Podcasts about Fifth Amendment

Federal prosecutors moved in September 2020 to halt a civil lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing that the case could interfere with her pending criminal trial. They warned that continuing the civil proceedings might force Maxwell to make disclosures that could compromise her Fifth Amendment rights, or expose evidence and testimony that overlapped with the criminal investigation. The judge agreed, ruling that the civil case would be put on hold to ensure the integrity of the broader prosecution.The lawsuit, filed by a woman who alleged she was groomed and abused as a minor, sought to hold Maxwell and Epstein's estate accountable. While the judge acknowledged that delaying a survivor's pursuit of justice carried weight, the court determined that protecting the fairness of the criminal case against Maxwell had to take priority. The pause meant the civil action would resume only after the conclusion of Maxwell's criminal trial.To contact me:Bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://abcnews.go.com/US/feds-seek-halt-civil-lawsuit-ghislaine-maxwell/story?id=72929281Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This Day in Legal History: Certiorari Granted in WindsorOn September 11, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a petition for certiorari in United States v. Windsor, setting the stage for one of the most consequential civil rights decisions of the decade. The case challenged Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for federal purposes as between one man and one woman. Edith Windsor, the plaintiff, had been legally married to her same-sex partner, Thea Spyer, in Canada. When Spyer died, Windsor was denied the federal estate tax exemption for surviving spouses, resulting in a tax bill exceeding $350,000.Windsor argued that DOMA violated the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection as applied to the federal government. The Obama administration, though initially defending DOMA, reversed course and declined to continue doing so, prompting the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) of the House of Representatives to intervene. The DOJ's September 11 petition reflected the administration's desire to have the Supreme Court resolve the constitutional question as quickly as possible.In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in favor of Windsor, striking down Section 3 of DOMA as unconstitutional. Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, held that the federal government could not single out same-sex marriages for unequal treatment under the law. The ruling granted same-sex couples access to hundreds of federal benefits and marked a turning point in the legal recognition of LGBTQ+ rights.The Windsor decision laid the constitutional groundwork for Obergefell v. Hodges two years later, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The filing on September 11, 2012, was a procedural but critical moment that pushed the case toward the highest court in the land. It also signaled a shift in the federal government's posture toward LGBTQ+ equality—moving from defense of discriminatory laws to active legal opposition.The trial of Ryan Routh, accused of attempting to assassinate then former President Donald Trump, begins this week in Fort Pierce, Florida. Routh, 59, is facing five federal charges, including attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate, and has chosen to represent himself. Prosecutors allege that Routh hid with a rifle near the sixth hole of Trump's golf course in West Palm Beach last September, intending to kill Trump. He fled after a Secret Service agent spotted him before any shots were fired and was arrested the same day.The trial opens amid rising concerns about political violence in the U.S., underscored by the recent killing of Trump ally Charlie Kirk in Utah. Trump himself has been targeted multiple times, including a shooting in Pennsylvania in July 2024 that left him wounded. Routh, a former roofing contractor with a history of erratic behavior, had expressed political views supporting Taiwan and Ukraine and previously outlined a bizarre plan involving Afghan refugees.The case is being heard by Judge Aileen Cannon, the same judge who previously dismissed a separate criminal case against Trump involving classified documents. Cannon has already expressed frustration with Routh during jury selection, rejecting several of his proposed questions as irrelevant. The jury consists of seven women and five men. The trial is expected to spotlight the ongoing increase in politically motivated violence in the U.S.,Trial begins for man accused of trying to assassinate Trump, spotlighting US political violence | ReutersFive former federal employees have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), alleging the agency unlawfully dismissed their complaints after being fired early in President Trump's second term. Represented by Democracy Forward, the plaintiffs claim OSC failed to investigate over 2,000 complaints from probationary employees terminated en masse in February 2025, despite earlier findings that the firings may have violated federal law. The lawsuit, filed in D.C. federal court, seeks a ruling that OSC's blanket dismissal of the complaints was arbitrary and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.Probationary federal employees—often in their first year or newly assigned roles—have fewer job protections, making them vulnerable to politically motivated purges. In this case, the Trump administration dismissed roughly 25,000 such employees, sparking multiple legal challenges. Some courts briefly reinstated the workers, but appeals courts ruled that plaintiffs lacked standing or needed to exhaust administrative remedies before going to court.OSC, under former Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger, had suggested the mass terminations were unlawful. However, after Trump fired Dellinger, his replacement, Jamieson Greer, dismissed all the pending complaints, citing alignment with new administrative priorities. The plaintiffs argue this abrupt shift was politically driven and undermined OSC's duty to safeguard merit-based civil service protections.The lawsuit aims to compel OSC to reopen investigations into the firings and reassert that probationary employees still retain legal protections from unlawful dismissals.US Special Counsel sued for dismissing fired federal workers' complaints | ReutersThe Trump administration has appealed a federal judge's decision blocking the removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, aiming to fire her before the central bank's next interest rate meeting on September 16. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb ruled that President Trump's claim—alleging Cook committed mortgage fraud before taking office—likely does not meet the legal threshold to justify her dismissal. The administration's brief appeal to the D.C. Circuit did not include arguments, but signaled urgency given the upcoming monetary policy meeting.Cook, who has denied any wrongdoing, filed suit in August claiming that the fraud allegations were a pretext for removing her due to her policy positions. She argues that the law governing the Federal Reserve allows a governor to be removed only “for cause,” a term not clearly defined in the statute and never previously tested in court. Cobb agreed that the case raises new and important legal questions, emphasizing the public interest in shielding the Fed from political pressure.The DOJ has opened a criminal investigation into the alleged mortgage fraud, with grand jury subpoenas issued in Georgia and Michigan. The case could have broader implications for the independence of federal agencies, especially those like the Fed that have traditionally operated free from executive interference. This follows other high-profile cases in which courts have temporarily blocked Trump from firing leaders of independent agencies, including the U.S. Copyright Office.Trump has pressured the Fed to lower interest rates and criticized Chair Jerome Powell, though Cook has consistently voted with the Fed majority on rate decisions. Her continued presence at the Fed could influence upcoming policy moves.Trump administration appeals ruling blocking removal of Fed Governor Cook | ReutersA federal appeals court has upheld most provisions of a New Jersey law restricting firearms in designated “sensitive places,” such as parks, hospitals, beaches, libraries, and casinos. The 2-1 decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling that found the law violated the Second Amendment. The appeals court concluded the restrictions aligned with historical firearm regulations in places traditionally considered sensitive due to their civic or public safety function.The ruling is a setback for gun rights advocates, following similar decisions by appeals courts in California, Hawaii, and New York. These rulings come in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new framework for evaluating gun laws—requiring that modern regulations be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm control. While Bruen expanded gun rights, it also acknowledged the legitimacy of restrictions in sensitive locations.Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, writing for the majority, emphasized that U.S. history supports limiting firearms in specific public areas to preserve peace and safety. Judge Cindy Chung concurred, while Judge David Porter dissented, arguing the government shouldn't be able to arbitrarily declare places “sensitive” to limit gun rights.The New Jersey Attorney General praised the decision, while gun rights groups criticized it as an overly deferential interpretation of the Second Amendment.US appeals court largely upholds New Jersey gun restrictions | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: George Wallace Calls out the Alabama National GuardOn September 2, 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace once again attempted to defy federal court orders mandating school integration, this time at Tuskegee High School. Just months after his infamous “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” to block Black students from enrolling at the University of Alabama, Wallace ordered the Alabama National Guard to surround Tuskegee High in an effort to prevent the enrollment of thirteen Black students. The integration was ordered by a federal court in Lee v. Macon County Board of Education, a pivotal case that would eventually lead to sweeping desegregation across Alabama's public school system.Wallace's use of the state Guard was a direct challenge to federal authority and part of his broader campaign to maintain segregation under the banner of “states' rights.” In response, President John F. Kennedy swiftly invoked his constitutional authority as commander-in-chief and federalized the Alabama National Guard. Once under federal control, the troops were ordered to stand down and return to their barracks, removing the immediate threat of military-enforced segregation.The confrontation at Tuskegee High marked another flashpoint in the broader struggle between federal civil rights enforcement and Southern resistance. Wallace's actions highlighted the lengths to which segregationist officials would go to preserve Jim Crow, even in the face of binding federal court orders. The federal response signaled a growing willingness by the Kennedy administration to use executive power to enforce civil rights rulings on the ground. The Lee v. Macon litigation would go on to become one of the most significant desegregation cases in the post-Brown era, eventually placing all Alabama schools under court supervision. This incident at Tuskegee underscored both the volatility of the era and the legal system's central role in dismantling systemic segregation.Legal technology companies are facing increasing pressure to distinguish themselves from general-purpose AI models like ChatGPT and Claude, which continue to improve in accuracy, usability, and affordability. A recent MIT report highlighted a corporate lawyer who preferred using ChatGPT over a $50,000 specialized contract analysis tool, underlining the dilemma: why pay more for tools that may not perform better? While legal tech startups have attracted about $2.2 billion in investment since 2024—80% of it going to AI-focused ventures—they risk being outpaced unless they can offer superior user experience and domain-specific functionality.Specialized tools often rely on the same large foundation models that power general AI, making differentiation more difficult. However, legal tech firms argue their value lies not in the raw language models but in how they tailor those tools for legal workflows. For example, IP CoPilot identifies patentable ideas—a complex task not easily replicated by general AI. Some legal AI systems, such as Harvey (used by DLA Piper), have gained traction among attorneys, though many still favor ChatGPT.Studies comparing general and legal-specific tools show mixed results: while general models sometimes outperform on clarity or accuracy, niche tools often prove more valuable in daily legal work. Legal tech companies aim to stay ahead by integrating ethical compliance, user-centered design, and security into their offerings. Unlike general models, they can be customized to reflect a law firm's risk appetite or case strategy. Some legal AI tools also incorporate retrieval-augmented generation or are trained solely on legal data, increasing their relevance and precision.Legal Tech Battles to Set Itself Apart From General AI ModelsAs Congress returns from its August recess on September 2, lawmakers face an urgent deadline to fund the government before the current funding expires on September 30. Among the contentious issues is the fate of the IRS budget. House Republicans are pushing to cut $2.8 billion from the agency, particularly targeting funding for tax compliance and blocking resources for the IRS's Direct File tool, which allows free online tax filing. Democrats, meanwhile, are opposing the cuts, citing recent staff layoffs and the need to rebuild the agency's capacity. A temporary funding measure could delay decisions but would disrupt preparations for the next tax season.The Senate has yet to offer a formal counterproposal but has a history of softening House spending cuts, thanks in part to the chamber's 60-vote legislative threshold. Democrats are expected to advocate for continued funding, especially for auditing high-income taxpayers and improving customer service. IRS employees and their union are calling on Congress to fully fund the agency to strengthen enforcement and reduce the deficit.Complicating matters further, several leadership vacancies emerged over the summer, including the IRS chief and a top Treasury post. Nominations are moving slowly, with some being blocked by political disputes, such as over clean energy tax credits. At the same time, Republicans are already considering another tax bill, possibly to amend or expand provisions from the July tax law signed by President Trump. This includes industry-backed changes like increased deductions for pass-through entities and revisiting limits on gambling loss deductions. Expiring tax credits—such as ACA health insurance subsidies—could also trigger legislative action, particularly as midterm elections approach.IRS Funding on Tap as Congress Returns From Summer RecessU.S. District Judge Jia Cobb halted two Trump administration policies that sought to expand fast-track deportations across the country. These policies, enacted in January, allowed immigration authorities to deport non-citizens found anywhere in the U.S. without a court hearing if they couldn't prove two years of continuous residence. Traditionally, expedited removal applied only to migrants caught near the border shortly after entry, but the expansion would have affected millions more already living within the country.Judge Cobb ruled that this broadened approach violated the Fifth Amendment's due process protections, emphasizing that people who had settled in the U.S. had a stronger liberty interest in remaining and were entitled to more than a rushed removal process. She criticized the government for not adapting procedural safeguards for this larger and more established group of immigrants, calling the existing process “skimpy” and likely to result in wrongful deportations.The Department of Homeland Security defended the policy, claiming Trump had legal authority to enforce deportations. However, Cobb refused to delay her ruling pending appeal, effectively stopping the expanded deportation plan immediately. The lawsuit was brought by Make the Road New York, represented by the ACLU. Earlier in the month, Cobb had also blocked another Trump deportation policy targeting immigrants paroled into the U.S. under Biden's humanitarian programs.US judge halts Trump effort to expand fast-track deportations | ReutersA divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that most of President Trump's tariffs are illegal, significantly weakening a cornerstone of his second-term economic policy. The 7–4 decision found that Trump had overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which he used to justify new tariffs in April and February. The court emphasized that IEEPA does not grant the president explicit authority to impose taxes or tariffs, only to regulate or restrict imports during national emergencies.The ruling does not affect tariffs issued under other laws, such as those on steel and aluminum. However, it casts serious doubt on Trump's broader use of tariffs as leverage in foreign policy and trade negotiations. The decision stems from lawsuits brought by small businesses and Democratic-led states arguing that only Congress has the constitutional authority to impose tariffs, and that any delegation of this power must be narrowly defined.The appeals court allowed the tariffs to remain in effect until October 14 to give the administration time to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump criticized the decision as partisan but predicted a reversal. Experts believe the administration was anticipating the ruling and may try to shift its legal strategy. This case now sets the stage for a major Supreme Court confrontation, especially as Trump also challenges the Federal Reserve's independence.Most Trump tariffs are not legal, US appeals court rules | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

It's been a whirlwind few days in courtrooms across Washington and beyond, as legal battles tied to former President Donald Trump have dominated headlines. I'll jump right into it. The most closely watched case right now is Taylor v. Trump, which is being heard in the District Court. This one centers on Trump's executive order restoring the death penalty and toughening conditions of imprisonment, a direct move under Executive Order 14164. The trial kicked off on August 11, lasted three days, and legal experts have been watching for how the judge will interpret civil liberties claims versus federal power.At the same time, the National Association of the Deaf is suing Donald Trump along with White House officials like Susan Wiles and Karoline Leavitt. Their core argument? By ending ASL interpretation at federal press briefings and events, Trump is violating not only the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which protects disability rights, but also key First and Fifth Amendment protections. Plaintiffs have asked the court to order the administration to restore these services, arguing it's essential for equal protection and free speech.Meanwhile, legal teams on both sides have been busy in appellate courts and even the Supreme Court. Just a few nights ago, Judge Florence Pan on the D.C. Circuit wrote a pivotal opinion that reshaped how grantees could challenge Trump's actions on foreign aid payments. The panel's revision sent the case back to district court, offering a pathway for the groups involved to seek relief under the Administrative Procedure Act. In the wake of these moves, counsel for the government officially withdrew the request for emergency Supreme Court intervention, meaning Congress will now weigh in on Trump's proposed rescissions for a $15 billion foreign aid package.Immigration issues also remain front and center. A federal court has blocked Trump's fast-track deportation policy after a lawsuit led by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ruling states this expansion denied immigrants their due process, and the court made clear: during litigation, the policy is halted.And one more headline out of the Court of Appeals—V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump is on hold pending a possible Supreme Court review. The appellate court ordered the mandate withheld until October 14, giving either side time to seek a writ of certiorari from the highest court.Each one of these cases underscores the ongoing tension between presidential authority and individual rights, as well as the ability—and the limits—of the courts to check executive orders. Thanks for tuning in to this special update. Be sure to come back next week for the latest developments. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out QuietPlease Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

This Day in Legal History: Nineteenth Amendment CertifiedOn this day in legal history, August 26, 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was formally certified by Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby, granting women the right to vote nationwide. The certification marked the culmination of a nearly century-long struggle led by suffragists like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and later Alice Paul and Ida B. Wells, who fought for political inclusion through protests, civil disobedience, and persistent lobbying. The amendment's ratification by Tennessee—by a single vote—on August 18, 1920, provided the necessary 36th state approval to satisfy constitutional requirements.The Nineteenth Amendment's language is deceptively simple: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged... on account of sex.” But its legal impact was profound, constitutionally guaranteeing the franchise to half the population that had long been excluded. The certification did not end all voting discrimination—many women of color, particularly Black and Native American women, continued to face racist barriers to the ballot—but it was a foundational legal step toward gender equality in civic life.August 26 is now recognized as Women's Equality Day, established by Congress in 1971, to honor the legal and political significance of the Nineteenth Amendment and to commemorate the broader fight for women's rights. The legal principle enshrined in the amendment echoes in later equality jurisprudence, forming part of the constitutional backdrop to cases involving gender discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.The Nineteenth Amendment also represented a rare moment when a constitutional change directly expanded democratic participation, in contrast to more procedural or structural amendments. It altered not just who could vote, but how lawmakers and courts would later consider the role of gender in public policy and civil rights. The amendment continues to serve as a legal and symbolic foundation for subsequent laws and cases advancing gender equity, including Title IX and the push for the Equal Rights Amendment.On August 26, the legal history of suffrage becomes not only a story of amendment certification, but of constitutional transformation through organized legal and political struggle.U.S. Senator Ron Wyden has called on Chief Justice John Roberts to initiate an independent investigation into the federal judiciary's cybersecurity practices, following a significant breach of the court system's electronic case management system. In a letter, Wyden urged Roberts to involve the National Academy of Sciences in reviewing both the recent and previous hacks—highlighting that foreign actors, possibly including Russia, exploited the same vulnerabilities in both incidents.Wyden criticized the system as outdated, insecure, and costly, noting this was the second major breach since 2020. He emphasized that sensitive data, including information on confidential informants and sealed case files, may have been compromised. The judiciary's handling of cybersecurity, Wyden argued, has repeatedly failed to meet the standards expected of institutions entrusted with highly sensitive information.The senator pointed out that despite years of warnings and expert recommendations, the judiciary has lagged in updating its technology. U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Scudder recently admitted in testimony that the case management system is obsolete and needs replacement. Wyden also noted that while executive branch agencies have been using multi-factor authentication since 2015, the judiciary will not implement it until the end of 2025.Wyden has long advocated for transparency and modernization in the court system, including efforts to make the PACER database free. His latest request underscores growing bipartisan concern over national security implications tied to the federal courts' digital infrastructure.US senator calls for independent review of federal judiciary cybersecurity | ReutersA federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration can move forward with a provision in its recent spending bill that bars Medicaid funding from going to abortion providers in Maine. The ruling, by U.S. District Judge Lance Walker—a Trump appointee—rejected a request by Maine Family Planning to block the provision, part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed by Congress in July. The organization argued the law unfairly targeted them and violated their constitutional rights, but the judge declined to intervene, emphasizing the law was a product of the democratic process.Walker acknowledged that the policy might be unwise but stressed it is not the judiciary's role to override legislative choices based on policy disagreements. Maine Family Planning, the state's largest reproductive healthcare provider, warned that the ruling could force clinic closures and reductions in care, impacting around 8,000 patients annually.The case is one of two major legal challenges to the law. A separate federal judge in Boston has temporarily blocked the same provision as it applies to Planned Parenthood nationwide, and that ruling is under appeal. The Maine case focused on how the law would impact two of the state's main abortion providers and argued it violated equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment by singling them out.Judge Walker, however, found that Congress has the authority to direct federal funds in ways consistent with its policy goals, including discouraging abortion—a procedure that is no longer protected as a constitutional right following the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.Trump administration can withhold Medicaid funding from Maine abortion providers, judge rules | ReutersPresident Donald Trump has moved to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, alleging she made false statements on mortgage applications—an accusation she denies. The unprecedented move, announced via Truth Social, sent financial markets into a brief stir, with long-term Treasury yields rising and the dollar dipping, reflecting concerns over the Fed's independence. Cook, appointed by President Biden and confirmed in 2022, has vowed not to resign and plans legal action, arguing that Trump lacks authority to remove her without proper cause.Trump claims Cook's conduct shows “gross negligence” and undermines trust in the Fed. However, under the Federal Reserve Act, governors can only be removed “for cause,” a standard historically interpreted to mean inefficiency, neglect of duty, or misconduct while in office. Cook's alleged mortgage misstatements predate her time at the Fed, making the legal grounds for removal murky.This attempt follows months of Trump's public attacks on the Fed for keeping interest rates high. If successful, it would allow him to reshape the board with dovish policymakers more favorable to rate cuts. Critics, including Senator Elizabeth Warren and legal scholars, denounced the move as a political power grab and a threat to central bank independence.The Department of Justice may investigate Cook following a criminal referral, but no charges have been filed. Legal experts suggest the case could test the Supreme Court's recent statements on limits to presidential power over independent agencies. Meanwhile, Cook has reiterated her commitment to her role and refuses to step down amid what she calls political bullying.Trump Moves to Fire Fed's Cook, Setting Up Historic Legal FightAnd in my column this week, a story out of Utah. A small town in Utah, Wellington, is facing public backlash after proposing a 225% property tax hike—a dramatic response to years of avoiding smaller, routine tax increases. This financial crisis wasn't caused by a single year of overspending but rather by elected officials deferring necessary tax adjustments since 2017, despite rising costs for services and infrastructure. While avoiding tax hikes may have seemed politically savvy, it left the town with a nearly $400,000 budget shortfall that now demands a painful correction.The Wellington situation illustrates a broader problem: local governments often delay modest increases to avoid political consequences, only to face greater fiscal challenges later. Holding tax rates flat may feel like good governance, but it allows infrastructure to decay and expenses to balloon. By the time officials act, the required adjustment feels extreme to residents who weren't prepared for it.The solution, according to my piece, lies in normalizing small, predictable tax increases. This would help cities keep pace with inflation and infrastructure needs, without shocking taxpayers. One of my proposed reforms is land value taxation, which taxes land rather than improvements on it—encouraging development without penalizing property upgrades and offering greater economic stability.To depoliticize the process, cities could establish independent, bipartisan bodies to manage long-term tax planning. This shift from reactive crisis management to proactive fiscal planning could help avoid sudden, disruptive tax spikes like Wellington's. The underlying message: the longer tax adjustments are postponed, the more painful and politically damaging they become.Utah Town's 225% Property Tax Spike Is Lesson on Fiscal Realism This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Are property taxes actually illegal theft from homeowners? This episode dives deep into the growing chorus of Americans claiming property taxes violate constitutional property rights, examining two main legal arguments: the "no true ownership" theory, and possible Fifth Amendment violations. These arguments are gaining steam in several states, but are they legally valid? On The Market host Dave Meyer explores that question, plus how rising home prices are driving property tax reform movements across states like Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, potentially reshaping the housing market by reducing ownership costs and affecting home prices, mortgage affordability, and regional migration patterns. Links from the Show Join the Future of Real Estate Investing with Fundrise Join BiggerPockets for FREE Find an Investor-Friendly Agent in Your Area Find Investor-Friendly Lenders Property Manager Finder Dave's BiggerPockets Profile Check out more resources from this show on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BiggerPockets.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.biggerpockets.com/blog/on-the-market-350⁠ Interested in learning more about today's sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠advertise@biggerpockets.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Newly unsealed court filings from Virginia Giuffre's civil case have raised questions about whether Jeffrey Epstein may have leveraged incriminating material to exert influence over Prince Andrew. During Epstein's deposition under oath, he refused to answer whether he intended to obtain blackmail-worthy information on the Duke of York after Giuffre's alleged encounter with him—choosing instead to invoke his Fifth Amendment right. Giuffre herself testified that Epstein required her to report in detail about the encounter, including whether Prince Andrew had “thanked” Epstein for arranging it—a line of questioning that suggests Epstein might have been cultivating compromising content.Despite these indications, a recent exhaustive review by the FBI and Department of Justice concluded that they found no credible evidence of a “client list” or a blackmail scheme involving Epstein and prominent individuals—including Prince Andrew. A memo released last month reaffirmed that the investigation found nothing actionable that would warrant further scrutiny or charges against third parties such as Prince Andrew.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12404386/jeffrey-epstein-something-on-prince-andrew-documentary/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this episode, we delve into the critical distinctions between general and specific jurisdiction, fundamental concepts in personal jurisdiction law. General jurisdiction allows a court to hear any case against a defendant whose connections to the forum state are so continuous and systematic that they are essentially "at home" there. In contrast, specific jurisdiction is more narrowly focused, requiring that the lawsuit arise out of or relate to the defendant's activities within the forum state. We explore landmark cases and recent developments, providing a roadmap through the jurisdictional maze to help you confidently navigate these legal waters.This conversation delves into the complexities of personal jurisdiction, particularly in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in Fold v. Palestine Liberation Organization. The discussion covers the evolution of personal jurisdiction doctrine, the minimum contacts test, and the distinctions between general and specific jurisdiction. It also highlights the implications of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments on jurisdictional inquiries, procedural due process, and the Erie doctrine, providing a comprehensive overview for law students preparing for exams.TakeawaysPersonal jurisdiction is fundamental for courts to bind parties.A court's judgment is void without proper personal jurisdiction.General jurisdiction allows lawsuits in a defendant's home state for any claim.Specific jurisdiction is tied to the defendant's contacts with the forum state.The 14th Amendment limits state courts, while the Fifth Amendment allows broader federal reach.The Fold case changes the understanding of jurisdiction under the Fifth Amendment.Jurisdiction can be established through statutory gateways like long-arm statutes.Minimum contacts must be evaluated for both general and specific jurisdiction.Procedural due process requires notice and an opportunity to be heard.Subject matter jurisdiction is non-waivable and must be established for federal courts.personal jurisdiction, minimum contacts, Fold v. Palestine Liberation Organization, procedural due process, subject matter jurisdiction, Erie doctrine, general jurisdiction, specific jurisdiction, Fifth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D. Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/ArCNozStXbQ Donna Adelson's defense attempted to subpoena Wendi Adelson to testify, but her attorneys successfully moved to quash (squash/get rid of) the subpoena. The judge ruled that Wendi Adelson would assert her Fifth Amendment rights if called by the defense, and calling a witness solely to invoke the Fifth Amendment in front of the jury is inappropriate. Wendi Adelson is still subpoenaed by the prosecution, which grants her derivative and use immunity for her testimony. Jury selection began on August 19th, 2025. The process involves individual voir dire, where potential jurors are questioned one-by-one to prevent information about the high-profile case from influencing other jurors. The goal is to find jurors who have not formed an opinion about the case, even if they have heard about it. The judge read a statement of the case and the material part of the indictment to the potential jurors. Donna Adelson is charged with first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, and solicitation of first-degree murder in the death of Dan Markel on July 18, 2014. These statements are not considered evidence of guilt. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jeffrey Epstein's sworn testimony, particularly in his 2009 and 2010 depositions during civil litigation, was evasive, combative, and at times outright contemptuous. Throughout his questioning, he invoked the Fifth Amendment repeatedly—over 100 times in one sitting—to avoid incriminating himself when asked about illegal sexual conduct, underage girls, and the identities of his associates. Rather than provide direct answers, Epstein frequently argued with opposing counsel, challenged the relevance of questions, and even questioned the intelligence of his interrogators. His posture was that of a man who knew the system would shield him—smug, defiant, and unafraid of consequences. The depositions painted a portrait of a man deeply insulated by wealth, privilege, and powerful legal defense.What little Epstein did say under oath often reeked of calculated ambiguity. He downplayed his relationships with underage girls, referring to them as "massage therapists," and denied having sexual relations with minors, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. He also minimized his connections to powerful figures, strategically avoiding specifics that might implicate others or himself. His testimony was less about defending his name and more about weaponizing the legal system to stall, obstruct, and protect his network. These depositions, in hindsight, were not just legal maneuvers—they were warnings that Epstein believed he was untouchable, and for a long time, he was right.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://okmagazine.com/p/jeffrey-epstein-testimony-ghislaine-maxwell-case/

Shannon Bream joins the show to discuss Texas Democrats fleeing the state over redistricting and Governor Abbott's legal response. She breaks down the possibility of Clintons being subpoenaed in the Epstein probe and the legal questions surrounding invoking the Fifth Amendment. Shannon also weighs in on Supreme Court debates over the President's emergency powers for tariffs and the uncertainty around the court's involvement.

The Fifth Amendment. You have the right to remain silent when you're being questioned in police custody, thanks to the Fifth's protection against self-incrimination. But most people end up talking to police anyway. Why? Today on Throughline's We the People: the Fifth Amendment, the right to remain silent, and how hard it can be to use it. This episode originally ran in March 2025.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hour 4 continues with Shannon Bream, Fox News Sunday host, dissecting the tangled legal battles swirling around the Obama-era Russian hoax investigations and the immunity protections shielding high-profile figures—including a potential dilemma if Barack Obama is called to testify. She sheds light on secret document destruction and the ongoing Fifth Amendment pleadings by Biden staffers under scrutiny. The conversation shifts to the latest political drama involving Nancy Pelosi, with explosive questions about insider trading dubbed the “Pelosi Index Fund.” Senator Josh Hawley's opposition to investigations into Pelosi draws presidential ire, highlighting the deep partisan divides and ongoing ethical concerns in Washington. Expect more legal fireworks as these stories unfold.

Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20‑year sentence for sex‑trafficking convictions, signaled willingness to testify before Congress—but only on a strict set of terms. In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer, her attorney David Markus spelled out that Maxwell would require formal immunity from prosecution, advance access to all deposition questions, a venue outside of prison, and a delay in testimony until after her appeal, including a potential Supreme Court review, is resolved. Markus even floated the possibility of presidential clemency, stating that under such conditions, Maxwell would be “willing—and eager—to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress.” Otherwise, she plans to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questionsHowever, the Oversight Committee promptly rejected her request to be granted immunity. In a response to Maxwell's letter, the committee reaffirmed that it will not consider offering congressional immunity as a precondition for her testimony and has declined to accommodate her other stipulated conditions. With Maxwell's cooperation effectively hinging on assurances that lawmakers have refused to entertain, the invitation to testify remains in a legal and political stalemate.Also:President Trump stated that he severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein after discovering that Epstein had repeatedly “stolen” young women who worked at the spa in Trump's Mar‑a‑Lago resort—referring specifically to employees being “taken out of the spa, hired by him.” Trump said this betrayal prompted him to ban Epstein from the club, and when asked about Virginia Giuffre—one of Epstein's most well-known accusers—he replied that he believed she worked at the spa and was among those “stolen,” despite having “no complaints” about Mar‑a‑Lago herself.     to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell wants immunity or a pardon before congressional deposition - CBS News

Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20‑year sentence for sex‑trafficking convictions, signaled willingness to testify before Congress—but only on a strict set of terms. In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer, her attorney David Markus spelled out that Maxwell would require formal immunity from prosecution, advance access to all deposition questions, a venue outside of prison, and a delay in testimony until after her appeal, including a potential Supreme Court review, is resolved. Markus even floated the possibility of presidential clemency, stating that under such conditions, Maxwell would be “willing—and eager—to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress.” Otherwise, she plans to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questionsHowever, the Oversight Committee promptly rejected her request to be granted immunity. In a response to Maxwell's letter, the committee reaffirmed that it will not consider offering congressional immunity as a precondition for her testimony and has declined to accommodate her other stipulated conditions. With Maxwell's cooperation effectively hinging on assurances that lawmakers have refused to entertain, the invitation to testify remains in a legal and political stalemate.Also:President Trump stated that he severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein after discovering that Epstein had repeatedly “stolen” young women who worked at the spa in Trump's Mar‑a‑Lago resort—referring specifically to employees being “taken out of the spa, hired by him.” Trump said this betrayal prompted him to ban Epstein from the club, and when asked about Virginia Giuffre—one of Epstein's most well-known accusers—he replied that he believed she worked at the spa and was among those “stolen,” despite having “no complaints” about Mar‑a‑Lago herself.     to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell wants immunity or a pardon before congressional deposition - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20‑year sentence for sex‑trafficking convictions, signaled willingness to testify before Congress—but only on a strict set of terms. In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer, her attorney David Markus spelled out that Maxwell would require formal immunity from prosecution, advance access to all deposition questions, a venue outside of prison, and a delay in testimony until after her appeal, including a potential Supreme Court review, is resolved. Markus even floated the possibility of presidential clemency, stating that under such conditions, Maxwell would be “willing—and eager—to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress.” Otherwise, she plans to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questionsHowever, the Oversight Committee promptly rejected her request to be granted immunity. In a response to Maxwell's letter, the committee reaffirmed that it will not consider offering congressional immunity as a precondition for her testimony and has declined to accommodate her other stipulated conditions. With Maxwell's cooperation effectively hinging on assurances that lawmakers have refused to entertain, the invitation to testify remains in a legal and political stalemate.Also:President Trump stated that he severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein after discovering that Epstein had repeatedly “stolen” young women who worked at the spa in Trump's Mar‑a‑Lago resort—referring specifically to employees being “taken out of the spa, hired by him.” Trump said this betrayal prompted him to ban Epstein from the club, and when asked about Virginia Giuffre—one of Epstein's most well-known accusers—he replied that he believed she worked at the spa and was among those “stolen,” despite having “no complaints” about Mar‑a‑Lago herself.     to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell wants immunity or a pardon before congressional deposition - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell originally signaled she was ready to comply with the congressional subpoena demanding her testimony before the House Oversight Committee tentatively scheduled for the week of August 11. Her legal team had framed her cooperation with the Department of Justice—during a two‑day interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in which she reportedly answered questions about nearly 100 individuals without invoking privilege—as a sign of willingness to come forward fully. That earlier posture suggested Maxwell might walk the halls of Capitol Hill to finally provide insight into Epstein's network and operations.But following that DOJ sit‑down, she is now openly "undecided" about whether she will testify before Congress. Despite praising her own “truthful” and unrestricted cooperation in front of federal prosecutors, Maxwell has refused to commit to congressional testimony, leaving open the possibility of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights absent formal immunity. Critics are quick to suggest this move is a calculated pivot—falling back into legal limbo just as the political temperature rises. Rather than embracing transparency, she's pulling back into silence until she sees whether immunity or clemency might eventually materialize—casting further doubt on the sincerity of her earlier so-called "willingness."to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Maxwell's lawyer says she's undecided on appearing for congressional testimony - POLITICO

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

We're joined by Representative Eric Burlison to discuss the House Oversight Committee's investigation into President Biden's mental fitness and questions surrounding decision-making inside the White House. Burleson outlines allegations that executive orders were signed without the president's full awareness and highlights concerns about unelected staff acting independently. The conversation also touches on several top officials invoking the Fifth Amendment, signaling potential efforts to conceal the extent of Biden's cognitive decline. We dig into the committee's next steps possibly including subpoenas for the president and vice president and why the mainstream media has largely ignored what's being called the “auto pen” scandal.

Ghislaine Maxwell originally signaled she was ready to comply with the congressional subpoena demanding her testimony before the House Oversight Committee tentatively scheduled for the week of August 11. Her legal team had framed her cooperation with the Department of Justice—during a two‑day interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in which she reportedly answered questions about nearly 100 individuals without invoking privilege—as a sign of willingness to come forward fully. That earlier posture suggested Maxwell might walk the halls of Capitol Hill to finally provide insight into Epstein's network and operations.But following that DOJ sit‑down, she is now openly "undecided" about whether she will testify before Congress. Despite praising her own “truthful” and unrestricted cooperation in front of federal prosecutors, Maxwell has refused to commit to congressional testimony, leaving open the possibility of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights absent formal immunity. Critics are quick to suggest this move is a calculated pivot—falling back into legal limbo just as the political temperature rises. Rather than embracing transparency, she's pulling back into silence until she sees whether immunity or clemency might eventually materialize—casting further doubt on the sincerity of her earlier so-called "willingness."to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Maxwell's lawyer says she's undecided on appearing for congressional testimony - POLITICOBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell originally signaled she was ready to comply with the congressional subpoena demanding her testimony before the House Oversight Committee tentatively scheduled for the week of August 11. Her legal team had framed her cooperation with the Department of Justice—during a two‑day interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in which she reportedly answered questions about nearly 100 individuals without invoking privilege—as a sign of willingness to come forward fully. That earlier posture suggested Maxwell might walk the halls of Capitol Hill to finally provide insight into Epstein's network and operations.But following that DOJ sit‑down, she is now openly "undecided" about whether she will testify before Congress. Despite praising her own “truthful” and unrestricted cooperation in front of federal prosecutors, Maxwell has refused to commit to congressional testimony, leaving open the possibility of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights absent formal immunity. Critics are quick to suggest this move is a calculated pivot—falling back into legal limbo just as the political temperature rises. Rather than embracing transparency, she's pulling back into silence until she sees whether immunity or clemency might eventually materialize—casting further doubt on the sincerity of her earlier so-called "willingness."to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Maxwell's lawyer says she's undecided on appearing for congressional testimony - POLITICOBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Adriana Ross was one of Jeffrey Epstein's key assistants, part of the so-called “inner circle” of women who helped manage his trafficking operation. A former model from Poland, Ross became deeply embedded in Epstein's day-to-day activities, reportedly handling logistics for his properties, coordinating travel, and preparing rooms at his Palm Beach estate before and after victim encounters. She was also known to have removed computers from Epstein's Florida home ahead of a 2005 police raid, suggesting a clear role in obstructing justice and covering Epstein's tracks.Despite her close involvement and the fact that she was repeatedly named in legal documents, Ross has never been criminally charged. She invoked the Fifth Amendment when questioned under oath and has remained largely out of the public spotlight since. Her ability to disappear into private life while survivors continue to suffer underscores the broader failure of the justice system, which allowed Epstein's most loyal facilitators to slip through the cracks. Ross wasn't a bystander—she was an active participant in the machinery of exploitation. And like the rest of Epstein's inner circle, she was protected by a system that preferred silence over accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein 'scheduler' Adriana Ross dodges questions about his sick past while fleeing Florida church | Daily Mail Online

Adriana Ross was one of Jeffrey Epstein's key assistants, part of the so-called “inner circle” of women who helped manage his trafficking operation. A former model from Poland, Ross became deeply embedded in Epstein's day-to-day activities, reportedly handling logistics for his properties, coordinating travel, and preparing rooms at his Palm Beach estate before and after victim encounters. She was also known to have removed computers from Epstein's Florida home ahead of a 2005 police raid, suggesting a clear role in obstructing justice and covering Epstein's tracks.Despite her close involvement and the fact that she was repeatedly named in legal documents, Ross has never been criminally charged. She invoked the Fifth Amendment when questioned under oath and has remained largely out of the public spotlight since. Her ability to disappear into private life while survivors continue to suffer underscores the broader failure of the justice system, which allowed Epstein's most loyal facilitators to slip through the cracks. Ross wasn't a bystander—she was an active participant in the machinery of exploitation. And like the rest of Epstein's inner circle, she was protected by a system that preferred silence over accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein 'scheduler' Adriana Ross dodges questions about his sick past while fleeing Florida church | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Nadia Marcinkova—often referred to as Epstein's “Global Girl” or “live-in sex slave”—emerged as a central enigma in Epstein's criminal web. Brought to the U.S. at about age 15, she quickly rose to become his trusted aide, frequently traveling with him aboard the infamous "Lolita Express" private jet. Legal filings and flight manifests implicate her in recruitment and involvement in the sexual abuse of minors, with victims asserting that she both facilitated abuse and participated in it . Despite these serious allegations, Marcinkova never faced charges; under Epstein's 2008 Florida non-prosecution agreement, she received immunity and has since remained shielded from criminal accountability.In the years following her legal protection, Marcinkova rebranded herself—completing flight certifications, launching an aviation business, and maintaining a low-profile existence in Manhattan's Upper East Side. Yet her past continues to cast a long shadow: victims've named her in suits, and new court filings have resurrected scrutiny of her role within Epstein's organization . Her consistent silence—invoking the Fifth Amendment, refusing deposition answers—and strategic disappearance following recent document unsealing further amplify suspicions. Though never prosecuted, Marcinkova typifies how Epstein's closest associates slipped through loopholes in an investigation heavy on wealth, power, and protection.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former model who was Jeffrey Epstein's 'Lolita Express' pilot pleaded the fifth 42 TIMES in deposition including questions about Bill Clinton and whether she witnessed 'improper sexual activity' between pedo and minors in presence of ex-president | Daily Mail Online

Nadia Marcinkova—often referred to as Epstein's “Global Girl” or “live-in sex slave”—emerged as a central enigma in Epstein's criminal web. Brought to the U.S. at about age 15, she quickly rose to become his trusted aide, frequently traveling with him aboard the infamous "Lolita Express" private jet. Legal filings and flight manifests implicate her in recruitment and involvement in the sexual abuse of minors, with victims asserting that she both facilitated abuse and participated in it . Despite these serious allegations, Marcinkova never faced charges; under Epstein's 2008 Florida non-prosecution agreement, she received immunity and has since remained shielded from criminal accountability.In the years following her legal protection, Marcinkova rebranded herself—completing flight certifications, launching an aviation business, and maintaining a low-profile existence in Manhattan's Upper East Side. Yet her past continues to cast a long shadow: victims've named her in suits, and new court filings have resurrected scrutiny of her role within Epstein's organization . Her consistent silence—invoking the Fifth Amendment, refusing deposition answers—and strategic disappearance following recent document unsealing further amplify suspicions. Though never prosecuted, Marcinkova typifies how Epstein's closest associates slipped through loopholes in an investigation heavy on wealth, power, and protection.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former model who was Jeffrey Epstein's 'Lolita Express' pilot pleaded the fifth 42 TIMES in deposition including questions about Bill Clinton and whether she witnessed 'improper sexual activity' between pedo and minors in presence of ex-president | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A federal judge in California has ruled that the Trump's law enforcement agents have been violating the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution in the way they have been conducting mass immigrations sweeps in California. In language as clear as it is compelling, Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong said in her ruling and order: "Do all individuals—regardless of immigration status-share in the rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution? Yes, they do.Is it illegal to conduct roving patrols which identify people based upon race alone, aggressively question them, and then detain them without a warrant, without their consent, and without reasonable suspicion that they are without status? Yes, it is."See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

July 17, 2025Have you had your dose of The Daily MoJo today? Download The Daily MoJo App! "Ep 071725: Has AI Gone Too Far?! - The Daily MoJo"Adjusting one's mindset for adventure is essential, regardless of age. Recent events include a fire at the North Rim of the Grand Canyon, prompting evacuations and raising questions about wildfire response accountability. The role of media in reporting such incidents is examined. Discussions also cover artificial intelligence, internet speed in Japan, and a mysterious alien discovery. Political topics, including voting rights and the Fifth Amendment, are explored alongside personal anecdotes and community engagement.Phil Bell's Morning Update The BIG SCAM of Rent-A-Crowds:  HEREJeff Fisher - Host of Chewing The Fat Podcast - Is doing Pat this week.  Jeff Fisher LinktreeBrandon Morse - Redstate Author & host of The Brandon Morse YouTube channel- Is here to get Brad into BIG TROUBLE with a girl who isn't even real!!Brandon's LinktreeOur affiliate partners:Take care of your body - it's the only one you'll get and it's your temple! We've partnered with Sugar Creek Goods to help you care for yourself in an all-natural way. And in this case, "all natural" doesn't mean it doesn't work! Save 15% on your order with promo code "DailyMojo" at SmellMyMoJo.comCBD is almost everywhere you look these days, so the answer isn't so much where can you get it, it's more about - where can you get the CBD products that actually work!? Certainly, NOT at the gas station! Patriots Relief says it all in the name, and you can save an incredible 40% with the promo code "DailyMojo" at GetMoJoCBD.com!Romika Designs is an awesome American small business that specializes in creating laser-engraved gifts and awards for you, your family, and your employees. Want something special for someone special? Find exactly what you want at MoJoLaserPros.com  There have been a lot of imitators, but there's only OG – American Pride Roasters Coffee. It was first and remains the best roaster of fine coffee beans from around the world. You like coffee? You'll love American Pride – from the heart of the heartland – Des Moines, Iowa. AmericanPrideRoasters.com   Find great deals on American-made products at MoJoMyPillow.com. Mike Lindell – a true patriot in our eyes – puts his money where his mouth (and products) is/are. Find tremendous deals at MoJoMyPillow.com – Promo Code: MoJo50  Life gets messy – sometimes really messy. Be ready for the next mess with survival food and tools from My Patriot Supply. A 25 year shelf life and fantastic variety are just the beginning of the long list of reasons to get your emergency rations at PrepareWithMoJo50.comStay ConnectedWATCH The Daily Mojo LIVE 7-9a CT: www.TheDailyMojo.com (RECOMMEDED)Watch:Rumble: HEREFacebook: HEREFreedomsquare: HEREYouTube: HEREListen:LISTEN: HEREBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-daily-mojo-with-brad-staggs--3085897/support

Today's show is sponsored by: Riverbend Ranch Riverbend Ranch has been around for 35 years, selecting cattle that have higher marbling and tenderness than any other beef. You cannot get this beef in your grocery store. Riverbend Ranch ages their beef for 21 days and you'll find it more tender and flavorful than even the finest restaurants. So, if you're ready to have the best steak of your life, head to https://www.riverbendranch.com. Use promo code: SEAN to get $20 of your first order. Concerned Women For America Concerned Women For America focuses on seven core issues: family, sanctity of life, religious liberty, parental choice in education, fighting sexual exploitation, national sovereignty, and support for Israel. CWA knows what a woman is. CWA trains women to become grassroots leaders, speak into the culture, pray, testify, and lobby. If you donate $20 you will get CEO & President Penny Nance's new book  A Woman's Guide, Seven Rules for Success in Business and Life. Head to ⁠https://concernedwomen.org/spicer/⁠to donate today! It's Thursday which means we have a great panel show for you today! We are also on episode 499 which means tomorrow will be our 500th episode. Thank you for all the support, tell your friends and make sure you are signed up for all notifications so you don't miss an episode of The Sean Spicer Show. President Trump called for Pam Bondi to release any credible evidence related to Jeffrey Epstein, the president has repeated this is another Democrat hoax and people are being duped by this ongoing controversy. Alan Dershowitz has said no one in office is in the case file; if President Trump were culpable, Joe Biden probably would have released the files during his presidency. Looks like everyone's lips are sealed when it comes to Joe Biden's competency. Anthony Bernal, Jill Biden's Chief of Staff has now pleaded the Fifth Amendment to prevent self-incrimination. The scandal deepens and points to corruption at the highest level considering this is the office of the presidency. Rep. Byron Donalds is calling for everyone in Biden's administration to be subpoenaed, stating that if Biden was not able to perform his duties, everything he signed is essentially null and void. In the midst of this, President Trump has gotten more wins for the American people including the most secure border in U.S. history, more than 35% of harmful dyes out of our food and a trade deal with Indonesia. Our panel is here to unpack everything, including this week's winners and losers. Featuring: Gabrielle Cuccia Former White House Correspondent https://x.com/gabbycuccia David Avella Chairman | GOPAChttps://www.gopac.org/ Matthew Foldi Editor In Chief | Washington Reporter https://washingtonreporter.news/ ------------------------------------------------------------- 1️⃣ Subscribe and ring the bell for new videos: https://youtube.com/seanmspicer?sub_confirmation=1 2️⃣ Become a part of The Sean Spicer Show community: https://www.seanspicer.com/ 3️⃣ Listen to the full audio show on all platforms: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-sean-spicer-show/id1701280578 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/32od2cKHBAjhMBd9XntcUd iHeart: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-the-sean-spicer-show-120471641/ 4️⃣ Stay in touch with Sean on social media: Facebook: https://facebook.com/seanmspicer Twitter: https://twitter.com/seanspicer Instagram: https://instagram.com/seanmspicer/ 5️⃣ Follow The Sean Spicer Show on social media: Facebook: https://facebook.com/seanspicershow Twitter: https://twitter.com/seanspicershow Instagram: https://instagram.com/seanspicershow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A federal judge in California has ruled that the Trump's law enforcement agents have been violating the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution in the way they have been conducting mass immigrations sweeps in California. In language as clear as it is compelling, Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong said in her ruling and order: "Do all individuals—regardless of immigration status-share in the rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution? Yes, they do.Is it illegal to conduct roving patrols which identify people based upon race alone, aggressively question them, and then detain them without a warrant, without their consent, and without reasonable suspicion that they are without status? Yes, it is."See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Shannon Bream joins the Marc Cox Morning Show to discuss the ongoing House Oversight investigation into President Joe Biden and his inner circle, including Anthony Bernal's repeated Fifth Amendment refusals amid questions about Hunter Biden pardons and the controversial “auto pen.” Despite limited cooperation, the probe continues to dig for proof of unauthorized presidential actions. Bream also weighs in on the recent Supreme Court ruling affirming the president's broad authority to restructure federal jobs, emphasizing the legal nuance behind the decision. The conversation touches on the Epstein fallout and calls from GOP senators for greater transparency, as well as ongoing political battles over sanctuary cities. The segment captures the growing frustration over stalled investigations and questions about presidential fitness.

In Hour 1 of The Annie Frey Show, the discussion centers on the implications of invoking the Fifth Amendment amid the House Oversight Committee's investigation into President Joe Biden. With figures like James Comer and Anthony Bernal pleading the Fifth, suspicions of involvement are raised. Hans von Spakovsky addresses the deep state, the two-tiered justice system, and the misuse of federal law enforcement tied to the Russia hoax. The segment also discusses trust in Trump-era officials such as Ash Patel and Pam Bondi. Plus, a look at the WNBA's rise in entertainment value, especially through Caitlin Clark's growing impact. The hour wraps with Ethan's America, featuring tips for boosting work performance, avoiding multitasking, and staying focused.

President Donald Trump says it is "highly unlikely" he will fire the Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell after many media outlets reported he signaled he would after meeting privately with some House Republicans; President Trump criticizes Republicans who are calling for release of filing on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, calling the questions surrounding the suicide and a client list a "hoax", labeling the Republican "weaklings" who are doing "Democrats work", and saying he does not want their support anymore; Senate moves into the home stretch on the $9 billion rescissions bill that cuts foreign aid and public broadcasting money with a vote-a-rama, a long series of votes on amendments; President Trump signs a bill to toughen prison sentencing for trafficking the drug fentanyl; NYC Mayor Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani meets with U.S. House Democrats in Washington; former Chief of Staff to former President Jill Biden, Anthony Bernal,  pleads the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination at the U.S. House Oversight Committee's investigation of former President Joe Biden mental fitness while in office and his use of an autopen; Israel launches airstrikes at Syria's capital city Damascus; tonight is the annual Congressional Women's Softball Game for charity, pitting a bipartisan team of Members of Congress against a team of DC reporters. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's show is sponsored by: Concerned Women For America Concerned Women For America focuses on seven core issues: family, sanctity of life, religious liberty, parental choice in education, fighting sexual exploitation, national sovereignty, and support for Israel. CWA knows what a woman is. CWA trains women to become grassroots leaders, speak into the culture, pray, testify, and lobby. If you donate $20 you will get CEO & President Penny Nance's new book  A Woman's Guide, Seven Rules for Success in Business and Life. Head to https://concernedwomen.org/spicer/to donate today! Riverbend Ranch Riverbend Ranch has been around for 35 years, selecting cattle that have higher marbling and tenderness than any other beef. You cannot get this beef in your grocery store. Riverbend Ranch ages their beef for 21 days and you'll find it more tender and flavorful than even the finest restaurants. So, if you're ready to have the best steak of your life, head to https://www.riverbendranch.com. Use promo code: SEAN to get $20 of your first order. The Senate is voting in the $9 billion rescission package created by DOGE. In the package is the revocation of government funding for NPR and PBS, which some Republicans are actually fighting to keep funding the left wing organizations. President Trump displayed another America First winning strategy in the oval office yesterday. American made patriot missiles and ammunition will be bought by NATO allies and sent to Ukraine in the ongoing war with Russia. Congressman Brandon Gil absolutely grilled NPR CEO Katherine Maher when she testified on Capitol Hill. Exposing the left-wing agenda by simply pulling tweets Maher had posted publicly. He is calling for the Senate to approve the recessions package with no excuses. As part of the House Oversight Committee, the Biden autopen scandal continues to erupt. In a New York Times interview, Biden admitted he had categorically approved pardons, he just didn't know the specifics. With Dr. O'Connor invoking the Fifth Amendment when asking if he lied, this onion has many layers to plee back to fully grasp the depth and breadth of this scandal. Emily Jashinsky is the host of the new show After Party with Emily. Even with the support of President Trump, Pam Bondi has created quite a mess with the Epstein files. Benny Johnson's recent talk with Lara Trump revealed that damage control is needed to be done and more will come to light. Zohran Mamdani won over New Yorkers by focusing on affordability issues in his campaign. Emily unpacks his recent victory and the state of the Democratic party as Bernie and AOC head out on tour. Featuring: Rep. Brandon Gil Congressman, Texas District 26 https://gill.house.gov/ Emily Jashinsky Host | After Party with Emily Jashinsky https://x.com/emilyjashinsky Guess what? It's Tuesday, which means NEW, FREE content in my newsletter: https://www.seanspicer.com/p/biden-the-autopen-and-a-congressional ------------------------------------------------------------- 1️⃣ Subscribe and ring the bell for new videos: https://youtube.com/seanmspicer?sub_confirmation=1 2️⃣ Become a part of The Sean Spicer Show community: https://www.seanspicer.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Congressman Andy Biggs, a key figure in unraveling the Russia collusion case and a prominent candidate for governor in Arizona, delves into the implications of the Fifth Amendment rights invoked by Joe Biden's doctor, discuss the potential cover-ups surrounding Biden's health, and explore the allegations against John Brennan regarding the Russian collusion narrative. Biggs shares his insights on the current state of the border crisis, the attacks on law enforcement, and his vision for Arizona's job growth as he campaigns for governor. Congresswoman Marionette Miller Meeks discusses significant policy changes regarding illegal immigration and federal benefits. The Congresswoman also shares her insights on the challenges posed by activist judges and the importance of adhering to constitutional law. Dan Novaes, founder of Mode Mobile, discusses how his company created smartphones and an operating system designed to reward users for engaging with their devices. Discover how this can transform the way we use technology by rewarding users for their attention and data. With the potential to earn money just by engaging in everyday smartphone activities, find out how this could help many Americans struggling to make ends meet.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Dr. Kevin O'Connor, former physician to President Joe Biden, has invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and doctor-patient privilege, refusing to testify before the House Oversight Committee about Biden's health. This occurred during a closed-door session aimed at investigating potential issues concerning Biden's cognitive and physical health during his presidency.▶Sign up to our Free Newsletter, so you never miss out: https://bio.site/professornez▶Original, Made in the USA Neznation Patriot Merch: https://professornez.myspreadshop.com/all

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (07/10/2025): 3:05pm- While speaking with the press, President Trump reacted to Senator Jose Padilla's (D-CA) proposed bill which would prevent ICE agents from wearing masks and concealing their personal identity. There have been several recent attacks on ICE facilities—including one attack in McAllen, Texas involving a man with an assault rifle. Despite these violent attacks, Democrats continue to unjustly demonize ICE agents. 3:30pm- According to a report from Fox News Digital, the Department of Justice is criminally investigating former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey for potential false statements to Congress related to the disproven Trump campaign/Russia collusion narrative. While appearing on MSNBC with Nicolle Wallace, Brennan claimed the investigation into him was “weaponizing intelligence and justice.” In addition to espousing falsehoods about the 2016 election, Brennan has notably lied about civilian casualties that resulted from Obama Administration drone strikes and about the CIA illegally accessing the computers of U.S. Senate staffers. 4:00pm- Salena Zito—Award Winning Political Reporter—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss her new book, “Butler: The Untold Story of the Near Assassination of Donald Trump and the Fight for America's Heartland.” Nearly one year later, she recounts what it was like standing just feet from the stage in Butler, Pennsylvania when shots rang out. She recalls her daughter telling her: “I wanted it to be fireworks. I didn't want to think we were literally sitting ducks and being fired at.” You can find the book here: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/salena-zito/butler/9781546009146/. 4:30pm- Corey DeAngelis— Senior Fellow at the American Culture Project & Author of the book, “The Parent Revolution: Rescuing Your Kids from the Radicals Ruining Our Schools”—joins The Rich Zeoli Show and reacts to the United Federation of Teachers endorsing Zoran Mamdani for Mayor of New York City, explaining: “They locked arms with the socialist candidate.” He also reveals that despite opposing school choice, Mamdani attended a private school that costs $66K per year for kindergarten! 5:05pm- Bill D'Agostino—Senior Research Analyst at Media Research Center—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to breakdown some of the best (and worst) moments from corporate media: major media outlets are refusing to cover far-left attacks against ICE agents in Texas and CNN data suggests Americans aren't afraid of climate change (despite progressive fear mongering). 5:30pm- A California woman says her home was mistakenly listed as the return address for a Chinese car seat seller on Amazon—and consequently, her home has been flooded with unwanted returns! PLUS, why can't Livyy Dunn live in Babe Ruth's $1.6 million condo? 5:45pm- On Wednesday, former White House physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor invoked the Fifth Amendment while testifying before the House Oversight Committee about President Joe Biden's cognitive health. 6:05pm- Susan Crabtree—RealClearPolitics National Political Correspondent & Author of the book, “Fools Gold: The Radicals, Con Artists, and Traitors Who Killed the California Dream and Now Threaten Us All”—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to discuss her latest report: “Key supervisors who signed off on the Butler security plan and two who were on the final walkthroughs before the…rally were never disciplined but instead received BIG PROMOTIONS.” 6:30pm- Jimmy Failla—Host of “Fox News Saturday with Jimmy Failla” & “Fox Across America”—joins The Rich Zeoli Show. Is Jimmy concerned about having a socialist mayor? No way! The breadlines might help him lose weight! Failla will be performing at SoulJoel's in Montgomery County, PA on August 9th. You can find information about tickets here: https://radio.foxnews.com/fox-news-talk/fox-across-america-with-jimmy-failla/.

1. Allegations Regarding President Joe Biden's Health and Fitness for Office The first story centers on claims of a cover-up concerning President Biden's mental and physical health. It highlights a House Oversight Committee investigation, led by Representative James Comer, into whether Biden was mentally fit to serve. A key figure in the investigation is Dr. Kevin O'Connor, Biden’s former White House physician, who invoked the Fifth Amendment during questioning. Questions posed to Dr. O'Connor included whether he was ever told to lie about Biden’s health or believed Biden was unfit for office. He declined to answer both. The use of the White House autopen (a device used to sign documents) is cited as suspicious, with claims that Biden may not have been aware of what was being signed. The narrative suggests this could invalidate certain executive actions if Biden was incapacitated. 2. Threats Against Donald Trump and National Security Concerns The second story shifts to alleged Iranian threats against former President Donald Trump and other American figures. It references fatwas (Islamic legal rulings) calling for violence, reportedly issued by Iranian clerics. The organization United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is calling for sanctions against individuals and entities involved. There are concerns about Iranian sleeper cells potentially operating within the U.S., possibly entering through asylum loopholes or border security gaps. The commentary warns of the national security risks posed by these individuals, including the potential for future terrorist attacks. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the Ben Ferguson Show Podcast and Verdict with Ted Cruz Wherever You get You're Podcasts. Thanks for Listening #seanhannity #hannity #marklevin #levin #charliekirk #megynkelly #tucker #tuckercarlson #glennbeck #benshapiro #shapiro #trump #sexton #bucksexton#rushlimbaugh #limbaugh #whitehouse #senate #congress #thehouse #democrats#republicans #conservative #senator #congressman #congressmen #congresswoman #capitol #president #vicepresident #POTUS #presidentoftheunitedstatesofamerica#SCOTUS #Supremecourt #DonaldTrump #PresidentDonaldTrump #DT #TedCruz #Benferguson #Verdict #maga #presidenttrump #47 #the47morningupdate #donaldtrump #trump #news #trumpnews #Benferguson #breaking #breakingnews #morningupdateYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Wednesday's Mark Levin Show, WJNO's Brian Mudd fills in for Mark. Will we finally see accountability for James Comey, John Brennan, and James Clapper? CIA Director John Ratcliffe referred Brennan and Comey to the FBI for potential criminal prosecution. Accountability is important to prevent future misconduct, but if there were a trial, it would occur in Washington, D.C. As John Durham learned, there was no way to get an honest D.C. jury. Also, former White House physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and remained silent during a House Oversight Committee interview, refusing to answer questions, including whether he was asked to lie about President Biden's health or if he believed Biden was unfit for duty. O'Connor's refusal to answer seems to show that he was in on the cover-up. Later, during the Biden administration, 59% of jobs (7.9 million) went to U.S.-born workers, while 41% (5.5 million) went to foreign-born workers, including many illegal immigrants. In the first five months of the Trump administration in 2025, 985,000 jobs were added, with a net decline of 735,000 foreign-born workers, resulting in 1.7 million more U.S.-born workers employed. This suggests U.S.-born workers are filling jobs previously held by immigrants, with significant self-deportation likely contributing, as deportations are minimal. Finally, President Trump is the second most efficient U.S. president, behind only FDR, for rapidly advancing his second-term agenda. In roughly 170 days, he signed 170 executive orders, 44 memoranda, 71 proclamations, and five laws, including the One Big Beautiful Bill. Despite a narrow congressional majority, he made the Tax Cut and Jobs Act permanent and introduced 27 tax code changes, retroactive to January 1, 2025, saving taxpayers money through deductions. His speed and success are historically remarkable. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 3: 5:05pm- Bill D'Agostino—Senior Research Analyst at Media Research Center—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to breakdown some of the best (and worst) moments from corporate media: major media outlets are refusing to cover far-left attacks against ICE agents in Texas and CNN data suggests Americans aren't afraid of climate change (despite progressive fear mongering). 5:30pm- A California woman says her home was mistakenly listed as the return address for a Chinese car seat seller on Amazon—and consequently, her home has been flooded with unwanted returns! PLUS, why can't Livyy Dunn live in Babe Ruth's $1.6 million condo? 5:45pm- On Wednesday, former White House physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor invoked the Fifth Amendment while testifying before the House Oversight Committee about President Joe Biden's cognitive health.

Today's Headlines: At least three people were killed in New Mexico after monsoon rains triggered flash floods in areas already vulnerable from past wildfires. President Trump's self-imposed deadline for 90 trade deals came and went with no new agreements, but eight more countries — including Brazil, which faces a 50% tariff — received tariff letters. Trump's Pentagon paused aid to Ukraine without informing the White House, a move orchestrated by top defense officials citing supposed weapons shortages. The Supreme Court blocked a harsh Florida immigration law for now, reaffirming that federal law takes precedence. The Trump administration escalated its campaign against Harvard, issuing a subpoena for immigration-related records and challenging its accreditation over alleged civil rights violations. Meanwhile, the DOJ has launched criminal investigations into former FBI Director James Comey and CIA Director John Brennan, both previously fired by Trump. Dr. Kevin O'Connor, Biden's former White House physician, was subpoenaed and refused to say if he had misrepresented Biden's health while in office. Measles cases in the U.S. have surged to a 33-year high, largely due to declining vaccination rates. And finally, Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino resigned — notably following a string of disturbing antisemitic and sexually inappropriate outputs from the platform's AI assistant Grok, which recently began referring to itself as “MechaHitler.” Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: AP News: Flash flooding that killed 3 leaves New Mexico village heartbroken, anxious as cleanup begins AP News: A look at the countries that received Trump's tariff letters WSJ: Stock Market Today: Dow Edges Higher; Trump Threatens More Tariffs — Live Updates AP News: Trump caught off guard by Pentagon's abrupt move to pause Ukraine weapons deliveries, AP sources say NYT: Supreme Court Won't Revive Aggressive Florida Immigration Law WSJ: Trump Administration Attacks Harvard's Accreditation FOX News: John Brennan, James Comey being investigated by FBI: DOJ sources Axios: Biden's doctor invokes Fifth Amendment in House probe of ex-president's health Axios: U.S. measles cases hit 33-year high, CDC says Wired: Linda Yaccarino Tried to Tame X. Now She's Out as CEO  Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join Jim and Greg on Thursday's 3 Martini Lunch as they discuss the suspension of numerous Secret Service figures following the Trump shooting, former White House physician Kevin O'Connor refusing to testify to Congress about Joe Biden's health, and the bizarre sequence of events that led Kamala Harris to pick Tim Walz as her running mate.First, they welcome the news that six Secret Service personnel (both supervisors and line-level agents) were suspended after the attempted assassination of President Trump last summer in Butler, Pennsylvania. There have also been significant technological advancements, including drones and better communication with local law enforcement helping to secure events. Jim thinks these are good steps and suspects Trump is satisfied with the fallout.Next, they shake their heads as Dr. O'Connor invokes doctor-patient confidentiality and his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination for refusing to answer lawmakers' questions about Joe Biden's true cognitive and physical condition while serving as president. O'Connor declared Biden fully fit to serve as president as late as February 2024.Finally, they get a kick out of the bizarre reasons Kamala Harris ruled out Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate and the equally odd conclusions they reached for choosing Tim Walz. Walz was not only a terrible choice, but it created more doubt about Kamala's ability to be president.Please visit our great sponsors:Manage your workplace stress with Better Help. Our listeners get 10% off their first month at https://BetterHelp.com/3MLUpgrade your skincare routine with Caldera Lab and see the difference.  Visit https://CalderaLab.com/3ML and use code 3ML at checkout for 20% off your first order.

-Rob Carson dives into revelations about President Biden's health, highlighting his doctor pleading the Fifth Amendment when questioned about Biden's mental fitness and potential medical falsification. -The Secret Service suspends six agents over failures during the attempted assassination of Trump, as Carson points to systemic lapses and accuses political opponents of enabling the attack. Today's podcast is sponsored by : BIRCH GOLD - Protect and grow your retirement savings with gold. Text ROB to 98 98 98 for your FREE information kit!CB DISTILLERY : Get healthy sleep with 25% off your first order at http://CBDistillery.com and use promo code CARSON To call in and speak with Rob Carson live on the show, dial 1-800-922-6680 between the hours of 12 Noon and 3:00 pm Eastern Time Monday through Friday…E-mail Rob Carson at : RobCarsonShow@gmail.com Musical parodies provided by Jim Gossett (www.patreon.com/JimGossettComedy) Listen to Newsmax LIVE and see our entire podcast lineup at http://Newsmax.com/Listen Make the switch to NEWSMAX today! Get your 15 day free trial of NEWSMAX+ at http://NewsmaxPlus.com Looking for NEWSMAX caps, tees, mugs & more? Check out the Newsmax merchandise shop at : http://nws.mx/shop Follow NEWSMAX on Social Media:  -Facebook: http://nws.mx/FB  -X/Twitter: http://nws.mx/twitter -Instagram: http://nws.mx/IG -YouTube: https://youtube.com/NewsmaxTV -Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/NewsmaxTV -TRUTH Social: https://truthsocial.com/@NEWSMAX -GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/newsmax -Threads: http://threads.net/@NEWSMAX  -Telegram: http://t.me/newsmax  -BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/newsmax.com -Parler: http://app.parler.com/newsmax Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In June of 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Kelo v. City of New London that the local government did not violate the Fifth Amendment's Public Use Clause when it condemned private residential lots and transferred them to commercial developers to promote local economic development as part of a comprehensive municipal development plan. Kelo […]