Podcasts about Jeffrey Epstein

After Jeffrey Epstein's death, Ghislaine Maxwell moved quickly to secure financial support from his estate, filing claims that she was owed money for years of work and personal protection supposedly carried out on his behalf. She framed herself as someone who had provided valuable services to Epstein—both professionally and personally—and argued that she had been left vulnerable and financially exposed because of her association with him. Her legal team pushed the narrative that Epstein had long promised to take care of her financially, and that his estate was obligated to honor those commitments even after his death.The Epstein estate rejected these claims outright, treating them as an attempt by Maxwell to insulate herself at a moment of extraordinary legal pressure. The effort to obtain funds was widely seen as a strategic move ahead of her criminal charges, intended to bolster her resources for a high-stakes defense. In the end, Maxwell's bid for financial support failed, further isolating her as scrutiny intensified. Her attempt to tap into Epstein's fortune after his death became yet another chapter in the unraveling partnership that had once shielded them both.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The ongoing fight over the Epstein files has exposed a widening fracture inside the MAGA movement, turning what was once a unifying rallying cry about corruption and elite criminality into a loyalty test with shifting rules. Demands for full transparency have collided with political self-preservation, particularly as questions arise that intersect uncomfortably with Donald Trump and his allies. As a result, figures who press too hard for disclosure are increasingly treated as liabilities rather than truth-seekers, revealing how conditional MAGA's commitment to “exposing elites” becomes once it threatens the movement's own power structure.Marjorie Taylor Greene's support for Epstein transparency has highlighted this contradiction. Despite years of near-unquestioned loyalty and ideological signaling, her willingness to break ranks on this issue has been enough to push her outside the movement's evolving “purity” boundary for some supporters. That reaction underscores a broader reality: within today's MAGA ecosystem, ideological conformity and protection of Trump now outweigh previous principles. The Epstein controversy has become a stress test that many in the movement failed, revealing a base more interested in enforcement of loyalty than consistency or accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew's handling of the now-infamous £750,000 payment came under renewed scrutiny when reports revealed he instructed bankers with questions about the transfer to “call Buckingham Palace.” According to coverage of the incident, when compliance officers at the bank sought clarification about the large sum—sent by Andrew's associate to Sarah Ferguson, and widely viewed as suspicious—Andrew chose not to provide details himself. Instead, he deflected inquiries to the palace, implying that the matter was official or sanctioned at an institutional level. This response immediately raised internal red flags, as banks rely on clear justification for high-value transfers, not royal name-dropping.The request to route all concerns to Buckingham Palace was seen by investigators as an attempt to use royal authority to sidestep standard financial scrutiny. Rather than easing the bank's concerns, Andrew's instruction heightened them, triggering further internal reviews and outside attention. The incident became one more example of how Andrew relied on the aura of royal privilege to manage controversies—an approach that ultimately collapsed once the Epstein scandal and subsequent civil case forced transparency. The £750,000 episode now stands as a pivotal moment showing how Andrew tried, unsuccessfully, to shield questionable financial dealings behind the palace gates.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Reports and lawsuits over the years have alleged that the FBI had detailed knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's activities long before his 2008 conviction and still failed to intervene in any meaningful way. According to these accounts, multiple victims and witnesses claimed they provided information to federal authorities about Epstein's recruitment methods, trafficking network, and the involvement of high-profile associates. Despite this, investigators are accused of slow-walking inquiries, minimizing leads, and ultimately allowing Epstein to operate with impunity for years. The allegations suggest that the bureau possessed far more insight into the scope of his crimes than was ever acted upon, raising serious questions about institutional failures—or worse, deliberate inaction.Critics argue that the FBI's handling of the case reflects a broader pattern in which powerful offenders receive deferential treatment, shielding them from consequences that would be unavoidable for ordinary citizens. The controversial 2008 non-prosecution agreement, which shut down a sprawling federal investigation in exchange for a lenient state plea deal, has become central to these allegations, with claims that the bureau either cooperated with or failed to challenge a deal that protected Epstein and his unnamed co-conspirators. The result, according to victims' attorneys and watchdog groups, is a portrait of an agency that had the information, had the authority, and still allowed a predator to continue harming minors for years after it should have stopped him.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's life makes little sense when viewed through the lens of a rogue financier or even a Mossad agent, but it becomes coherent when understood as the creation of the CIA. From his early placement at the Dalton School by Donald Barr, to his sudden leap into finance at Bear Stearns, to his inexplicable relationship with Leslie Wexner, Epstein's career looks less like chance and more like cultivation. His fortune was smoke and mirrors, likely bolstered by covert funding, and his so-called philanthropy in genetics and AI neatly overlapped with U.S. intelligence interests. His homes wired with cameras, his blackmail operations ensnaring politicians, scientists, and billionaires, and his sweetheart deal in Florida that shielded not just him but his co-conspirators—all of it suggests he was protected because he was too valuable to the intelligence state to lose.While Mossad connections through Ghislaine Maxwell cannot be denied, foreign services couldn't have orchestrated the decades-long media suppression, the unprecedented non-prosecution agreement, or the circumstances of Epstein's death in federal custody. Only U.S. intelligence had the power to build and protect him, then silence him when he became a liability. Epstein was not simply a predator; he was a CIA instrument of blackmail and control, designed to compromise America's own elites and keep them in line. His death was not the end of a scandal—it was the final act of a cleanup operation, ensuring that the files, tapes, and evidence he gathered would never see daylight, and leaving the public with a scapegoat narrative while the machinery of secrecy rolled on.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday book is far more than a grotesque artifact—it's a rare glimpse into how the ruling class truly thinks when they believe no one is watching. The notes and jokes scrawled by high-profile figures weren't cautious or sanitized; they were brazen, mocking, and disturbingly casual about Epstein's depravity. These weren't random signatures but names tied to politics, finance, media, and culture—the very people who shape the systems we live under. In their own handwriting, stripped of handlers and stagecraft, they revealed a mindset of entitlement and impunity, a belief that rules are for the powerless, while the elite exist above morality and consequence.The real lesson isn't about Epstein himself, but about the world that enabled him. The book exposes a class that laughs at the darkest crimes, shields one another from accountability, and thrives while the public tears itself apart over endless distractions. We've been set against each other by design, too busy fighting culture wars to notice the true enemy: the predator class whose names fill those pages. The birthday book pulls the curtain back, showing us that the divide isn't left versus right, but them versus us—and unless we recognize that bigger picture, the joke remains on us.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Jeffrey Epstein scandal stands as one of the most glaring failures of the American justice system, a case where victims were silenced, a secret non-prosecution agreement shielded powerful enablers, and federal custody ended in Epstein's death under suspicious negligence. Despite civil settlements, oversight reports, and the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, the story remains fragmented, unresolved, and tainted by mistrust. The Department of Justice is compromised by its own history in the case, and every unanswered question deepens public suspicion. A federally appointed special counsel is the only mechanism capable of cutting through that distrust—armed with subpoena power, independence from political pressure, and the mandate to follow the evidence wherever it leads.That need is only magnified by the President's shocking dismissal of the scandal as a “hoax.” Such rhetoric retraumatizes survivors, emboldens enablers, and corrodes faith in the rule of law. When the highest office mocks the reality of child exploitation, independence becomes not just preferable but mandatory. A special counsel would separate truth from politics, provide finality where there has only been denial, and ensure that victims receive recognition instead of erasure. Without such independence, every decision will remain suspect, every survivor's voice overshadowed, and the system itself further discredited. The choice is stark: let denial bury justice, or appoint a special counsel to prove that no power, no denial, and no president stands above the truth.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bienvenue dans Les fabuleux destins. Aujourd'hui nous allons vous parler d'un homme d'affaires richissime à l'origine d'un horrible trafic sexuel. Proche de nombreux chefs d'États et célébrités américaines et internationales, on le suspecte d'avoir fourni des filles mineures aux quatre coins du globe. Son nom : Jeffrey Epstein. De son ascension fulgurante à sa mort mystérieuse, découvrez son ignoble destin.  Jeffrey Epstein, le magnat de la finance à l'origine d'un horrible trafic sexuel  Jeffrey Epstein naît à Brooklyn en 1953 dans une famille de classe moyenne. Après quelques années d'études à l'université de New York, il se spécialise en physique et en mathématiques. Dès l'âge de 20 ans, il devient professeur, mais le métier ne lui plaît pas. Les perspectives de carrière sont limitées, les horaires contraignants, et puis surtout… le salaire est ridicule à ses yeux. Car Jeffrey rêve de luxe et d'opulence. Il veut faire fortune, et vite ! En 1982, Jeffrey Epstein fonde sa propre entreprise et se voit confier la gestion financière de plus d'un milliard de dollars d'actifs. En à peine quelques années, il s'enrichit considérablement. Il est le symbole de la réussite, du rêve américain, le génie des finances à la personnalité attachante et au physique avantageux. Mais derrière ce masque, il cache un abominable secret qui va le conduire à sa perte... Un podcast Bababam Originals Voix : Andréa Brusque Ecriture : Elie Olivennes Production : Bababam (montage Matteo Benedetto, Antoine Berry Roger) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit in August 2021 against Prince Andrew in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on multiple occasions when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein's sexual abuse scheme and abused her in three locations: London, Epstein's Manhattan residence, and Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Central to the suit was her claim that she was coerced into sexual acts under threat and manipulation as part of Epstein's operation, and that Prince Andrew was fully aware of her age and the circumstances.Prince Andrew denied all allegations and initially sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing lack of jurisdiction and pointing to a 2009 settlement Giuffre had reached with Epstein, which his legal team claimed shielded him from liability. The court rejected those arguments, allowing the case to proceed toward discovery and depositions. However, in February 2022, before the case reached trial, Prince Andrew agreed to a settlement with Giuffre. While the settlement included no admission of wrongdoing, it effectively ended the case and marked a major collapse of Andrew's public defenses, triggering severe reputational damage, the loss of his military titles and royal patronages, and his permanent removal from public royal duties.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Judge Rodney Smith's ruling granting the Department of Justice access to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury materials marks a significant shift in how long-protected records related to the case may be handled. Smith found that the recently passed congressional Epstein transparency law overrides the federal rules that typically safeguard grand jury secrecy, effectively opening the door for the unsealing and potential public release of the Florida proceedings. The decision undercuts the DOJ's apparent effort to delay disclosure and signals that courts are willing to recognize congressional intent to prioritize transparency in a case defined by decades of institutional failure.While expectations for major new revelations remain tempered, the release of these records could prove damaging for federal law enforcement by highlighting missed opportunities, prosecutorial caution, and systemic inaction rather than exposing dramatic new evidence. Legal experts note that grand jury materials often reveal more through omissions and tone than explosive disclosures, potentially showing how Epstein was able to operate for years despite widespread awareness of his conduct. The ruling underscores growing pressure on the DOJ and FBI to account not just for Epstein's crimes, but for their own handling of the case, reinforcing broader concerns about unequal justice and the government's reliance on secrecy to shield itself from scrutiny.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Transcripts from Epstein investigation in Florida ordered released | AP News

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit in August 2021 against Prince Andrew in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on multiple occasions when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein's sexual abuse scheme and abused her in three locations: London, Epstein's Manhattan residence, and Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Central to the suit was her claim that she was coerced into sexual acts under threat and manipulation as part of Epstein's operation, and that Prince Andrew was fully aware of her age and the circumstances.Prince Andrew denied all allegations and initially sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing lack of jurisdiction and pointing to a 2009 settlement Giuffre had reached with Epstein, which his legal team claimed shielded him from liability. The court rejected those arguments, allowing the case to proceed toward discovery and depositions. However, in February 2022, before the case reached trial, Prince Andrew agreed to a settlement with Giuffre. While the settlement included no admission of wrongdoing, it effectively ended the case and marked a major collapse of Andrew's public defenses, triggering severe reputational damage, the loss of his military titles and royal patronages, and his permanent removal from public royal duties.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the aftermath of Prince Andrew's settlement with Virginia Roberts, the Royal Family made a conspicuously cold display of distance when his birthday arrived. There were no public tributes, no coordinated social-media posts, and no ceremonial acknowledgments that normally accompany a senior royal's milestone. Instead, the palace treated the day like any other on the calendar, signaling that Andrew's legal entanglements and the shadow cast by the Epstein scandal had completely severed his standing within the institution. What would once have been an orchestrated celebration was reduced to silence, reflecting the family's desire to avoid further public backlash.Behind palace walls, the message was just as clear. Andrew's siblings were reportedly unwilling to associate themselves with him publicly, and senior courtiers pushed to eliminate any appearances that could be construed as support. His birthday became a symbol of his isolation: a stark contrast to the pomp he once enjoyed. The quiet freeze-out underscored an unspoken reality—Andrew's settlement had not closed the book; it had made him a permanent liability. The Royal Family's deliberate absence of acknowledgment showed how decisively they were moving to protect the institution by sidelining him entirely.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

James Comer, chair of the House Oversight Committee, is facing sharp criticism over his response to the release of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents. Critics argue that Comer has publicly complained about the timing and scope of disclosures rather than welcoming transparency, despite his committee's stated mission. They say his rhetoric and actions suggest an effort to downplay or slow the release of information that could implicate powerful political figures, particularly within his own party, and that this stance undermines public trust in congressional oversight.The broader critique centers on the belief that the Epstein case represents a rare bipartisan demand for full transparency, driven by years of documented failures, sealed records, and alleged institutional protection. Observers contend that attempts by some Republicans to delay, minimize, or control disclosures risk permanently damaging their political legacies, especially if perceived as shielding former President Donald Trump or contributing to a wider cover-up. As additional records emerge and public pressure continues to mount, the argument holds that efforts to manage or contain the scandal are likely to fail, leaving lasting reputational consequences for those seen as obstructing accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Even from behind bars, Ghislaine Maxwell has remained a steadfast and vocal defender of Prince Andrew, clinging to a narrative of innocence that defies the mountain of public scrutiny and survivor testimony. In interviews and through intermediaries, Maxwell has repeatedly insisted that the infamous photo of Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre—his arm around her bare waist, Maxwell herself grinning in the background—is either doctored or misrepresented. This denial comes despite the fact that the image has been widely authenticated and corroborated by multiple individuals, including Giuffre. Maxwell's unwavering defense appears less about truth and more about protecting a shared past—one steeped in elite privilege, mutual secrets, and potentially incriminating knowledge. Her loyalty to Andrew reads not as moral conviction, but as a desperate act of preservation for a world that once protected them both.What stands out about Maxwell's continued defense of Prince Andrew is how consistent it has remained, even after her own conviction. Rather than expressing any accountability or reflecting on the damage caused by the trafficking ring she was convicted of helping to run, Maxwell has chosen to double down on denying Andrew's involvement. She's made repeated claims that the photo of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre is fake, despite no credible evidence to support that. Her stance seems rooted less in legal strategy and more in loyalty to past allies. It suggests that, even in prison, Maxwell is still protecting the network of high-profile individuals connected to Epstein, perhaps in the hope that continued silence or allegiance might one day benefit her.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell offers no apology to Epstein victims | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's death inside a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 ignited a chain of suspicion that has never faded, morphing into a narrative where suicide is never just suicide. From Epstein himself to Jean-Luc Brunel in Paris, to former White House aide Mark Middleton in Arkansas, to Deutsche Bank executives and even Ghislaine Maxwell's father decades earlier, each sudden death has been folded into a larger pattern. Official rulings of suicide or accident are met with disbelief, because the timing always feels too convenient, the circumstances too strange, and the institutions overseeing these figures too compromised.Together, these deaths form more than a morbid list—they've become symbols of systemic failure. Each one robs survivors of testimony, erases potential evidence, and reinforces the belief that the powerful never face full accountability. Whether by incompetence, coincidence, or conspiracy, the effect is the same: witnesses vanish, truth is buried, and public trust corrodes. In the shadow of Epstein, bizarre suicides are no longer personal tragedies—they are the story itself, a grim reminder that justice often dies before it can be delivered.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's death inside a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 ignited a chain of suspicion that has never faded, morphing into a narrative where suicide is never just suicide. From Epstein himself to Jean-Luc Brunel in Paris, to former White House aide Mark Middleton in Arkansas, to Deutsche Bank executives and even Ghislaine Maxwell's father decades earlier, each sudden death has been folded into a larger pattern. Official rulings of suicide or accident are met with disbelief, because the timing always feels too convenient, the circumstances too strange, and the institutions overseeing these figures too compromised.Together, these deaths form more than a morbid list—they've become symbols of systemic failure. Each one robs survivors of testimony, erases potential evidence, and reinforces the belief that the powerful never face full accountability. Whether by incompetence, coincidence, or conspiracy, the effect is the same: witnesses vanish, truth is buried, and public trust corrodes. In the shadow of Epstein, bizarre suicides are no longer personal tragedies—they are the story itself, a grim reminder that justice often dies before it can be delivered.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive, filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought against him by survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse. However, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff denied this motion, allowing the case to proceed to pre-trial evidence gathering..Staley is accused of protecting Epstein during his tenure at JPMorgan, where he worked from 1979 to 2013. The bank claims that Staley was instrumental in maintaining Epstein's business relationship with JPMorgan despite Epstein's criminal activities. JPMorgan seeks to make Staley financially responsible for any damages the bank might incur from other related lawsuits and to recover compensation paid to him from 2006 to 2013. Staley has denied these allegations, stating that JPMorgan is using him as a scapegoat for its own supervisory failures and claims he was unaware of Epstein's criminal behavior​.(commercial at 8:14)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - MTD Mem. of Law - (11148357.16).docx (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive, filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought against him by survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse. However, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff denied this motion, allowing the case to proceed to pre-trial evidence gathering..Staley is accused of protecting Epstein during his tenure at JPMorgan, where he worked from 1979 to 2013. The bank claims that Staley was instrumental in maintaining Epstein's business relationship with JPMorgan despite Epstein's criminal activities. JPMorgan seeks to make Staley financially responsible for any damages the bank might incur from other related lawsuits and to recover compensation paid to him from 2006 to 2013. Staley has denied these allegations, stating that JPMorgan is using him as a scapegoat for its own supervisory failures and claims he was unaware of Epstein's criminal behavior​.(commercial at 8:14)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - MTD Mem. of Law - (11148357.16).docx (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn were not peripheral figures in Jeffrey Epstein's world but central operators who helped build, maintain, and financially sustain his criminal enterprise. As Epstein's longtime lawyer and accountant, they created and managed the complex web of trusts, shell companies, bank accounts, and legal entities that allowed money to move discreetly while obscuring its purpose. Lawsuits filed by survivors and the U.S. Virgin Islands government describe them as “indispensable captains” of the enterprise, alleging they facilitated payments to victims and recruiters, structured entities to shield assets, and continued working for Epstein even after his 2008 sex-crime conviction. Though they deny any knowledge of abuse, judges have allowed civil claims against them to proceed, ruling that allegations of aiding and abetting trafficking are legally plausible and worthy of full discovery.After Epstein's death in 2019, Indyke and Kahn were named co-executors of his estate, giving them control over key documents, assets, and settlement negotiations, including a $105 million settlement with the U.S. Virgin Islands. Their continued gatekeeping role, combined with their status as beneficiaries of Epstein-linked trusts, has fueled criticism that the system has protected the very professionals accused of enabling his crimes. Despite being repeatedly named in court filings and investigative reports, they have largely avoided public scrutiny and congressional testimony. Critics argue that the failure to subpoena or question them under oath reflects a broader pattern of performative oversight, where political theater replaces substantive investigation into the financial and legal infrastructure that made Epstein's long-running operation possible.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn were not peripheral figures in Jeffrey Epstein's world but central operators who helped build, maintain, and financially sustain his criminal enterprise. As Epstein's longtime lawyer and accountant, they created and managed the complex web of trusts, shell companies, bank accounts, and legal entities that allowed money to move discreetly while obscuring its purpose. Lawsuits filed by survivors and the U.S. Virgin Islands government describe them as “indispensable captains” of the enterprise, alleging they facilitated payments to victims and recruiters, structured entities to shield assets, and continued working for Epstein even after his 2008 sex-crime conviction. Though they deny any knowledge of abuse, judges have allowed civil claims against them to proceed, ruling that allegations of aiding and abetting trafficking are legally plausible and worthy of full discovery.After Epstein's death in 2019, Indyke and Kahn were named co-executors of his estate, giving them control over key documents, assets, and settlement negotiations, including a $105 million settlement with the U.S. Virgin Islands. Their continued gatekeeping role, combined with their status as beneficiaries of Epstein-linked trusts, has fueled criticism that the system has protected the very professionals accused of enabling his crimes. Despite being repeatedly named in court filings and investigative reports, they have largely avoided public scrutiny and congressional testimony. Critics argue that the failure to subpoena or question them under oath reflects a broader pattern of performative oversight, where political theater replaces substantive investigation into the financial and legal infrastructure that made Epstein's long-running operation possible.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lawsuit filings reported by the Toronto Sun allege that Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused and trafficked girls as young as 11 and 13, expanding the known scope of his crimes far beyond previously documented accounts. The complaint describes a pattern in which Epstein and his associates targeted extremely vulnerable children, luring them with promises of help or opportunity before coercing them into sexual acts. According to the suit, the trafficked minors were moved through Epstein's network of homes and transportation assets, including private aircraft, and were subjected to repeated exploitation across multiple jurisdictions.The complaint further asserts that Epstein's wealth and connections allowed this system to operate for years without intervention, even as the alleged abuse spanned state and international borders. The new accusations challenge earlier assumptions about the age range of Epstein's victims and deepen questions about how such a network remained intact despite prior investigations and public scrutiny. If the allegations are validated in court, they would represent some of the most disturbing claims ever tied to Epstein's operation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Epstein maintained a public account on Spotify, and his playlists — created between roughly 2011 and 2015 — show a strikingly broad and eclectic taste in music. His selections ranged from classical (including Ludwig van Beethoven) to jazz (notably Oscar Peterson), Broadway show tunes, gospel, pop, rock, and even contemporary club-style hits. His playlists featured songs by major artists such as Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Doors, Elton John, Céline Dion, Billy Joel, Bob Dylan, The Beach Boys, and Pitbull. Beyond music, the account also contained a comedy-album by Louis C.K. — illustrating that Epstein's public streaming activity extended beyond just songs.However, analysts and reporters have pointed out that some songs on Epstein's playlists carry lyrics or themes that — in the context of what's later known about him — read as disturbing or even alarmingly suggestive. For example, his playlists included tracks like Hot for Teacher by Van Halen (a song that has been criticized for its sexualized and somewhat predatory undertones), and My Heart Belongs to Daddy an older jazz number by Oscar Peterson that many interpret as featuring a troubling adult-child dynamic. Observers contend that while a playlist alone doesn't prove intent or wrongdoing, those particular song choices — when viewed with the rest of the evidence in Epstein's history — add a deeply unsettling and ironic dimension to how he publicly presented himself.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein's operation in the U.S. Virgin Islands has been described by investigators, victims, and court filings as a conveyor belt of exploitation, with some accounts indicating he “entertained” up to seven girls per day. These weren't social visits — they were scheduled, arranged, and controlled encounters designed to keep a steady stream of vulnerable young girls flowing through his secluded compound. The island's isolation made escape nearly impossible, and the environment functioned like a privately run trafficking hub where Epstein dictated every movement. The volume of girls brought in each day underscored the industrial, systematic nature of his abuse network, revealing a pattern far more calculated and relentless than the sanitized narrative his defenders once tried to sell.The more recent revelations about the inside of his U.S. Virgin Islands home only deepen the horror. Among the disturbing details was a full dentist chair installed inside one of the rooms — a bizarre and deeply unsettling piece of equipment that victims say aligns with the coercive, clinical, and dehumanizing environment he created. Along with the chair were eerie masks, strange décor, and a setting that looked less like a private residence and more like a place engineered for control and intimidation. While authorities have never provided an official explanation for the chair, its presence reinforces what survivors have long described: Epstein built spaces designed to dominate, manipulate, and terrify the young girls trapped within his orbit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

An alleged page of Epstein's 50th birthday book is leaked, featuring a drawing of what looks like the outline of a woman's torso. No head, just the curves of a neck, shoulders, no arms and ‘u' shaped drawings for the breasts. Within the outlined silhouette is a badly written poem and it's signed at the very bottom, ‘Donald J. Trump' in thick black ink. His scribbled signature seemingly positioned as the pubic hair of the woman's silhouette.   Trump sues the Wall Street Journal for distributing this alleged letter for $10B and posts on ‘truth social' that it's completely fake. Despite this denial, a clip of Epstein's deposition begins to circulate alongside the poem. Epstein is sitting on a leather armchair, fully leaned to one side, arm propped on the chair, his head resting in his hand. He is asked, “Have you ever had a personal relationship with Donald Trump?” Epstein answers, “What do you mean by personal relationship?” “Have you socialized with him?” “Yes sir.” “Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?” Epstein replies, “Though I'd like to answer that question at least today, I'm going to have to assert my 5th, 6th, and 14th amendment right sir.” The 5th Amendment permits someone to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination. The man's name mentioned in Epstein's deposition? The current president of the United States.   How many of the world's most elite and powerful people are connected to serial sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein??   Full show notes available at RottenMangoPodcast.com  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger Picture Trump is now helping the farmers out in California, he is now opening the waters in the north to help the farmers in the south. China is now purchasing soybeans from the US. The US is going to be a manufacturing powerhouse, the US is now building Tiny Cars. Trump is ready to release the liquid gold under our feet. Elon wants the EU abolished which will lead to the destruction of the ECB. The [DS] is trying to stop Trump from moving forward with his plan to take back the country and allow the people to control it. Trump and team released the NSS letting the old guard know that their days are numbered and put the countries on notice that the US is going down a different path and some of the allies we have now might not be our allies. Everything is about to change WW. Economy (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Trump Administration to Direct More Water to California Farms  The Trump administration is making good on a promise to send more water to California farmers in the state’s crop-rich Central Valley. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on Thursday announced a new plan for operating the Central Valley Project, a vast system of pumps, dams, and canals that direct water southward from the state’s wetter north. It follows an executive order President Donald Trump signed in January calling for more water to flow to farmers, arguing the state was wasting the precious resource in the name of protecting endangered fish species. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said the plan will help the federal government “strengthen California’s water resilience.” It takes effect Friday. But California officials and environmental groups blasted the move, saying sending significantly more water to farmlands could threaten water delivery to the rest of the state and would harm salmon and other fish. Most of the state’s water is in the north, but most of its people are in the south. Source: newsmax.com https://twitter.com/SecRollins/status/1997033961210433741?s=20  Trump Set to Sign Off on New Arctic Drilling Surge  Alaska’s Congressional delegation, along with the support of House and Senate Republicans, has scored a major win on the energy front. Representative Nick Begich (AK-At Large) introduced House Joint Resolution 131, stripping Biden-era restrictions on oil and gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Rep. Begich’s resolution has passed the House of Representatives and the Senate and is headed to President Trump’s desk for signature. Alaska's congressional delegation on Thursday succeeded in stripping Biden-era protections from the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, moving to expand opportunities for drilling there. The U.S. Senate voted to eliminate the 2024 leasing program for the refuge that put much of the refuge's 1.6-million-acre coastal plain off-limits to potential drilling.  The vote does a lot more than just open the door for potential oil and gas activity.  This is another step in unlocking America’s treasure chest. The areas in question in ANWR are estimated to hold 7.7 billion barrels of oil recoverable with current technology, and the U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that there may be hundreds of millions of barrels in other areas to the west of the ANWR sites. Source: redstate.com https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1997327003062538459?s=20 Political/Rights https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1997007545097961499?s=20 JUST IN: Trump-Appointed Judge Unseals Epstein Grand Jury Records in South Florida  US District Judge Rodney Smith, a Trump appointee, said the law passed by Congress and signed by President Trump overrides grand jury secrecy. The Act applies to unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials that relate to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Consequently, the later-enacted and specific language of the Act trumps Rule 6's prohibition on disclosure. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that United States' Expedited Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Transcripts and Modify Protective Order [DE 6] is GRANTED,” the judge wrote. Last month President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency act into law to release all files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Source: thegatewaypundit.com DOGE https://twitter.com/Patri0tContr0l/status/1997015233399795932?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1996997974455357552?s=20 European Union Fines X (Twitter) $140 Million for Violations of Europe's Digital Services Act  The European DSA is ultimately designed to control information, that reality should not be debated. All efforts to control traditional and social media are efforts to control information. The specifics of the reasoning for the fine are typically European.  (1) Twitter allows ordinary people to deliver information at the same level as people who should be defined as more important.  (2)  Advertisers of those who pay for promotion of information on X are not easily identifiable – people need to figure it out on their own.  (3)  It is too difficult to figure out who is providing the information. Basically, all of the EU concerns center around information control.  It's really an ideology issue.  In the outlook of the EU, bureaucrats and elites feel they are superior and must rule/protect the people under them.  Ordinary people having access to information that may or may not be approved by the EU is the underlying issue. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com [SOURCE] What Christopher Landau notes as the contrast and conflict in ideological priority from the EU can just as easily be applied to the USA dynamic with Canada.  As noted by Twitter user John Frank, “The same observations can easily apply to the relations with Canada, given the divergence between the US role in the military alliance with Canada, while Canada is involved in activities which work against US interests.” https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1996925010569511321?s=20 https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1996945925822939407?s=20 https://twitter.com/kadmitriev/status/1997233337354895559?s=20 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1997358453698728063?s=20 Geopolitical War/Peace EU making unacceptable demands on Ukraine peace – Kremlin Western European leaders are constantly making proposals that are unacceptable for Russia, presidential aide Yury Ushakov has said EU leaders are complicating Russia-US efforts to reach a settlement on the Ukraine conflict by making unacceptable demands, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov has said. European states, however, have reportedly been urging Kiev to reject any deal with Moscow without receiving security guarantees from the US, according to the Wall Street Journal. The EU and UK have also insisted on playing a larger role in the peace process. Source: rt.com Ukraine State Structure in Crisis: Neo-Nazi Junta Starts Unraveling. Clash within its Military-Intelligence (SBU-GUR) Apparatus   Ukrainian state stopped existing in early 2014 at the latest, when it was replaced by a US/NATO-installed regime composed of Nazis, criminals, murderers and their enforcers (it could easily be argued that these are all synonyms and listing them separately might be redundant). This was unequivocally confirmed by the infamous Victoria Nuland, one of the architects of the NATO-orchestrated    Source: theglobalist.com Trump made it a point to when meeting with Zelensky that they don’t have elections in Ukraine because of the war.  How do you get Ukraine to accept a peace deal while the EU, NATO DS is putting on pressure on Zelensky to start WWIII 1. As more corruption is brought out into the open this will put pressure on Zelensky 2. Zelensky will either going along with Trump peace deal or be exposed 3. If Zelensky does not go along, most likely he will be removed because of the corruption 4. This will pave the way for a new candidate, someone who is not controlled by the EU,NATO DS.    NATO EU DS might push a false flag to push the war 5. Trump will be able to work with the president of Ukraine because Putin is ready to go Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1997083856315224405?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1997073307397423152?s=20   efficacy of this “schedule,” as have I! That is why I have just signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the Department of Health and Human Services to “FAST TRACK” a comprehensive evaluation of Vaccine Schedules from other Countries around the World, and better align the U.S. Vaccine Schedule, so it is finally rooted in the Gold Standard of Science and COMMON SENSE! I am fully confident Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and the CDC, will get this done, quickly and correctly, for our Nation's Children. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAHA! https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/1996994177175855445?s=20 [DS] Agenda Grand Jury Says It Won't Indict Letitia James A federal grand jury refused Thursday to reindict New York Attorney General Letitia James. The grand jury rejected Department of Justice's (DOJ) second attempt to bring mortgage-fraud charges just 10 days after a federal judge tossed the original case, according to CNN. Another source told CNN that the decision should not be interpreted as a clean win for James, saying the department could ask a third grand jury to consider the allegations. Source: thegatewaypundit.com FBI Raids Home of High-Ranking DEA Official Under Obama, Charges Him For Conspiring to Launder Millions of Dollars For Mexican Drug Cartel  The FBI on Friday morning raided the home of a high-ranking DEA official under Barack Obama and charged him for conspiring to launder millions of dollars for a Mexican drug cartel. The Feds charged former DEA Deputy Chief of the Office of Financial Operations Paul Campo and friend Robert Sensi for conspiring to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization. Paul Campo and Robert Sensi were charged with narcoterrorism, terrorism, narcotics distribution, and money laundering charges. Campo and Sensi were arrested on Thursday afternoon in New York, according to the DOJ. Campo and Sensi agreed to launder $12 million and participate in narcotics trafficking for the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, a/k/a Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion or CJNG. Per the Department of Justice: As part of the scheme, CAMPO and SENSI agreed to launder approximately $12,000,000 of CJNG narcotics proceeds; laundered approximately $750,000 by converting cash into cryptocurrency; and provided a payment for approximately 220 kilograms of cocaine on the understanding that the payment would trigger the distribution and sale of the narcotics worth approximately $5,000,000, for which CAMPO and SENSI would (i) receive directly a portion of the narcotics proceeds as profit; and (ii) receive a further commission upon the laundering of the balance of the narcotics proceeds. Source: thegatewaypundit.com  President Trump's Plan Kash Patel Shuts Down Candace Owens’ Accusations About Charlie Kirk's Murder FBI Director Kash Patel shut down numerous accusations that have been made by podcast host Candace Owens involving the murder of the late co-founder of Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk. During his appearance on Friday on the Sirius XM The Megyn Kelly Show podcast, Kelly started out by asking Patel if they believe they have the “proper suspect in custody” — if Tyler Robinson is “in fact, the man who killed Kirk.” Patel didn’t hesitate in the slightest and answered, “Yes.” The host then brought up one of the wild accusations that have been made by Owens, which includes claiming that Kirk’s own friends and his organization allegedly knew and approved of his murder. Insane. “Do you have any credible reason to believe that anyone connected with the Turning Point organization had anything to do with Charlie’s death?” Kelly asked. Patel’s response: “Zero.” He was then pressed about other claims that Owens has made about the alleged involvement of foreign governments in Kirk’s assassination, like French paratroopers, Egyptian Air Force planes flying out of Provo, Utah, and “potential underground assassins traveling through unseen tunnels,” as the producer of The Charlie Kirk Show, Blake Neff, previously explained. “At this time, the FBI doesn’t have credible information to connect any foreign governments to it,” Patel said. The FBI director made it clear that the investigation is continuing and they are looking into everything, no matter how small. “We are not done just because we arrest someone, just like in the pipe bomber case,” Patel said. “We don’t just say, Okay, we’re done, on to the next. The investigative team continues to work with the Utah authorities, and they’re deriving their own leads and coming back to us saying, ‘Hey, can you look at this piece of information? Can we get a search warrant on this account? What about this individual who is located in X, Y, or Z?'” Source: redstate.com https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1996873942406164855?s=20 https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1997120806212546797?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1997120806212546797%7Ctwgr%5Ed963eef05511b000b3f2631742a9c8e0f0d3c2a2%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fbobhoge%2F2025%2F12%2F05%2Fdc-pipe-bomb-suspect-i-did-it-n2196869  AUTISTIC-LIKE”   SO Why didn't BIDEN'S FBI REALLY catch THIS GUY MS NOW reported that Brian Cole is a Trump supporter. https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1996990984584933729?s=20 January 6 Pipe Bomb Suspect Brian Cole is NOT a Trump Supporter – Family Says He is an “Autistic Recluse” Who Lived in a Basement  January 6 pipe bomb suspect Brian Cole is not a Trump supporter like the legacy media has claimed. Brian Cole's grandmother told The Daily Mail that her grandson has no party affiliation and that he is not a Trump supporter. Cole's family said he is an “autistic recluse” and “computer nerd” who lived in the basement of his parents' Woodbridge, Virginia, home. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/talk2trav/status/1996716378066505847?s=20   until proven guilt in a court of law THREAD https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1996984026129732020?s=20  written to pardon “all targeted” and “everyone involved in the events surrounding that day”, functions as a class based pardon broad enough to include DOJ linked pre riot conduct like the pipe bomb incident. Because federal authorities folded that episode into the J6 security narrative, the defense says it sits squarely within the pardon's scope. https://twitter.com/Patri0tContr0l/status/1996975974106144923?s=20 is made up. So Kash gets a big win and the NEXT DAY the Fake News comes out with a hit piece based on anonymous sources. I can't believe there are still people out there who can't see through this bullshit. https://twitter.com/TheStormRedux/status/1996722966806028760?s=20   about this FBI is that we are running investigations while providing what we can… This pipe bomb investigation should show the American public that we, while providing information on the pipe bomb over the last 8 months and protecting the integrity of our investigation, gets us to the end point we want. Accountability & transparency… This investigation should show the world how we are going to operate in every single investigation. Arctic Frost specifically, we have HUGE investigation going… and it's gonna take a little more time to peel it back. But no, I'm not gonna let people get off the hook or get a hall pass. I don't care what position you held in the FBI, you're gonna be held accountable. And this DOJ is assuredly backing us.” Love it. We keep getting bits & pieces of the grand conspiracy investigation before ultimately the hammer drops. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand for some… Pam Bondi Gives FBI Marching Orders For Tackling Antifa Terrorists Attorney General Pam Bondi instructed federal law enforcement agents on Thursday to form a list of Antifa groups for potential prosecution, according to multiple reports. Bondi's order is part of a broader counterterrorism plan after President Donald Trump's directives targeting the Antifa movement and organized political violence, Reuters and Bloomberg Law reported, citing a Thursday memo from Bondi. The FBI must provide within 30 days a list of groups “engaged in acts that may constitute domestic terrorism” along with strategies to disrupt them, with an emphasis on left-wing extremists, the memo reportedly says.  Bondi's memo directs law enforcement agencies to unearth whatever intelligence files they have on Antifa groups for investigators and to investigate unsolved domestic terrorism incidents over the past five years, Reuters and Bloomberg Law reported. The incidents may include the “doxxing” of law enforcement officers' personal information and threats against Supreme Court justices. The FBI must also streamline its tip line to allow members of the public to “send media” on suspected domestic terrorism, the memo says, according to Reuters. Source: dailycaller.com  https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/1996984378983915761?s=20 With the New U.S. National Security Strategy, Trump Revives Monroe Doctrine     Trump administration released the 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS). The intent seems to be a return to the Monroe Doctrine by increasing the United States military presence in the Western Hemisphere, taking on the drug cartels, enhancing border security, making trade deals that are better for the United States, and enhancing American energy production. That’s not the worst high-level take on the NSS, but a look at the actual document is illustrative. The NSS states as its purpose: To ensure that America remains the world's strongest, richest, most powerful, and most successful country for decades to come, our country needs a coherent, focused strategy for how we interact with the world. And to get that right, all Americans need to know what, exactly, it is we are trying to do and why. A “strategy” is a concrete, realistic plan that explains the essential connection between ends and means: it begins from an accurate assessment of what is desired and what tools are available, or can realistically be created, to achieve the desired outcomes. A strategy must evaluate, sort, and prioritize. Not every country, region, issue, or cause—however worthy—can be the focus of American strategy. The purpose of  foreign policy is the protection of core national interests; that is the sole focus of this strategy. One of the more interesting (but not surprising) pieces of this NSS is the overt and robust return to the Monroe Doctrine, an early 19th-century policy intended to restrict further European colonization of the Western Hemisphere and to ensure American dominance in that region. The modern take on this doctrine by the Trump administration uses American power by employing both internal and external security measures. The NSS states: American policy should focus on enlisting regional champions that can help create tolerable stability in the region, even beyond those partners' borders. These nations would help us stop illegal and destabilizing migration, neutralize cartels, nearshore manufacturing, and develop local private economies, among other things. We will reward and encourage the region's governments, political parties, and movements broadly aligned with our principles and strategy. But we must not overlook governments with different outlooks with whom we nonetheless share interests and who want to work with us. Source: redstate.com The Monroe Doctrine is a foundational principle of United States foreign policy, first articulated by President James Monroe in his annual message to Congress on December 2, 1823.   It declared that the Western Hemisphere was no longer open to European colonization or interference, while affirming that the U.S. would not meddle in existing European colonies or internal affairs.   Essentially, it warned European powers—particularly those in the Holy Alliance (Russia, Austria, and Prussia)—against attempting to extend their influence or establish new colonies in the Americas, positioning the U.S. as a protector of independent nations in the region The doctrine emerged amid concerns over European monarchies potentially aiding Spain in reconquering its former Latin American colonies, which had recently gained independence. It was largely drafted by Secretary of State John Quincy Adams and reflected growing American confidence following the War of 1812.  At the time, the U.S. lacked the military power to enforce it fully, so it relied on British naval support, as Britain also opposed European rivals in the Americas for trade reasons.Key excerpts from Monroe’s address include: The American continents “are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.” Any attempt by Europe to extend its political system to the Western Hemisphere would be viewed as “dangerous to our peace and safety.”   Significance and EvolutionInitially more symbolic than enforceable, the Monroe Doctrine evolved into a justification for U.S. intervention in Latin America during the 19th and 20th centuries. For instance: In the mid-1800s, it intertwined with Manifest Destiny to support U.S. territorial expansion, such as during the Mexican-American War.  President Theodore Roosevelt’s 1904 “Corollary” expanded it to allow U.S. intervention in Latin American countries to prevent European involvement, leading to actions like the occupation of Cuba and the Dominican Republic. It influenced Cold War policies, framing U.S. opposition to communism in the hemisphere as a defense against external threats. Critics, especially in Latin America, have viewed it as a tool for U.S. imperialism, enabling dominance over sovereign nations. Though less invoked today, it remains a symbol of U.S. hemispheric influence and anti-colonial rhetoric. facebook.com https://twitter.com/onechancefreedm/status/1996970776373735933?s=20 https://twitter.com/JoeLang51440671/status/1996992569746567173?s=20   other hand, I can see how we help real allies with aid when needed, as long as we get something of economic value in return. Regardless, NGO's are the root of a lot of EVIL and this will DESTROY a lot them. This is a good thing. https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1996951610769961070?s=20 Senate To Confirm 97 More Trump Nominees After Democrat Blockade Fails Republicans will confirm a bloc of eight dozen Trump nominees as soon as next week following an attempted blockade by Senate Democrats. Republican leadership planned Thursday to kick-off the procedural process to confirm 88 of President Donald Trump's nominees in a bloc vote, but were initially thwarted by Democratic Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, who challenged the package for violating Senate rules. When Republicans refiled the package later on Thursday, the conference included an additional nine nominees, bringing the total to nearly 100.  The Senate has confirmed 314 civilian nominees as of Thursday evening, according to a tally by the Senate Republican Communications Center. The 97-member bloc would bring the Senate to more than 410 civilian confirmations in the first year of Trump's second term. “That far outstrips total confirmations by this point in President Biden's term, and in President Trump's first term as well,” Thune said Thursday. Thune also said that Senate Republicans have virtually cleared the nominations backlog. Before Republicans changed Senate precedent to allow for certain nominees to be confirmed in groups, more than 150 of the president's picks were awaiting floor consideration. The Senate approved a 48-member nominations package in September and an additional 108 of the president's picks in a single group vote in October. Source: dailycaller.com  (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

John Fawcett breaks down today's top stories, including a Supreme Court ruling that allows Texas to utilize its newly redrawn congressional maps, the ongoing investigation into welfare fraud in Minnesota, linking high-profile Democrats to a scandal involving the misuse of federal funds intended for children, the unsealing of Jeffrey Epstein grand jury records and the media's portrayal of related events.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Jeff and Phil welcome artist, author and advocate Rina Oh, one of the only Asian American women to publicly share her experience as a victim of sex offender and trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. She shares about her journey as an immigrant and striving artist that eventually led her into the orbit of the disgraced financier -- a relationship marked by manipulation, exploitation, and ultimately, regret.  She talks about the reckoning still yet to come, as details about the web of players from the Epstein investigation continue to come to light. Rina also shares about her journey of healing and renewal as a survivor and artist. Also: The Good, The Bad, and The WTF of the release of the Epstein files. 

December, 6 2025 7AM;The US conducted another strike Thursday, this time in the Eastern Pacific. It came as lawmakers continued to address video they were shown Thursday of the controversial first strike of the campaign in September, which resulted in a so-called "double tap" strike that killed two shipwrecked survivors. Laura Barrón-López and Alexander Ward join The Weekend to discuss the fallout from the recent attacks.For more, follow us on social media:Bluesky: @theweekendmsnow.bsky.socialInstagram: @theweekendmsnowTikTok: @theweekendmsnow 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.

When the government files a brief in response to a defendant's appeal, its function is to present arguments and legal reasoning supporting the lower court's decision and opposing the defendant's arguments for overturning that decision. This brief serves to defend the conviction or ruling made against the defendant in the lower court.Typically, the government's brief will address the legal issues raised by the defendant on appeal, analyze relevant case law, statutes, and constitutional principles, and argue why the lower court's decision should be upheld. It may also address any procedural or evidentiary issues raised by the defendant.In essence, the government's brief is a key component of the appellate process, where both sides present their arguments to the appellate court, which will ultimately decide whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the lower court's decision.In this episode, we begin our look at the United States Governments brief in response to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt at appealing her sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

When the government files a brief in response to a defendant's appeal, its function is to present arguments and legal reasoning supporting the lower court's decision and opposing the defendant's arguments for overturning that decision. This brief serves to defend the conviction or ruling made against the defendant in the lower court.Typically, the government's brief will address the legal issues raised by the defendant on appeal, analyze relevant case law, statutes, and constitutional principles, and argue why the lower court's decision should be upheld. It may also address any procedural or evidentiary issues raised by the defendant.In essence, the government's brief is a key component of the appellate process, where both sides present their arguments to the appellate court, which will ultimately decide whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the lower court's decision.In this episode, we begin our look at the United States Governments brief in response to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt at appealing her sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

When the government files a brief in response to a defendant's appeal, its function is to present arguments and legal reasoning supporting the lower court's decision and opposing the defendant's arguments for overturning that decision. This brief serves to defend the conviction or ruling made against the defendant in the lower court.Typically, the government's brief will address the legal issues raised by the defendant on appeal, analyze relevant case law, statutes, and constitutional principles, and argue why the lower court's decision should be upheld. It may also address any procedural or evidentiary issues raised by the defendant.In essence, the government's brief is a key component of the appellate process, where both sides present their arguments to the appellate court, which will ultimately decide whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the lower court's decision.In this episode, we begin our look at the United States Governments brief in response to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt at appealing her sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

When the government files a brief in response to a defendant's appeal, its function is to present arguments and legal reasoning supporting the lower court's decision and opposing the defendant's arguments for overturning that decision. This brief serves to defend the conviction or ruling made against the defendant in the lower court.Typically, the government's brief will address the legal issues raised by the defendant on appeal, analyze relevant case law, statutes, and constitutional principles, and argue why the lower court's decision should be upheld. It may also address any procedural or evidentiary issues raised by the defendant.In essence, the government's brief is a key component of the appellate process, where both sides present their arguments to the appellate court, which will ultimately decide whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the lower court's decision.In this episode, we begin our look at the United States Governments brief in response to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt at appealing her sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

When the government files a brief in response to a defendant's appeal, its function is to present arguments and legal reasoning supporting the lower court's decision and opposing the defendant's arguments for overturning that decision. This brief serves to defend the conviction or ruling made against the defendant in the lower court.Typically, the government's brief will address the legal issues raised by the defendant on appeal, analyze relevant case law, statutes, and constitutional principles, and argue why the lower court's decision should be upheld. It may also address any procedural or evidentiary issues raised by the defendant.In essence, the government's brief is a key component of the appellate process, where both sides present their arguments to the appellate court, which will ultimately decide whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the lower court's decision.In this episode, we begin our look at the United States Governments brief in response to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt at appealing her sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)

Congress obtaining Jeffrey Epstein's banking records marks one of the most significant breakthroughs in the long-delayed financial side of the investigation. After years of stonewalling, federal agencies and major banks have finally begun turning over detailed transaction histories tied to Epstein's accounts, including those held at JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank. Lawmakers say these records contain years of wire transfers, shell-company activity, large unexplained cash movements, and internal communications about Epstein's status as a client. For the first time, congressional investigators will be able to trace how Epstein moved money, who benefited from those movements, and which institutions looked the other way while red flags piled up.The release of these records also signals a broader shift toward transparency after Congress passed legislation compelling agencies to hand over previously sealed material connected to Epstein and his network. Members of the oversight committees have stated that these financial disclosures could answer long-standing questions about who financially enabled Epstein, who may have participated in or profited from his criminal enterprises, and whether federal regulators failed to act despite knowing the gravity of the allegations. With Congress now in possession of the banking paperwork Epstein fought for decades to keep in the dark, the investigation is expected to accelerate — and the list of individuals and institutions with potential exposure is likely to grow, not shrink.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Lawmakers obtain Epstein banking records, release photos of his private island compound - CBS News

In the clearest possible terms, the financial network surrounding Jeffrey Epstein was not an accident, an anomaly, or the work of a lone predator—it was a deliberately constructed ecosystem enabled by billionaires, institutions, and the largest bank in the United States. Figures like Les Wexner and Leon Black didn't just brush up against Epstein; they empowered him, legitimized him, and embedded him inside their financial worlds. Wexner gave Epstein unprecedented legal control over his empire through power-of-attorney arrangements and trust structures that effectively turned Epstein into the architect of Wexner's personal and philanthropic machinery. Black, for his part, funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Epstein under the guise of “consulting,” using offshore pathways and fee structures so inexplicable that financial experts still can't reconcile the numbers. These weren't casual business relationships—they were pipelines, mechanisms, and conduits that allowed Epstein to scale his influence far beyond what any conventional résumé could justify.But none of Epstein's financial maneuvering would have been possible without JPMorgan Chase, whose private-banking division knowingly ignored internal warnings, suspicious activity reports, and staff concerns because Epstein delivered access to elite clients and deep-pocketed networks. The bank's compliance failures weren't accidental—they represented a strategic blindness, a willingness to override red flags in pursuit of profit and prestige. Taken together, Wexner's access, Black's money, and JPMorgan's infrastructure formed the backbone of Epstein's financial power. And that is precisely why Congress avoids digging into this side of the scandal: following the money wouldn't just expose Epstein—it would expose the machinery that enabled him, and the institutions that still shape American economic and political life today.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Dan Bongino has built an entire persona on being the tough-talking, truth-sniffing, deep-state-busting warrior who's supposedly unafraid to charge into the darkest corners of American corruption. Yet when the Epstein files finally landed on his desk—after years of him teasing their explosive contents and promising that he, unlike all the cowards in the room, would expose everything—he folded faster than a cheap suit at a clearance sale. Instead of the crusader he advertised, we got a man suddenly terrified of his own shadow, suddenly deferential to “protocol,” suddenly convinced that nothing in Epstein's orbit pointed to trafficking networks, financial malfeasance, or co-conspirators. His audience was expecting the pit bull he portrays on air; what they got was a Shih Tzu hiding behind government talking points. And that's the hypocrisy that burns brightest: the guy who built his brand screaming about elite protection rackets turned into the loudest voice assuring everyone that Epstein was just a “lone pervert,” as if the photos, the lawsuits, the settlements, the flight logs, the financial ties, and the emails simply evaporated.Worse, Bongino's silence isn't the silence of someone who doesn't know—it's the silence of someone who does. A former Secret Service agent and self-styled insider absolutely understands the magnitude of a case involving international trafficking, intelligence links, financial networks, and political entanglements. He knows that the official narrative is a thin, flimsy shield covering a mountain of rot, yet he has chosen to pretend the mountain doesn't exist because acknowledging it would force him to confront the very institutions and figures he's built his career defending. That's the real betrayal here: not just to the public, but to the survivors whose stories he casually sidelines. Dan Bongino didn't just fail to expose the Epstein network—he became part of the insulation around it, an amplifier of the same dismissive messaging the powerful rely on when their secrets get a little too close to daylight.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

For years, Ghislaine Maxwell insisted that she had cut all ties with Jeffrey Epstein after his 2008 arrest and conviction, portraying herself as someone who had distanced from him and played no role in his life afterward. She publicly claimed that their relationship effectively ended and that any suggestion she maintained involvement in his affairs was false. This narrative was central to her defense strategy — an attempt to separate herself from Epstein's criminal identity and rewrite history by presenting herself as a former associate who had left his orbit long before the federal government reopened the case.But that story unraveled when flight records, photographs, emails, and testimony showed that Maxwell continued to have contact with Epstein for years after his first conviction. She was documented traveling on Epstein's private jets, living in properties purchased with his funds, exchanging messages with him, and appearing alongside him socially long after he was publicly exposed as a sex offender. There was also evidence that Epstein remained financially entangled with her, supporting her lifestyle and activities well into the 2010s. The contradiction between her sworn statements and the documented truth underscored a broader pattern: Maxwell was not an abandoned acquaintance but a continuing partner and loyal associate who maintained her position within Epstein's operation — even after the world learned who he really was.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt to secure Rule 37 sanctions against Virginia Roberts and her legal team was a strategic effort to regain control of a defamation case that had already begun to expose damaging details about her role in the Epstein network. Maxwell accused Roberts and her attorneys of allegedly withholding discovery, failing to comply with court-ordered deadlines, and intentionally obstructing the flow of information that Maxwell claimed she needed for her defense. In essence, Maxwell tried to paint herself as the party being unfairly disadvantaged, framing Roberts's team as litigants abusing the discovery process to gain leverage in the public arena. Her motion was not merely a procedural request — it was an attempt to undermine the credibility of Roberts and her counsel, shift the narrative away from the core allegations, and create a legal record suggesting that Maxwell, not Roberts, was the party suffering prejudice.The court, however, saw Maxwell's sanctions request for what it was: an overreaching attempt to weaponize Rule 37 to punish a survivor and her attorneys for routine litigation disputes. Judges are typically cautious about using sanctions in high-stakes civil cases, and Maxwell's claims failed to meet the standard required to impose penalties. The court found no basis for concluding that Roberts or her lawyers had acted in bad faith or deliberately withheld information in a way that warranted sanctions. As a result, Maxwell's effort not only failed but reinforced the perception that she was using aggressive procedural tactics to avoid confronting the substance of the allegations against her. The denial of sanctions further weakened Maxwell's legal posture and underscored the court's unwillingness to entertain attempts to redirect the case away from the central question of her role in Epstein's abuse network.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

According to flight logs and reporting, Clinton took a number of international trips in 2002 and 2003 using Epstein's private jet — often referred to by critics as the “Lolita Express.” On those flights, Epstein's plane reportedly carried Clinton, members of his entourage (staff, supporters, Secret Service), and on several occasions, Ghislaine Maxwell, identified in the logs by her initials. Destinations listed in those logs include not only Africa and Europe, but also Asia and China, among other countries. These trips were described at the time as part of philanthropic or “foundation-related tours,” tied to Clinton's post-presidential work.After Epstein's crimes became more widely known, Maxwell gave a sworn interview to the U.S. Department of Justice in which she denied that Epstein ever introduced Clinton to the private-island properties tied to the sex-trafficking case — insisting that Clinton “absolutely never went” to Epstein's island. She characterized his flights aboard Epstein's jet as humanitarian or foundation-related and denied any knowledge of wrongdoing or illicit activity involving Clinton. Despite the public flight logs and records showing repeated travel with Epstein and Maxwell, the question of what Clinton knew, when he knew it, and whether any misconduct occurred remains publicly unresolved — clouded by conflicting accounts, denials, and sealed records.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

James Staley's reply memorandum in support of his motion for summary judgment argues that he should not be held liable in the case brought by the Government of the United States Virgin Islands and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. He asserts that there is no evidence proving his involvement in or knowledge of any alleged misconduct, specifically emphasizing that the claims lack material facts directly linking him to any fraudulent activities or conspiracies. Staley requests the court to dismiss the claims against him based on the lack of substantive evidence, arguing that the legal standards for summary judgment have been.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.591653.332.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The defamation battle between Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Roberts was one of the most consequential legal clashes in the broader Epstein saga, because it forced Maxwell to confront allegations she had spent years trying to swat away through intimidation, denial, and public relations spin. Virginia Roberts accused Maxwell of knowingly recruiting and grooming her for Jeffrey Epstein, detailing years of exploitation that Maxwell publicly dismissed as lies. Roberts sued for defamation, arguing that Maxwell's denials were not just false but part of a deliberate effort to discredit her and protect the criminal network surrounding Epstein. As evidence accumulated, the case became a referendum on Maxwell's credibility and on the broader culture of silence that had shielded Epstein's circle for decades. Every filing, motion, and deposition chipped away at the carefully curated persona Maxwell tried to maintain, exposing a pattern of evasiveness and self-preservation consistent with Roberts's claims.Sensing that the case was moving toward discovery that could be devastating for her, Maxwell attempted a procedural escape hatch: she pushed for the judge to grant summary judgment in her favor, arguing that the case lacked sufficient evidence to proceed to trial. It was a classic high-power legal maneuver—cut the case off before testimony, documents, and sworn statements could drag more damaging details into the open. But the judge rejected the attempt, ruling that there were clear factual disputes that had to be resolved through a full legal process, not swept aside with a shortcut. The denial of summary judgment ensured that Maxwell would have to face the very evidence she sought to suppress, ultimately contributing to a legal and public unraveling that her attorneys had fought desperately to avoid.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The filing comes from a major civil action in the Southern District of New York brought by six Jane Doe plaintiffs, each suing individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, against a wide array of defendants tied to the U.S. Virgin Islands government. The defendants include the Government of the USVI, former governors, senators, the First Lady, the Attorney General, congressional delegate Stacey Plaskett, and up to 100 unnamed individuals. The lawsuit is part of the broader litigation concerning the role USVI officials allegedly played in enabling, protecting, or benefiting from Jeffrey Epstein's operations in the territory. This particular document is a memorandum of law submitted by the plaintiffs' attorneys at Merson Law, PLLC, and it signals that the plaintiffs are actively expanding and refining their claims as new information continues to surface.Specifically, the plaintiffs are asking the court for permission to amend their complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(3) and to obtain targeted discovery related to jurisdiction and venue. In short, they are arguing that additional facts and defendants need to be formally added to the record and that limited discovery is necessary to establish why the SDNY is the appropriate forum for the case. The motion reflects the plaintiffs' position that the alleged misconduct by USVI officials is broader and more interconnected than originally understood and that formal discovery will reveal further evidence of systemic failures and complicity. By seeking leave to amend and pushing for early jurisdictional discovery, the plaintiffs are attempting to ensure that the case proceeds on its full factual footing rather than being constrained by procedural defenses raised by the USVI and individual defendants.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.610915.94.1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

After the shocking revelations about Epstein's crimes and his death, Senators have repeatedly clashed over who has blocked or delayed release of critical documents. Blackburn has publicly pressed for full disclosure — demanding that unredacted versions of Epstein's private-jet flight logs, his associates' names, and records from his estate be subpoenaed. She argues that the logs, along with what some call Epstein's "little black book" of contacts, are essential to expose the full scope of his network and bring justice to victims.Durbin, who chaired the relevant Senate committee while many of these requests were made, has pushed back — claiming he asked for written requests for the logs and pointing to procedural issues when Republicans tried to force votes. He has denied that the committee “blocked” Blackburn's efforts, stating that no formal subpoena request meeting the committee's rules was submitted. Blackburn has fired back, accusing him of lying and of deliberately stonewalling the release despite repeated written appeals. The tension has turned public, with each side accusing the other of obstructing transparency as Epstein-related revelations continue to surface.to contact me:bobbycapuccI@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Chief Michael Reiter, the former Palm Beach Police Chief, openly condemned the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein as deeply corrupted by influence, wealth, and political pressure. After his department conducted a meticulous, months-long investigation that identified dozens of underage victims and built a compelling case for serious felony charges, Reiter was stunned to find that the State Attorney's Office appeared unwilling to prosecute Epstein accordingly. Instead of pursuing justice, prosecutors seemed to downplay the severity of the crimes. Reiter described how meetings with State Attorney Barry Krischer became tense and evasive, with Epstein's legal team allowed unusual access and influence. The result was a disturbing reluctance by local prosecutors to move forward with charges that fit the evidence—charges that would have led to significant prison time.Reiter was so alarmed by what he saw behind the scenes that he took the extraordinary step of bypassing local prosecutors and turning the case over to the FBI. He then wrote a letter of apology to the victims and their families, expressing regret that the system had failed them. In his words and actions, Reiter made it clear that justice was being obstructed not because the evidence was lacking, but because Epstein had the money and legal firepower to warp the system in his favor. He would later describe the entire handling of the case—particularly the secretive non-prosecution agreement brokered by U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta—as “a complete breakdown of the justice process,” and the most disturbing failure he had witnessed in his entire career.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ex-Florida police chief: Epstein case 'the worst failure of the criminal justice system' in modern timesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Judge Rodney Smith's ruling granting the Department of Justice access to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury materials marks a significant shift in how long-protected records related to the case may be handled. Smith found that the recently passed congressional Epstein transparency law overrides the federal rules that typically safeguard grand jury secrecy, effectively opening the door for the unsealing and potential public release of the Florida proceedings. The decision undercuts the DOJ's apparent effort to delay disclosure and signals that courts are willing to recognize congressional intent to prioritize transparency in a case defined by decades of institutional failure.While expectations for major new revelations remain tempered, the release of these records could prove damaging for federal law enforcement by highlighting missed opportunities, prosecutorial caution, and systemic inaction rather than exposing dramatic new evidence. Legal experts note that grand jury materials often reveal more through omissions and tone than explosive disclosures, potentially showing how Epstein was able to operate for years despite widespread awareness of his conduct. The ruling underscores growing pressure on the DOJ and FBI to account not just for Epstein's crimes, but for their own handling of the case, reinforcing broader concerns about unequal justice and the government's reliance on secrecy to shield itself from scrutiny.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Transcripts from Epstein investigation in Florida ordered released | AP NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit in August 2021 against Prince Andrew in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on multiple occasions when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein's sexual abuse scheme and abused her in three locations: London, Epstein's Manhattan residence, and Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Central to the suit was her claim that she was coerced into sexual acts under threat and manipulation as part of Epstein's operation, and that Prince Andrew was fully aware of her age and the circumstances.Prince Andrew denied all allegations and initially sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing lack of jurisdiction and pointing to a 2009 settlement Giuffre had reached with Epstein, which his legal team claimed shielded him from liability. The court rejected those arguments, allowing the case to proceed toward discovery and depositions. However, in February 2022, before the case reached trial, Prince Andrew agreed to a settlement with Giuffre. While the settlement included no admission of wrongdoing, it effectively ended the case and marked a major collapse of Andrew's public defenses, triggering severe reputational damage, the loss of his military titles and royal patronages, and his permanent removal from public royal duties.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit in August 2021 against Prince Andrew in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on multiple occasions when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein's sexual abuse scheme and abused her in three locations: London, Epstein's Manhattan residence, and Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Central to the suit was her claim that she was coerced into sexual acts under threat and manipulation as part of Epstein's operation, and that Prince Andrew was fully aware of her age and the circumstances.Prince Andrew denied all allegations and initially sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing lack of jurisdiction and pointing to a 2009 settlement Giuffre had reached with Epstein, which his legal team claimed shielded him from liability. The court rejected those arguments, allowing the case to proceed toward discovery and depositions. However, in February 2022, before the case reached trial, Prince Andrew agreed to a settlement with Giuffre. While the settlement included no admission of wrongdoing, it effectively ended the case and marked a major collapse of Andrew's public defenses, triggering severe reputational damage, the loss of his military titles and royal patronages, and his permanent removal from public royal duties.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sky Roberts described how he personally drove his pickup truck to the house of Jeffrey Epstein to meet him and Ghislaine Maxwell after his then-teenage daughter Virginia Giuffre was offered a job as a masseuse. He said Epstein seemed like “a regular guy” and Maxwell appeared friendly — nothing that suggested to him the abuse that would later come to light. Roberts said he believed at the time he was simply doing his parental duty by checking out the job offer his daughter accepted, and insisted he had no clue Epstein was a pedophile or that his daughter would be exploited. According to him, Virginia “never came home from trips and said, ‘I've been sexually abused'” — and because she never described it to him, he remained completely unaware of what was really happening.In later public remarks, Roberts reaffirmed that he believed his daughter's allegations were real. He backed the authenticity of a widely circulated photograph showing Giuffre with Epstein's associates, saying she had shown him the original years before she went public — meaning it wasn't doctored. He called Epstein and Maxwell “despicable,” condemning how they abused wealth and power to prey on vulnerable young women. He also criticized those — including powerful men — whom he feels escaped real accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Visit https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/TYT and use code TYT and get $50 in lineups when you play your first $5 lineup! Benjamin Netanyahu is once again publicly opposing the creation of a Palestinian state. Pete Hegseth reportedly asked a top admiral to resign after months of internal conflict. Trump's renewed focus on the drug war is creating massive new opportunities for defense startups. New documents show Jeffrey Epstein assisted Alan Dershowitz in attacking Mearsheimer and Walt's Israel Lobby. Hosts: Ana Kasparian SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞  https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK  ☞   https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER  ☞       https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM  ☞  https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK  ☞          https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks

Visit https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/TYT and use code TYT and get $50 in lineups when you play your first $5 lineup! Benjamin Netanyahu is once again publicly opposing the creation of a Palestinian state. Pete Hegseth reportedly asked a top admiral to resign after months of internal conflict. Trump's renewed focus on the drug war is creating massive new opportunities for defense startups. New documents show Jeffrey Epstein assisted Alan Dershowitz in attacking Mearsheimer and Walt's Israel Lobby. Hosts: Ana Kasparian SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞  https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK  ☞   https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER  ☞       https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM  ☞  https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK  ☞          https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks