Podcast appearances and mentions of virginia giuffre

Jen Psaki points out Attorney General Pam Bondi's strenuous efforts to avoid having to answer for anything happening within the department she leads, which is a problem throughout the Trump administration and is particularly acute in Trump himself, who not only famously refuses to take responsibility for anything but seems to have no real idea what is going on with the things he's supposed to be in charge of.Jacob Soboroff, MSNBC senior national correspondent, reports from the Chicago suburbs about how Donald Trump's anti-immigrant enforcers are targeting even the most benign members of the community, sparking outrage and defiance. Virginia Giuffre once described Ghislaine Maxwell as worse than Jeffrey Epstein and the puppetmaster who pulled Epstein's strings. Her brother and sister-in-law talk with Jen Psaki about Donald Trump's weird hedging on whether he could pardon Maxwell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Lady Victoria Hervey, a former friend of Prince Andrew, has repeatedly claimed that the now-famous photograph showing Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre at Ghislaine Maxwell's London home is doctored. She has alleged in interviews and on social media that the image is “fake,” suggesting Andrew's head was photoshopped onto someone else's body or that it was otherwise digitally altered to create a false impression. Hervey even visited the location where the picture was allegedly taken to argue that certain features didn't match the photo. These assertions echo Prince Andrew's own denials about the photo's authenticity and have become part of the broader dispute over evidence linking him to Epstein's network.In her book The Palace Papers, journalist Tina Brown alleges that Prince Andrew's behavior during a 1993 visit to Sunnylands — the lavish Palm Springs estate of philanthropists Walter and Lee Annenberg — shocked his hosts. According to Brown's account, Andrew arrived as part of a formal delegation but quickly separated himself from the group, retreating to his private suite where he allegedly spent two full days watching pornography on cable television. Lee Annenberg was said to be horrified by what she described as the prince's juvenile and inappropriate behavior, an episode that reportedly became a point of embarrassment among those who managed his U.S. visits at the time.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Jean-Luc Brunel, the French modeling agent and longtime associate of Jeffrey Epstein, was found dead in his La Santé prison cell in Paris on February 19, 2022, in what authorities immediately labeled a suicide by hanging. Brunel had been under investigation for rape, sexual harassment, and the trafficking of minors, accused by several women—including Virginia Giuffre—of grooming and supplying underage models to Epstein and other powerful men. His death occurred before his case could reach trial, instantly reigniting suspicions about how another key figure in the Epstein network could die under eerily similar circumstances to Epstein himself. Victims expressed outrage, saying Brunel's death robbed them of justice and silenced a potential witness who might have revealed more about the structure and reach of Epstein's global operation.The official narrative—that Brunel's death was a suicide—sparked widespread skepticism and frustration across France and beyond. Reports emerged that Brunel had been on suicide watch previously, prompting questions about prison oversight, security lapses, and whether his death was preventable—or possibly convenient. Critics drew parallels to Epstein's own jailhouse death in 2019, arguing that both men's sudden “suicides” effectively closed critical avenues of investigation into elite sex-trafficking networks. French prosecutors confirmed no foul play was “immediately suspected,” but they acknowledged the timing and circumstances raised understandable public concern. To this day, Brunel's death remains shrouded in doubt, a haunting echo of a global scandal that continues to expose the failures of institutions to deliver full accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Lady Victoria Hervey, a former friend of Prince Andrew, has repeatedly claimed that the now-famous photograph showing Prince Andrew with Virginia Giuffre at Ghislaine Maxwell's London home is doctored. She has alleged in interviews and on social media that the image is “fake,” suggesting Andrew's head was photoshopped onto someone else's body or that it was otherwise digitally altered to create a false impression. Hervey even visited the location where the picture was allegedly taken to argue that certain features didn't match the photo. These assertions echo Prince Andrew's own denials about the photo's authenticity and have become part of the broader dispute over evidence linking him to Epstein's network.In her book The Palace Papers, journalist Tina Brown alleges that Prince Andrew's behavior during a 1993 visit to Sunnylands — the lavish Palm Springs estate of philanthropists Walter and Lee Annenberg — shocked his hosts. According to Brown's account, Andrew arrived as part of a formal delegation but quickly separated himself from the group, retreating to his private suite where he allegedly spent two full days watching pornography on cable television. Lee Annenberg was said to be horrified by what she described as the prince's juvenile and inappropriate behavior, an episode that reportedly became a point of embarrassment among those who managed his U.S. visits at the time.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jean-Luc Brunel, the French modeling agent and longtime associate of Jeffrey Epstein, was found dead in his La Santé prison cell in Paris on February 19, 2022, in what authorities immediately labeled a suicide by hanging. Brunel had been under investigation for rape, sexual harassment, and the trafficking of minors, accused by several women—including Virginia Giuffre—of grooming and supplying underage models to Epstein and other powerful men. His death occurred before his case could reach trial, instantly reigniting suspicions about how another key figure in the Epstein network could die under eerily similar circumstances to Epstein himself. Victims expressed outrage, saying Brunel's death robbed them of justice and silenced a potential witness who might have revealed more about the structure and reach of Epstein's global operation.The official narrative—that Brunel's death was a suicide—sparked widespread skepticism and frustration across France and beyond. Reports emerged that Brunel had been on suicide watch previously, prompting questions about prison oversight, security lapses, and whether his death was preventable—or possibly convenient. Critics drew parallels to Epstein's own jailhouse death in 2019, arguing that both men's sudden “suicides” effectively closed critical avenues of investigation into elite sex-trafficking networks. French prosecutors confirmed no foul play was “immediately suspected,” but they acknowledged the timing and circumstances raised understandable public concern. To this day, Brunel's death remains shrouded in doubt, a haunting echo of a global scandal that continues to expose the failures of institutions to deliver full accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A provocative billboard in New York criticized Prince Andrew by mocking his alleged involvement in the Epstein scandal. The billboard, erected by a Manhattan storage company, used a tongue-in-cheek approach to highlight the sex abuse allegations and the multimillion-dollar settlement he reached with Virginia Giuffre. Its message forced the public and media to confront a topic that many prefer to evade: the intersection of royalty, privilege, and alleged trafficking.The billboard's appearance illustrates how public activism and visual protest can pierce institutional silence. It turned a whisper campaign into a street-level accusation, making it harder for powerful actors to ignore or downplay. In doing so, it reinforced the idea that accountability and justice won't always come from elite institutions—that sometimes the most effective pressure comes from the margins demanding attention.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Alan Dershowitz has repeatedly and vehemently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, insisting that he never engaged in sexual misconduct with Virginia Giuffre or any other woman tied to Epstein's trafficking network. He has publicly stated that he never met Giuffre, called her accusations “a complete fabrication,” and pointed to travel records, phone logs, and witness statements as proof of his innocence. Dershowitz has long maintained that he only represented Epstein in legal matters and that any personal contact was limited to professional obligations, not illicit behavior.Beyond denying the specific allegations, Dershowitz has framed himself as a victim of false accusations, portraying the claims against him as part of a broader smear campaign. He has launched defamation lawsuits against Giuffre and her legal team, seeking to clear his name, and has gone on the offensive in media appearances, daring accusers to provide evidence and branding them as liars. Despite the consistency of his denials, his close association with Epstein has kept him under a cloud of suspicion in the public eye, with critics arguing that his combative defense has done little to erase the stain of his proximity to one of history's most notorious predators.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew has pushed for access to the original, unaltered version of the now-famous photograph showing him with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, arguing that the image could hold the key to challenging her allegations. His legal team has questioned the authenticity of the photo for years, suggesting it may have been doctored, and Andrew has maintained he does not recall ever meeting Giuffre despite the picture. By demanding the original, he seeks forensic analysis that could either validate or undermine one of the most damning pieces of evidence tying him to Epstein's trafficking network.The fallout from Prince Andrew's decision to settle with Virginia Giuffre was immediate and devastating to his reputation, reinforcing public perception that the royal was attempting to avoid a courtroom battle that could expose damaging details. Though the settlement included no admission of guilt, it was widely seen as a tacit acknowledgment of the seriousness of Giuffre's claims and further tarnished Andrew's standing within the monarchy. He was stripped of his military affiliations and charitable patronages, effectively forced into public exile, and the move sparked outrage among critics who argued that a man who insisted he was innocent would have fought to clear his name rather than write a multimillion-pound check. The royal family itself faced intense backlash, accused of protecting its own by allowing Andrew to quietly buy his way out of accountability while the scandal dragged the monarchy's image through the mud.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew didn't get slapped with the nickname “the Prince of Nonces” because of some tabloid cheap shot—it's because his behavior and associations earned it. His relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, his documented friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell, and the credible allegations from Virginia Giuffre and others cemented his reputation. Instead of acting like a public servant or a man of integrity, Andrew was photographed and tied up in scandal after scandal, clinging to excuses that sounded more like bad comedy than serious defense—like the infamous “I don't sweat” claim. When someone with his privilege and power shows up repeatedly in the orbit of convicted sex offenders, the nickname isn't slander—it's a blunt reflection of what people see.The title sticks because Andrew embodies everything rotten about the elites who cozied up to Epstein. While survivors were ignored, disbelieved, or silenced, Andrew was living it up on private jets and palatial estates with men who were actively exploiting young girls. His refusal to cooperate fully with law enforcement and his retreat from public life only add weight to the perception that he's hiding from accountability. Calling him “the Prince of Nonces” isn't cruel—it's the public stripping away the royal polish and naming him for what he represents: entitlement, corruption, and a man tied at the hip to one of the most infamous predators of our time.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

A provocative billboard in New York criticized Prince Andrew by mocking his alleged involvement in the Epstein scandal. The billboard, erected by a Manhattan storage company, used a tongue-in-cheek approach to highlight the sex abuse allegations and the multimillion-dollar settlement he reached with Virginia Giuffre. Its message forced the public and media to confront a topic that many prefer to evade: the intersection of royalty, privilege, and alleged trafficking.The billboard's appearance illustrates how public activism and visual protest can pierce institutional silence. It turned a whisper campaign into a street-level accusation, making it harder for powerful actors to ignore or downplay. In doing so, it reinforced the idea that accountability and justice won't always come from elite institutions—that sometimes the most effective pressure comes from the margins demanding attention.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the UK, allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell centered on claims that they trafficked and exploited young women on British soil, further expanding the scope of their international abuse network. Virginia Giuffre alleged she was trafficked to London in 2001, where she was photographed with Prince Andrew at Maxwell's Belgravia townhouse, a picture that became one of the most damning symbols of the scandal. Maxwell, with her British social connections, was accused of acting as Epstein's recruiter and facilitator, using her influence and status to introduce him into elite UK circles while allegedly procuring girls for abuse.These accusations shook the British establishment, dragging royalty and prominent figures into the fallout as questions mounted over how Epstein and Maxwell were able to operate so openly within high society. Both were accused of leveraging the UK as a playground for their trafficking ring, exploiting power, wealth, and connections to silence scrutiny. The allegations not only placed Andrew in the spotlight but also ignited criticism of British institutions that had enabled or ignored Epstein and Maxwell's activities, turning the scandal into an enduring stain on the UK elite.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Critics argue that the Epstein–Maxwell–Prince Andrew saga showcased the two-tier justice system in stark relief. Epstein's infamous 2008 Florida plea deal, which let him plead guilty to lesser state charges and avoid sweeping federal prosecution, has been described as the clearest example of justice bending for the powerful. Critics note that any ordinary defendant facing similar charges would likely have received decades in federal prison rather than a lenient sentence that allowed Epstein day release and minimal oversight.In contrast, Maxwell became the only major figure from Epstein's circle to face a lengthy prison term, while many alleged co-conspirators avoided charges altogether. Prince Andrew, despite being accused in a civil suit brought by Virginia Giuffre, evaded criminal liability entirely and settled quietly out of court without admitting wrongdoing. To survivors and legal critics, the contrast makes clear that elite figures with wealth, influence, and royal status have means to shield themselves from consequences that others would inevitably face.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Alan Dershowitz has repeatedly and vehemently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, insisting that he never engaged in sexual misconduct with Virginia Giuffre or any other woman tied to Epstein's trafficking network. He has publicly stated that he never met Giuffre, called her accusations “a complete fabrication,” and pointed to travel records, phone logs, and witness statements as proof of his innocence. Dershowitz has long maintained that he only represented Epstein in legal matters and that any personal contact was limited to professional obligations, not illicit behavior.Beyond denying the specific allegations, Dershowitz has framed himself as a victim of false accusations, portraying the claims against him as part of a broader smear campaign. He has launched defamation lawsuits against Giuffre and her legal team, seeking to clear his name, and has gone on the offensive in media appearances, daring accusers to provide evidence and branding them as liars. Despite the consistency of his denials, his close association with Epstein has kept him under a cloud of suspicion in the public eye, with critics arguing that his combative defense has done little to erase the stain of his proximity to one of history's most notorious predators.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew has pushed for access to the original, unaltered version of the now-famous photograph showing him with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, arguing that the image could hold the key to challenging her allegations. His legal team has questioned the authenticity of the photo for years, suggesting it may have been doctored, and Andrew has maintained he does not recall ever meeting Giuffre despite the picture. By demanding the original, he seeks forensic analysis that could either validate or undermine one of the most damning pieces of evidence tying him to Epstein's trafficking network.The fallout from Prince Andrew's decision to settle with Virginia Giuffre was immediate and devastating to his reputation, reinforcing public perception that the royal was attempting to avoid a courtroom battle that could expose damaging details. Though the settlement included no admission of guilt, it was widely seen as a tacit acknowledgment of the seriousness of Giuffre's claims and further tarnished Andrew's standing within the monarchy. He was stripped of his military affiliations and charitable patronages, effectively forced into public exile, and the move sparked outrage among critics who argued that a man who insisted he was innocent would have fought to clear his name rather than write a multimillion-pound check. The royal family itself faced intense backlash, accused of protecting its own by allowing Andrew to quietly buy his way out of accountability while the scandal dragged the monarchy's image through the mud.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

One of Australia's most iconic couples have called it quits. We are of course talking about Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban. Holly sits down with Amelia and Jessie to unpack what we know and to decode what's fact, what's fiction and what's plain ol' scurrilous gossip. Plus, when was the last time you changed your makeup routine? If it's been a hot minute, it's highly likely you're doing it all wrong. Amelia talks us through the latest TikTok tips that may turn everything you thought you knew about makeup upside down. And, why everybody needs to climb 'Cringe Mountain' to get to the sunny land of 'cool'. But why do some generations find it harder than others? Support independent women's media What To Listen To Next: Listen to our latest episode: An Emergency Meeting About Nicole & Keith Listen: Vanessa Amorosi, Emma Watson & The Problem When Kids Earn More Than Their Parents Listen: Victoria Beckham’s Version & Jessie’s Very Big News Listen: “Tough It Out”. The Announcement That Upset Us More Than We Expected Listen: Everything You Need To Know About Writing A Book, With Holly & Jessie Listen: The Jimmy Kimmel Fallout & The Internet’s Biggest Cheating Scandal Listen:The Questionable Brilliance Of The 'Lemon Law' Listen: Every Thought We Had After Watching Netflix's 'Unknown Number' Listen to Parenting Out Loud: Stealth Mums, The Roblox Controversy & A Tiny Internet Feud Connect your subscription to Apple Podcasts Discover more Mamamia Podcasts here Watch Mamamia Out Loud: Mamamia Out Loud on YouTube What to read: Nicole Kidman just filed for divorce from Keith Urban. This is what we know. OPINION: 'Everyone's saying the same thing about Nicole and Keith's divorce. They're wrong.' Two daughters and a rehab stint: A look back at Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban's 19-year marriage. There's still an insatiable interest in Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's divorce. This story proves it. 'I’m an over-50s beauty writer. I use these 6 glowy products when I don’t feel like a full face of makeup.' The only makeup products you need after 40, according to beauty experts. THE END BITS: Check out our merch at MamamiaOutLoud.com Mamamia studios are styled with furniture from Fenton and Fenton GET IN TOUCH: Feedback? We’re listening. Send us an email at outloud@mamamia.com.au Share your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice message. Join our Facebook group Mamamia Outlouders to talk about the show. Follow us on Instagram @mamamiaoutloud and on Tiktok @mamamiaoutloud Mamamia acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the Land we have recorded this podcast on, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present, and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures. Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Prince Andrew didn't get slapped with the nickname “the Prince of Nonces” because of some tabloid cheap shot—it's because his behavior and associations earned it. His relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, his documented friendship with Ghislaine Maxwell, and the credible allegations from Virginia Giuffre and others cemented his reputation. Instead of acting like a public servant or a man of integrity, Andrew was photographed and tied up in scandal after scandal, clinging to excuses that sounded more like bad comedy than serious defense—like the infamous “I don't sweat” claim. When someone with his privilege and power shows up repeatedly in the orbit of convicted sex offenders, the nickname isn't slander—it's a blunt reflection of what people see.The title sticks because Andrew embodies everything rotten about the elites who cozied up to Epstein. While survivors were ignored, disbelieved, or silenced, Andrew was living it up on private jets and palatial estates with men who were actively exploiting young girls. His refusal to cooperate fully with law enforcement and his retreat from public life only add weight to the perception that he's hiding from accountability. Calling him “the Prince of Nonces” isn't cruel—it's the public stripping away the royal polish and naming him for what he represents: entitlement, corruption, and a man tied at the hip to one of the most infamous predators of our time.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lady Victoria Hervey has voiced deep skepticism about the Maxwell trial and its fallout, framing Maxwell not solely as a villain but also as a victim turned scapegoat. She's claimed publicly that Maxwell used people—including Hervey herself—as “bait” to further Epstein's operations, suggesting Hervey was “naïve” and manipulated in those circles. Simultaneously, Hervey has cast doubt on the narrative pushed by prosecutors and media, contending that Maxwell is being unfairly punished as “there is no one else to blame.”Hervey has also challenged the authenticity of some key evidence, most notably a photograph depicting Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre, which Maxwell's allies—and Hervey—have insisted was doctored or manipulated. She uses these claims to further argue that Maxwell's prosecution is tainted by bias, selective narrative control, and a lack of full transparency.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew's downfall has been defined by his ties to Jeffrey Epstein and the ensuing sexual abuse allegations that irreparably stained his reputation. His infamous 2019 BBC Newsnight interview, intended as damage control, became a public-relations disaster—marked by bizarre defenses and a lack of remorse—that cemented public suspicion rather than alleviating it. Matters escalated with Virginia Giuffre's 2021 lawsuit alleging Andrew sexually abused her while she was trafficked by Epstein; though he denied the claims, he settled in 2022 for a multimillion-dollar payment and a pledge to support victims' rights, all while avoiding formal liability.The legal battles forced the monarchy's hand. In January 2022, a U.S. judge rejected Andrew's effort to dismiss Giuffre's lawsuit, prompting Buckingham Palace to strip him of his military titles, royal patronages, and any remaining public role. Once styled as “the Queen's favorite son,” Andrew has since become a marginalized figure within the royal family—shunned from ceremonial duties, exiled from public life, and reduced to a cautionary tale of entitlement, arrogance, and scandal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lady Victoria Hervey has voiced deep skepticism about the Maxwell trial and its fallout, framing Maxwell not solely as a villain but also as a victim turned scapegoat. She's claimed publicly that Maxwell used people—including Hervey herself—as “bait” to further Epstein's operations, suggesting Hervey was “naïve” and manipulated in those circles. Simultaneously, Hervey has cast doubt on the narrative pushed by prosecutors and media, contending that Maxwell is being unfairly punished as “there is no one else to blame.”Hervey has also challenged the authenticity of some key evidence, most notably a photograph depicting Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre, which Maxwell's allies—and Hervey—have insisted was doctored or manipulated. She uses these claims to further argue that Maxwell's prosecution is tainted by bias, selective narrative control, and a lack of full transparency.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew has become a perpetual liability for the British monarchy, with his scandals continuing to overshadow the institution's attempts at modernization and public service. His long association with Jeffrey Epstein and subsequent settlement with Virginia Giuffre, while never an admission of guilt, has cemented him in the public mind as a man of disgrace who cannot be trusted. Every time his name resurfaces, it drags the monarchy back into a mire of sleaze and scandal, reminding the world of his recklessness and arrogance. His inability to account honestly for his relationships and behavior, paired with his disastrous BBC “Newsnight” interview, exposed not only his own lack of judgment but also the monarchy's tone-deafness in handling crises.Even after being stripped of official duties, Andrew remains a thorn in the side of the royal family, his mere presence at events sparking public outrage and critical headlines. His clinging to privilege, combined with his refusal to step aside completely, undermines the monarchy's carefully managed image of dignity and service. Instead of fading into obscurity, his scandals linger as a living reminder of hypocrisy at the heart of the institution—a prince who used his position recklessly and now stains the legacy of the monarchy with every reemergence. His behavior continues to erode the trust and respect the monarchy depends on for survival in the modern era.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew has become a perpetual liability for the British monarchy, with his scandals continuing to overshadow the institution's attempts at modernization and public service. His long association with Jeffrey Epstein and subsequent settlement with Virginia Giuffre, while never an admission of guilt, has cemented him in the public mind as a man of disgrace who cannot be trusted. Every time his name resurfaces, it drags the monarchy back into a mire of sleaze and scandal, reminding the world of his recklessness and arrogance. His inability to account honestly for his relationships and behavior, paired with his disastrous BBC “Newsnight” interview, exposed not only his own lack of judgment but also the monarchy's tone-deafness in handling crises.Even after being stripped of official duties, Andrew remains a thorn in the side of the royal family, his mere presence at events sparking public outrage and critical headlines. His clinging to privilege, combined with his refusal to step aside completely, undermines the monarchy's carefully managed image of dignity and service. Instead of fading into obscurity, his scandals linger as a living reminder of hypocrisy at the heart of the institution—a prince who used his position recklessly and now stains the legacy of the monarchy with every reemergence. His behavior continues to erode the trust and respect the monarchy depends on for survival in the modern era.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Prince Andrew's maneuvering to avoid a deposition in Virginia Giuffre's lawsuit was a masterclass in royal cowardice dressed up as legal strategy. Here was a man accused of sexual abuse, hiding behind the velvet ropes of privilege, while his legal team played a shell game with jurisdiction, paperwork, and technicalities. Instead of facing questions under oath — the bare minimum any honest man would do to clear his name — Andrew's camp leaned into delay tactics, hoping that exhaustion and settlement would erase the scandal. It wasn't courage, it wasn't truth-seeking; it was damage control at its most cynical, designed to keep him from ever having to look a lawyer in the eye and answer for his actions.And of course, it worked. Andrew wrote a check and bought silence, shielding himself from the humiliating spectacle of cross-examination that would have stripped away the thin veneer of his denials. This wasn't justice; it was aristocratic crisis management, where money spoke louder than accountability. For a man who once claimed he had nothing to hide, his frantic effort to dodge sworn testimony was deafening proof of the opposite. A deposition would have pinned him down, locked him into a version of events he could never wiggle out of — and Andrew, ever the entitled prince, wasn't about to risk that. So he paid, he preened, and he slithered back into the shadows, another powerful man escaping real scrutiny.to contact me:  bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew has become a perpetual liability for the British monarchy, with his scandals continuing to overshadow the institution's attempts at modernization and public service. His long association with Jeffrey Epstein and subsequent settlement with Virginia Giuffre, while never an admission of guilt, has cemented him in the public mind as a man of disgrace who cannot be trusted. Every time his name resurfaces, it drags the monarchy back into a mire of sleaze and scandal, reminding the world of his recklessness and arrogance. His inability to account honestly for his relationships and behavior, paired with his disastrous BBC “Newsnight” interview, exposed not only his own lack of judgment but also the monarchy's tone-deafness in handling crises.Even after being stripped of official duties, Andrew remains a thorn in the side of the royal family, his mere presence at events sparking public outrage and critical headlines. His clinging to privilege, combined with his refusal to step aside completely, undermines the monarchy's carefully managed image of dignity and service. Instead of fading into obscurity, his scandals linger as a living reminder of hypocrisy at the heart of the institution—a prince who used his position recklessly and now stains the legacy of the monarchy with every reemergence. His behavior continues to erode the trust and respect the monarchy depends on for survival in the modern era.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Journalist Michael Tracey joins The Winston Marshall Show for an uncompromising deep-dive into the murky world of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and the web of conspiracies surrounding their crimes.Tracey separates fact from fiction — breaking down Epstein's 2008 plea deal, the failures of federal prosecutors, and the dubious credibility of key accusers like Virginia Giuffre. He exposes how much of the “Epstein mythology” has been built on shaky claims, media sensationalism, and opportunistic lawyers, while real questions remain about Epstein's finances, intelligence links, and the powerful figures in his orbit.They discuss Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, the infamous “Little Black Book,” and the Miami Herald investigation that reignited the scandal. Tracey also examines the suspicious circumstances of Giuffre's recent death, her fortune from settlements, and the ongoing disputes over her estate.All this — Epstein's crimes, Maxwell's role, the credibility crisis of accusers, media distortion, and the conspiracies that refuse to die…-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To see more exclusive content and interviews consider subscribing to my substack here: https://www.winstonmarshall.co.uk/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:Substack: https://www.winstonmarshall.co.uk/X: https://twitter.com/mrwinmarshallInsta: https://www.instagram.com/winstonmarshallLinktree: https://linktr.ee/winstonmarshall----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Chapters 00:00 Michael Tracy's Role and Epstein's Legal Plea04:51 Government Designated Victims and Legal Challenges09:17 Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts Giuffre's Claims 10:13 The Credibility of Virginia Roberts Giuffre18:15 Media, Interviews, and Public Perception21:02 Giuffre's Death and Financial Settlements 26:47 The Questions Around Giuffre's Death 29:39 Epstein's Crimes and Victim Testimonies39:21 The “Little Black Book” and Its Impact 44:50 Epstein's Death and Conspiracy Theories46:00 Epstein's Property Portfolio and Associations46:21 Steve Bannon and Epstein's Interviews1:00:45 Epstein's Business Activities and Ghislaine Maxwell's Testimony1:11:08 Epstein's Financial Dealings and Clientele1:18:24 Trump's Relationship with Epstein and Media Coverage1:21:54 Epstein's Wealth and Assets1:24:18 Epstein's International Business and Multiple Passports1:38:13 Media Coverage and Public Perception Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Prince Andrew's maneuvering to avoid a deposition in Virginia Giuffre's lawsuit was a masterclass in royal cowardice dressed up as legal strategy. Here was a man accused of sexual abuse, hiding behind the velvet ropes of privilege, while his legal team played a shell game with jurisdiction, paperwork, and technicalities. Instead of facing questions under oath — the bare minimum any honest man would do to clear his name — Andrew's camp leaned into delay tactics, hoping that exhaustion and settlement would erase the scandal. It wasn't courage, it wasn't truth-seeking; it was damage control at its most cynical, designed to keep him from ever having to look a lawyer in the eye and answer for his actions.And of course, it worked. Andrew wrote a check and bought silence, shielding himself from the humiliating spectacle of cross-examination that would have stripped away the thin veneer of his denials. This wasn't justice; it was aristocratic crisis management, where money spoke louder than accountability. For a man who once claimed he had nothing to hide, his frantic effort to dodge sworn testimony was deafening proof of the opposite. A deposition would have pinned him down, locked him into a version of events he could never wiggle out of — and Andrew, ever the entitled prince, wasn't about to risk that. So he paid, he preened, and he slithered back into the shadows, another powerful man escaping real scrutiny.to contact me:  bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

During the interview, Kim Iversen pressed Dershowitz about his associations with Jeffrey Epstein and asked probing questions that he appeared taken off-guard by. One key moment came when Iversen asked whether Epstein “killed himself,” to which Dershowitz responded that Epstein did not die entirely of his own doing—suggesting involvement of others, particularly guards. Dershowitz seemed visibly frustrated with the line of inquiry, complaining about what he felt was being “sandbagged”—i.e. caught unawares on shifting topics. When Iversen tried to connect the conversation back to Donald Trump and broader current events, Dershowitz challenged the framing, appearing to assert that certain issues were being conflated unfairly.Dershowitz ultimately ended the exchange by telling Iversen it would be “the last time” he appeared on her show, indicating that he felt the interview had crossed implicit boundaries. The interaction made headlines largely because of that tension, the unexpected speculation about Epstein's death, and Dershowitz's claim that questions about unrelated topics had been sprung without warning.Also...Alan Dershowitz has publicly said that Prince Andrew made “a terrible mistake” by settling the lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre in 2022 rather than taking the case to trial. Dershowitz believes Andrew could have won in court, arguing there were legal grounds to challenge jurisdiction, statute of limitations, and credibility of Giuffre's claims. He suggests Andrew's legal team—and possibly Queen Elizabeth II—pressured him into settling to avoid the embarrassment of a public deposition and the full airing of allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Les Wexner was subpoenaed by Alan Dershowitz as part of Dershowitz's counterclaims in the defamation suit brought by Virginia Giuffre. Dershowitz issued subpoenas in April 2020 demanding that Wexner and his attorney John Zeiger produce documents and give deposition testimony concerning Giuffre's allegations, including those related to Jeffrey EpsteinWexner's legal side objected to the subpoenas, arguing that many of the requested records are protected by attorney-client privilege or otherwise confidential. They also claimed Dershowitz's request was designed primarily to attack Giuffre's credibility rather than uncover relevant facts, and that much of what Dershowitz seeks is inadmissible or irrelevant to the core issues of the case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-dershowitz-wexner-epstein-giuffre-20200810-d56q3emu2rhsrpt3ennvmp4vru-story.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew's maneuvering to avoid a deposition in Virginia Giuffre's lawsuit was a masterclass in royal cowardice dressed up as legal strategy. Here was a man accused of sexual abuse, hiding behind the velvet ropes of privilege, while his legal team played a shell game with jurisdiction, paperwork, and technicalities. Instead of facing questions under oath — the bare minimum any honest man would do to clear his name — Andrew's camp leaned into delay tactics, hoping that exhaustion and settlement would erase the scandal. It wasn't courage, it wasn't truth-seeking; it was damage control at its most cynical, designed to keep him from ever having to look a lawyer in the eye and answer for his actions.And of course, it worked. Andrew wrote a check and bought silence, shielding himself from the humiliating spectacle of cross-examination that would have stripped away the thin veneer of his denials. This wasn't justice; it was aristocratic crisis management, where money spoke louder than accountability. For a man who once claimed he had nothing to hide, his frantic effort to dodge sworn testimony was deafening proof of the opposite. A deposition would have pinned him down, locked him into a version of events he could never wiggle out of — and Andrew, ever the entitled prince, wasn't about to risk that. So he paid, he preened, and he slithered back into the shadows, another powerful man escaping real scrutiny.to contact me:  bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bill Richardson, the former New Mexico governor, U.S. Energy Secretary, and U.N. Ambassador, passed away on September 1, 2023, at his summer home in Massachusetts at the age of 75. He died peacefully in his sleep. Richardson was known for his long career in public service, including his work as a diplomat and later through the Richardson Center for Global Engagement, where he focused on international negotiations to free Americans detained abroad. His career was marked by high‐profile roles in both domestic and international politics, and even after leaving elected office, he remained engaged in humanitarian and diplomatic efforts until his passing.Richardson's name also appeared in unsealed legal documents connected to Jeffrey Epstein. Virginia Giuffre alleged that she was directed by Ghislaine Maxwell to give Richardson a massage, though the filings did not provide concrete evidence, specific dates, or context showing Richardson's awareness of Epstein's broader crimes. Richardson and his representatives consistently denied any wrongdoing, and he was never charged, investigated, or designated as a subject in Epstein-related prosecutions. His inclusion in the documents has been viewed by many as more suggestive than substantive, but the association nonetheless lingers in public perception despite his denials and the lack of legal action.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein's alleged sex trafficking victim named Bill Richardson, George Mitchell in newly released documents | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Alan Dershowitz filed a lawsuit against Netflix in 2021 over its docuseries Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich, alleging defamation and breach of contract. He claimed the series unfairly presented Virginia Giuffre's allegations against him without including exculpatory evidence he provided, and argued that producers had promised to air his side of the story but failed to do so. Netflix denied the allegations and filed a countersuit, insisting the program was accurate and that Dershowitz's claims were meritless.Separately, Dershowitz became embroiled in a bitter legal fight with prominent attorney David Boies, who sued him for defamation after Dershowitz accused Boies of unethical conduct and pressuring Giuffre into making false statements. Dershowitz countered with his own claims that Boies had orchestrated a campaign to smear him. Both disputes—Dershowitz versus Netflix and Dershowitz versus Boies—ultimately ended in late 2022 when all parties agreed to dismiss their lawsuits with prejudice. Giuffre herself issued a statement acknowledging she may have misidentified Dershowitz, closing out the high-profile litigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

For years, U.S. authorities have expressed interest in the United Kingdom as a potential hub in Jeffrey Epstein's trafficking network, with both the FBI and lawyers for survivors pointing to possible co-conspirators who operated there. The focus has often centered on Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime companion and recruiter, who was born and raised in Britain and accused of arranging for underage girls to be trafficked across borders. Virginia Giuffre and other survivors testified that Epstein's operations included flights into and out of the UK, with at least one trip to London forming the basis of Giuffre's allegations against Prince Andrew—allegations he has repeatedly and categorically denied. British media have reported since 2020 that the FBI sought interviews with Prince Andrew, Maxwell, and at least two other unnamed British women said to have knowledge of Epstein's activities. While Maxwell was ultimately convicted in the U.S. on sex trafficking charges, no parallel prosecutions of alleged UK-based figures have taken place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Prince Andrew one of four Brits FBI wants to quiz over paedophile pal Jeffrey Epstein - Mirror OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

During the interview, Kim Iversen pressed Dershowitz about his associations with Jeffrey Epstein and asked probing questions that he appeared taken off-guard by. One key moment came when Iversen asked whether Epstein “killed himself,” to which Dershowitz responded that Epstein did not die entirely of his own doing—suggesting involvement of others, particularly guards. Dershowitz seemed visibly frustrated with the line of inquiry, complaining about what he felt was being “sandbagged”—i.e. caught unawares on shifting topics. When Iversen tried to connect the conversation back to Donald Trump and broader current events, Dershowitz challenged the framing, appearing to assert that certain issues were being conflated unfairly.Dershowitz ultimately ended the exchange by telling Iversen it would be “the last time” he appeared on her show, indicating that he felt the interview had crossed implicit boundaries. The interaction made headlines largely because of that tension, the unexpected speculation about Epstein's death, and Dershowitz's claim that questions about unrelated topics had been sprung without warning.Also...Alan Dershowitz has publicly said that Prince Andrew made “a terrible mistake” by settling the lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre in 2022 rather than taking the case to trial. Dershowitz believes Andrew could have won in court, arguing there were legal grounds to challenge jurisdiction, statute of limitations, and credibility of Giuffre's claims. He suggests Andrew's legal team—and possibly Queen Elizabeth II—pressured him into settling to avoid the embarrassment of a public deposition and the full airing of allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Alan Dershowitz filed a lawsuit against Netflix in 2021 over its docuseries Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich, alleging defamation and breach of contract. He claimed the series unfairly presented Virginia Giuffre's allegations against him without including exculpatory evidence he provided, and argued that producers had promised to air his side of the story but failed to do so. Netflix denied the allegations and filed a countersuit, insisting the program was accurate and that Dershowitz's claims were meritless.Separately, Dershowitz became embroiled in a bitter legal fight with prominent attorney David Boies, who sued him for defamation after Dershowitz accused Boies of unethical conduct and pressuring Giuffre into making false statements. Dershowitz countered with his own claims that Boies had orchestrated a campaign to smear him. Both disputes—Dershowitz versus Netflix and Dershowitz versus Boies—ultimately ended in late 2022 when all parties agreed to dismiss their lawsuits with prejudice. Giuffre herself issued a statement acknowledging she may have misidentified Dershowitz, closing out the high-profile litigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein were quick to condemn Kash Patel's claim that there was “no credible evidence” of Epstein trafficking victims to anyone but himself. They pointed out that the public record alone undermines Patel's statement. Virginia Giuffre's sworn depositions, the Maxwell trial testimony, and multiple FBI interview summaries (FD-302s) make direct references to high-profile individuals. Survivors also reminded the public that members of Congress, including Rep. Thomas Massie, have already stated in hearings that victims named more than 20 powerful men—including billionaires, politicians, and a prince—to whom they were trafficked.They accused Patel of either ignoring or deliberately minimizing the mountain of corroborating evidence. Beyond official court documents and sworn testimony, survivors criticized him for deferring to prior DOJ conclusions without releasing the raw FBI reports or victim statements. They demanded transparency in the form of unsealed FD-302s, noting that nothing in Epstein's controversial non-prosecution agreement prevents their disclosure. Survivors said Patel's statement not only insults them but perpetuates the cover-up, and they called for immediate accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Survivors Blast FBI Director Kash Patel For Claiming 'No Credible Information' Financier Trafficked Women to Others

Alan Dershowitz filed a lawsuit against Netflix in 2021 over its docuseries Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich, alleging defamation and breach of contract. He claimed the series unfairly presented Virginia Giuffre's allegations against him without including exculpatory evidence he provided, and argued that producers had promised to air his side of the story but failed to do so. Netflix denied the allegations and filed a countersuit, insisting the program was accurate and that Dershowitz's claims were meritless.Separately, Dershowitz became embroiled in a bitter legal fight with prominent attorney David Boies, who sued him for defamation after Dershowitz accused Boies of unethical conduct and pressuring Giuffre into making false statements. Dershowitz countered with his own claims that Boies had orchestrated a campaign to smear him. Both disputes—Dershowitz versus Netflix and Dershowitz versus Boies—ultimately ended in late 2022 when all parties agreed to dismiss their lawsuits with prejudice. Giuffre herself issued a statement acknowledging she may have misidentified Dershowitz, closing out the high-profile litigation.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein were quick to condemn Kash Patel's claim that there was “no credible evidence” of Epstein trafficking victims to anyone but himself. They pointed out that the public record alone undermines Patel's statement. Virginia Giuffre's sworn depositions, the Maxwell trial testimony, and multiple FBI interview summaries (FD-302s) make direct references to high-profile individuals. Survivors also reminded the public that members of Congress, including Rep. Thomas Massie, have already stated in hearings that victims named more than 20 powerful men—including billionaires, politicians, and a prince—to whom they were trafficked.They accused Patel of either ignoring or deliberately minimizing the mountain of corroborating evidence. Beyond official court documents and sworn testimony, survivors criticized him for deferring to prior DOJ conclusions without releasing the raw FBI reports or victim statements. They demanded transparency in the form of unsealed FD-302s, noting that nothing in Epstein's controversial non-prosecution agreement prevents their disclosure. Survivors said Patel's statement not only insults them but perpetuates the cover-up, and they called for immediate accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Survivors Blast FBI Director Kash Patel For Claiming 'No Credible Information' Financier Trafficked Women to OthersBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

During the interview, Kim Iversen pressed Dershowitz about his associations with Jeffrey Epstein and asked probing questions that he appeared taken off-guard by. One key moment came when Iversen asked whether Epstein “killed himself,” to which Dershowitz responded that Epstein did not die entirely of his own doing—suggesting involvement of others, particularly guards. Dershowitz seemed visibly frustrated with the line of inquiry, complaining about what he felt was being “sandbagged”—i.e. caught unawares on shifting topics. When Iversen tried to connect the conversation back to Donald Trump and broader current events, Dershowitz challenged the framing, appearing to assert that certain issues were being conflated unfairly.Dershowitz ultimately ended the exchange by telling Iversen it would be “the last time” he appeared on her show, indicating that he felt the interview had crossed implicit boundaries. The interaction made headlines largely because of that tension, the unexpected speculation about Epstein's death, and Dershowitz's claim that questions about unrelated topics had been sprung without warning.Also...Alan Dershowitz has publicly said that Prince Andrew made “a terrible mistake” by settling the lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre in 2022 rather than taking the case to trial. Dershowitz believes Andrew could have won in court, arguing there were legal grounds to challenge jurisdiction, statute of limitations, and credibility of Giuffre's claims. He suggests Andrew's legal team—and possibly Queen Elizabeth II—pressured him into settling to avoid the embarrassment of a public deposition and the full airing of allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein were quick to condemn Kash Patel's claim that there was “no credible evidence” of Epstein trafficking victims to anyone but himself. They pointed out that the public record alone undermines Patel's statement. Virginia Giuffre's sworn depositions, the Maxwell trial testimony, and multiple FBI interview summaries (FD-302s) make direct references to high-profile individuals. Survivors also reminded the public that members of Congress, including Rep. Thomas Massie, have already stated in hearings that victims named more than 20 powerful men—including billionaires, politicians, and a prince—to whom they were trafficked.They accused Patel of either ignoring or deliberately minimizing the mountain of corroborating evidence. Beyond official court documents and sworn testimony, survivors criticized him for deferring to prior DOJ conclusions without releasing the raw FBI reports or victim statements. They demanded transparency in the form of unsealed FD-302s, noting that nothing in Epstein's controversial non-prosecution agreement prevents their disclosure. Survivors said Patel's statement not only insults them but perpetuates the cover-up, and they called for immediate accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Survivors Blast FBI Director Kash Patel For Claiming 'No Credible Information' Financier Trafficked Women to OthersBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

During his deposition, former Attorney General Bill Barr confirmed that Prince Andrew was always someone the Southern District of New York wanted to question in connection with the Jeffrey Epstein case. Barr explained that Andrew was regarded as a witness the DOJ hoped to interview, given the allegations raised by Virginia Giuffre and the supporting evidence investigators had compiled, such as travel and hotel records. He noted there was an ongoing “dispute” regarding Andrew's cooperation, highlighting how prosecutors publicly stated he wasn't cooperating, while Andrew's camp insisted otherwise.Barr also clarified that, despite the SDNY's interest, he did not recall ever being informed that Andrew had been officially elevated to the level of a “subject” or “target” of the investigation. In Barr's account, Andrew remained in that gray zone of being a “person of interest” — someone the DOJ wanted information from, but not someone the department was actively moving to prosecute or extradite. This distinction reinforced how Andrew's royal status and wealth seemed to keep him shielded from the more aggressive legal pursuit others in Epstein's orbit faced.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Prince Andrew was 'at least' a witness in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, reveals former chief US prosecutor as he recalls 'zero cooperation' press conference in newly-released Epstein files | Daily Mail Online

During his deposition, former Attorney General Bill Barr confirmed that Prince Andrew was always someone the Southern District of New York wanted to question in connection with the Jeffrey Epstein case. Barr explained that Andrew was regarded as a witness the DOJ hoped to interview, given the allegations raised by Virginia Giuffre and the supporting evidence investigators had compiled, such as travel and hotel records. He noted there was an ongoing “dispute” regarding Andrew's cooperation, highlighting how prosecutors publicly stated he wasn't cooperating, while Andrew's camp insisted otherwise.Barr also clarified that, despite the SDNY's interest, he did not recall ever being informed that Andrew had been officially elevated to the level of a “subject” or “target” of the investigation. In Barr's account, Andrew remained in that gray zone of being a “person of interest” — someone the DOJ wanted information from, but not someone the department was actively moving to prosecute or extradite. This distinction reinforced how Andrew's royal status and wealth seemed to keep him shielded from the more aggressive legal pursuit others in Epstein's orbit faced.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Prince Andrew was 'at least' a witness in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, reveals former chief US prosecutor as he recalls 'zero cooperation' press conference in newly-released Epstein files | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bill Richardson's ties to Jeffrey Epstein highlight the grotesque double standard that protects the powerful. Despite being named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men she was trafficked to, Richardson—former New Mexico governor, U.N. ambassador, and establishment insider—faced almost no scrutiny. His denials were delivered with the bland, calculated tone of a man confident that his reputation and connections would shield him. The media, which treats lesser figures with endless outrage, politely buried his name, turning what should have been a career-ending scandal into a forgotten footnote. That silence was not oversight—it was a deliberate choice by the same machine that has long protected Epstein's orbit of elites.Richardson's case is especially damning because Epstein's Zorro Ranch, rumored to be a hub of trafficking and secrecy, sat in New Mexico under his watch as governor. The coincidence is staggering, yet no questions were asked, no investigations launched, and no accountability pursued. His inclusion in Virginia's sworn testimony wasn't random—it fit a consistent pattern of Epstein surrounding himself with powerful, insulated men unlikely to face consequences. Richardson's polished career may remain intact in polite circles, but his name is forever entwined with the Epstein scandal, serving as a perfect example of how justice bends when it brushes up against the untouchables.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

George Mitchell, the former Senate Majority Leader and respected peace negotiator, was named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men Jeffrey Epstein trafficked her to. Despite the gravity of the allegation, Mitchell's name was quietly pushed aside, his denial accepted without serious challenge, and the story faded from public discourse. Unlike figures such as Prince Andrew or Donald Trump, who were relentlessly scrutinized, Mitchell received soft handling from the media and political class, his ties to Epstein treated as an uncomfortable detail best ignored. His presence at Epstein's townhouse and social connection to the disgraced financier raised obvious questions, but few dared to pursue them. The result was a glaring double standard that exposed how power and prestige protect certain names from accountability.This selective amnesia reveals how the Epstein scandal has been weaponized rather than fully exposed. Survivors' testimony is amplified when it serves partisan purposes, but buried when it implicates figures like Mitchell who belong to the establishment's “safe” circles. The hypocrisy is stark: those screaming about “the other team's” monsters go silent when their own are implicated. Mitchell's erasure from the mainstream narrative shows how survivors were betrayed not just by their abusers, but by a system that cherry-picks justice. His story underscores the bipartisan rot at the core of the Epstein saga—proof that truth has been traded for theater, and survivors' voices have been muffled in service of political convenience.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's association with Jeffrey Epstein has been scrutinized due to serious allegations. Virginia Giuffre, an accuser of Epstein, testified that she was directed by Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, to engage in sexual activities with Richardson while she was underage. Richardson's name appeared multiple times in Epstein's flight logs, indicating he traveled on Epstein's private jet. These connections raise concerns about Richardson's involvement with Epstein's illicit activities. Richardson has denied these allegations, stating through a spokesperson that he never met Giuffre and was unaware of any inappropriate conduct by Epstein. Despite these denials, the documented interactions between Richardson and Epstein, including campaign contributions from Epstein to Richardson's political endeavors, cast a shadow over Richardson's judgment and associations. The extent of Richardson's involvement with Epstein remains a subject of public concern, highlighting the need for transparency and accountability among public officials.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Today, we hear from the family of Virginia Giuffre, who became the most prominent victim of Jeffrey Epstein.In an interview with Laura, they said that Lord Mandelson should never have been given the position of UK ambassador to the United States.And Business Secretary Peter Kyle told her it was "highly unlikely" Lord Mandelson would have been appointed if the extent of his relationship with Epstein was known to those in government.We unpack the interview, the government response, and what it means for Keir Starmer.We also look ahead to the state visit of Donald Trump, which starts on Tuesday.You can take part in the Newscast census here - http://bit.ly/4mfhIgbYou can now listen to Newscast on a smart speaker. If you want to listen, just say "Ask BBC Sounds to play Newscast”. It works on most smart speakers.You can join our Newscast online community here: https://tinyurl.com/newscastcommunityhereGet in touch with Newscast by emailing newscast@bbc.co.uk or send us a whatsapp on +44 0330 123 9480.New episodes released every day. If you're in the UK, for more News and Current Affairs podcasts from the BBC, listen on BBC Sounds: https://bit.ly/3ENLcS1Newscast brings you daily analysis of the latest political news stories from the BBC. It was presented by Laura Kuenssberg and Paddy O'Connell. It was made by Chris Flynn and Grace Reeve. The social producer was Darren Dutton. The technical producer was James Piper. The weekend series producer is Chris Flynn. The assistant editor is Chris Gray. The senior news editor is Sam Bonham.

Former world champion boxer, Ricky Hatton, has been found dead at his home in Greater Manchester. The family of Jeffrey Epstein's victim Virginia Guiffre say Lord Mandelson should never have been appointed as the UK's ambassador in Washington. Sir Keir Starmer has condemned assaults on the police at yesterday's Unite the Kingdom rally in London.

David Boies, attorney for Virginia Giuffre, explained that Prince Andrew initially tried to stonewall the case but quickly pivoted toward a settlement when faced with the prospect of a deposition. According to Boies, Andrew's priority was to pay as little as possible and avoid publicly acknowledging Giuffre as a victim, even implying her claims were fabricated. The agreement, reached just a week before the scheduled deposition, centered on two elements: a “substantial amount of money” and a carefully worded statement from Andrew, both resolved swiftly under pressure.Boies later noted that if Andrew truly wanted to back out of the settlement, the process was simple: “Just call me, let me take Andrew's deposition, and we'll go to trial.” After Giuffre's death in April 2025, Boies again pressed Andrew to take responsibility, stressing that Virginia would have accepted even a partial acknowledgment or apology. He insisted it was “not too late” for Andrew to come clean, framing accountability as the only way to honor Giuffre's legacy and provide a measure of justice.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Lawyer for Prince Andrew's sex abuse accuser claims Duke of York avoided going to trial over photo | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Even from behind bars, Ghislaine Maxwell continues to staunchly defend Prince Andrew, displaying a brazen disregard for the gravity of her own convictions and the overwhelming evidence against her. In a 2022 interview from prison, Maxwell audaciously claimed that the infamous photograph showing Prince Andrew with his arm around Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein's most prominent accusers, is "fake," despite its widespread acceptance as genuine. This blatant attempt to discredit a victim not only undermines the experiences of countless survivors but also highlights Maxwell's unrepentant nature and her willingness to perpetuate falsehoods to protect her powerful associates.Furthermore, Maxwell's expressed sympathy for Prince Andrew, referring to him as a "dear friend" and stating she "feels so bad" for him, is a glaring example of her continued manipulation and deflection. By portraying Andrew as a victim suffering due to his association with her, Maxwell attempts to elicit public sympathy for a man who has been credibly accused of sexual misconduct, thereby minimizing the severity of the allegations against him. This tactic not only insults the intelligence of the public but also serves to retraumatize survivors by elevating the concerns of the accused over the suffering of the victims. Maxwell's unwavering defense of Prince Andrew from her prison cell is a stark reminder of her persistent allegiance to the powerful, even at the expense of justice and truth.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bill Richardson's ties to Jeffrey Epstein highlight the grotesque double standard that protects the powerful. Despite being named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men she was trafficked to, Richardson—former New Mexico governor, U.N. ambassador, and establishment insider—faced almost no scrutiny. His denials were delivered with the bland, calculated tone of a man confident that his reputation and connections would shield him. The media, which treats lesser figures with endless outrage, politely buried his name, turning what should have been a career-ending scandal into a forgotten footnote. That silence was not oversight—it was a deliberate choice by the same machine that has long protected Epstein's orbit of elites.Richardson's case is especially damning because Epstein's Zorro Ranch, rumored to be a hub of trafficking and secrecy, sat in New Mexico under his watch as governor. The coincidence is staggering, yet no questions were asked, no investigations launched, and no accountability pursued. His inclusion in Virginia's sworn testimony wasn't random—it fit a consistent pattern of Epstein surrounding himself with powerful, insulated men unlikely to face consequences. Richardson's polished career may remain intact in polite circles, but his name is forever entwined with the Epstein scandal, serving as a perfect example of how justice bends when it brushes up against the untouchables.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

George Mitchell, the former Senate Majority Leader and respected peace negotiator, was named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men Jeffrey Epstein trafficked her to. Despite the gravity of the allegation, Mitchell's name was quietly pushed aside, his denial accepted without serious challenge, and the story faded from public discourse. Unlike figures such as Prince Andrew or Donald Trump, who were relentlessly scrutinized, Mitchell received soft handling from the media and political class, his ties to Epstein treated as an uncomfortable detail best ignored. His presence at Epstein's townhouse and social connection to the disgraced financier raised obvious questions, but few dared to pursue them. The result was a glaring double standard that exposed how power and prestige protect certain names from accountability.This selective amnesia reveals how the Epstein scandal has been weaponized rather than fully exposed. Survivors' testimony is amplified when it serves partisan purposes, but buried when it implicates figures like Mitchell who belong to the establishment's “safe” circles. The hypocrisy is stark: those screaming about “the other team's” monsters go silent when their own are implicated. Mitchell's erasure from the mainstream narrative shows how survivors were betrayed not just by their abusers, but by a system that cherry-picks justice. His story underscores the bipartisan rot at the core of the Epstein saga—proof that truth has been traded for theater, and survivors' voices have been muffled in service of political convenience.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The show is hit by AI slop, Jeffrey Epstein survivors press conference, Young Thug trial, Corey Feldman's upcoming projects, OnlyFans managers, Coast Guard on the attack, Maz has another birthday celebration, and Jim's Picks: Top 10 Worst Band Names. Who has more power with the Super Bowl Halftime Show? Roger Goodell or Jay Z? TMZ answers the age old question...OnlyFans, is it good or bad? Cameron Dallas has lost audience fast. And now he's moving on to a more respectable line of work...Managing OnlyFans stars. Corey Feldman was on TMZ. He's so busy putting out failed projects, he barely has time for Dancing With The Stars. The Minnesota school shooter Robin Westman blamed some of his problems on his furry ex girlfriend. Did the Coast Guard ever blow up a boat like recently? What happened to the drugs? A new Bonerline. Drew was sick in an AI hospital. Sir Paul McCartney and Maz came by to visit him. Jim Bentley was comforted by his favorite band Muse. What is up with Howard Stern? He went out to see Metallica? WTF?! He won't even come by the studio to record a show. Harry Styles & Zoe Kravitz are boning. Jeffrey Epstein survivors held a massive press conference in Washington DC. Virginia Giuffre is going to name Henry Kissinger as one of her attackers in a new book. Dr Henry Kissinger's Who's Dated Who... We call Maz before ANOTHER birthday dinner. You'll never guess whose dinner is more important than this show. Are you going to watch Michigan or Michigan State on Saturday? Is Micah Parsons going to play on Sunday? Tom has a pretty hot take about the Detroit Lions. Rolling Stone dug deep into the Young Thug trial. Southwest Airlines drunk passenger, Leanna Perry, showed up in court today dressed to the nines. She's gross. Jim's Picks: Top 10 Worst Band Names. If you'd like to help support the show… consider subscribing to our YouTube Channel, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter (Drew Lane, Marc Fellhauer, Trudi Daniels, Jim Bentley and BranDon).