and we are deeply sorry. We know this is especially hurtful for our Black guests, team members and partners. Removing the costume is an important first step, and the company is looking closely at how this happened and what needs to change to ensure this won't happen again.Target Statement on Offensive Halloween Costume: As a company, we know we got this wrong, and we are deeply sorry. The costume is offensive and should never have been part of our assortment. It is no longer available for sale. We know this is especially hurtful for our Black guests, team members and partners. Removing the costume is an important first step, and the company is looking closely at how this happened and what needs to change to ensure this won't happen again.The statement comes directly from Target's Corporate Communications department speaking on behalf of the entire enterprise, rather than a single individual like the CEO or Board Chair. Corporate apologies are deliberately released without a human signature for several strategic and legal reasons:Legal Personhood: Legally under U.S. law, Target Corporation is treated as a single legal entity (often called "corporate personhood"). It can sign contracts, hold liability, and issue official statements as an institution rather than as individual people.Leaving executive names off the statement prevents media coverage from focusing on a specific person (e.g., "CEO Brian Cornell Apologizes"). It keeps the focus on the company's operational changes and prevents individual leaders from becoming personal lightning rods for public backlash.These statements are rarely drafted by an executive. They are heavily scrubbed by legal counsel, crisis PR managers, and corporate strategy teams. Attaching a CEO's signature to a text engineered by a dozen lawyers and communications staff can actually feel less authentic internally.Phrasing the apology around "we" and "the company" establishes institutional accountability. It signals that the failure occurred in corporate vetting systems, not just from one bad decision-maker.In January 2025, Target Corporation announced the termination of its REACH initiative and restructuring of its Supplier Diversity program, marking one of the largest corporate DEI rollbacks in recent history. This decision has triggered public backlash, legal scrutiny, and investor uncertainty.Callaway Golf CEO apologizes after Good Good ad showing male golfer shoving woman sparks backlashCallaway Golf CEO Chip Brewer on Tuesday apologized for an advertisement that sparked an online backlash for its depiction of a male golfer shoving a female golfer to the ground when she attempts to use his driver."That approval should never have happened. Mistakes were made, and we are taking the matter very seriously," Brewer wrote on Tuesday. "I want to make it clear that we sincerely apologize for the video." Callaway released a statement Thursday explaining its reasoning behind ending the brand partnership: "Over the last several days, we have reflected deeply on the hurt and disappointment caused by the video we reposted. We heard from individuals who shared personal experiences related to violence against women, and their stories were powerful reminders that this issue touches the lives of far too many people. Unequivocally, violence against women is unacceptable and should never be trivialized, normalized, or used as entertainment.""In this instance, our content review process was not comprehensive enough …We have taken appropriate internal corrective actions and significantly strengthened our approval procedures to help ensure this does not happen again."The brand added that it would donate $1 million to organizations that aim to "prevent violence against women, provide resources to survivors, and advance education and awareness efforts."The online video ad, which was released online and has since been pulled, sparked criticism for depicting violence against women, while some consumers said they planned to stop buying products made by Callaway.Brewer said the ad, created by Good Good Golf, was released last week to promote a co-branded driver and had been approved by Callaway before the spot was posted online. The ad featured Good Good co-founder Garrett Clark telling Alexis Miestowski, a former Division I female golfer, in a menacing voice, "Do not touch my new driver," after he shoves her to the ground.Good Good is an American sports YouTube channel and company based in Frisco, Texas. Founded in 2020 by Garrett Clark, Stephen Castaneda, CEO Matt Kendrick, and Matt Scharff.Owner: Scoreboard ventures: co-founders Nahid Giga and Brian DickLead Investor: Creator Sports Capital — a firm co-founded by former YouTube executive Benjamin Grubbs and investment executive Brian Kabot.Good Good's CEO went nuclear on Callaway after the brand cut ties over an ad scandal"Interesting that @CallawayGolf asks us to make an ad then approves it then asks us to take the fall then drops us in a coordinated media blitz and covers it up by giving a million dollars away thinking everyone will be ok with it," Matt Kendrick wrote in a post on X.The ad fallout has had major repercussions for Good Good's business beyond the loss of its Callaway partnership. Dick's Sporting Goods yanked Good Good products from shelves, and the golf group pulled out as a title sponsor for a PGA Tour event in the fall. The reverberation has spread to the Golf Channel, which scrapped the upcoming season of its reality golf series "Big Break," whose grand prize was entry into the PGA Tour event that Good Good was supposed to have sponsored.FFA:14% have merit2 women! (combined 6% influence)Director Thomas Dundon 56% influence and 10% sharesDirector Nominee Skills Matrix includes “Golf Enthusiast” (9/9)Consumer Products Experience: 5/9Bill Gates Warns Humanity About AI: ‘We Do Not Have the Luxury of Moving Slowly'Bill Gates fears world leaders are unprepared for 3 major AI risks: ‘Stunted' child development; emboldened criminals; and vanishing jobs for Gen Z Bill Gates Issues Stark AI Warning: 'There Is No Plan' for What Comes NextWhat did he say?Gates warns AI will either be the greatest equalizer ever created or the worst source of global injustice, claiming world leaders are underprepared for the social upheaval ahead.He proposes that governments legally set aside "human-reserved" job categories—similar to protected nature reserves—for roles requiring human empathy and connection, such as healthcare and teaching.To offset tax policies that encourage replacing humans, Gates suggests taxing AI processing "tokens" and physical robots to fund worker retraining and stronger safety nets.He categorizes AI's biggest risks into three buckets: permanent job loss, empowering bad actors to launch cyber and biological attacks, and eroding child development.Gates calls for an international AI regulatory agency—modeled after global aviation and nuclear inspection agreements—requiring tight cooperation between the U.S. and China.He claims tech industry executives are downplaying catastrophic AI threats to public safety because there is too much money on the line.Gates warns that agreeable AI companions risk becoming addictive to young people while weakening independent critical thinking.‘We have a limited window': 116 companies, entities sign on to major AI cyber defense pushOpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft, Advanced Micro Devices and more than 100 other companies and entities signed a letter on Thursday calling on businesses and policymakers to prioritize cybersecurity and “act decisively” to bolster defenses in the age of artificial intelligence.“We have a limited window to strengthen cyber defenses,” the letter said9% female CEOs:Accenture: Julie Sweet (Chair/CEO)AMD: Dr. Lisa Su (Chair/CEO)Citi: Jane FraserClearly AI: Emily Choi-Greene (Co-founder)Equinix: Adaire Fox-MartinFIS: Stephanie Ferris General Motors: Mary Barra (Chair/CEO)Lumen Technologies: Kate JohnsonNationwide Building Society: Dame Debbie CrosbieOracle: Safra CatzRunSybil: Ariel Herbert-Voss (Co-founder)TrendAI (Trend Micro): Eva Chen (Co-founder)Goodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: X Users Post Flock CEO's Address and Photos of His Home After He Says Americans Must 'Compromise' on PrivacyDR: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to BelieveCNBC survey asked over 1,000 US adults aged between 18 and 34 “who do you trust to act responsibly on AI?”Palantir CEO Alex Karp 81 percent “don't trust”Peter Thiel 79% “don't trust”Mark Zuckerberg 71% “don't trust”Elon Musk 70% “don't trust”Sam Altman 69% “don't trust”Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella 65% “don't trust”fared the best — albeit with a pitiful 35 percent “trust” score.DR: Jeff Bezos ordered to reinstate fired Black opinion writer at Washington Post over Charlie Kirk reactionThe ruling Thursday said the newspaper did not have sufficient cause to terminate Karen Attiah, who at the time was the last Black full-time member of the Post's opinion desk. The arbitrator, Sarah Miller Espinosa, also ordered the Post to award Attiah full back pay and lost benefits.After Kirk's killing, Attiah, the founding global opinion editor for the Post and the newspaper's only Black female opinion writer, made several posts to her Bluesky account.Attiah was emailed a termination letter on Sept. 11, accusing her of “gross misconduct.”“Your public comments on social media regarding the death of Charlie Kirk violate the Post's social media policies, harm the integrity of our organization, and potentially endanger the physical safety of our staff,” the letter read.MM: Flock CEO Says Americans Must 'Compromise' on Privacy; Then His Own Home Address Leaked Online DRMM: Starbucks Drops Drink Powder That Enveloped Baristas in Clouds of DustAssholiest of the Week (MM):Meta Settlement and AI earth destruction that has normalized what would have been horrific news, but now we shrug and re-elect the boards - SPEED ROUND! The anti woke: Black Wealth Will Be 4 Times Lower Than Whites By 2050 - SHOULD CAREMen: Real men don't bike: How cars became the symbol of American manhood - DON'T CARECowards: Deloitte to Pay $21.5 Million to End DOJ Fraud Investigation Over DEI Policies - SHOULD CAREEpstein: Ex-Barclays boss denies having sex with woman dressed as Snow White after Epstein emails - SHOULD CAREEpstein adjacent: Elon Musk's xAI used child porn to train Grok models, lawsuit says - SHOULD CAREPay committees: CEOs earn 614 times more than workers at US's 100 lowest-paying corporations - SHOULD CAREClimate change: Study blames fossil fuel emissions for significant loss of American West's water - SHOULD CAREActual death: Turn Around and Don't Look': Amazon Accused of Letting Worker Die in Warehouse Amid 'Corporate Greed' Claims - SHOULD CAREThe anti labor: Disney celebrates blockbuster 2026 by kicking employees' spouses off healthcare plans - SHOULD CAREThe anti homeless: This Palantir Billionaire's Passion Project is Criminalizing Homelessness - SHOULD CAREOther social media companies: TikTok agrees to pay $400 million to settle Justice Department children's privacy case - DON'T CARE“The lawsuit, related to compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, was filed by the Biden administration's DOJ in 2024”Headliniest of the WeekDR: Elon Musk's former right-hand man at X will give you 30 minutes of business advice for $15,000MM: BoringTrump Claims Junk Food Is 'Good' and Gym 'Boring' After Doctors Warn He Is 'Playing With Fire'Elon Musk Says He's Not Warren Buffett's ‘Biggest Fan' And Finds His Way of Getting Rich ‘Super Boring' — ‘Does Anybody Want That Job?'MM: What is a 'meat proxy'? The new term for coworkers who blindly share AI outputWho Won the Week?DR: Futurism writer Frank Landymore for this headline: Bill Gates Announces That He Is the First Person Ever to Be Concerned About the Effects of AI after Bill said, “I am in a state of shock that I'm sort of the first one saying, ‘This is crazy. This is insane.'”MM: Watches:Sam Altman's love of watches is getting memed 'Lord of the Rings' styleDespite having a net worth of $400 million, Kevin O'Leary still shops at Walmart for $29 jeans: ‘I'm always looking for a great deal'The picture in the article is him wearing not one, but TWO $15k Rolex watches, one on each wrist - the message: guy who buys jeans JUST LIKE YOU has multiple Rolexes - you should get one too!PredictionsDR: I spend $15,000 for business advice from Elon Musk's former right-hand man at X and he tells me a really clever way to save $15,000MM: French Canadiens, after getting the CEO of Air Canada fired and killing Trump trade talks, decide to make the United States a new Canadian province called New Quebec where French is the only legal language and renames Lake Superior “Lake French Superior”

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bill Clinton's February 27, 2026 testimony before the House Oversight Committee finally forced him to answer under oath about a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein that had generated questions for decades, but the proceeding hardly delivered the kind of exhaustive accounting the public had been promised. Clinton insisted that he had “done nothing wrong,” knew nothing about Epstein's abuse and never witnessed anything that caused him concern, effectively asking lawmakers to accept that his repeated contact with Epstein, travel aboard Epstein's aircraft and proximity to Ghislaine Maxwell never exposed him to anything suspicious. That explanation deserved considerably more scrutiny than it received. Clinton had not volunteered for the deposition either. He resisted the committee's subpoena, failed to appear for a scheduled January 13 deposition and only agreed to testify after a bipartisan contempt resolution advanced against him. Yet when he finally appeared, even some lawmakers who had spent months demanding answers quickly described him as cooperative and candid. The central problem remained unresolved: Clinton's defense depended heavily on what he claimed not to have seen, not to have known and not to remember, while the documentary record established that his association with Epstein was substantial enough to demand far more than a polite acceptance of those denials.The congressional process itself also exposed the weaknesses that have plagued nearly every official examination of Epstein's network. Rather than methodically reconstructing Clinton's relationship with Epstein against flight records, photographs, visitor records, witness accounts and contemporaneous communications, the deposition became entangled in the same partisan warfare that repeatedly consumes the Epstein investigation. Republicans emphasized Clinton while Democrats complained that Donald Trump had not been subpoenaed, and Chairman James Comer immediately used Clinton's answers to make political claims about Trump rather than keeping the focus exclusively on Epstein and the unanswered questions surrounding Clinton himself. Clinton's testimony therefore produced another familiar outcome: a powerful person denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes, lawmakers divided themselves into political camps, and very little was done to independently test how plausible those denials actually were. Clinton's appearance was historically significant because Congress compelled a former president to testify, but significance should not be confused with accountability. After years of questions about one of the most prominent men in Epstein's orbit, the public was still largely left with Clinton's version of events and a congressional process that appeared more interested in scoring partisan points than aggressively determining whether that version could withstand sustained scrutiny.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bill Gates was pressed by CNN's Anderson Cooper about allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had attempted to use sensitive information about Gates' personal life to pressure him after their relationship deteriorated. During an appearance on Anderson Cooper 360, Cooper raised a series of graphic, unverified claims contained in draft emails Epstein wrote in 2013 but apparently never sent, including allegations involving Gates' extramarital affairs and supposed medical issues. Cooper said the material sounded like an attempted blackmail effort and asked Gates whether he had known Epstein was considering using the information against him. Gates said he had not known at the time, maintained that Epstein never actually blackmailed him and again described his decision to spend time with Epstein as a serious mistake. Gates had previously acknowledged infidelity in his marriage but disputed the more sensational allegations contained in Epstein's unsent drafts.Gates also defended the account he had given House Oversight Committee investigators during a closed-door interview in June 2026, saying he had gone through his meetings and communications with Epstein in detail. He said he had not maintained a social relationship with Epstein, had never met women through him and had never visited Epstein's island, New Mexico ranch or Florida residence. Gates repeated that he had associated with Epstein because he believed Epstein could connect wealthy donors with global-health philanthropy, a judgment he now called a “gigantic mistake.” In his congressional statement, however, Gates acknowledged that Epstein eventually learned sensitive information about his infidelities and attempted to leverage it to draw him back into contact after Gates disengaged. Gates said the effort failed, but the episode added a more troubling dimension to questions about why he continued meeting with Epstein years after Epstein's 2008 conviction and what Epstein hoped to gain from cultivating a relationship with one of the world's most powerful businessmen.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Former Barclays chief Jes Staley told House Oversight Committee investigators that he had a sexual encounter with one of Jeffrey Epstein's assistants after meeting her through Epstein. Staley said he first met the unnamed woman at Epstein's Manhattan townhouse and that their conversations eventually became flirtatious. According to his testimony, the woman later invited him to her Upper East Side apartment sometime around 2009 or 2010, where they had what he described as a single consensual sexual encounter. Staley insisted Epstein had not arranged the meeting, claimed he never told Epstein about it and said he had no knowledge of Epstein directing women to have sex with his associates. Investigators also informed Staley that the woman had later sued Epstein alleging sexual abuse and reached a settlement with Epstein's estate, something Staley said he had not known. The questioning came amid congressional scrutiny of Staley's extraordinarily close relationship with Epstein, including roughly 1,200 communications exchanged between the two from 2008 through 2012 while Staley headed JPMorgan's Private Bank and Epstein remained a client.Investigators also confronted Staley with some of the more disturbing and suggestive correspondence contained in the released Epstein material. In July 2010, Staley had written to Epstein, “Say hi to Snow White,” prompting Epstein to ask what character Staley wanted next, to which Staley replied, “Beauty and the Beast.” Another message sent to Epstein around the same time referenced a woman in a Snow White costume having sex shortly after putting it on, and investigators showed Staley a photograph Epstein had circulated of a young woman dressed as the Disney character. Staley maintained that he did not remember seeing a woman dressed as Snow White at Epstein's residence, denied having sex with anyone wearing such a costume and said he did not recognize the woman in the photograph. His testimony therefore added another uncomfortable layer to the long-running scrutiny of his relationship with Epstein: Staley acknowledged becoming sexually involved with a woman he met inside Epstein's orbit while simultaneously denying that Epstein facilitated the encounter or that he understood what was happening to women around Epstein.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonnail.comsource:Ex-Barclays chief Jes Staley details his ‘intimate encounter' with Jeffrey Epstein's assistant  to House investigatorsb

A newly surfaced June 15, 2009 letter from then-acting U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman showed that Jeffrey Epstein had repeatedly violated the terms of his extraordinarily favorable 2007 non-prosecution agreement, yet federal prosecutors in South Florida never exercised their explicit authority to tear up the deal and prosecute him. Sloman told Epstein's attorneys that there had been “several instances” in which Epstein breached both the letter and spirit of the agreement, with prosecutors ultimately issuing five warnings over roughly two years. The violations included Epstein's failure to make his promised state guilty plea within the agreed timetable, his lawyers submitting a proposed state plea agreement containing language that conflicted with the federal deal, interference with prosecutors' efforts to notify victims, delays in securing legal representation for victims, efforts to resist a subpoena for computer equipment that could help identify additional victims, and false or threatening representations concerning his eligibility for work release. The precise basis for the fifth warning was not spelled out in the letter. Sloman complained that whenever prosecutors confronted Epstein, his lawyers would claim that Epstein had merely relied on their advice, provide a superficial fix and then continue benefiting from the agreement until another violation occurred.What made the revelations especially significant was that Epstein's non-prosecution agreement explicitly stated that the breach of even one condition gave the United States the option to terminate the deal and investigate and prosecute Epstein and others for federal crimes. Despite documenting repeated violations, prosecutors did not do that. Sloman acknowledged in the letter that Epstein continued receiving the central benefit of the bargain, freedom from federal prosecution, while the government was not receiving the finality, conservation of resources, punishment and victim restitution that the agreement was supposed to produce. Asked in 2026 why the government had done little more than issue warnings, Sloman said he could not remember the specific reasoning, although he maintained that prosecutors had ultimately treated the matter as a state case and called approval of the deal a “bad call” rather than something nefarious. The documents therefore added another damaging layer to the history of the Epstein prosecution: federal authorities did not merely give Epstein an exceptionally lenient agreement, they apparently documented multiple occasions on which he failed to honor that agreement and still allowed the immunity arrangement protecting him and potential co-conspirators to remain intact.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein breached 2007 non-prosecution agreement five times, prosecutors did zip

The start of the Todd Blanche era at the Department of Justice also marks the start of the video era at Talking Feds. Ken Dilanian, Frank Figliuzzi, and Katie Phang join Harry in technicolor (on YouTube, at least) to break down Blanche's first moves as Attorney General, Katie's lawsuit to force him to release Epstein material, Jeanine Pirro's unsettling failures in a serious criminal case, and the looming trial of James Comey. Mentioned in this episode:The video version of this episode. Ken's reporting.Frank's Substack.Katie's Substack.Katie's YouTube.Harry's column about the MS-13 case. Harry's column about Comey's vindictive prosecution motion.Lawfare's reporting about J6 reoffenders. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Legal AF pod is back helmed by Popok and KFA and covering breaking law and politics news including the DOJ's appeal of a court order requiring the release of additional Epstein files; the latest rejection of Ghislaine Maxwell's effort to overturn her conviction; the Kennedy Center naming fight as a federal judge prepares to hear arguments over the Trump administration's latest attempt to put his name on the building; new lawsuits from Democratic-led states challenging Trump's mail-in voting restrictions following the Supreme Court's recent ruling; Meta's proposed multistate settlement of up to $17.1 billion over allegations involving harm to children and teens; and so much more at the intersection of law and politics. Support Our Sponsors: Smalls: For a limited time, get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping and free treats for life, when you head to https://Smalls.com/legalaf Magic Spoon: Save $5 OFF your next order when you go to http://magicspoon.com/LEGALAF Honey Love: Save 20% Off Honeylove by going to https://honeylove.com/LEGALAF! #honeylovepod Sundays for Dogs: Get 50% OFF your first order of Sundays. Go to https://sundaysfordogs.com/LEGALAF50 or use code: LEGALAF50 at checkout. Become a member of Legal AF YouTube community: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgZJZZbnLFPr5GJdCuIwpA/join Learn more about the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe to Legal AF Substack: https://michaelpopok.substack.com/subscribe?coupon=2179cd85 Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af Sidebar with Katie Phang: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sidebar-with-katie-phang/id1886801652 The Parnas Perspective: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-parnas-perspective/id1869165949 The Intersection with Michael Popok: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-intersection-with-michael-popok/id1818863274 MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Five Minute News: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/five-minute-news/id1471715443 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this exclusive interview with Jimmy, former Trump stalwart Marjorie Taylor Greene calls the President a "traitor" for betraying his "no more foreign wars" promise and covering up the Epstein files to protect his friends. She also condemns his foreign beef import plan as a "slap in the face" to American ranchers, accusing him of putting corporate interests and Israel ahead of the American people.  The fallout began when Trump launched the Iran war and escalated after Greene publicly demanded the release of the Epstein files, leading Trump to call her "Marjorie 'Traitor' Greene". She argues that neither party represents working Americans, pointing to $40 trillion in debt and the H-1B visa program as examples of how Congress works for lobbyists, not the people. Plus segments on why Trump's new sanctions on Iran are doomed to fail and Andrew Wilson's epic flip-flop on questioning the FBI's story about who killed Charlie Kirk. Also featuring Stef Zamorano and Mike MacRae. And a phone call from JD Vance!

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer gave Ghislaine Maxwell a verbal spanking while ruling against her bid to overturn her sex trafficking convictions for her role in the Jeffrey Epstein saga. Judge Engelmayer wrote a 67 page ruling where he calls Maxwell’s claims meritless and frivolous and said the Epstein file release not only didn’t exonerate her, it further incriminated her and reinforced the verdict against her. He also made it very clear, Maxwell is out of legal options, writing that no further appeals would be considered. We have reaction from Epstein survivors and what Congress has tried to do to prevent her only get-out-of-jail card left: a Presidential pardon. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A federal judge has exposed Todd Blanche for the searingly unjust way he has been dealing with convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's co-conspirator, and the lies that Todd Blanche accepted from Maxwell when he interviewed her.In a move that signaled that the American people should believe the lies she told, Maxwell was transferred from a legitimate federal prison to a cushy camp sleep-away in Texas, where she enjoys service animals and Pilates classes. Glenn explains how prosecutors are supposed to deal with convicted defendants, especially when they lie, claiming they did nothing wrong, and when they try to falsely exonerate other criminal associates. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Content Warning: While we avoid graphic descriptions of abuse, this story is inherently about the sexual abuse, exploitation, and trafficking of children and a crew of horrible people who allowed it to play out over decades. It is upsetting, disturbing, and enraging. Listener discretion is encouraged. Alan Dershowitz was a key player in one of the most appalling and long-running miscarriages of justice in generations. In 2005, his friend Jeffrey Epstein learned that he was being investigated by police for sexually abusing young girls. Epstein did what anyone would; he called the most aggressive lawyer he could think of. Alan spent the next several years smearing victims, strong-arming prosecutors, and possibly cooperating with an intense harassment and intimidation campaign against investigators. And it paid off; Alan's hard work meant that his friend Jeff could continue abusing girls for nearly 15 more years, but Alan also found himself in the crosshairs when Epstein's victims began to come forward. Sponsors Upgrade your every day! Download the Quince app for app-exclusive offers, or go to ⁠Quince.com/TRASHY⁠. Get free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada and UK, too! Vinted. See what's hiding in your closet – you might be surprised how much you can earn with Vinted! Download the Vinted app for free to start listing with no seller fees, and for a limited time, enjoy free shipping in the US. For a limited time, get 60% off your first order, plus free shipping and free treats for life, when you head to Smalls.com/TRASHY. Want early, ad-free episodes, regular Dumpster Dives, bonus divorces, limited series, Zoom hangouts, and more? Join us at patreon.com/trashydivorces! Want a personalized message for someone in your life? Check us out on Cameo! To advertise on our podcast, please reach out to info@amplitudemediapartners.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer gave Ghislaine Maxwell a verbal spanking while ruling against her bid to overturn her sex trafficking convictions for her role in the Jeffrey Epstein saga. Judge Engelmayer wrote a 67 page ruling where he calls Maxwell’s claims meritless and frivolous and said the Epstein file release not only didn’t exonerate her, it further incriminated her and reinforced the verdict against her. He also made it very clear, Maxwell is out of legal options, writing that no further appeals would be considered. We have reaction from Epstein survivors and what Congress has tried to do to prevent her only get-out-of-jail card left: a Presidential pardon. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Buckle up: Conspiracy Bill is back. Bill Simmons joins the pod to surprise Jason and Tyler with the 12 stories that have had him doing deep dives. Here's today's agenda: 00:07: Stephen King's alias 04:39: Bill Simmons's alias: Conspiracy Bill 08:40: Conspiracy Bill's 12 Deepest Dives of the Year 20:12: No. 12: Havana Syndrome 25:35: No. 11: The Fox News mask incident 29:44: No. 10: Epstein won the Powerball?! 31:37: No. 9: The Whitehouse Correspondents Dinner 35:51: No. 8: What happened at the Miami mall? 38:41: No. 7: The Niners substation situation 41:32: No. 6: Nancy Guthrie 43:24: No. 5: What's up with Trump's ear? His hand? 48:35: No. 4: The microphone … 48:35: No. 3: Missing scientists 54:36: No. 2: Matt Miller … or Karen Read 01:00:33 No. 1: The Lindsay Clancy case 01:10:25 Bonus round: Why did Mark Cuban sell the Mavs? Plus: JC's Long Island serial killer theory. Follow us on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@waitasecondpodcastHosts: Jason Concepcion and Tyler ParkerGuest: Bill SimmonsProducers: T Cruz and Justin SaylesVideo editing: Marco Escalante and T CruzEngineering: Jacob CornettSocial media: Paige Ransbury Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices