Podcasts about Jeffrey Epstein

Epstein's Suicide Note, the SPLC's Nazi Romance & Jon Levine. UNSAFE w/ Ann Coulter Watch the entire video at- https://youtu.be/RWI-l2dUY40?si=idK7OHxrMivcF-Iq Ann Coulter 2.63K subscribers 1,287 views Jun 20, 2026 UNSAFE w/ Ann Coulter - live on 06/18/2026  In this full episode of UNSAFE w/ Ann Coulter, Ann runs through five stories: how California's vote-by-mail system is built for Democrats to steal elections, the New York Times investigation that convinced her Jeffrey Epstein really did die by suicide, the Southern Poverty Law Center staffer entangled with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, and the unraveling of venture capitalist Amy Griffin's MDMA-assisted 'recovered memory' memoir The Tell. Then Washington Free Beacon reporter Jon Levine joins to dig through the deleted tweets and academic writings of Darializa Avila Chevalier, the Zohran Mamdani-backed democratic socialist challenging Rep. Adriano Espaillat in New York's 13th Congressional District -- abolishing police, prisons, and schools, calling the American flag a dish rag, and cheering in Times Square on October 8th. Ann and Jon also debate jokes and cancel culture, Elon Musk and the death of the Twitter blue checkmark, whether Americans are the least racist people on earth, and New Jersey congressional candidate Adam Hamawy, the Princeton plastic surgeon who testified as a defense witness for the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman.  Topics: California election fraud, mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting, Jeffrey Epstein, New York Times, Southern Poverty Law Center, National Alliance, Amy Griffin, The Tell, recovered memory, Jon Levine, Washington Free Beacon, Darializa Avila Chevalier, Adriano Espaillat, Zohran Mamdani, NYC Democratic primary, abolish ICE, abolish police, school abolition, October 7, Hamas, Elon Musk, Twitter, cancel culture, Adam Hamawy, the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, al-Qaeda. Watch live on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/AnnCoulter TikTok:   / realanncoulter   X (formerly Twitter): https://x.com/anncoulter Substack: https://anncoulter.substack.com/

This week we're excited that crazy Hollywood reject Jamie Kennedy interviewed crazier Hollywood reject Corey Feldman. They get into a heated argument about which pedophiles are worse - Hollywood vs Jeffrey Epstein vs Pizzagate. The best part is when Corey explains that Jim and Them are being paid to make fun of him and that that should be against the law. Christian Bladt joins the show to present Artie Fletcher calling into to Mike Calta's show. Mike called Artie out on his BS immediately and he never let off the gas, which is brilliant! Jerry Banfield apparently took a hit off a joint and started talking about how time is just a social construct, man! He's so much dumber than he'll ever know. Hawk Tuah is still making videos that no one could possibly care about. Please tell me she's updating her resume. Joe Matarese keeps changing the format of his “Road Back to Philly” podcast. Now he's comparing Philadelphia to Dan's home state of Utah. What a show! We finish up with Internet News and your voicemails.  Support us, get bonus episodes, and watch live every Saturday and Wednesday: ⁠⁠http://bit.ly/watp-patreon⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://watp.supercast.tech/⁠ Christian Bladt's channel - https://www.youtube.com/@TheBladtcast  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight on The Last Word: A federal judge orders the Trump administration to explain the Kennedy Center tarp. Also, the House Oversight Committee subpoenas Jeffrey Epstein associate Leon Black. Plus, Republican support grows for prosecuting women who get abortions. And the Supreme Court allows Trump to end Haitian TPS protections. Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Joyce Beatty, Rep. James Walkinshaw, Michele Goodwin, and Dr. Amy Acton join Jonathan Capehart. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week on Because Miami, Billy Corben is joined by Miami New Times reporter Scott McLendon who wrote about former Miami Beach mayor Phil Levine's relationship with Jeffery Epstein. Plus, Camila Ball comes on the show to talk about being forcefully removed from a Miami-Dade county commission meeting during public comment with the intent on discussing local law enforcement working hand in hand with ICE. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

"Congress and the public deserve a clear answer about whether the Epstein Estate paid a settlement to an accuser who made serious allegations against Donald Trump, and who was interviewed four times by the FBI."On 24 February 2026, NPR reporter Stephen Fowler published an investigative report comparing the public database of Epstein files released by the DOJ on January 30th with the Ghislaine Maxwell trial evidence index (handed to her defense attorneys in 2021 as part of standard discovery procedures). The two documents do not match.According to the evidence index, the FBI conducted four interviews with a woman in 2019. These interviews produced four sets of written summaries, known as 302 reports, which should have all been included in the January 30th document release. Only one was included, in which she claimed she'd been assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was just 13 years old. The other three were the ones in which this woman - known only as Jane Doe 4 - made credible accusations against the sitting President of the United States...This is a continuation of a series we started last year. Before listening to this episode, please go back and listen to our original 8-part series on the Epstein Scandal and any preceding Postscript updates.Learn more about this podcast at http://unresolved.meCheck out the podcast store at unresolved.dashery.comIf you would like to support this podcast, consider heading to https://www.patreon.com/unresolvedpod to become a Patron or ProducerBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/unresolved-a-true-crime-mystery-podcast--3266604/support.

The Epstein connection to Erika gets interesting, we look back at those strange monoliths that went viral in 2020, and remember when I told you that I noticed an oddity about September 10th regarding the amount of young men wearing maroon shirts? Well, after what I found, no one will try to convince me that the deep state did not organize Charlie's assassination. Last episode before we go away for 2 weeks for a summer vacation...and it's going to be a good one. Join me at Lionel Nation after the stream here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRmxeij_JJk 00:00 - Start. 02:01 - The maroon boys and questionable people in the 9/10 audience. 16:57 - Jeffrey Epstein & Erika Kirk's Next Model Management connection. 32:34 - Frank Turek defies Brian Harpole's claims again. 35:28 - Lingering questions to look into and our pending FOIAs. 51:16 - Final thoughts and comments. PDS Debt​ ​ Get your free, personalized assessment TODAY at http://pdsdebt.com/candace #PDSdebt #PDSpartner Balance of Nature​ ​ Go to http://BalanceofNature.com today and get 10% OFF the Whole Health System™ supplements when you use promo Code: CANDACE. PureTalk​ ​ Take advantage of unlimited high-speed data for just $34.99 per month at http://www.PureTalk.com/Owens Tax Network USA​ ​ Do not wait for another IRS letter or a frozen bank account. Call 866-686-1651 or visit http://tnusa.com/candace  Nimi Skincare​ Save 10% on your order with promo code CANDACE10 at http://www.NimiSkincare.com Candace Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@ClipsCandaceOwens Candace Official Website: https://candaceowens.com Candace Merch: https://shop.candaceowens.com Candace on Apple Podcasts: https://t.co/Pp5VZiLXbq Candace on Spotify: https://t.co/16pMuADXuT Candace on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/RealCandaceO Candace en Español: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensEnEspanol Candace Owens em Português: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensemPortugues Candace Owens en Français: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensEnFrançais Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this jam-packed hour, host Walter Sterling sits down with broadcaster Eddy Aragon to unpack a massive conspiracies, Saudi princes, and Jeffrey Epstein. Then, retired NYPD detective Vic Ferrari drops in to detail the unbelievable true crime story of a one-armed Gambino mobster who allegedly orchestrated a $1.7 million heist at a Manhattan Chanel boutique. Taking a break from the world's chaos, Walter flips the script to focus on "personal news," sharing touching milestones about his autistic daughter learning to make scrambled eggs and confidently booking her own Apple Store appointment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Story of the Week (DR):JP Morgan's news weekThe Lurid Lawsuit, Salami Scandal and Trash-Can Thief Vexing JPMorgan's PR Department AND Meme of 'JPMorgan's HR Department in 2026' Has People in Stitches Amid Sex Scandal and Knicks Bin IncidentShe Stole a Knicks Trash Can Off the Street and Lost Her Job at JPMorganThe Trash Bin That Cost Her Career: Who Is Angie Báez? JPMorgan DEI Executive Fired After Viral Knicks Parade VideoThe Trash-Can Thief: Angie Báez, an Executive Director of Community and Industry Engagement at the bank, was captured on a viral video during the New York Knicks championship parade emptying a public trash bin onto a Manhattan sidewalk so she could steal the limited-edition, blue-and-orange Knicks-themed container.The Resolution: JPMorgan quickly terminated her employment after the video went viral. Báez eventually returned the trash bin and was issued $175 in sanitation fines.But what kinds of thing DON'T get you fired and get you fined?In 2023, JPMorgan Chase agreed to a $290 million (1,657,143x) settlement to resolve a class-action lawsuit from survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. The bank was accused of actively ignoring glaring red flags and helping bankroll Epstein's sex-trafficking operation for 15 years.Internal documents and later congressional probes revealed that the bank processed roughly 4,700 suspicious transactions totaling $1.1 billion for Epstein. They failed to file a single Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) until after his death.Who Kept Their Job? Mary Erdoes: The Head of Asset & Wealth Management was fully aware of Epstein's status as a high-risk sex offender, reviewed his account, and was directly implicated in internal communications regarding his status. She faced zero professional demotions and remains one of the top candidates to eventually succeed Jamie Dimon as CEO.In 2020, JPMorgan Chase entered a deferred prosecution agreement and agreed to pay a record $920 million (5,257,143x) to settle federal charges of market manipulation.For nearly a decade, traders on JPMorgan's precious metals and U.S. Treasuries desks engaged in "spoofing"—placing tens of thousands of fake, deceptive orders to artificially move market prices and maximize their own profits. The FBI stated that traders "openly disregarded U.S. laws."While a couple of mid-to-high-level traders (like Michael Nowak and Gregg Smith) were later criminally convicted and sentenced to prison, the executive leadership team responsible for supervising them and implementing compliance programs suffered no casualties. Top management stayed perfectly secure, chalking the multi-million dollar fraud up as the work of a few "bad apples."The Salami Scandal: Veteran wealth manager Brent Bodner was fired by JPMorgan in 2024 after he expensed a $642.50 deli platter (containing wings, sandwiches, and salads) for a Super Bowl gathering at his Beverly Hills home. The bank accused him of intentionally misclassifying a personal party as a pre-approved business meeting.Bodner counter-sued, jokingly dubbing the controversy the "salami incident." He argued that the event was a legitimate client-acquisition dinner that only two prospects ended up attending, and that the minor coding error was used as a pretext to push him out.The Resolution: A FINRA arbitration panel sided heavily with Bodner, ruling that JPMorgan acted preemptively out of paranoia that brokers were leaving for rivals. The panel ordered JPMorgan to pay Bodner $4.25 million in damages.The Lurid Lawsuit: Chirayu Rana, a former vice president on JPMorgan's leveraged finance team, leveled highly salacious allegations against his female supervisor, Executive Director Lorna Hajdini. Rana's lawsuit alleges he was subjected to a campaign of racial discrimination, severe harassment, and forced sexual relations under the threat of having his career sabotaged.The Resolution: Rana rejected a $1M settlement offer, countering with a demand for up to $22 million before escalating the fight to court. Both Hajdini and JPMorgan strongly deny the allegations as entirely fabricated, and the legal battle is moving toward a highly publicized trial.JPMorgan Chase promotes Petno, Rohrbaugh to copresidents, setting up two more successors for DimonThe Wait to Replace Jamie Dimon Keeps Getting Longer: Another potential successor, Marianne Lake, is leaving JPMorgan, as the longstanding chief executive enters his third decade atop the bank.How JPMorgan went from 3 female CEO contenders to an all-male succession raceJPMorgan named Doug Petno and Troy Rohrbaugh, current co-heads of the bank's commercial and investment bank, as co-presidents, setting them up as the frontrunners to succeed longtime CEO Jamie Dimon. Their promotions, the bank said in a press release, "are part of the Board's ongoing succession planning process."Petno and Rohrbaugh were among a handful of powerhouse candidates poised to succeed Dimon, including Jennifer Piepszak, chief operating officer, Marianne Lake, CEO of the commercial bank, and Mary Erdoes, CEO of asset and wealth management.Marianne Lake, a Potential Dimon Successor, Leaves JPMorganOne-time Retention and Continuity equity awards to the following Operating Committee members:Doug Petno, Co-President and CEO of the Commercial & Investment Bank, and Troy Rohrbaugh, Co-President and CEO of Consumer & Community Banking, in the amount of $30M each;Mary Erdoes, CEO of Asset & Wealth Management, and Jennifer Piepszak, Chief Operating Officer, in the amount of $20M each.JPMorgan Chase unveils $50 billion buyback, Goldman Sachs raises dividend after Fed stress testA 6 year study shows which CEOs are pushing RTO mandates: The ones with the biggest egosFortune 500 bosses demanding staff return to the office share one trait: narcissism, research findsA six-year study tracking corporate executives revealed that strict return-to-office (RTO) mandates are heavily driven by narcissism and executive ego, rather than actual employee productivityWharton organizational psychologist Adam Grant noted that researchers used reliable corporate proxies to quantify CEO narcissism, including the oversized scale of their compensation packages, the size of their signatures, and the prominence of their photos in company annual reports.The data showed that leaders with highly inflated self-opinions consistently coveted maximum power and status, making them the most aggressive opponents of remote work.Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan pushed hard for a 5-day-a-week return to the office. Why they're now letting employees work from homeGameStop CEO Cohen spurns $35 billion pay plan to focus on plan to buy eBayGameStop CEO on His eBay Pursuit: ‘I'm Not Going to Stop, I'm Not Going to Go Away'GameStop unveiled a compensation package worth roughly $35B for Ryan Cohen ​in January, hinging on a turnaround that requires him to lift the struggling company's market value more than tenfold and sharply boost its profit.In May, Cohen surprised Wall Street with an unsolicited offer to buy eBay for roughly $56 billion in cash and stock to ‌turn the e-commerce company into ⁠a bigger competitor to Amazon.EBay's board rejected the proposal, calling the offer "neither credible nor attractive."Cohen argued that he doesn't want the package ⁠so that GameStop's leadership can fully focus on its operating performance and the planned acquisition.SpaceX handed lowest possible ESG rating by MSCI: Triple C score puts Elon Musk's company on par with Russia after 2022 invasion of UkraineMusk 'most obvious risk' following SpaceX's lowest possible ESG rating“Board of Directors: The SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES board currently has an independent majority, which enables it to more effectively fulfill its critical function of overseeing management on behalf of shareholders. The company has failed to split the roles of CEO and chairman, which may limit the board's independence from current management interests. Split CEO and chairman roles are characteristic of 67% of companies in this market.”Welltower CFO's $167 million pay package sets new recordWelltower's Tim McHugh is the new highest-paid finance chief among the biggest U.S. companies. His $167 million pay package in 2025 not only dwarfs that of his CFO peers but also outpaces the compensation of many CEOs.McHugh's pay at Welltower, a real-estate investment trust focused on rental housing for seniors, surpasses the $139 million compensation package received by Tesla's Vaibhav Taneja in 2024. This puts him more than $135 million above Alphabet's Anat Ashkenazi, the next highest-paid CFO in 2025. And it secures him a spot in the club of executives making $100 million or more, a group that remains rare.Here's what the article DID NOT MENTION: CEO Shankh Mitra: $821MGoodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: Scientists Say New Method Turns Coffee Grounds Into High-Potency Renewable FuelAccording to a press release from South Korea's National Research Council of Science and Technology, a team of researchers at the Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) have developed a method to convert spent coffee waste into high-quality charcoal, known as biochar.While that's a feat in and of itself, the kicker is the method's blistering speed: it takes just 90 seconds from start to finish, with no drawn-out drying process or oil separation required. According to the release, the new technique solves a major issue in extracting the latent energy potential of spent coffee beans.DR: Bill to raise minimum wage to $25 an hour will be introduced in Senate DR MMThe bill would incrementally increase the minimum wage from its current rate of $7.25, with the first jump to $12 an hour in the first year of enactment. Major corporations would have six years to work up to a $25 minimum wage, while smaller employers would have a 13-year runway. The legislation would also do away with subminimum wages for tipped workers, such as restaurant servers, youth workers and workers with disabilities. Nearly half of the American workforce makes less than $25 an hour.DR: Federal judge blocks new law aimed at ESG, DEI investing decisionsA federal judge has blocked Kansas from enforcing a new law that requires institutional investment advisers to make certain disclosures when recommending against company management on issues, including environmental, social and governance principles.U.S. District Judge Holly Teeter on Wednesday issued a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of law enacted last session that two major national institutional investment advisers said was unconstitutional because it discriminated based on speech.MM: MacKenzie Scott alone accounted for one-third of America's $19.2 billion in megagifts last yearAssholiest of the Week (MM):CEO SPEED ROUND - ONE HEADLINE, ONE CEO, ONE LINERTim Cook - It's pretty sweet to quit your job and let the new guy fight the union: Apple closed America's first unionized store and blocked workers from transfers — now the union is fighting backJamie Dimon - It was easy - we just pointed to the ones with boobs and said “Not you”: How JPMorgan went from 3 female CEO contenders to an all-male succession raceZuck - The best thing about being a little man king with no accountability is I can randomly change and unchange and rechange my mind… about people's lives: Meta pauses an AI training program that tracks employees' keystrokes after an internal leakLarry Fink - Have you SEEN the size of my signature??? Fucking come to work: A 6 year study shows which CEOs are pushing RTO mandates: The ones with the biggest egos“In the six-year study, researchers collected data on Fortune 500 CEOs, using behavioral proxies—signature size, photo size in annual reports, pay gap relative to peers—to construct narcissism scores. The higher the score, the more likely a CEO was to publicly oppose remote and hybrid work and seek additional status (like a board chairmanship). In a separate experiment, CEOs whose egos were primed—by reflecting on the assertive leadership styles of Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison—showed significantly greater opposition to working from home than a control group”Andy Jassy - Now we know EXACTLY when you're wasting our time peeing in a bottle instead of working: Amazon is on a mission to optimize warehouse work. Its latest test puts wearable devices on support staff.Nikesh Arora - If you just said, “Who?”, you better pay attention because I have important things to say: Palo Alto Networks CEO: We're in 'a Darwinian moment' where employees have to prove their AI skills - BRONZE ASSHOLESatya Nadella - If I complain about how everyone TALKS about AI, does that make me sound more sympathetic?: Microsoft's CEO Takes Aim At AI Companies: 'We Have To Walk The Walk' To Convince The Public - GOLDEN ASSHOLEJeff Bezos - I mean, if I'm honest, everyone is terrible and should be laid off: Jeff Bezos Called Washington Post His Worst Investment and Staff He Laid Off ‘Terrible' People - SILVER ASSHOLEBrian Moynihan - I mean, or your kid was late to school because they forgot to make their card for teacher appreciation day, you didn't eat breakfast, and you rushed in to work from the office as fast as you could because working from home isn't allowed anymore: By 7 a.m., Bank of America's CEO has already read 5 newspapers, his email inbox, and hit the gym—he says if you're late to meetings, you're ‘selfish'Dave Ramsey - 0.0001% of Musk's worst day could end hunger ON EARTH, but sure, take away Halloween and pets from the rest of us: Dave Ramsey Says 20% of Americans' Halloween and Pet Budgets Could End Hunger: 'There'd Be No Hungry Kids'Headliniest of the WeekDR: Beloved Grandmother Was Standing in Her Own House When a Tesla, Allegedly on Autopilot, Smashed Through the Wall and Killed Her in Grandchildren's PlayroomA popular password manager was hit by a hack. What you need to know—and how to keep your data safeMM: Ryanair says it will reluctantly not charge parents to sit next to childrenMM: Elon Musk will get a billion shares of SpaceX if he can settle a million humans on MarsJust make it 10 trillion shares if he can safely land Gus who sleeps at the bus station on NeptuneWho Won the Week?DR: The MotherS(C)hIpMM: ESG RatingsPredictionsDR: Symbolically giving up your $35 billion CEO pay package becomes the new $1 salary: proxy statements will say: “Our CEO generously waived his $35 billion pay package as a gesture of sacrifice to lead by example, preserve corporate cash, and show solidarity with displaced workers and stressed stakeholders.”MM: Ryanair announces a new fee children can pay to sit AWAY from their parents

Bill Gates' testimony on Jeffrey Epstein released, NY Times unloads on Diana Russini, Jeff Bezos loves pretending to be on the phone, a new Bonerline, and Jim's Picks: Father's Day Songs. JFK's grandson Jack Schlossberg lost his Senate race. Good. He seems like a turd. Drew is finally catching World Cup Fever. He especially loves the Scottish and Norwegian fans. DJ Fat Tony is trying to kiss the Beckham's butts again. Door Dash paid over $1 million to Brooklyn Beckham for his stupid commercial. The NY Times is successfully making Diana Russini's life miserable. She got busted texting while driving with her kids in the car. May Ling wants the biggest butt ever. Hot or gross? Reese Witherspoon should be in trouble for dating an old billionaire. Jeff Bezos is always pretending to be on the phone. Brand new Bonerline. Drew & Roberto are in love with The Victory Tour (The Jacksons). Maternal Instinct on Netflix is one of the wildest documentaries out there. There's now transcripts out there of Taylor Parker in jail crying to her mom. Poor Taylor. Bill Gates' testimony is released. He should have left Melinda sooner. We called Tom Mazawey and he missed the call. It's crazy! Jim's Picks: Top 10 Father's Day Songs Merch, yo. Check it. If you'd like to help support the show… consider subscribing to our YouTube Channel, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter (Drew Lane, Marc Fellhauer, Trudi Daniels, Jim Bentley, BranDon, and Roberto).

Walter and New Mexico broadcaster Eddie Aragon unpack the bizarre disappearance of a military "UFO gatekeeper" who vanished with first-aid kits and a revolver amidst a struggle with cognitive decline. The conspiracy talk doesn't stop there, as Walter dives into the dark history of the CIA secretly paying off journalists to control the news and touches on gruesome rumors about Jeffrey Epstein's Zorro Ranch. Also, Vic Ferrari talks about a rogue corrections officer spiking a coworker's coffee with laxatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

Annie Farmer testified during Ghislaine Maxwell's federal trial that she was just 16 years old when Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein flew her to Epstein's ranch in New Mexico under the guise of an academic retreat. Farmer explained that she initially believed the trip was meant to provide her with educational and career opportunities. Instead, she said the experience quickly turned uncomfortable and exploitative. She recalled Maxwell giving her a massage during which Maxwell touched her breasts, an incident that left her feeling frozen and terrified. She also testified that Epstein had climbed into her bed unexpectedly and caressed her without consent. Farmer described feeling "panicked" and manipulated by two adults who had promised mentorship and safety.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bill Gates told the House Oversight Committee that his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was, in his telling, about philanthropy — Epstein claimed he could connect Gates to wealthy donors who might put major money into global health work. Gates said he met Epstein beginning in 2011, after Epstein's 2008 conviction, and continued interactions until 2014, when he concluded Epstein could not deliver on those promises. He denied witnessing Epstein commit crimes, denied visiting Epstein's island, ranch, or Florida home, and said he “never victimized anyone,” while acknowledging that he may have been in the presence of Epstein victims during his dealings with Epstein.The more damaging part is that Gates admitted Epstein gained access to sensitive information about his personal life, including extramarital affairs, and allegedly tried to use that information — mixed with falsehoods, according to Gates — to pressure him back into contact. Gates portrayed Epstein as a manipulator who used proximity to powerful people to launder his reputation, while lawmakers pressed the obvious question: why Gates kept engaging with a convicted sex offender at all. Gates expressed regret, saying he should never have met with Epstein, but the testimony still adds another example of Epstein's method: insinuating himself into elite circles, collecting leverage, and using access as currency.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Gates says he didn't witness crimes but may have been in presence of Epstein victims | CNN Politics

Jeffrey Epstein's infamous Palm Beach mansion—where many of his alleged crimes took place—was ultimately sold off and demolished after years of controversy and legal battles tied to his estate. After Epstein's death, real estate developer Todd Michael Glaser bought the property, razed the existing house, and put the empty waterfront lot back on the market. That parcel, with about 170 feet of Intracoastal Waterway frontage, was then purchased by venture capitalist David Skok, a partner at Matrix Partners, for nearly $26 million—significantly more than what the developer paid. Skok acquired the land after the original structure was removed, turning a place associated with trauma and public outrage into a blank slate.While specific public plans for the property under its new owner haven't been fully detailed, the change in ownership and demolition itself signal a deliberate shift in vision: to erase the physical remnants of a site tied to abuse and transform the parcel into something entirely new. Initially, Glaser had hoped to build a large modern estate, but architectural board pushback led him to sell the lot instead. With Skok now in control, the focus appears to be on redevelopment rather than preservation of the notorious structure, marking a controversial but clear departure from the mansion's dark past.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Jeffrey Epstein repeatedly manipulated the legal, social, and institutional systems around him by exploiting power imbalances, cultivating influential allies, and leveraging ambiguity to delay or derail accountability. From the earliest reports, he relied on intermediaries to insulate himself—using employees and recruiters to create distance between himself and victims—while simultaneously presenting himself as a legitimate financier whose wealth and connections discouraged scrutiny. When allegations surfaced, Epstein's lawyers went over the heads of local prosecutors, engaging directly with federal officials and framing the case as narrow, manageable, and unsuitable for aggressive prosecution. This strategy culminated in the 2008 non-prosecution agreement, an extraordinary deal that shut down a federal investigation, shielded unnamed co-conspirators, and was negotiated in secret, all while victims were kept in the dark. The outcome was not accidental; it was the result of sustained pressure, elite access, and a legal strategy designed to exploit discretion and deference within the justice system.Even after his crimes were widely known, Epstein continued to bend the system to his advantage through delay, obfuscation, and reputation laundering. He used civil settlements, confidentiality agreements, and aggressive legal threats to silence victims and discourage further reporting, while simultaneously rebranding himself through academic donations, philanthropic fronts, and proximity to respected institutions. When scrutiny intensified, agencies repeatedly stalled, narrowed the scope of inquiries, or claimed jurisdictional or procedural limits, allowing Epstein to maintain a veneer of legitimacy long after credible evidence of serial abuse existed. His ability to survive multiple investigative moments was not due to a lack of evidence, but to a pattern of institutional failure—one that Epstein anticipated, exploited, and reinforced—turning bureaucratic inertia, prosecutorial caution, and elite protection into tools that consistently worked in his favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Western Australian police have agreed to review how officers handled their interactions with Virginia Giuffre before her death by suicide in April 2025. Giuffre's brother, Sky Roberts, and sister-in-law, Amanda Roberts, wrote to both police and the state coroner asking for scrutiny of the response to a domestic violence dispute involving Giuffre and a former partner. Police commissioner Col Blanch confirmed during a parliamentary hearing that the family's letter had been received and that a review was underway, while saying he did not yet know the details of the police response and wanted the review to establish what happened.The family says they are not challenging the official circumstances of Giuffre's death, but they want answers about whether police failed to properly follow up after she reportedly went to a police station more than once. Amanda Roberts questioned where those reports are and why further action did not appear to continue, while Sky Roberts framed the push as part of a broader demand to examine systemic failures around domestic and family violence. Family violence experts and advocates have also backed the request for an inquest, arguing that Giuffre's case could expose wider failures in how authorities respond to victims before tragedy strikesto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Western Australian police to review response to Virginia Giuffre domestic violence dispute | Jeffrey Epstein | The Guardian

The congressional oversight committee handling the Epstein investigation is a toothless operation built to create the appearance of action while keeping the coverup intact. Instead of forcing witnesses into sworn, public, high-pressure testimony where lies and evasions carry real consequences, the committee has relied on closed-door sessions, voluntary testimony, delayed transcripts, and soft procedures that let people dodge, forget, spin, and hide behind lawyers. That makes the testimony nearly worthless, because if witnesses do not fear being held accountable, they have every reason to give half-truths, claim amnesia, and protect themselves and the institutions around them.James Comer is allowing the process to function as a wall, not an investigation. The whole operation was supposed to drain the Epstein story of momentum and bury it under procedure, but the discharge petition disrupted that plan and forced the committee to look busy. So instead of pursuing real accountability, Comer and the committee keep cutting corners, controlling the process, and feeding the public another round of political theater. The result is more secrecy, more delay, more circular testimony, and more protection for the powerful, while survivors and citizens are once again handed process instead of truth.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

We look back at some of the conflicting eye witness statements given on 9/10, another person comes forward to give testimony about the Erika Kirk connection to Next Model Management & Jeffrey Epstein, and Tim Dillon's "reading" of JD Vance's new book is hilarious. 00:00 - Start. 02:10 - What Brian Harpole did with Charlie's shirt. 12:20 - Email about potential ABS shattered glass in the car. 17:36 - Conflicting eye witness statements. 22:45 - Updated list on why the exploding mic theory could work. 24:45 - Lance Twiggs will not be compelled to show up to the preliminary hearing. 32:11 - Erika Frantzve, Jeffrey Epstein, and the Next Model Management connection. 39:05 - Erika potential dissociative identity disorder? 47:07 - Tim Dillon's "reading" of JD Vance's new book. 52:12 - Comments. Ground News​ ​ Check out Ground News today at https://groundnews.com/candace to get 40% off the Vantage subscription to see through mainstream media narratives. Dose​ ​ Get 35% off your first month subscription with promo code CANDACE at http://www.DoseDaily.co/Candace Ethos​ Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/CANDACE. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. American Financing​ NMLS 182334, http://www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org. APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.327% for well qualified borrowers. Call 800-795-1210 for details about credit costs and terms. Visit http://www.AmericanFinancing.net/Owens. Average savings based on borrowers who save over $199.99. Candace Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@ClipsCandaceOwens Candace Official Website: https://candaceowens.com Candace Merch: https://shop.candaceowens.com Candace on Apple Podcasts: https://t.co/Pp5VZiLXbq Candace on Spotify: https://t.co/16pMuADXuT Candace on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/RealCandaceO Candace en Español: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensEnEspanol Candace Owens em Português: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensemPortugues Candace Owens en Français: https://www.youtube.com/@CandaceOwensEnFrançais Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Les Wexner framed his nearly six-hour congressional deposition about Jeffrey Epstein as a political stunt, calling it “silly,” “a nothing burger,” and accusing House Democrats of using the session for “airtime” rather than serious oversight. He claimed he had “nothing to hide,” repeated that he knew nothing about Epstein's criminal conduct, and cast himself as another person deceived by Epstein — financially wounded, personally embarrassed, but not responsible. That posture is convenient, but it also dodges the central problem: Wexner was not some casual acquaintance. He was one of Epstein's most powerful patrons and most prominent clients, and the idea that he could hand Epstein extraordinary access, trust, and legitimacy while remaining completely unaware of the warning signs is exactly why lawmakers and the public remain skeptical.Wexner also attacked Democrats for leaving the room, holding press events, and asking questions he believed were designed for campaign material, including one about his donations to Ohio Sen. Jon Husted. But that criticism works only if you accept Wexner's premise that his role has already been fully explained, and it has not. His complaints about optics do not erase the deeper issue: Epstein's access to elite institutions depended on men like Wexner giving him credibility, wealth, and proximity to power. Wexner may want the deposition to be “one and done,” but his insistence that there was nothing meaningful to ask sounds less like closure and more like an attempt to reduce years of unresolved questions into an annoyance he believes he has outgrown.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Wexner Calls Congressional Epstein Deposition ‘Silly,' Says Democrats Used It as ‘Photo Op' | News | The Harvard Crimson

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

Jean-Luc Brunel was found dead in his cell at La Santé prison in Paris during the early hours of February 19, 2022. French authorities said the 75-year-old modeling agent had been found hanged during an overnight inspection and treated his death as a suicide. Brunel had been held in custody since his arrest at Charles de Gaulle Airport in December 2020, when authorities detained him as he was preparing to fly to Senegal. He was under formal investigation over allegations involving the rape and sexual assault of minors and adults, as well as suspicions that he had helped arrange transportation and accommodations for young women connected to Jeffrey Epstein. Brunel denied the allegations against him and died before the case could proceed to trial.Brunel had been a prominent figure in the international modeling industry and founded MC2 Model Management with financial backing from Epstein. Multiple women had accused him of sexual misconduct over several decades, while Virginia Giuffre alleged in court filings that he supplied young women and girls to Epstein. His death ended the possibility that he would face a public trial, testify under oath or be questioned further about his relationship with Epstein and others in their social and business circles. French authorities opened an investigation into the circumstances of his death, but officials reported no immediate indication that another person had been involved.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Rupert Lowe's inquiry says it received evidence from survivors, relatives, whistleblowers, professionals and political figures about organised child sexual exploitation in communities across the United Kingdom. The report describes a recurring pattern in which vulnerable girls were targeted with attention, gifts, alcohol and drugs before being subjected to sexual violence, intimidation and trafficking between offenders and locations. It states that the victims discussed in the evidence were predominantly white British girls and that many of the alleged perpetrators were men of Pakistani Muslim heritage. The inquiry says the abuse was allowed to continue because police forces, social services, schools, healthcare providers, licensing authorities and government bodies repeatedly failed to identify victims, share information, investigate allegations properly or intervene when clear warning signs appeared.The report calls for mandatory reporting of suspected child sexual exploitation, improved collection of demographic information about victims and offenders, specialist police units and a consistent national system for sharing safeguarding intelligence. It also recommends regular training for police officers, teachers, medical staff and social workers; automatic referrals when children present with injuries, pregnancies, sexually transmitted infections, self-harm or other indicators of exploitation; and long-term medical, psychological, housing and legal support for survivors. Additional recommendations include reviewing convictions imposed on children who committed offences while being exploited, stronger sentencing, deportation proceedings against convicted foreign nationals where legally applicable, and legal action against perpetrators or officials believed to have escaped accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Rape Gang Inquiry Report.docx

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

Liz Oyer, a former DOJ pardon attorney, argues that Todd Blanche and the Trump Justice Department have been hiding the real reason Ghislaine Maxwell was moved from FCI Tallahassee to the minimum-security Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Texas after Blanche personally interviewed her for roughly nine hours over two days. Maxwell, who is serving 20 years for helping Jeffrey Epstein sexually exploit girls, gave Trump highly favorable statements during that meeting, saying he was “a gentleman” and denying that she ever saw him behave inappropriately with Epstein. Days later, she was moved to a far less restrictive prison camp, despite Bureau of Prisons rules that generally bar convicted sex offenders from minimum-security camps because they carry a “public safety factor” requiring at least low-security confinement.The core accusation is that the DOJ's public explanation does not hold up. BOP claimed Maxwell was moved for safety reasons and that there was no special treatment, but Oyer says safety threats are normally handled through protective custody, SHU placement, or a transfer to another appropriate low-security facility — not by sending a convicted sex trafficker to the least-secure kind of federal prison. The “clear admission,” in her view, is a May 6, 2026 change to BOP policy giving the attorney general power to designate or redesignate where prisoners are held, which she sees as a retroactive attempt to justify what already happened to Maxwell and to give Blanche sweeping power over prisoner placement. Her conclusion is blunt: this looks like preferential treatment for Maxwell, potentially tied to protecting Trump, and it should be a major line of questioning at Blanche's confirmation hearing.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:'Clear admission' Trump DOJ broke rules to help Ghislaine Maxwell uncovered by expert - Raw Story

In the Broward County defamation litigation CACE 15-000072, the deposition at issue is sworn testimony from Paul Cassell, one of the attorneys representing Epstein survivors and a former federal judge. Cassell's deposition focuses on his role in challenging the 2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement granted to Jeffrey Epstein, and on statements he made publicly about Alan Dershowitz that later became the basis for Dershowitz's defamation claims. Cassell explains the factual foundation for his remarks, emphasizing that they were rooted in court filings, sworn victim testimony, investigative reporting, and contemporaneous evidence. He details how survivors' allegations against Dershowitz emerged, how they were evaluated by legal teams, and why he believed it was appropriate and accurate to reference them in public advocacy surrounding Epstein's secret plea deal. Cassell consistently frames his conduct as part of his duty to represent victims and expose prosecutorial misconduct, not as a personal attack.The deposition also addresses Dershowitz's accusation that Cassell acted recklessly or with malice, which Cassell firmly rejects. He testifies that he never fabricated claims, never coached witnesses to lie, and never acted outside ethical or professional boundaries. Cassell underscores that his statements reflected allegations already made under oath by victims and contained in legal records, and that suppressing discussion of those allegations would further harm survivors. Throughout the testimony, Cassell situates the dispute within the larger Epstein cover-up, arguing that the real issue is not reputational discomfort among the powerful but the systemic failure to protect exploited minors. The deposition ultimately functions as a defense of victim-centered advocacy and transparency, directly countering Dershowitz's narrative that survivor allegations were invented, coerced, or irresponsibly amplified.to contact me:EFTA00594390.pdf

In the Broward County defamation litigation CACE 15-000072, the deposition at issue is sworn testimony from Paul Cassell, one of the attorneys representing Epstein survivors and a former federal judge. Cassell's deposition focuses on his role in challenging the 2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement granted to Jeffrey Epstein, and on statements he made publicly about Alan Dershowitz that later became the basis for Dershowitz's defamation claims. Cassell explains the factual foundation for his remarks, emphasizing that they were rooted in court filings, sworn victim testimony, investigative reporting, and contemporaneous evidence. He details how survivors' allegations against Dershowitz emerged, how they were evaluated by legal teams, and why he believed it was appropriate and accurate to reference them in public advocacy surrounding Epstein's secret plea deal. Cassell consistently frames his conduct as part of his duty to represent victims and expose prosecutorial misconduct, not as a personal attack.The deposition also addresses Dershowitz's accusation that Cassell acted recklessly or with malice, which Cassell firmly rejects. He testifies that he never fabricated claims, never coached witnesses to lie, and never acted outside ethical or professional boundaries. Cassell underscores that his statements reflected allegations already made under oath by victims and contained in legal records, and that suppressing discussion of those allegations would further harm survivors. Throughout the testimony, Cassell situates the dispute within the larger Epstein cover-up, arguing that the real issue is not reputational discomfort among the powerful but the systemic failure to protect exploited minors. The deposition ultimately functions as a defense of victim-centered advocacy and transparency, directly countering Dershowitz's narrative that survivor allegations were invented, coerced, or irresponsibly amplified.to contact me:EFTA00594390.pdf

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

In the Broward County defamation litigation CACE 15-000072, the deposition at issue is sworn testimony from Paul Cassell, one of the attorneys representing Epstein survivors and a former federal judge. Cassell's deposition focuses on his role in challenging the 2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement granted to Jeffrey Epstein, and on statements he made publicly about Alan Dershowitz that later became the basis for Dershowitz's defamation claims. Cassell explains the factual foundation for his remarks, emphasizing that they were rooted in court filings, sworn victim testimony, investigative reporting, and contemporaneous evidence. He details how survivors' allegations against Dershowitz emerged, how they were evaluated by legal teams, and why he believed it was appropriate and accurate to reference them in public advocacy surrounding Epstein's secret plea deal. Cassell consistently frames his conduct as part of his duty to represent victims and expose prosecutorial misconduct, not as a personal attack.The deposition also addresses Dershowitz's accusation that Cassell acted recklessly or with malice, which Cassell firmly rejects. He testifies that he never fabricated claims, never coached witnesses to lie, and never acted outside ethical or professional boundaries. Cassell underscores that his statements reflected allegations already made under oath by victims and contained in legal records, and that suppressing discussion of those allegations would further harm survivors. Throughout the testimony, Cassell situates the dispute within the larger Epstein cover-up, arguing that the real issue is not reputational discomfort among the powerful but the systemic failure to protect exploited minors. The deposition ultimately functions as a defense of victim-centered advocacy and transparency, directly countering Dershowitz's narrative that survivor allegations were invented, coerced, or irresponsibly amplified.to contact me:EFTA00594390.pdf

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is portrayed as someone whose public charm and privileged image always sat alongside a much uglier reputation behind the scenes. His former girlfriend Sandi Jones described him as a “real character” who liked making people laugh and was popular with women, but that softer image is contrasted with accounts of Andrew as loud, spoiled, arrogant, and difficult from childhood onward. The broader portrait is of a man indulged by royal status, treated as the Queen's favorite son, and allowed to move through life with a sense that ordinary rules did not apply to him.That personality profile becomes part of the larger explanation for his downfall: Andrew was once marketed as the handsome war-hero prince, especially after serving as a helicopter pilot during the Falklands, but the old “Randy Andy” image curdled into something far darker as his behavior, judgment, friendships, and entitlement came under scrutiny. The same traits once dismissed as cheeky royal mischief — arrogance, self-importance, vulgar humor, and a need to be catered to — are presented as warning signs that followed him into adulthood, through his failed marriage, his trade envoy controversies, his Epstein association, the disastrous Newsnight interview, and finally his collapse into disgrace.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's ex-girlfriend sums up his 'real personality' in four words | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

We opened this episode of The Dr. Peter Breggin Hour acknowledging the weight of our times. For the past week, we've explored how to live meaningfully amid chaos, threats, and cultural unraveling. That conversation remains vital. But reality does not pause for comfort. This week, we returned to the difficult terrain with our friend J.J. Carroll — a man of uncommon courage, a former law enforcement officer with decades on the border and in fugitive operations, a truth-teller who was recently fired for daring to speak plainly on the very issues he lived. J.J.'s experiences are not abstract. They have been forged in daily encounters with violence in the six months he worked with ICE in 2025-2026 and the violence he faced for 24 years as a Border Patrol Officer, arresting drug cartel members on the Southern border. He describes a nation where the demographic transformation is not subtle policy but visible, measurable destruction. J.J. is a firsthand witness to the continued open borders, net increases in illegal immigration, and jobs going overwhelmingly to non-Americans while native-born citizens, especially White males, are sidelined. Government data he cites paints a stark picture: hundreds of arrests daily, yet a system so backlogged that true mass deportations feel like a distant promise rather than a current reality. We do not shy away from these realities on this show. America was built by a specific people with a specific culture — a White, Christian, European-rooted nation that achieved greatness through shared values, faith, rule of law, and high-trust communities. Pretending otherwise dishonors history and endangers the future. As J.J. powerfully states, demographics shape destiny. When you import millions from cultures with vastly different norms, lower average IQs, and incompatible worldviews — often without any expectation of assimilation — you do not enrich; you transform, and not for the better. Europe is learning this lesson in blood and social collapse. We ignore it at our peril. Even now, the mayhem is surging onto our shores. The rising tide of migrant violence and social breakdown is unmistakable across Europe and England, where no-go zones, knife crime, and gang rapes have become grim daily realities. Here in the United States, the pattern repeats in major cities like New York and beyond. The many stories of murders, rapes, and other violence by illegal immigrant populations are not isolated tragedies; they are the predictable consequence of policies that prioritize unassimilated foreign populations over the safety and future of our own children. We have a huge country to manage with almost 350 million souls living here from all parts of the world. There are issues with continued illegal border crossings, international drug trafficking into the US, and massive issues of fraud and theft on a level never before identified that threatens to demolish us and invites totalitarianism to come and take charge. The Judeo-Christian foundational culture that created America and those individuals who were all part of it are being shredded by our political and intellectual elite and other cultures coming from far different places in the world who want no part of what we have here in terms of civilization. A significant number of these people have no understanding of respect for human life, the rule of law, the US Constitution, basic rules of life, or rules of the road that we take for granted. How does that ignorance translate into the daily lives of citizens? No respect for human life translates into murder, including the deliberate attacks on people who are strangers by perpetrators using trucks, knives, guns, and other weapons. No understanding of, agreement with, and respect for the rule of law translates into fraud and theft on a massive basis, employing lying, subterfuge, and cunning to swindle, cheat, and steal from individuals and from American citizens through federal theft. In California, several massive, multi-million-dollar fraud rings involving illegal immigrants and transnational criminal organizations have recently been dismantled by federal authorities for stealing taxpayer-funded welfare, COVID-19 relief, and tax revenue. Similar large-scale fraud operations tied to Somali communities have also plagued Minnesota, further draining public resources intended for American citizens. This cultural incompatibility extends even to everyday infrastructure. Illegal immigrant commercial drivers, often poorly trained, unlicensed, or operating stolen or improperly maintained vehicles, are contributing to chaos on our highways. Serious accidents, deadly pile-ups, and overwhelmed emergency services have increased in areas with high concentrations of such drivers, adding yet another layer of preventable danger to American families who simply want to travel safely on roads built and maintained by prior generations. As Elizabeth Nickson has powerfully documented in her recent Substack column “White Boy's Summer,” the impact across Europe has been devastating. Decades of mass migration have been accompanied by a deliberate political project that has taught many newcomers to view the native populations — the very citizens who built and sustain these societies as producers, taxpayers, and keepers of the culture — with resentment and outright hatred. (See: White Boy's Summer) The Spiritual Dimension This is not merely political or economic. It is spiritual. We agreed that there is a degree of evil walking the world that we have not seen before. Both concepts of evil and love have been banished from intellectual discussion, laughed at as old-fashioned. Cultural relativism — the idea that all cultures and moral systems are equally valid with no objective standard by which to judge them — is the opposite of these terms. Allan Bloom's 1987 bestseller, The Closing of the American Mind, sounded the warning but was quickly buried in intellectual and media circles with a wave of multiculturalism, DEI, calls of racism to silence critics, and a focus on bending reality with transgenderism and other tales that have left devastation in their path. J.J. speaks as a believer who sees Satan as the source of evil roaming the earth, a force that delights in the slaughter of the innocent — 63 million abortions, the mutilation of children under transgender ideology, and the darkest allegations tied to elite networks like those surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. The failure to fully release the Epstein files, despite promises and power, is a profound betrayal. When those in authority protect the powerful at the expense of justice for children, the system stands condemned. Peter and I have long warned about the moral free fall — the erosion of the Ten Commandments in public and private life, the suppression of love and conscience, the celebration of evil in entertainment and elite circles. Occult influences, ritualistic abuses, and a rejection of God create a void that darkness eagerly fills. We see it in the boldness of anti-human spectacles at major events and in the quiet despair of families watching their children be targeted. We Refuse Despair We do not exempt leaders from scrutiny. While Donald Trump remains the strongest border president in modern memory, serious disappointments linger — continued promotion of mRNA technology, the absence of full accountability for past crimes, and an emperor-like tone in some foreign policy pronouncements. Real change requires more than one man. It demands people willing to reclaim their inheritance. Yet we refuse despair. Peter reminded us of the Black Robed Regiment — the ministers who fueled the American Revolution with Judeo-Christian conviction. The Black Robed Regiment was the courageous pastors and clergy of the Revolutionary era. They preached biblical principles of liberty, justice, and resistance to tyranny from their pulpits and from town to town in Colonial days, leading up to the American Revolution, while dressed in their distinctive black robes. These men were instrumental in shaping the fundamental, encompassing worldviews of individual freedom, liberty, and release from tyranny. These courageous and hardy pastors, ministers, and clerics rallied the American people, framing the fight for independence as a sacred duty and providing the moral and spiritual backbone of our nation's birth. We need a similar revival today: a return to the fundamentals of faith, family, and constitutional order. J.J. finds hope in his teenage son's generation and the friends he drives around — young people who are more politically engaged and spiritually aware than many in prior generations. They are turning away from the emptiness of the sexual revolution, materialism, and identity chaos, and they want none of it. Across the country, our youngest generations — Gen Z and Alpha — are showing signs of a quiet but powerful shift, returning to God, traditional churches, and core American values of family, self-reliance, and ordered liberty. Reports and surveys document rising interest in Christianity, declining support for extreme gender ideology, and a renewed appreciation for the Founding principles that made this nation exceptional. Young girls, too, are increasingly rejecting the glitter culture of hyper-sexualization and fluid identity in favor of something more grounded and enduring. Small Is Beautiful: Love in Action In the face of such overwhelming disorder, the answer begins at home. Make your home a sanctuary. Love your spouse fiercely. Raise your children in truth. Plant apple trees — literally, as Peter and I recently did in our backyard. Build a real community where you are. Civility, trust, and decency radiate outward from strong families. As Peter emphasized at the close, the world's evil fades by comparison to the love we put into it. God will measure us by that love. In a time when elites peddle division and death, we counter with creation, fidelity, and courage. This conversation with J.J. Carroll is raw, unflinching, and necessary. We invite you to listen to the full episode. Let it stir you — not to hopelessness, but to renewed commitment. Speak truth. Reject the lies about our nation's Founding and character. Protect the innocent. Cling to God. And never apologize for loving your people, your culture, and your children's future. We continue our series on living faithfully in dark days — see our recent “Small Is Beautiful” piece on Substack. Your presence here, your subscriptions, and your own acts of courage sustain our work. We love you, dear audience. Stay strong. The fight is generational, but good men and women — and a sovereign God — are not easily defeated.

David protein bars went from startup to one of the hottest consumer products in America in under two years. But the ride has been anything but smooth. Founder and CEO Peter Rahal joins Rapid Response to talk about building a breakout brand through lawsuits, a Jeffrey Epstein association, and the kind of social media heat most companies would run from. Rahal also revisits his $600 million sale of RXBar to Kellogg and what he learned about keeping your edge after a defining win.Visit the Rapid Response website here: https://www.rapidresponseshow.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Marjorie Taylor Greene (former U.S. Representative for Georgia's 14th Congressional District) joins Chris Cuomo for one of her most candid conversations yet, explaining why she believes Donald Trump has broken key promises to the MAGA movement, why she refuses to give unconditional loyalty to any politician, and why she says Trump—not her—is the one who changed. Greene discusses her growing disagreements with Trump, the future of MAGA, government spending, foreign policy, immigration, and the Jeffrey Epstein controversy that continues to divide Trump's supporters. She also shares details of conversations she had with Trump about the Epstein files, explains why she believes many voters feel betrayed by Washington, and argues that political leaders are demanding loyalty instead of delivering results. Cuomo and Greene debate whether MAGA is still the movement it once was, what happens when political identity becomes personal loyalty, and why so many Americans remain frustrated with both parties despite years of promises from Washington. The conversation also explores the midterms, populism, America's political future, and whether either party is addressing the issues that matter most to voters. Join The Chris Cuomo Project on YouTube for ad-free episodes, early releases, exclusive access to Chris, and more: https://www.youtube.com/@chriscuomo/join Follow and subscribe to The Chris Cuomo Project on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes every Tuesday and Thursday: https://linktr.ee/cuomoproject Try QUO for free and get 20% off your first 6 months at https://www.quo.com/CUOMO Get 30% off your entire order of Soul Mood Gummies at https://GetSoul.com with promo code CUOMO Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Walter Sterling dives into everything from the miracle of cheap TikTok drain cleaner and the strange reality of NYC subway floods, to the immortal menace of peeing housecats. After debating the merits of Dunkin' Donuts versus Starbucks and declaring that the absolute secret to career success is simply "showing up", things take a mysterious turn. New Mexico broadcaster Eddy Aragon joins the show to discuss Jeffrey Epstein's bizarre Zorro Ranch. It's the perfect late-night mix of everyday musings and deep conspiracy rabbit holes! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Rupert Lowe's inquiry says it received evidence from survivors, relatives, whistleblowers, professionals and political figures about organised child sexual exploitation in communities across the United Kingdom. The report describes a recurring pattern in which vulnerable girls were targeted with attention, gifts, alcohol and drugs before being subjected to sexual violence, intimidation and trafficking between offenders and locations. It states that the victims discussed in the evidence were predominantly white British girls and that many of the alleged perpetrators were men of Pakistani Muslim heritage. The inquiry says the abuse was allowed to continue because police forces, social services, schools, healthcare providers, licensing authorities and government bodies repeatedly failed to identify victims, share information, investigate allegations properly or intervene when clear warning signs appeared.The report calls for mandatory reporting of suspected child sexual exploitation, improved collection of demographic information about victims and offenders, specialist police units and a consistent national system for sharing safeguarding intelligence. It also recommends regular training for police officers, teachers, medical staff and social workers; automatic referrals when children present with injuries, pregnancies, sexually transmitted infections, self-harm or other indicators of exploitation; and long-term medical, psychological, housing and legal support for survivors. Additional recommendations include reviewing convictions imposed on children who committed offences while being exploited, stronger sentencing, deportation proceedings against convicted foreign nationals where legally applicable, and legal action against perpetrators or officials believed to have escaped accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Rape Gang Inquiry Report.docx

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

In September 2025, Peter Mandelson — then the United Kingdom's Ambassador to the United States — was dismissed (effectively recalled and fired) by Prime Minister Keir Starmer after revelations about his longstanding social relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein surfaced. Emails published earlier that year showed Mandelson had maintained contact with Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction and had expressed supportive sentiments toward him, which diplomats said was far deeper than what had been known at the time of his appointment. Those communications raised questions about his judgment and suitability for the high-profile diplomatic post, prompting Starmer to remove him from the position immediately.In February 2026, the scandal escalated when authorities arrested Mandelson on 23 February on suspicion of misconduct in public office. This followed the release of internal documents and emails from the U.S. Department of Justice's Epstein files suggesting he may have shared sensitive government information with Epstein during his time in government in 2009–10. As part of the fallout, Mandelson resigned from the House of Lords and the Labour Party, and British police executed search warrants at his residences as part of a criminal investigation. His arrest reflects widening legal and political consequences from the Epstein file revelations that have also embroiled other high-profile figures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Recent disclosures from congressional investigations and documents tied to the Epstein estate have exposed a far deeper and more personal relationship between Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein than previously acknowledged, raising serious questions about her judgment and fitness to serve as general counsel of Goldman Sachs. Emails and schedules show she met with Epstein dozens of times between 2014 and 2019 — long after his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor — and that their communication ranged from career advice and personal travel planning to repeated informal exchanges, which some insiders view as far beyond the scope of mere professional interaction. She was even named as a backup executor in an early version of Epstein's will, a detail that triggered internal alarm at Goldman once it became public, and suggests a level of trust and intimacy that many observers find profoundly inappropriate given Epstein's crimes. The revelations directly undermine her role on Goldman's Reputational Risk Committee, where she helps decide which clients and relationships could endanger the firm's ethical standing.Even after Goldman's leadership publicly defended Ruemmler and denied any formal plans to replace her, the controversy has not dissipated; critics argue that the firm's insistence on keeping her in a top legal and governance role reflects a troubling tolerance for ethical ambiguity when it benefits powerful insiders. Some executives reportedly view Ruemmler as a potential liability whose past associations were not fully disclosed or understood at the time of her hiring, and whose continued presence on ethics-related committees sends a poor message about the bank's commitment to accountability and moral judgment. The fact that these revelations emerged only through released documents and not proactive disclosure further fuels skepticism about transparency at the highest levels of Goldman Sachs, intensifying scrutiny from investors, lawmakers, and corporate governance watchdogs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:New court doc asserts former Obama WH counsel advised Jeffrey Epstein during critical reputational and legal battles | CNN Politics

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

Virginia Roberts Giuffre's lawsuit against Prince Andrew was filed in federal court in New York in August 2021, accusing him of sexually abusing her when she was 17 after she had allegedly been trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The case alleged that Andrew assaulted her in multiple locations, including London, New York, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and it was brought under New York's Child Victims Act, which temporarily allowed older abuse claims to be filed despite expired statutes of limitation. Andrew denied the allegations and tried to get the case dismissed, but Judge Lewis Kaplan rejected that effort in January 2022, allowing the lawsuit to move forward while making clear that the ruling was not a finding that the accusations were trueThe lawsuit was explosive because it threatened to drag Andrew into discovery, depositions, and possibly a public civil trial over his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell. Instead, in February 2022, Andrew and Giuffre reached an out-of-court settlement for an undisclosed amount, with Andrew agreeing to make a substantial donation to Giuffre's victims' rights charity while making no admission of liability. The settlement ended the civil case, but it did not erase the damage: Andrew had already lost royal duties, military affiliations, and much of his public standing, and the case cemented him as one of the most disgraced figures in the modern royal family.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Andrew Windsor is facing another wave of damaging allegations, this time tied to claims from royal biographer Andrew Lownie's updated book about the House of York. One of the central accusations involves an airline stewardess who allegedly said Andrew behaved inappropriately during a flight, grabbing or spinning her around before grinding against her. The accusation adds to the larger image of Andrew as someone who moved through elite spaces with entitlement, arrogance, and a sense that normal boundaries did not apply to him.Another alleged airplane incident involves Andrew on a British Airways flight to New York in 2010, where a flight attendant claimed he complained that his bottled water was too cold before putting it inside his trousers and joking that it would warm up there. The broader point is that these stories are being folded into the already ugly public narrative surrounding Andrew: his Epstein ties, his fall from royal duties, his repeated denials, and the long-running accusations that he treated people around him with contempt while protected by status, money, and the institution around him.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

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

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

In his interview with the DOJ Office of the Inspector General, Alex Acosta repeatedly framed the 2007–2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a constrained, pragmatic decision made under pressure rather than a deliberate act of favoritism. He told inspectors that Epstein's defense team, stacked with politically connected and aggressive lawyers, created what he described as a credible threat of a federal indictment collapse if prosecutors pushed too hard. Acosta emphasized that his office believed securing some conviction at the state level was better than risking none at all, and he claimed he was focused on avoiding a scenario where Epstein walked entirely. Throughout the interview, Acosta leaned heavily on the idea that the deal was the product of risk assessment, limited evidence, and internal prosecutorial judgment rather than corruption or improper influence, repeatedly asserting that he acted in good faith.At the same time, the OIG interview exposed glaring gaps and evasions in Acosta's account, particularly regarding victims' rights and transparency. He acknowledged that victims were not informed about the existence or finalization of the NPA, but attempted to downplay this as a procedural failure rather than a substantive violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Acosta also distanced himself from the unusual secrecy of the agreement, suggesting that others in his office handled victim communications and specific drafting decisions. Most damaging, however, was his inability to offer a coherent justification for why Epstein received terms so extraordinary that they effectively shut down federal accountability altogether. The interview left the unmistakable impression of a former U.S. Attorney attempting to launder an indefensible outcome through bureaucratic language, while avoiding responsibility for a deal that insulated Epstein and his network from meaningful scrutiny for more than a decade.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EFTA00009229.pdf

"Zorro Ranch was probably the most eerie place, just giant and quiet and literally in the middle of nowhere. Miles and miles of just mountains and dirt."On the morning of 8 March 2026, a group of people gathered at a gate on a dirt road in the New Mexico desert, about 30 miles south of Santa Fe, in a place called Stanley. The gate leads to an extravagant property that sits on roughly 7600 acres of high desert scrubland. The nearest town is twenty miles away. If you screamed out here, no one would hear it.The property used to be called Zorro Ranch. It belongs to a Texas family now, who bought it in 2023 and renamed it San Rafael Ranch. Before that family attempted to rehabilitate the ranch into a Christian retreat, however, it belonged to Jeffrey Epstein...This is a continuation of a series we started last year. Before listening to this episode, please go back and listen to our original 8-part series on the Epstein Scandal.Learn more about this podcast at http://unresolved.meCheck out the podcast store at unresolved.dashery.comIf you would like to support this podcast, consider heading to https://www.patreon.com/unresolvedpod to become a Patron or ProducerBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/unresolved-a-true-crime-mystery-podcast--3266604/support.

This week on the Mark Levin Show, we're still waiting for the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran to be released. Iran has a copy. So does Qatar, Pakistan and Turkey. But we don't. And neither does Israel. But even if the deal was made public, no deal will change the behavior of this enemy. The Iranian regime has never and will never change its ideology. To them, we are the enemy and we must be destroyed. Those who insist a deal can be made and that it is preferable, then they have to prove it. Later, motivated by hatred of Trump, billionaires, Israel, and Jeffrey Epstein-related conspiracies, plotted a multi-phase attack on the UFC Freedom 250 White House event using explosive drones on the South Lawn followed by sniper teams to massacre fleeing attendees. The FBI foiled the plot by infiltrating the chats after a suspect's mother alerted police over his firearm purchases and radicalization. These Woke Reich conspiracy promoters are fueling such violence, as the Woke Reich overlaps significantly with Marxist-Islamist left ideologies. When Mark Levin was working in the Reagan administration he argued strenuously against a deal with the congressional Democrats where the administration would agree to grant citizenship to 2.3 million illegal aliens in exchange for promised funds to better secure the border. President Reagan did as promised, but the Democrats reneged. Mark has his disagreements with the Iran MOU, and does not believe the Iranian regime will ever honor any agreement, but Mark adores President Trump, just like Reagan. If President Trump wants the MOU to become a final deal, it will proceed regardless of opposition. Later, there are ongoing Hezbollah attacks—firing missiles and drones daily into Israel under a supposed ceasefire, directed by Iran, forcing depopulation of northern Israel. Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy never truly part of Lebanon that has murdered hundreds of Americans, assassinated Lebanon's president, and weakened the country, remains its most powerful force. The proposed MOU demanding Israel cease military operations permanently, including in Lebanon, before a final agreement risk enabling continued Iranian aggression while setting Israel up for blame if it defends itself. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jeff Peeples, founder of Sentinel Safety and The Philomena Initiative—a nonprofit dedicated to locating and rescuing trafficked youth and reuniting them with their families—joins the show alongside Claire Brown, host of The PowerWomen Podcast, to raise awareness about the ongoing fight against human trafficking. Jeff is committed to protecting blue-collar workers through Sentinel Safety, while Claire has helped shine a light on the stories of victims connected to Jeffrey Epstein through her advocacy and media work. Follow Jeff at @Jeff_Peeples and @sentinel_safety, visit SentinelSafety.com, and follow Claire at @powerw.o.m.e.n. Be sure to check out The PowerWomen Podcast and learn more at ThePowerWomen.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Warning: This episode discusses suicide. Hours after Jeffrey Epstein arrived at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, an employee expressed concern over his distraught state, saying in an email to the jail staff, “just to be on the safe side and prevent any suicidal thoughts can someone from Psychology come and talk with him.” The reporter Charles Homans details The New York Times's major new investigation, which tries to answer the question: Did the world's most powerful and well-connected sex offender die by his own hand or by somebody else's? If you are having thoughts of suicide, call or text 988 to reach the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, or go to SpeakingOfSuicide.com/resources for a list of additional resources. Guest: Charles Homans, a reporter covering national politics for The New York Times and The Times Magazine. Background reading: Congressional action made possible the fullest examination of Epstein's death, and The New York Times set out to do it. Photo: The New York Times For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also subscribe via your favorite podcast app here https://www.nytimes.com/activate-access/audio?source=podcatcher. For more podcasts and narrated articles, download The New York Times app at nytimes.com/app. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.