Podcasts about Mega

Mega-bestselling author of The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, Mark Manson joins Kelly to discuss sabotaging happiness, the key to long term relationships and quitting versus letting go. Mark breaks down a good man vs a nice man, when we should give a fuck, and asks what are you willing to be disliked for. A perfect Holiday season listen! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Patrick Bet-David sits down with billionaire DNC mega donor John Morgan from Morgan and Morgan for a raw, no-filters conversation on his legal battles with Disney, Bill Clinton's ties to Jeffrey Epstein, the Biden administration's cover-up accusations, and his feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.------

It's a flawed football team, for sure, but it's still got moxie. Hear award-winning columnist Dejan Kovacevic's Daily Shots of Steelers, Penguins and Pirates -- three separate podcasts -- every weekday morning on the DK Pittsburgh Sports podcasting network, available on all platforms: https://linktr.ee/dkpghsports Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, we break down why recent political signals from Trump could trigger a mega rally, and which altcoins listed or favored by Coinbase might explode next.

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (Case No. 1:24-cr-00542-AS), the defense has filed a memorandum supporting a motion to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants executed at Combs' residences in Los Angeles and Miami. The defense contends that federal authorities included false statements and omitted critical exculpatory information in their affidavits to secure these warrants, particularly regarding the voluntary nature of an alleged victim's participation in events described by the prosecution. Additionally, the defense argues that the warrants were overly broad, leading to the seizure of extensive personal data and records beyond the scope of the investigation. In the alternative, the defense requests a Franks hearing to examine the veracity of the affidavits supporting the search warrants.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.160.0.pdf

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (Case No. 1:24-cr-00542-AS), the defense has filed a memorandum supporting a motion to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants executed at Combs' residences in Los Angeles and Miami. The defense contends that federal authorities included false statements and omitted critical exculpatory information in their affidavits to secure these warrants, particularly regarding the voluntary nature of an alleged victim's participation in events described by the prosecution. Additionally, the defense argues that the warrants were overly broad, leading to the seizure of extensive personal data and records beyond the scope of the investigation. In the alternative, the defense requests a Franks hearing to examine the veracity of the affidavits supporting the search warrants.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.160.0.pdf

After four weeks of trial, Sean "Diddy" Combs's defense team has mounted a vigorous challenge to the federal RICO charges against him, which include allegations of racketeering and sex trafficking. Led by attorney Brian Steel, the defense has sought to dismantle the prosecution's narrative by emphasizing that Combs's relationships and interactions were consensual, albeit complex and sometimes tumultuous. They argue that the prosecution's portrayal of Combs as orchestrating a criminal enterprise is a mischaracterization of his personal and professional life. In cross-examinations, the defense has highlighted inconsistencies in witness testimonies and questioned the credibility of accusers, suggesting that some allegations are financially motivated or stem from personal grievances. For instance, they scrutinized affectionate messages sent by former assistant "Mia" after her employment ended, which she attributed to being "brainwashed"Furthermore, the defense has contested the prosecution's use of a 2016 hotel surveillance video showing Combs assaulting then-girlfriend Cassie Ventura, arguing that while the footage is disturbing, it does not constitute evidence of a broader criminal conspiracy. They maintain that the incident, though regrettable, was an isolated event and not indicative of a pattern of racketeering activity. The defense also challenged the admissibility and interpretation of this video, asserting that its repeated presentation could prejudice the jury . Despite these efforts, the judge has denied motions for mistrial and has admonished Combs for courtroom behavior, including attempting to communicate with jurors, which the defense claims was misinterpreted . As the trial progresses, the defense continues to argue that the government's case lacks the necessary evidence to prove the existence of a coordinated criminal enterprise under RICO statutes.In this episode, I make that argument for them.  to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In light of the recent legal troubles surrounding Sean "Diddy" Combs, a growing number of celebrities are actively distancing themselves from him and his infamous parties. The fallout stems from a series of disturbing allegations, including sex trafficking and violent misconduct at Diddy's so-called "Freak Off" parties, where many high-profile individuals were once regular attendees.Celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio and Megan Fox have been notably swift in creating distance, with DiCaprio's camp emphasizing that he hasn't been involved with Diddy for years, despite old photos resurfacing from parties they both attended. Megan Fox, meanwhile, deleted posts featuring Diddy across her social media platforms. Others, like Kim Kardashian and Justin Bieber, who were previously seen at Diddy's high-profile gatherings, have remained silent but have quietly distanced themselves as well. Some stars, such as Damon Dash, have gone on record to clarify that they only attended one or two events many years ago, often framing their association as minimal.PR experts suggest that this silence is part of a calculated strategy, as discussing Diddy's legal issues publicly could lead to unwanted scrutiny. Celebrities are now avoiding the topic entirely, trying to remove themselves from the narrative to protect their personal and professional reputations as Diddy's legal battles continue to unfold.Meanwhile, the public outcry demanding answers from these people continues to grow.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:TOM LEONARD: Which A-Listers will be dragged into P Diddy's drugs and orgies scandal next? A nervous Hollywood is full of friends who were once so thrilled to be invited to his notorious parties | Daily Mail Online

After four weeks of trial, Sean "Diddy" Combs's defense team has mounted a vigorous challenge to the federal RICO charges against him, which include allegations of racketeering and sex trafficking. Led by attorney Brian Steel, the defense has sought to dismantle the prosecution's narrative by emphasizing that Combs's relationships and interactions were consensual, albeit complex and sometimes tumultuous. They argue that the prosecution's portrayal of Combs as orchestrating a criminal enterprise is a mischaracterization of his personal and professional life. In cross-examinations, the defense has highlighted inconsistencies in witness testimonies and questioned the credibility of accusers, suggesting that some allegations are financially motivated or stem from personal grievances. For instance, they scrutinized affectionate messages sent by former assistant "Mia" after her employment ended, which she attributed to being "brainwashed"Furthermore, the defense has contested the prosecution's use of a 2016 hotel surveillance video showing Combs assaulting then-girlfriend Cassie Ventura, arguing that while the footage is disturbing, it does not constitute evidence of a broader criminal conspiracy. They maintain that the incident, though regrettable, was an isolated event and not indicative of a pattern of racketeering activity. The defense also challenged the admissibility and interpretation of this video, asserting that its repeated presentation could prejudice the jury . Despite these efforts, the judge has denied motions for mistrial and has admonished Combs for courtroom behavior, including attempting to communicate with jurors, which the defense claims was misinterpreted . As the trial progresses, the defense continues to argue that the government's case lacks the necessary evidence to prove the existence of a coordinated criminal enterprise under RICO statutes.In this episode, I make that argument for them.  to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Pokémon announces both Mega Lucario Z and Mega Mewtwo in Pokémon Legends Z-A before the DLC this week. We talk about how Mega's stats work or have worked in the series. Pokémon Friends gets a surprising winter update that adds 10 new puzzles and 50 new plushes. Pokémon TCG Pocket didn't get a monthly set, but one should be around the corner. TIMESTAMPS00:00:00-Introduction00:02:40-Mega Lucario Z00:19:50-Mega Mewtwo Arrives00:29:10-Pokémon Friends Update00:47:40-TCG Pocket News01:07:00-Accended Heroes01:20:30-CreditsLINKS

(2:00) CFP Final Reveal: a tradition disliked more than any other(8:00) FSU passes on bowl?(16:00) Patrick Surtain the first move?!(24:00) The weirdest hires in the cycle(28:00) UF's former coach gets scooped by playoff squad(32:00) Was is the plan, why wasn't it figured out 2 months ago(53:00) How will the QB market be?(1:01:00) Hoops, soccerMusic: Midfield - Southpawvitaminenergy.com | PROMO: warchantbogo | buy one, get one free!In Crawfordville, your Home Convenience Store is ACE Home Center & NAPA Auto Parts located at 2709 Crawfordville Hwy Download the  Underdog app today and sign up with promo code WARCHANT to score A HUNDRED dollars in Bonus Funds when you play your first five dollarsMust be 18+ (19+ in Alabama & Nebraska; 19+ in Colorado for some games; 21+ in Arizona, Massachusetts & Virginia) and present in a state where Underdog Fantasy operates. Terms apply. See assets.underdogfantasy.com/web/PlayandGetTerms_DFS_.html for details. Offer not valid in Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Concerned with your play? Call 1-800-GAMBLER or visit www.ncpgambling.org. In New York, call the 24/7 HOPEline at 1-877-8-HOPENY or Text HOPENY (46736) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This is the big one. Aaron Bruski brings you the deepest Fantasy Basketball breakdown in the industry, covering all 30 NBA teams and analyzing over 100 players with no corners cut. In this massive episode: Must-Add players you can't afford to miss Buy-low players ready to explode Sell-high candidates before they crash Role changes and rotation trends across the league Sustainability checks: what's real and what's fool's gold? Actionable strategies for every fantasy manager Presented by FanDuel! Download the SportsEthos App on the APP Store and Google Play! FantasyPass now includes DAILY PROJECTIONS—perfect for DFS and head-to-head leagues. Join the Discussion on DISCORD for real-time advice and community support. Subscribe, Rate, and Review on Apple and Spotify for expert updates and tips! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Thatch is joined by Lynian and Sharkfinnagan to talk about the revelation of Z Megas and which current pokemon with a Mega need to get a new mega to be better than their original counterparts!Mailbag Question: What pokemon do you hope gets a Z mega? puclpodcast@gmail.comIntro: 0:01:26News: 0:09:56Z Megas Topic: 0:22:10PokeQuiz: 0:57:17Poke Opinion: 1:13:47Mailbag: 1:20:24PUCL Survey Link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdhx-6MT5XBhGASO6bIwg7Ze-QBCwuizZeMpx9f7uVBEJUCFw/viewform?usp=headerUse Code PUCLPOD5 at trollandtoad.com for 5% off and support the show!Check us out on Discord!www.pucldiscord.comTwitter: https://twitter.com/puclpodcastFacebook: https://Facebook.com/puclpodcastBlusky: https://bsky.app/profile/puclpodcast.bsky.socialTwitch: https://twitch.tv/thepuclpodcast Support us at https://Patreon! Patreon.com/puclpodcast#pokemonpodcast #pokecast #pokemontalk #pokemonxy #pokemonza #pokemontcg #pokemongo #pokemontalk #pokemon #nintendo #nintendoswitch #nintendoswitchlite #nintendoswitch2 #pokemonchampions #pokemonlegendsza #pokemonlegendsarceus #pokemonscarletandviolet Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

(2:00) CFP Final Reveal: a tradition disliked more than any other(8:00) FSU passes on bowl?(16:00) Patrick Surtain the first move?!(24:00) The weirdest hires in the cycle(28:00) UF's former coach gets scooped by playoff squad(32:00) Was is the plan, why wasn't it figured out 2 months ago(53:00) How will the QB market be?(1:01:00) Hoops, soccerMusic: Midfield - Southpawvitaminenergy.com | PROMO: warchantbogo | buy one, get one free!In Crawfordville, your Home Convenience Store is ACE Home Center & NAPA Auto Parts located at 2709 Crawfordville Hwy Download the  Underdog app today and sign up with promo code WARCHANT to score A HUNDRED dollars in Bonus Funds when you play your first five dollarsMust be 18+ (19+ in Alabama & Nebraska; 19+ in Colorado for some games; 21+ in Arizona, Massachusetts & Virginia) and present in a state where Underdog Fantasy operates. Terms apply. See assets.underdogfantasy.com/web/PlayandGetTerms_DFS_.html for details. Offer not valid in Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Concerned with your play? Call 1-800-GAMBLER or visit www.ncpgambling.org. In New York, call the 24/7 HOPEline at 1-877-8-HOPENY or Text HOPENY (46736) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In today's explosive episode, Tara breaks down the jaw-dropping allegations of massive welfare, Medicaid, and pandemic-era fraud in Minnesota — a scandal some say could reach $8 BILLION.

In light of the recent legal troubles surrounding Sean "Diddy" Combs, a growing number of celebrities are actively distancing themselves from him and his infamous parties. The fallout stems from a series of disturbing allegations, including sex trafficking and violent misconduct at Diddy's so-called "Freak Off" parties, where many high-profile individuals were once regular attendees.Celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio and Megan Fox have been notably swift in creating distance, with DiCaprio's camp emphasizing that he hasn't been involved with Diddy for years, despite old photos resurfacing from parties they both attended. Megan Fox, meanwhile, deleted posts featuring Diddy across her social media platforms. Others, like Kim Kardashian and Justin Bieber, who were previously seen at Diddy's high-profile gatherings, have remained silent but have quietly distanced themselves as well. Some stars, such as Damon Dash, have gone on record to clarify that they only attended one or two events many years ago, often framing their association as minimal.PR experts suggest that this silence is part of a calculated strategy, as discussing Diddy's legal issues publicly could lead to unwanted scrutiny. Celebrities are now avoiding the topic entirely, trying to remove themselves from the narrative to protect their personal and professional reputations as Diddy's legal battles continue to unfold.Meanwhile, the public outcry demanding answers from these people continues to grow.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:TOM LEONARD: Which A-Listers will be dragged into P Diddy's drugs and orgies scandal next? A nervous Hollywood is full of friends who were once so thrilled to be invited to his notorious parties | Daily Mail Online

In Ada County Case No. CR01-24-31665, Defendant Bryan Kohberger filed motions to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants directed at AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon. The defense argued that these warrants were invalid, alleging they were based on information gathered through unconstitutional methods, including the use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), and that the affidavits supporting the warrants contained intentional or reckless omissions of material facts. They contended that the evidence obtained from these warrants violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights and should therefore be excluded from trial.However, the court denied these suppression motions, ruling that the search warrants were lawfully issued and executed. The judge found that the affidavits provided sufficient probable cause and that the methods employed, including the use of IGG, did not violate constitutional protections. Additionally, the court determined that there was no evidence of intentional or reckless falsehoods or omissions in the affidavits that would warrant a Franks hearing. As a result, the evidence obtained from AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon remains admissible in the proceedings against Kohbergerto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:021925-Order-Defedants-Motions-Suppress-ATT-Google-USB-Apple-Amazon.pdf

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdf

In Ada County Case No. CR01-24-31665, Defendant Bryan Kohberger filed motions to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants directed at AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon. The defense argued that these warrants were invalid, alleging they were based on information gathered through unconstitutional methods, including the use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), and that the affidavits supporting the warrants contained intentional or reckless omissions of material facts. They contended that the evidence obtained from these warrants violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights and should therefore be excluded from trial.However, the court denied these suppression motions, ruling that the search warrants were lawfully issued and executed. The judge found that the affidavits provided sufficient probable cause and that the methods employed, including the use of IGG, did not violate constitutional protections. Additionally, the court determined that there was no evidence of intentional or reckless falsehoods or omissions in the affidavits that would warrant a Franks hearing. As a result, the evidence obtained from AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon remains admissible in the proceedings against Kohbergerto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:021925-Order-Defedants-Motions-Suppress-ATT-Google-USB-Apple-Amazon.pdf

In Ada County Case No. CR01-24-31665, Defendant Bryan Kohberger filed motions to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants directed at AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon. The defense argued that these warrants were invalid, alleging they were based on information gathered through unconstitutional methods, including the use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), and that the affidavits supporting the warrants contained intentional or reckless omissions of material facts. They contended that the evidence obtained from these warrants violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights and should therefore be excluded from trial.However, the court denied these suppression motions, ruling that the search warrants were lawfully issued and executed. The judge found that the affidavits provided sufficient probable cause and that the methods employed, including the use of IGG, did not violate constitutional protections. Additionally, the court determined that there was no evidence of intentional or reckless falsehoods or omissions in the affidavits that would warrant a Franks hearing. As a result, the evidence obtained from AT&T, Google, USB devices, Apple, and Amazon remains admissible in the proceedings against Kohbergerto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:021925-Order-Defedants-Motions-Suppress-ATT-Google-USB-Apple-Amazon.pdf

For years, palace insiders whispered that Prince Andrew harbored ambitions far beyond his station and that he quietly maneuvered to keep Charles from ever reaching the throne. According to these rumors, Andrew believed that Charles was unfit to reign and that the monarchy would be better served—meaning more tightly controlled—if the succession somehow skipped the heir and went directly to Andrew's preferred candidate: Prince William. These accounts painted Andrew as a behind-the-curtain operator, leveraging his mother's affection, exploiting internal rivalries, and feeding narratives that Charles lacked the temperament and stability to lead. None of it was overt, of course. Andrew was said to work in nods, whispers, and subtle pressure campaigns, all designed to chip away at Charles's inevitability.The speculation grew particularly intense during Queen Elizabeth II's later years, when Andrew—despite his spiraling scandals—seemed to position himself as a gatekeeper around his mother. Rumor had it he tried to control access, influence her perception of Charles, and push the idea that the monarchy's public image would recover faster under a younger, fresher sovereign. The irony was brutal: here was a man drowning in the Epstein scandal allegedly trying to steer the future of the Crown as if anyone still saw him as credible. In the end, the whispers amounted to nothing; Charles ascended, Andrew collapsed, and the schemes attributed to him now read like the last gasps of a fading prince who wildly overestimated both his pull and his relevance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

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 Online

Adria Sheri English, a former go-go dancer, has made serious allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs, claiming that she was forced to participate in sexual activities at his infamous "freak-off" parties. English, who has filed a lawsuit against Diddy, also revealed a list of high-profile celebrities she saw at these gatherings. Among the notable figures she claims were present are Donald Trump, Diana Ross (with her underage son Evan), Paris Hilton, Ja Rule, Busta Rhymes, and Reverend Al Sharpton. English expressed surprise at seeing some of these individuals, particularly Reverend Al Sharpton, at such controversial events.English alleges that while these celebrities attended the main parties, the "freak-offs" took place in secluded rooms away from the main events, suggesting that many of the partygoers may not have been aware of the more sinister activities happening behind closed doors. English also claimed that Diddy secretly recorded these encounters for potential blackmail purposes, further complicating the accusations against him.Courtney Burgess, a witness in the federal investigation against Sean "Diddy" Combs, testified before a grand jury that he possesses 11 flash drives containing sex tapes allegedly involving Combs and eight celebrities, including two to three minors. Burgess claimed these tapes were provided to him by Combs' ex-girlfriend, Kim Porter, before her death in 2018. He described the individuals in the tapes as appearing inebriated and suggested they were victims of Combs' actions..Additionally, Burgess stated that he has seen an unedited version of a memoir written by Porter, which contains detailed accounts of Combs' alleged physical and sexual violence. He mentioned that he was contacted by agents from the Department of Homeland Security and later subpoenaed by a federal grand jury to provide all relevant electronic devices. Burgess's testimony adds to the mounting allegations against Combs, who is currently facing charges including sex trafficking and racketeering.Also...During a recent interagency operation at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, authorities seized drugs, homemade weapons, and electronic devices. The operation, involving the Bureau of Prisons, the Justice Department's inspector general, and other law enforcement agencies, aimed to address safety and security concerns within the facility. Officials stated that the sweep was part of a broader initiative and not in response to any specific threat or individual, including current detainee Sean "Diddy" Combs.The raid calls into question the point of the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's death, considering how many of the same issues are still present, even after the BOP was made aware of the issues.  to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Dan is off to Disneyland, so Adam steps into the host chair, breaking down all the weekend action, including Maxime Raynaud, Cam Spencer and Kyle Filipowski, among others. Let's power up on blocks, threes, and well-rounded weekly winners in this 30-team lightning level recap! The Old Man Squad has a PATREON now. It's $1 and doesn't get a single benefit. It is entirely to support the mission here but won't change anything we do. https://www.patreon.com/cw/oldmansquad Follow Dan Besbris on Twitter: https://x.com/danbesbris Find Dan on the brand new BlueSky social network: https://bit.ly/3Vo5M0N Check out Dan's Google Sheet with Ranks, Weekly Streaming Schedule Charts & Injury Replacement Adds FREE! https://bit.ly/3XrAdEW Listen and subscribe on iTunes: https://apple.co/3XiUzQK Listen and subscribe on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3ACCHYe Float on over to the new Old Man Squad Sports Network YouTube page to watch videos from the network's top talent: https://bit.ly/46Z6fvb Join the Old Man Squad Discord to chat with Dan and all the other hosts: https://t.co/aY9cqDrgRY Follow Old Man Squad Fantasy on Instagram for all our short videos: https://bit.ly/3ZQbxrt Podcast logo by https://twitter.com/freekeepoints Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

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.

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.

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.

This month on Boozy Bracketology, we are kicking off our best 90s movie mega-bracket with 1999! In this episode, Brittany hosts an excellent panel of Mike, Arthur, Jeremy, Natalie, and Aaron (stepping in after a brief appearance by Chris) hashing out the Sweet 16. Some of these choices seem obvious to our panel, some less so, and there may be a little contention along the way. So many great films and it's only part 1! And don't forget to check out the play-in games as well on our Patreon! Are you enjoying the show? www.patreon.com/ptebb Connect with us on Discord, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc... at www.ptepodcasts.com/links and tell us everything we got wrong!   Email us at PubTriviaExperience@gmail.com   Don't forget – Leave us a 5 Star Rating and write us a review   Enjoy The Show!

On this MEGAPOD, We give you part one of the best L10 Podcast Episodes about SEO!

Vantara claims to house more than 150,000 animals - that's 15 times the size of London Zoo.Writer: Jonathan LewisProducer: Poppy BullardHost: Casey MagloireEpisode photography: Sofia FentonExecutive Producer: Rebecca Moore Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

Lamba lambda lambda, nerds! Com a Mega da Virada prestes a pagar um prêmio de UM BILHÃO DE REAIS, resolvemos voltar ao NerdCast mais clássico de todos os tempos (segundo vocês), para mais um papo com juros e correção monetária sobre nossas maiores excentricidades da vida de bilionário. Neste programa, Alottoni, Pedro Duarte, Sr. K, Didi Braguinha, Tucano e Azaghal debatem se com R$ 200 mil por mês AINDA dá pra se viver com tranquilidade, se o Concorde é o novo Antonov, e mais delírios extravagantes no sonho do bilhão próprio. Estoure a champanhe e não se arrependa de nada com nossos especialistas da deseducação financeira! Leapmotor Assista à NerdTour de São Lourenço com Leapmotor: https://jovemnerd.short.gy/Leapmotor_NerdTour_NerdCast Ozob: A Cyberpunk Board Game NOVA CHANCE para apoiar a campanha até 09/12! Mais informações em: https://ozob.com.br/ Magalu Cloud Saiba mais sobre a edição 2025 do evento Cloud Futures: https://jovemnerd.short.gy/Maglu_cloud_SPOT_NERDCAST Fanlab Conheça Fanlab, roupas e acessórios de moda geek: https://jovemnerd.short.gy/FanLab_D5_SPOT_ccxp CITADO NO PROGRAMA:Airbnb do Sr. M - Ficou com vontade de conhecer São Lourenço? Hospede-se no apartamento do Sr. M! O mesmo que a Portuguesa morou. Localização privilegiada! Reserve sua estadia: https://airbnb.com/h/jl408Como Vovó Fazia - Financiamento coletivo do Pedro Duarte: https://www.catarse.me/comovovofaziaCONFIRA OS OUTROS CANAIS DO JOVEM NERD E-MAILS Mande suas críticas, elogios, sugestões e caneladas para nerdcast@jovemnerd.com.br APP JOVEM NERD: Google Play Store | Apple App Store ARTE DA VITRINE: Randall Random Baixe a versão Wallpaper da vitrine EDIÇÃO COMPLETA POR RADIOFOBIA PODCAST E MULTIMÍDIA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices