Podcasts about familythe

Most leaders are trained to perform, strategize, and execute, but there's one skill almost nobody teaches, and it's the difference between leaders who get compliance and leaders who earn devotion. It's called presence, and it has surprisingly little to do with focus.In this episode, Josh sits down with high performance coach Dr. Mark Matthews to break down the Present Protocol, a framework for leading with deep presence at work and at home. Here's what they get into:The "leadership gap" almost no one talks about, and why being focused on someone is not the same as being present with themThe one-line distinction between focus and presence that reframes how you show up as a leaderThe two phases of the Present Protocol, starting with the four capacities of deep presence that most high performers skip right pastWhy presence is the antidote to the loneliness so many founders feel even when they're surrounded by a team every dayThe skill that separates leaders who manage people from leaders who actually move themHow Josh is applying this in the three "home base" areas of his life: his team, his customers, and his familyThe hardest capacity to master, the one that asks you to suspend judgment in real time (Josh shares a 6:30 a.m. story from that very morning)This isn't woo woo, and it isn't another time management hack. It's the relational skill that changes how your team, your customers, and your family experience you. If you've ever felt present on paper but somehow still not connected, this is the episode that makes it click.Connect with Dr. Mark Matthews on Instagram @facemyfear or on LinkedIn as Dr. Mark Matthews. Want to go deeper? Go back to episode 231, "Are You Addicted to Achievement and the Hidden Cost of High Performance."Loved this episode? Drop us a rating because we're going for #1 ecommerce podcast in the world and every single rating moves the needle.-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-► Visit Our Website For Training and Resources► Leave Us An Honest Rating, Email An Image Of Your Rating To team@theecommercealley.com, We'll Send You A $10 Amazon Gift Card As An Appreciation Gift!► Learn About Our Mentorship Program For Ecom Brands Making Over $10k/month► Checkout Our Software, Breezeway - Never Second-Guess Your Meta Ads Again►  Follow Josh on social media: YouTube | Instagram | Facebook | TikTok | 

Family disconnect often stems from deep-seated fears and overlooked talents. In this eye-opening episode, we uncover the seven most common causes that quietly undermine family bonds and how understanding these can transform your relationships today. Are fears of failure, overwhelm, burnout, perfectionism, lack of motivation, or feeling unheard quietly sabotaging your family? You're not alone, and recognizing these blockers is the first step toward stronger, more authentic connections.Whether you're a parent, partner, or family member, you'll discover practical insights to break free from these invisible barriers. We break down how fear of rejection paralyzes growth, why burnout drains joy and energy, and how high standards can keep you stuck. Plus, learn real strategies to foster clarity, ignite passion, and uplift each other's talents so your family can thrive, not just survive.Key topics covered include:The toxic impact of fear of failure and how to shift mindsets for growthHow lack of clarity and accountability stifle potential within your familyThe role of chronic stress and burnout in eroding emotional bondsThe danger of perfectionism and how to set sustainable standardsWays to reignite motivation and passion for your shared mission and life goalsIgnoring these issues leaves families vulnerable to ongoing disconnection, missed opportunities, and unfulfilled potential. But by understanding and addressing these root causes, you unlock the door to deeper trust, resilience, and unity, empowering generations to come.This episode is perfect for anyone feeling stuck or distant from loved ones, or seeking to create a more connected, supportive family environment. If you're ready to identify what's holding you back and take actionable steps toward healing, this conversation is a must-listen.Join us to explore the unseen forces quietly shaping your family life, and learn how to turn obstacles into opportunities for growth and connection.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdf

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The transcripts from Howard Lutnick's closed-door appearance before Congress painted a picture of a witness trying to minimize both the depth and duration of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein while lawmakers confronted him with records suggesting far more contact than he had previously acknowledged. Lutnick repeatedly described his interactions with Epstein as “inconsequential,” insisting he only met with him a handful of times and claiming he cut ties after a disturbing 2005 interaction inside Epstein's Manhattan townhouse. According to the testimony, Lutnick said Epstein made sexually suggestive comments about massages during that visit, which he claimed immediately disgusted both him and his wife. However, members of the House Oversight Committee confronted him with emails, schedules, and business records showing contact continuing years after Epstein's 2008 conviction, including meetings at Epstein's townhouse, discussions involving a shared business venture, and a 2012 lunch visit to Epstein's private island alongside Lutnick's familyThe transcripts also showed lawmakers growing increasingly frustrated with what they viewed as evasive answers and shifting explanations from Lutnick as more documentation was placed in front of him. Democrats in particular accused him of misleading the public for years about the true extent of the relationship, especially after previously portraying Epstein as little more than a casual acquaintance. Lutnick attempted to explain away the continued contact by claiming the encounters were brief, social, or business-related and that he never witnessed any criminal behavior or saw underage girls around Epstein. He also reportedly walked back previous public comments suggesting Epstein blackmailed powerful people, telling lawmakers he had only been speculating and had no firsthand knowledge of such activity. Republicans on the committee largely defended Lutnick and argued Democrats were trying to weaponize the hearing politically, while critics argued the testimony further demonstrated how many powerful figures continued associating with Epstein long after his criminal conduct was already publicly known.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:HGO126550 Lutnick Draft-pdf2_Redacted-Update_RedactedV3.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this heartfelt episode, Lantz Howard sits down with Zach Garza — founder of You Can Mentor and passionate advocate for mentoring fatherless boys and girls.Zach shares:The power of simple, consistent presence over rigid routines (judge the fruit, not the watering schedule)His own story of growing up without a consistent father figure and how one mentor (Bob) changed the trajectory of his lifeWhy mentoring is discipleship — showing up, encouraging, and letting kids catch more than they're taughtThe differentiator of You Can Mentor: faith-based mentoring that points kids to Christ and healthy familyPractical ways to start mentoring: do what you love, invite others, and include your own familyThe long obedience of faithfulness — “if you don't quit, you win”A motivating conversation for any man or woman wondering if they have what it takes to mentor and how one faithful relationship can break generational cycles.--Learn more about coaching with Lantz Howard at www.lantzhoward.com

In this episode, Craig discusses his latest book Fighting for Your Family, emphasizing the importance of fighting alongside family members against spiritual enemies rather than against each other. He shares personal insights, biblical principles, and practical strategies for strengthening family relationships and spiritual warfare.TopicsSpiritual warfare in the familyThe role of love and leadership in marriagePractical parenting and relationship strategiesThe importance of physical health for family impactTitlesFighting for Your Family: 7 Biblical Strategies to Strengthen Your HomeHow to Win the Spiritual Battle in Your FamilyChapters00:00 Introduction and Podcast Overview00:59 Introducing ‘Fighting for Your Family'01:53 Understanding Spiritual Warfare in Families07:04 The Role of Personal Responsibility in Family Dynamics10:50 Leadership and Love in Marriage15:05 Commitment and Community in Parenting19:02 Physical Health and Its Impact on Family20:55 Adoption and Orphan Care22:56 Conclusion and Call to Action

In this deeply inspiring episode of The Recovery Vow Podcast… Eric Kennedy sits down with Tanner Smith and his parents, Nicci and Mark, a family whose journey through autism, faith, and resilience has transformed not just their lives, but thousands of others. What began as fear, uncertainty, and a life-altering diagnosis turned into a story of purpose, growth, and unexpected impact.Tanner shares his journey from early struggles with communication to becoming a confident, independent young man traveling the world, meeting celebrities, and inspiring audiences everywhere. But behind the spotlight is a family that fought through years of confusion, emotional breakdowns, and relentless effort just to reach a place many take for granted.Mark and Nicci open up about the moment everything changed, the diagnosis that shattered their expectations, the financial and emotional weight that followed, and the silent battles they faced as parents trying to do everything right. From therapy sessions at the kitchen table to redefining their marriage and roles, their story is raw, real, and filled with moments that will truly inspire.On This Episode:The life-changing autism diagnosis that reshaped an entire familyThe emotional reality of parenting through uncertainty and fearHow Tanner went from limited communication to global impactThe truth about marriage under pressure and staying as a teamWhy purpose matters more than “fixing” the problemThe unseen struggles families with autism face, and why they need supportConnect with us:Socials: @‌RecoveryVowWebsite: http://recoveryvow.comEmail: recoveryvow@gmail.comNew episodes every other Monday.Top ways to support this podcast:

In this throwback episode of the Uncommon Real Estate Podcast, Chris sits down with long-time friend and powerhouse team leader Susan Arant to talk about what it really takes to grow a thriving real estate business with your spouse — without losing your mind or your marriage.Susan and her husband Gene have led one of Austin's most respected real estate teams, selling over 3,000 homes with a concierge-level client experience and a team culture rooted in intentionality and excellence. From navigating work-life balance, to crafting a vision together, to staying profitable in shifting markets — Susan drops unfiltered wisdom for agents looking to build both wealth and lasting relationships.Topics Covered:How Susan and Gene scaled a real estate team while raising a familyThe systems and mindset shifts that keep their marriage and business thrivingHow their team drives 75% of deals through repeat clients and referralsWhat NLP is — and how it's helping agents rewire for successUsing data-driven conversations to fuel prospecting (without sounding salesy)The secret to staying in your “genius zone” and finding the right team membersBuilding wealth beyond the cash machine — and giving back through the Gene Arant FoundationConnect with Susan:Email: susan@genearant.comWebsite: austintexasrealestate.com Referrals to Austin? Reach out to Susan and her team directly — they'd love to help!Connect with Chris:Instagram: @craddrockFacebook: Chris CraddockResources:

Entrepreneurs are told to chase work-life balance - but what if that idea is completely wrong? In this episode, Tom Cox breaks down why trying to balance everything leads to failure in both business and family life. He shares a better approach focused on presence, consistency, and intentional decision-making.What You Will Learn:Why balance doesn't workHow to prioritize your familyThe power of small daily momentsWhen to say noWhy hiring faster mattersGuest Bio:Tom Cox is a business advisor and former college football coach helping entrepreneurs improve clarity and structure.Links Mentioned:ThomasCox.co##Visit www.CloseTheDeal.com to see all episodes.The Close The Deal Podcast is where decisions and broken promises to oneself  get made.Hosted by Ewell Smith, this show features real conversations with high achievers - entrepreneurs, business owners, leaders, and competitors who are at a crossroads facing the decision they've been putting off. This isn't about theory, tactics, or surface-level advice.Every episode is built around one thing:

Michelle Choairy is a speaker, mentor, podcaster, and the founder of Wisdom 4 Complex Kids, Special Education Concierge, and the THRIVE Program. She is the creator and host of the Complex Kids, Simple Solutions podcast and co-host of The Mom Panel, where she blends expert guidance with heartfelt conversations to support parents raising neurodivergent, apraxic, and complex kids.Her work is personal and purpose-driven. Michelle is the mother of Drake, a child with a rare genetic disorder and childhood apraxia of speech. Navigating medical systems, IEPs, insurance barriers, therapies, and state-funded programs showed her just how overwhelming and isolating this journey can be. After walking it alone for too long, she made a promise: no parent should ever have to navigate this world without a guide or a team.That calling led her to national visibility, including speaking for ApraxiaKids.com, where she shares lived experience, advocacy tools, and hope-filled direction for families searching for clarity and community.In This Episode, We Discuss:How to advocated for complex kids, specifically with IEP and medical therapy needs.How Michelle keeps things simple, meaningful, and fun for her familyThe struggles families face in trying to find on a diagnosis, and subsequent treatmentEncouragement for all families, but especially those with complex kidsKey Takeaway:THRIVE Framework: Teamwork Help Systems Relationships Integration Validation Expecting the MiracleAbout Our Guest: Michelle ChoairyMichelle Choairy is a mom of a complex kid. She has been her son's best advocate and has learned through the years what it takes to get the best care for her child. She is the Founder of Collective Wisdom for Complex Kids, a support group for mothers with children with disabilities. She has a passion for helping families re-evaluate and prioritize their dynamics, along with guiding them from confusion to clarity while raising complex children.Michelle's Website: https://specialeducationconcierge.com/Follow her on Social: FB: https://www.facebook.com/ChoairymIG: https://www.instagram.com/michelle.choairy/YT: https://www.youtube.com/@SpecialEducationConciergeFind Michelle's Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/complex-kids-simple-solutions/id1804450757____________________Want to be a guest on The Motherhood Experience? Send Val Kleppen a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/1758742098661627c9cc46f40

I'm getting really personal in this one. After 13 years of living abroad, moving to Spain with my husband and daughter, and having multiple team members living in the same city... I still felt lonely. And I didn't know how to admit it.In this completely unscripted episode, I share what it's actually been like coming back to Málaga after being gone for three months, diving straight into bootcamp mode, and realizing that my business manager Evan had built this entire social life while I was gone… and I was jealous.I talk about the moment I finally admitted to Evan that I felt left out and lonely, and what happened when I did. Spoiler: he told me he felt lonely too, even with all those friends. And that conversation changed everything.What I cover:Why loneliness can happen even when you move abroad with a partner or familyThe scary moment I asked Evan to introduce me to his friends (and why it felt so awkward)How I forced myself to reach out to three people I'd only met once or twice (and what happened)Why we hold ourselves back from being vulnerable about lonelinessThe difference between locals and other expats when it comes to building communityHow admitting "I have no friends" at a meetup actually helped me make friendsMy "big asks" practice and how asking for what you need (even socially) is worth the discomfortThe big lesson: Loneliness abroad isn't a sign you made the wrong choice. It's a sign you're human. And the solution isn't going back home, it's reaching out.This episode is raw, honest, and probably the most vulnerable I've been on the podcast. If you've ever felt lonely (or you're worried you will when you move), this one's for you.Subscribe and ReviewIf you loved this episode, please take a moment to subscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts! Your support helps us reach more visionaries who need these insights.

In the special segment "OMG I'm Freaking Out!," Shanna and Laura reveal the current parenting dilemmas that have their hair standing on end, including an unexpected sight on Shanna's school communication app and a travel conundrum that is stressing Laura out. Also, Laura reports on her son's back-to-back tooth loss that has left him with a double gap, and Shanna checks in on her daughter's surprising trip to the dentist to get her cavities filled. Finally, the moms share their BFPs and BFNs for the week, including a fun kids craft and a trip to Vegas. Shanna's kids are 7 and 10 years old, and Laura's kids are 7 years old and 5 years old.Topics discussed in this episode:What to do when your kid loses a tooth right before bedWhat happens when your kid loses a tooth at schoolWhen your child needs to get cavities filledSeeing something confusing and unsettling on your school communication appDeciding whether to travel solo or with your familyThe joy of your child expressing interest in something you loveTaking a trip to Las VegasProducts, links, resources mentioned in this episode:Rainbow Loom kitWizard of Oz at the SphereMad ApplePast BFP episodes mentioned in this episode:Ep. 402 - Where Laura learns about the Ear Tube FairyConnect with UsFollow us on social: Instagram, TikTok or Facebook at @bfppodcastJoin our Facebook community group for support and camaraderie on your parenting journey.Visit our website: bigfatpositivepodcast.comEmail us: contact@bigfatpositivepodcast.comSend us a voice message: speakpipe.com/bfppodcastIf you enjoyed this episode, help spread the word by sharing the show or leaving a review. Thank you!Big Fat Positive: A Pregnancy and Parenting Journey is produced by Laura Birek, Shanna Micko and Steve Yager. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Craig discusses the concept of privilege in the context of Christian parenting, emphasizing biblical goals and responsibilities. He advocates for intentionally providing children with privileges such as a two-parent home, safety, biblical sexuality, financial stability, community, and a relationship with Christ, while encouraging listeners to extend these privileges to others.TopicsThe concept of privilege in modern cultureBiblical goals for Christian parentingThe importance of a two-parent homeSafety and security for childrenBiblical view of sexuality and genderFinancial stewardship and stabilityExtended community and church familyThe privilege of a relationship with ChristSound Bites“I want my kids to be privileged.”“Living within our means teaches responsibility.”“Our responsibility begins in our home.”Chapters00:00The Concept of Privilege in Parenting03:48Essential Privileges for Children10:01Extending Privileges Beyond the Family13:47Engaging with Culture as Christian Parents

If you're the eldest daughter, you may have grown up being the strong one.The responsible one. The emotional stabilizer. The one who quietly held everything together.But what happens when the role you learned in childhood follows you into adulthood?In this solo episode, I'm unpacking something many women have felt but rarely had language for: emotional parentification and the invisible load eldest daughters carry throughout their lives.As an eldest daughter myself, I share the deeper psychology behind these roles and how we can break the cycle for ourselves and the next generation. If you've ever felt like the one who holds everything together but secretly wonders who is holding you, this conversation is for you.What you'll get out of this episode… Why eldest daughters often become the emotional stabilizers of the familyThe psychology behind emotional parentificationHow childhood roles shape adult relationships and friendshipsWhy eldest daughters tend to become high performers and over-giversThe nervous system patterns that make rest feel unsafeHow to stop confusing love with effort and over-functioningWays to retrain your nervous system for joy, rest, and self-expressionHow to break these cycles for future generationsThis Episode is Sponsored by Chai Tonics

In this episode, Dr. Geeta Harb (@therealOCdentist) shares her inspiring path from a remarkably young start in dentistry to building a practice rooted in integrity, artistry, and authentic patient care. Born to be a warrior, after 14 years growing up in war-torn Beirut, she moved to the U.S. where she graduated from university at the young age of 17 and went on to earn a doctorate. For the last 15 years, she has built a successful, multi-specialty dental practice focusing on cosmetic dentistry, changing lives one smile at a time. In 2024, U.S. News and World Report recognized her with the Patient Top Choice award; she also was named a Top 100 Doctor by LA Style magazine. Her podcast, THE SMILE DIARIES, shares true stories of determination and triumph, ultimately offering strategies for overcoming challenges and maneuvering life's balancing act.KEY TOPICS:Dr. Harb's early start in dentistry at age 21 and lessons learned from managing a practice youngTransition from corporate dentistry to private practice focused on artistry and ethicsThe impact of high-volume clinical environments on the quality and artistry of dental workHow personal integrity and purpose shape her approach to patient care and businessBuilding a boutique, relationship-driven dental office that feels like familyThe emotional toll of dentistry, managing stress, burnout, and maintaining mental healthThe role of social media—Instagram—as a tool for authenticity and patient connectionRedefining success: from material possessions to peace, purpose, and meaningful impactThe significance of setting boundaries with patients and staff to uphold standardsRESOURCES & LINKS⁠Dr. Guitta Harb on Instagram⁠⁠Dr. Guitta Harb WebsiteThe Smile Diaries Podcast_______Don't miss out on these deals: Prioritize your wellness—shop my daily essentials here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://teethmatterpod.com/store⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠COCOFLOSS - Use code TM20 to get 20% off ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://cocofloss.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ FIGS - Use referral code to get 20% off ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://fbuy.io/figs/elliehalabian⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠If you want to join the conversation about the realities of dentistry, follow: Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@_teethmatter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ellie Halabian⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠__________________________If you enjoy the podcast, subscribe and rate ⭐️. If you think a friend will enjoy it, please share it with them.

Emma Storey: How 2 part-time working mums billed £500K in their first 2 years!Emma Storey never thought she'd still be in recruitment after having kids.She'd never worked with a mum in the industry. Never had a role model who'd done it. The assumption was always the same: have a baby, and your recruitment career is over.But after successfully juggling recruitment and becoming a mum inside the pandemic, in 2023 she launched her own agency with colleague Nicola Morse, a fellow working mum.They launched Hera with the plan to both work part-time, and within months, Emma soon fell pregnant with baby number 2.Inside the first 2 years, working part-time around school runs, nursery pickups and a maternity leave, they have billed £500K.That's £150K in year one during one of the worst recruitment markets in a generation, and £350K in year two with Emma off for three months and working three days a week for the rest.But what makes Emma different isn't the revenue. It's the reason she built the business in the first place.Female candidates regularly tell Hera they're nervous about wearing their wedding ring to interviews because they know it signals they might want children. Hiring managers have told them directly: we don't want people from that age range.Emma lived it herself. In one agency, a mum who left at three o'clock was met with the same comment every single day: "Thanks for coming."So Emma and Nicola built Hera around a guarantee most agencies won't make: a diverse shortlist on every single role. They positioned diversity and inclusion not as a side project but as the commercial engine. And it worked. Every client they've won has bought into it.Their target is £500K this year. They have no plans to hire a team. No plans to scale beyond two. No plans to stop billing.Inside this unique story we cover:Why Emma assumed motherhood would end her recruitment careerThe "thanks for coming" culture that still exists in agenciesWhy female candidates hide their wedding rings in interviewsHow two part-time working mums billed £500K in their first two yearsThe diverse shortlist guarantee that wins every clientWhy they target £500K a year and have zero interest in scaling beyond thatHow shared parental leave changed everything for their familyThe co-founder relationship that started at kids' swimming lessonsThis isn't about scaling fast or building an empire.It's about two women who were told, directly and indirectly, that motherhood and recruitment don't mix. They billed half a million pounds in two years working part-time and proved it wrong. Without sacrificing bedtimes, school runs, or being present for their kids.If you're a female recruiter wondering whether you can have children, build a business, and still love what you do, this episode is your blueprint.__________________________________________Episode Sponsor: AtlasLet's be honest. Admin is one of the biggest drains on growth in a recruitment business.That's where Atlas comes in.Atlas is the AI-first recruitment platform built for modern agencies that want to scale without adding more manual work.It doesn't just track CVs and calls. It captures every conversation - emails, interviews, client calls - and makes it fully searchable.With Magic Search, you can literally ask:Who mentioned they're open to relocating next year?Who talked about wanting a four-day week?Who's worried about their commute?Atlas searches across real conversations, not just keywords on a CV, and gives you answers instantly.Atlas 2.0 also makes business development easier. With Opportunities, you can track and grow client relationships using generative AI, all inside your existing workflow.And this isn't hypothetical.Atlas customers have reported up to 41% EBITDA growth and an 85% increase in monthly billings after adopting the platform.No admin. No silos. No lost information.Just faster shortlists, better hires, and more time spent on the work that actually drives revenue.If you want to see what the future of recruitment looks like, unlock your exclusive RAG listener offer at:https://recruitwithatlas.com/therag/__________________________________________Episode Sponsor: HoxoEvery recruitment founder is investing in LinkedIn.Spending thousands on Recruiter licences.Building connections. Posting content. Growing networks.But here's the question almost no one can answer:How much revenue is LinkedIn actually bringing into your business?Most founders have thousands of connections but no clear process to turn that attention into cash.That's the problem we solve.At Hoxo, we help recruitment founders build predictable revenue systems on LinkedIn, not just noise or vanity metrics.Our clients are turning LinkedIn into £100K–£300K in new billings within months, using their existing networks and a simple repeatable process.To show you how it works, we've created a short training video exclusively for RAG listeners.In less than 10 minutes, you'll learn:Why most recruiters are getting zero measurable ROI from LinkedInHow small, niche teams are generating consistent inbound demandThe 3X Revenue System we use to turn LinkedIn into a predictable cash-generating channelSo fill in the form today to see how this system could transform LinkedIn into your agency's most profitable channel: https://hubs.ly/Q03lBpYC0

In this episode of Sharing Passion and Purpose, host Nancy Moore sits down with Jenna Worthen, founder of Mom Who Works, to explore the powerful shift in how we think about motherhood, work, and purpose.Jenna shares the story behind the moment that sparked her movement—an ordinary run in 2016 that turned into an extraordinary idea. Overwhelmed with the weight of expectations placed on women, Jenna began questioning the label “working mom.” What started as a simple shift in language soon grew into a powerful platform and community dedicated to helping women reclaim their identity, worth, and calling.Through Mom Who Works, Jenna encourages women to rethink the narratives they've been given. Instead of trying to live up to impossible standards or comparing themselves to carefully curated images online, she invites moms to define their own version of “having it all.”In this conversation, Jenna shares:Why the phrase “working mom” deserves to be reexaminedHow moms can let go of guilt and comparison in the age of social mediaWhy community and support are essential for mothers navigating career and familyThe importance of defining your own version of success in every season of motherhoodHow pursuing purpose can positively impact both your family and your futureJenna also opens up about integrating her work with motherhood, involving her children in her journey, and how faith, movement, and mentorship help keep her grounded as both a mom and entrepreneur.This episode is a meaningful reminder that motherhood doesn't limit purpose—it often clarifies it. Jenna's message is both freeing and empowering: every woman has the right to define her own “all,” pursue her dreams, and know she is not alone in the journey.If you're a mom balancing work, dreams, family, and identity, this conversation will encourage you to embrace the path that is uniquely yours.Special thanks to the Sponsor of this episode:Five Star Painting of TulsaCall Trevor for a Free Quote: (918) 500 - 5788

In this episode of Over 50 & Flourishing, I sit down with Susan Holmes McKagan for a conversation about reinvention, courage, and playing the long game.After a successful career as a 90s supermodel, Susan pivoted in her late 40s and enrolled in Harvard Graduate School to deepen and refine her craft as a writer. She shares what inspired that decision, what it felt like to be older than many of her classmates, and how the academic rigor sharpened her writing and strengthened her discipline.We also talk about her nearly 27-year marriage to Duff McKagan of Guns N Roses. How they met on a blind date, what keeps their relationship strong, and what it was really like raising two daughters while navigating life on tour. Susan offers an honest look at the pros and challenges of being married in the rock and roll world and why longevity in love, just like career, requires intention and growth.In this episode, we discuss:Why Susan chose to go to Harvard Graduate School in her 40s after a successful modeling careerWhat it felt like to be the outlier in the classroomHow her writing sharpened and evolved after graduate schoolHow she met Duff McKagan and built a lasting marriage in rock and rollWhat tour life was like while raising a familyThe importance of taking leaps of faith at any ageWhy following your passion matters more than playing it safeHow benefiting from the long game leads to lasting successFor more on Susan Holmes McKagan, follow her on:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/susanholmesmckagan/?hl=en Twitter/X: https://x.com/SuHolmesMcKagan Susan's book, The Velvet Rose: https://a.co/d/0cZfZwW8 Three Chords & The Truth: https://duffmckagan.com/radio-show/ Thanks to my Sponsors:Ritual: Save 25% on your first month at Ritual.com/OVER50 Hers: If you want clearer insight into your health, go to https://ForHers.com and schedule your labsAudible: Go to Audible.com/BigAgeSeries to start listening todayHoneylove: Save 20% off Honeylove at Honeylove.com/OVER50 Manukora: Head to Manukora.com/FLOURISHING to save up to 31% plus $25 worth of free giftsBloom Nutrition: Go to bloomnu.com and use code OVER50 for 20% off your first order. Keep in Touch:Website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dominiquesachse.tv/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Book: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://dominiquesachse.tv/book/Insta: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/dominiquesachse/Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/DominiqueSachse/TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@dominiquesachse?lang=enYouTube: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@dominiquesachsetvHave a question for Dominique? Submit it here for a chance to have it answered on the show! https://forms.gle/MpTeWN1oKN8t18pm6 Interested in being featured as a guest? Please email ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠courtney@dominiquesachse.tv⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ We want to make the podcast even better. Help us learn how we can: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/2EcYbu4⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Please note that this episode may contain paid endorsements and advertisements for products and services. Individuals on the show may have a direct or indirect financial interest in products or services referred to in this episode.Produced by Dear Media.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week on Claiming Zero, I'm reading and reacting to two very honest Reddit threads — one from the Reddit community r/regretfulparents and the other from r/childfree.In the first post, parents were asked: “Are you envious of your childfree by choice friends?" And they did not hold back. Commenters talked about:Watching childfree friends travel freelyHaving disposable incomeBeing able to focus on their relationships moreHaving time, autonomy, and flexibility and so much moreThen I flipped the script. In the child-free thread, someone asked: “Does anyone regret not having kids?” Some people admitted fears around:Being ostracized by familyThe fear of loneliness later in lifeNot having someone who depends on you and moreThis episode isn't about who made the “right” choice.It's about honesty. What do people actually say when they feel safe enough to tell the truth? And what can we learn when we listen without defensiveness?Support the showEmail: claimingzeropodcast@gmail.comIG/FB: @claimingzero

Let us know what you think about the podcast!Episode 207 - Family Reactivity and Anxiety: Why Your Relationship Feels Stuck Do you feel stuck in painful cycles of family conflict and emotional reactions? Maybe you feel like you are walking on eggshells around your child. Or maybe your emotions take over, and you say things you later wish you had handled differently.In this episode of the Coaching Your Family Relationships Podcast, Tina Gosney, family conflict coach and family life educator, teaches you why reactivity is one of the biggest reasons family relationships stay tense, distant, or stuck, especially in parenting adult children relationships.You will learn:What family reactivity really looks like and why it is not always yelling or angerHow anxiety quietly fuels emotional distance from adult childrenWhy patterns from your family of origin get repeated unless you interrupt themHow one reactive person can set the emotional tone for the entire familyThe difference between reacting from anxiety and responding with emotional maturityThis conversation will help you understand why your adult child may be pulling away and what you can begin doing differently if you want to rebuild trust and create connection without control.This episode is your guide to creating emotional freedom—even if your family feels stuck in chaos right now. Tina Gosney is the Family Conflict Coach. She works with parents who have families in conflict to help them become the grounded, confident leaders their family needs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Connect with us: Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/tinagosneycoaching/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tinagosneycoaching ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tina is certified in family relationships and a trauma informed coach. Visit tinagosney.com for more information on coaching services.

In the special segment "Dear Past Me," Shanna and Laura give their former selves parenting advice based on what they know now, including wisdom about sentimental baby items and encouragement to advocate for yourself in the early days of new motherhood. Also, Laura manages to get her reluctant kids to go on an urban adventure, and Shanna celebrates her daughter's 7th birthday and travels to Phoenix with her family for a celebration-of-life event. Finally, they share their BFPs or BFNs for the week. Shanna's kids are 7 and 9.5 years old, and Laura's kids are 6.5 years old and 4.5 years old.Topics discussed in this episode:Finding outdoor adventures close to home for your familyThe difficulty of transitions with kidsAttending a memorial/celebration of life and what it's like to do meaningful rituals with kidsReflections on early parenting choices and what we wish we could tell our younger selvesWhy keeping up with milestone keepsakes for all your kids is importantNavigating career and creativity opportunities as a new momAnti-mom bias at work and within creative spaces, and why advocating for yourself mattersKids exploring the performing arts and the joy of seeing them come alive creativelyFinding helpful online communities and learning new routines that are rewardingProducts, links, resources mentioned in this episode:Flint Peak Trail"Big Fish" movieThe Baby-Sitter's Club #33: "Claudia and the Great Search""Flashback" (Shanna's short film)Shanna's WebsiteFine Hair SubredditPomeranian SubredditPast BFP episodes mentioned in this episode:Ep. 283 - (Laura discusses Auggie's reluctance to participate in his school's theater production)Ep. 285 - (Laura reports on Auggie's refusal to participate in the theater production on the day of the show)Ep. 374 - (Laura talks about her boys getting excited about their hiking "costumes" in Portland)Ep. 376 - (Shanna talks about her stepdad's passing)Connect with UsFollow us on social: Instagram, TikTok or Facebook at @bfppodcastJoin our Facebook community group for support and camaraderie on your parenting journey.Visit our website: bigfatpositivepodcast.comEmail us: contact@bigfatpositivepodcast.comIf you enjoyed this episode, help spread the word by sharing the show or leaving a review. Thank you!Big Fat Positive: A Pregnancy and Parenting Journey is produced by Laura Birek, Shanna Micko and Steve Yager. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of The Money Mondays Podcast, Dan Fleyshman sits down in Las Vegas with Bradley Sugars, founder of ActionCOACH, one of the world's largest business coaching organizations operating in 85+ countries and responsible for billions in client revenue.Brad shares decades of hard-earned wisdom on what truly separates struggling operators from successful business owners. From why most entrepreneurs stay stuck doing $20/hour tasks to how real wealth is built through systems, coaching, and accountability, this conversation pulls back the curtain on money, mindset, and scale.They dive deep into:Why business coaching delivers a 6–7x ROI and how to know if you're actually coachableThe difference between being a great operator vs. a true ownerWhy “how” kills most goals — and what to focus on insteadHow to think about investing once you've made money (businesses, real estate, and rules)Why talking about money openly is essential — especially with friends and familyThe real purpose of wealth, legacy, and giving backBrad also breaks down his philosophy on goal-setting, investing only where you're an expert, and why most people would rather look rich than be rich. This is a masterclass in business thinking, long-term wealth, and building a life that actually feels successful.If you want to make more money, invest smarter, and understand wealth at a deeper level, this episode is required listening.Like this episode? Watch more like it