Podcast appearances and mentions of virginia giuffre

Prince Andrew's downfall has accelerated sharply in the wake of fresh allegations tied to Jeffrey Epstein and the explosive release of Virginia Giuffre's memoir, Nobody's Girl. The book recounts new details about Andrew's alleged sexual encounters with Giuffre while she was being trafficked as a minor by Epstein. These revelations reignited public outrage and renewed scrutiny over Andrew's long-denied relationship with both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Buckingham Palace has reportedly been forced into damage control, with King Charles III supporting Andrew's decision to give up his “Duke of York” title and remaining royal honors. The palace has publicly stated that the new allegations must be fully investigated, signaling growing institutional distance from Andrew as pressure mounts for full transparency and accountability.Adding to his disgrace, newly surfaced claims allege that Andrew attempted to orchestrate an online smear campaign against Giuffre to salvage his reputation. According to The Guardian's coverage of the memoir, the prince and his aides tried to hire internet trolls to harass Giuffre online and even sought access to her private information, including her Social Security number. Reports indicate that the Metropolitan Police have opened an inquiry into whether Andrew misused his royal security detail or other public resources during this smear campaign. Parliamentarians are also reportedly pushing to strip him of any remaining titles and privileges, as his reputation continues to collapse under the weight of new evidence and public disgust over his conduct.Also...Ian Maxwell, brother of convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, publicly smeared Virginia Giuffre by labeling her “the real monster” in the Epstein saga, claiming she was the one who “ruined lives.” In a tone dripping with contempt, Maxwell reversed the narrative of survivor and perpetrator, portraying Giuffre not as a victim of child sex trafficking, but as a malicious force responsible for the downfall of others. He claimed that Giuffre had “profited” from her accusations and implied that her allegations lacked credibility—completely ignoring the fact that his sister was convicted in a U.S. federal court, and that Giuffre's testimony and civil suits helped bring global attention to Epstein's trafficking ring.Maxwell's comments weren't just tone-deaf—they were a grotesque display of gaslighting and reputational warfare against a survivor of child abuse. Rather than addressing his sister's crimes or acknowledging the systemic exploitation she helped carry out, Ian Maxwell chose to attack one of the few women courageous enough to confront the monster head-on. His remarks attempted to muddy the moral waters, deflect guilt, and assassinate the character of a woman who endured horrific abuse. In doing so, Ian Maxwell made it clear that his family's legacy of denial and elite entitlement is alive and well—even in disgrace.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

I had read Virginia Giuffre's memoire over the Thanksgiving weekend, and wanted to highlight some of the underreported aspects of her life story. I am definitely in the camp of getting Epstein fatigue, so I understand if this isn't an exciting first pick. It was easy to reference my highlights and go from there, so […] The post THC+ Book Report | Nobody's Girl: The Virginia Giuffre Memoir appeared first on The Higherside Chats.

Prince Andrew's downfall has accelerated sharply in the wake of fresh allegations tied to Jeffrey Epstein and the explosive release of Virginia Giuffre's memoir, Nobody's Girl. The book recounts new details about Andrew's alleged sexual encounters with Giuffre while she was being trafficked as a minor by Epstein. These revelations reignited public outrage and renewed scrutiny over Andrew's long-denied relationship with both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Buckingham Palace has reportedly been forced into damage control, with King Charles III supporting Andrew's decision to give up his “Duke of York” title and remaining royal honors. The palace has publicly stated that the new allegations must be fully investigated, signaling growing institutional distance from Andrew as pressure mounts for full transparency and accountability.Adding to his disgrace, newly surfaced claims allege that Andrew attempted to orchestrate an online smear campaign against Giuffre to salvage his reputation. According to The Guardian's coverage of the memoir, the prince and his aides tried to hire internet trolls to harass Giuffre online and even sought access to her private information, including her Social Security number. Reports indicate that the Metropolitan Police have opened an inquiry into whether Andrew misused his royal security detail or other public resources during this smear campaign. Parliamentarians are also reportedly pushing to strip him of any remaining titles and privileges, as his reputation continues to collapse under the weight of new evidence and public disgust over his conduct.Also...Ian Maxwell, brother of convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, publicly smeared Virginia Giuffre by labeling her “the real monster” in the Epstein saga, claiming she was the one who “ruined lives.” In a tone dripping with contempt, Maxwell reversed the narrative of survivor and perpetrator, portraying Giuffre not as a victim of child sex trafficking, but as a malicious force responsible for the downfall of others. He claimed that Giuffre had “profited” from her accusations and implied that her allegations lacked credibility—completely ignoring the fact that his sister was convicted in a U.S. federal court, and that Giuffre's testimony and civil suits helped bring global attention to Epstein's trafficking ring.Maxwell's comments weren't just tone-deaf—they were a grotesque display of gaslighting and reputational warfare against a survivor of child abuse. Rather than addressing his sister's crimes or acknowledging the systemic exploitation she helped carry out, Ian Maxwell chose to attack one of the few women courageous enough to confront the monster head-on. His remarks attempted to muddy the moral waters, deflect guilt, and assassinate the character of a woman who endured horrific abuse. In doing so, Ian Maxwell made it clear that his family's legacy of denial and elite entitlement is alive and well—even in disgrace.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew was not covered by Jeffrey Epstein's 2007–2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), a point that has repeatedly been misunderstood or deliberately obscured. Legal experts have emphasized that the NPA applied narrowly to Epstein himself and, at most, to unnamed U.S.-based co-conspirators under specific jurisdictional limits tied to the Southern District of Florida. Prince Andrew, a British national with alleged conduct occurring outside that jurisdiction—including in the United Kingdom, New York, and the U.S. Virgin Islands—fell entirely outside the agreement's scope. Courts later made clear that the NPA did not grant immunity to foreign nationals, did not bind other federal districts, and did not preempt civil or criminal exposure beyond the deal's precise terms.That legal reality became especially clear during Virginia Giuffre's civil case against Prince Andrew, where judges rejected arguments that Epstein's plea deal insulated Andrew from liability. The settlement Andrew ultimately reached was not a function of legal protection under the NPA, but rather a strategic move to avoid sworn testimony, discovery, and the risk of trial. Attorneys and legal analysts have noted that Andrew's long period of effective insulation stemmed from political deference, diplomatic sensitivity, and institutional hesitation—not from any binding legal shield in Epstein's agreement. In short, Andrew was never legally protected by the Epstein NPA; he was protected by silence, delay, and power, none of which carried the force of law.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Friday, January 2nd, 2026Today, the Wall Street Journal is out with new reporting that the Mar a Lago spa was trafficking girls to Epstein; the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered Trump to return control of the National Guard to Gavin Newsom; new jail video footage disproves government claims about which cameras were working at the time of Epstein's death; US officials confirm Ukraine did NOT strike Putin's residence; the US strikes five more boats in the Caribbean, possibly leaving survivors; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Guest: John FugelsangTell Me Everything|John Fugelsang, The John Fugelsang Podcast, John Fugelsang|Substack, @johnfugelsang|Bluesky, @JohnFugelsang|TwitterSeparation of Church and Hate by John Fugelsang - OUT NOW!AG is joining John Fugelsang this Friday on his Sirius XM show Tell Me Everything on Channel 127 at 9 PM Eastern, 6 Pacific. UNSEALED order in the Abrego Case and the DoJ coverup of the pipe bomber motivesStories:https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/u-s-finds-ukraine-didnt-target-putin-in-drone-strike-615ce4be?reflink=desktopwebshare_permalinkhttps://apnews.com/article/boat-strike-us-military-venezuela-trump-6d975cd2cafaf9ad959e2dad6f0cb8f0https://www.wsj.com/us-news/trump-epstein-mar-a-lago-ban-2011dc53?reflink=desktopwebshare_permalinkhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/epstein-files-videos-jail-footage/Good TroubleACA subsidies that lower monthly insurance premiums for millions of Americans have expired. An estimated 22 million of the 24 million ACA marketplace enrollees are currently receiving enhanced premium tax credits to lower their monthly premiums, and many are preparing to see their premiums soar in 2026.Contact  your House Rep and your Senators - Let them know that this is unacceptable and they need to take action now.Contacting U.S. SenatorsFind Your Representative | house.gov5 Calls.orgFrom The Good NewsPaw It Forward Sanctuary Non-Profithttps://www.facebook.com/people/Paw-It-Forward-Sanctuary-Non-Profit/100095532039556/?mibextid=wwXIfrhttps://ncdoj.gov/attorney-general-jeff-jackson-wins-17-million-lawsuit-against-fema-blocking-femas-attempt-to-withhold-funding-for-first-responders/https://www.npr.org/2025/12/20/g-s1-103223/lumbee-tribe-federal-recognition-137-yearsPatrons Sponsoring Patrons - The Daily Beans→Go To DailyBeansPod.com Click on ‘Good News and Good Trouble' to Share YoursSubscribe to the MSW YouTube Channel - MSW Media - YouTubeOur Donation LinksPathways to Citizenship link to MATCH Allison's Donationhttps://crm.bloomerang.co/HostedDonation?ApiKey=pub_86ff5236-dd26-11ec-b5ee-066e3d38bc77&WidgetId=6388736Allison is donating $20K to It Gets Better and inviting you to help match her donations. Your support makes this work possible, Daily Beans fam. Donate to It Gets Better / The Daily Beans FundraiserJoin Dana and The Daily Beans and support on Giving Tuesday with a MATCHED Donation http://onecau.se/_ekes71More Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - Donate

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.

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.

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.

Prince Andrew repeatedly refused to cooperate with formal legal requests seeking his testimony about Jeffrey Epstein, denying at least three documented approaches from attorneys representing Epstein victims and, later, U.S. authorities. Lawyers for Virginia Giuffre first sought Andrew's cooperation during civil litigation in the United States, requesting interviews and testimony about his relationship with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Andrew declined to participate. Subsequent formal requests—renewed as evidence mounted and court deadlines approached—were likewise rejected, with his legal team maintaining that he would not submit to questioning or provide a sworn account.That pattern continued even as pressure escalated. U.S. prosecutors publicly stated they had made repeated efforts to speak with Andrew as part of their Epstein investigation, only to be rebuffed each time. Legal experts noted that while Andrew was under no obligation to voluntarily cooperate as a foreign national, his refusal to engage stood in sharp contrast to public claims that he was eager to help authorities. The denials became a central feature of the case's narrative, reinforcing criticism that Andrew avoided scrutiny not through legal immunity, but through strategic non-cooperation—declining every formal opportunity to explain his role in Epstein's orbit under oath.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Part 2 of this two-part dive into the recent batch of released Epstein files kicks off by naming more of the men photographed in the Epstein files who seemingly enjoyed the spoils of supporting his network, from magician David Copperfield, to disgraced movie director Brett Ratner, to named co-conspirator, and infamous predator disguised as a model scout, Jean-Luc Brunel. With more released documentation of what victims were reporting over the years, and who could have taken action, the number of people who chose to look the other way is astounding. A startling FBI Tip from an alleged victim regarding Epstein and Trump's involvement in crimes against her at 13-years old on Lake Michigan takes us on a historical dive into forced business connections with that area that span decades. Several victim statements and allegations are reviewed, and throughout, we see the impact of Virginia Giuffre's bravery to pursue legal action against Ghislaine Maxwell and speak publicly. All opinions are personal and not representative of any outside company, person, or agenda. This podcast is hosted by a United States citizen, born and raised in a military family that is proud of this country's commitment to free speech. Information shared via published articles, legal documents, press releases, government websites, executive orders, public videos, news reports, and/or direct quotes and statements, and all may be paraphrased for brevity and presented in layman's terms.Check your voter registration, find your polling location, or contact your representatives via USA.GOV, VOTE.GOV, and/or the "5 Calls" app. “I love America more than any other country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.” - James BaldwinWanna support this independent pod? Links below:BuyMeACoffee - https://www.buymeacoffee.com/BBDBVenmo @TYBBDB Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Valdson Cotrin, who managed Epstein's Paris residence for 18 years, publicly challenged the official ruling that Epstein died by suicide in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019. He insisted that Epstein “loved life too much” to have taken his own life and believed his boss was intent on negotiating bail. Cotrin expressed fear for his own safety, citing the mysterious deaths of individuals tied to the case—including accuser Virginia Giuffre and modeling agent Jean‑Luc Brunel—as cause for concern.Beyond doubts about Epstein's death, Cotrin painted a picture of Epstein as deeply connected within elite circles. He made striking claims—including that Epstein told him Trump offered him a job in his administration, which Epstein declined, and recalling Ghislaine Maxwell as the true authority in his household. Cotrin also recounted memorable moments, such as collecting Epstein from the Paris airport and encountering Bill Clinton, describing the experience as intimidating—he "was trembling"—and confirmed he retains photographs of himself with both Epstein and Clinton, despite claiming he never witnessed the criminal behavior Epstein was accused of.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein 'loved life too much' to kill himself and must have been murdered, his butler says as he spills the beans on everyone who visited - from Prince Andrew to Bill Clinton | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew repeatedly refused to cooperate with formal legal requests seeking his testimony about Jeffrey Epstein, denying at least three documented approaches from attorneys representing Epstein victims and, later, U.S. authorities. Lawyers for Virginia Giuffre first sought Andrew's cooperation during civil litigation in the United States, requesting interviews and testimony about his relationship with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Andrew declined to participate. Subsequent formal requests—renewed as evidence mounted and court deadlines approached—were likewise rejected, with his legal team maintaining that he would not submit to questioning or provide a sworn account.That pattern continued even as pressure escalated. U.S. prosecutors publicly stated they had made repeated efforts to speak with Andrew as part of their Epstein investigation, only to be rebuffed each time. Legal experts noted that while Andrew was under no obligation to voluntarily cooperate as a foreign national, his refusal to engage stood in sharp contrast to public claims that he was eager to help authorities. The denials became a central feature of the case's narrative, reinforcing criticism that Andrew avoided scrutiny not through legal immunity, but through strategic non-cooperation—declining every formal opportunity to explain his role in Epstein's orbit under oath.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew was not covered by Jeffrey Epstein's 2007–2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), a point that has repeatedly been misunderstood or deliberately obscured. Legal experts have emphasized that the NPA applied narrowly to Epstein himself and, at most, to unnamed U.S.-based co-conspirators under specific jurisdictional limits tied to the Southern District of Florida. Prince Andrew, a British national with alleged conduct occurring outside that jurisdiction—including in the United Kingdom, New York, and the U.S. Virgin Islands—fell entirely outside the agreement's scope. Courts later made clear that the NPA did not grant immunity to foreign nationals, did not bind other federal districts, and did not preempt civil or criminal exposure beyond the deal's precise terms.That legal reality became especially clear during Virginia Giuffre's civil case against Prince Andrew, where judges rejected arguments that Epstein's plea deal insulated Andrew from liability. The settlement Andrew ultimately reached was not a function of legal protection under the NPA, but rather a strategic move to avoid sworn testimony, discovery, and the risk of trial. Attorneys and legal analysts have noted that Andrew's long period of effective insulation stemmed from political deference, diplomatic sensitivity, and institutional hesitation—not from any binding legal shield in Epstein's agreement. In short, Andrew was never legally protected by the Epstein NPA; he was protected by silence, delay, and power, none of which carried the force of law.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe world is moving away from wind and solar, coal demand is up, China was never going along with the green new scam. Trump is moving carefully through the [CB] minefield economy. Gold is on the move. Trump is moving the country out of the old system. The [DS] try to get Trump with the Epstein hoax, now that the information dropped the people can now see what the [DS] was planning. Ship building is coming back to the US. Trump signs the NDAA that has additional protections for the election. Every step of the way Trump is countering the [DS] cheating system. Economy https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2003156645388406992?s=20   consumption, or 4.95 billion tonnes. By comparison, US coal demand stands at 410 million tonnes, just ~5% of the world's total. Meanwhile, the IEA projects a gradual decline in demand over the next 5 years, to ~8.60 billion tonnes by 2030. However, past forecasts of peak coal demand have repeatedly proven wrong, as consumption continues to rise. Coal remains in high demand 23 US States Are At High Risk Of (Or In) Recession Currently  In 2025, states responsible for about a third of U.S. GDP are in recession, or face high recession risk. Another third are expanding, including Florida and Utah, based on payrolls, employment, and other key economic data. This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows recession risk by state in 2025, based on analysis from Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics. In Recession/High Risk Treading Water Expanding State/District Business Cycle Status Share of U.S. GDP (%) Georgia In Recession/High Risk 3.03 Montana In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Wyoming In Recession/High Risk 0.18 Michigan In Recession/High Risk 2.44 Massachusetts In Recession/High Risk 2.73 Mississippi In Recession/High Risk 0.53 Minnesota In Recession/High Risk 1.70 Kansas In Recession/High Risk 0.80 Rhode Island In Recession/High Risk 0.28 Delaware In Recession/High Risk 0.34 Washington In Recession/High Risk 3.02 Illinois In Recession/High Risk 3.85 West Virginia In Recession/High Risk 0.36 New Hampshire In Recession/High Risk 0.42 Maryland In Recession/High Risk 1.86 Virginia In Recession/High Risk 2.66 South Dakota In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Connecticut In Recession/High Risk 1.27 Oregon In Recession/High Risk 1.14 Iowa In Recession/High Risk 0.86 New Jersey In Recession/High Risk 2.93 Maine In Recession/High Risk 0.33 District of Columbia In Recession/High Risk 0.64 Missouri Treading Water 1.54 Ohio Treading Water 3.14 Hawaii Treading Water 0.39 Arkansas Treading Water 0.65 New Mexico Treading Water 0.49 Tennessee Treading Water 1.87 New York Treading Water 7.92 Vermont Treading Water 0.16 Alaska Treading Water 0.24 Colorado Treading Water 1.92 California Treading Water 14.50 Nevada Treading Water 0.86 South Carolina Expanding 1.18 Texas Expanding 9.41 Oklahoma Expanding 0.92 Idaho Expanding 0.43 Kentucky Expanding 0.99 Alabama Expanding 1.10 Indiana Expanding 1.81 Nebraska Expanding 0.63 North Carolina Expanding 2.86 Louisiana Expanding 1.11 Florida Expanding 5.78 North Dakota Expanding 0.26 Pennsylvania Expanding 3.54 Arizona Expanding 1.88 Wisconsin Expanding 1.53 Utah Expanding 1.02 Currently, many coastal, Northeastern states are facing some of the worst economic conditions. In Maine, for instance, year-over-year GDP growth is just 0.8% as of Q2 2025, compared to the U.S. average of 2.1%. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C.'s unemployment rate was 6.4% in July, significantly higher than the 4.6% U.S. average given sweeping federal cuts. According to Zandi's analysis, New York and California are “Treading Water”, together responsible for driving over 22% of U.S. GDP. In comparison, Texas, which fuels 9.4% of U.S. economic growth is expanding. Unemployment rates of 4.0% in July remain below the U.S. average. Additionally, the Texas economy is growing faster than the nation, while income growth rose 6.3% annually as of Q2 2025, outpacing the national average.   Source: zerohedge.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/unseen1_unseen/status/2003254895143461092?s=20   caused by falling home prices while increasing the affordability of homes. Home builders aren’t going to build more homes if they are losing money. Trump can’t force them to build homes. This is where thinking outside the box comes in play and things like the 50 year mortgage, interest rate cuts, lower down-payments, salt taxes etc get proposed. With deportations and the decline of the boomer generation from old age, supply will be increasing. Prices will come down. The trick is not to allow them to go into a free fall and keep demand high enough to soak up a great deal of that supply. Trump’s proposed $2,000 tariff rebate checks depend on Congress   President Donald Trump needs Congress to take action to make good on a proposal to send some Americans $2,000 tariff rebate checks next year. Director of the National Economic Council Kevin Hassett said the U.S. House and Senate will need to take up the matter. “I would expect that in the new year, the president will bring forth a proposal to Congress to make that happen,” Hassett said on “Face the Nation” on Sunday. Details about Trump’s tariff rebate proposal remain sparse. Trump has said he wants to issue the rebate checks and use the rest of the tariff revenue to pay down the nation’s $38 trillion debt, even as the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet determined whether he has the authority to impose tariffs. Source: thecentersquare.com US Industrial Production Rises At Strongest Annual Rate Since Apr 2022 Following the much-stronger-than-expected GDP print, US Industrial Production also surprised to the upside, rising 0.2% MoM in November and pulling the YoY change up to 2.52% – the strongest annual growth since April 2022… Source: zerohedge.com Trump Boom: U.S. Economy Grows 4.3%, Fastest in Two Years, Smashing Expectations The U.S. economy grew this summer at the fastest pace in two years, far outpacing economists' forecasts. The Commerce Department said U.S. gross domestic product—the government's official economic scorecard—rose at a seasonally and inflation-adjusted 4.3 percent annual rate in the third quarter. The report on the July through September period was delayed due to the shutdown. Consumer spending grew much faster than expected, expanding at a seasonally and inflation-adjusted annual rate of 3.5 percent. That's up from 2.5 percent in the second quarter and above the 2.7 percent expected. Source: breitbart.com    FULL steam ahead — “You haven't seen anything yet!” Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2003149733158588868?s=20 This list is just the table setting for the coming booming economy. Wait till Trump transforms the entire fiat world debt system. A Golden Age for the world approaches. https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2003285919668011147?s=20    good news, the Market went up. Nowadays, when there is good news, the Market goes down, because everybody thinks that Interest Rates will be immediately lifted to take care of “potential” Inflation. That means that, essentially, we can never have a Great Market again, those Markets from the time when our Nation was building up, and becoming great. Strong Markets, even phenomenal Markets, don't cause Inflation, stupidity does! I want my new Fed Chairman to lower Interest Rates if the Market is doing well, not destroy the Market for no reason whatsoever. I want to have a Market the likes of which we haven't had in many decades, a Market that goes up on good news, and down on bad news, the way it should be, and the way it was. Inflation will take care of itself and, if it doesn't, we can always raise Rates at the appropriate time — But the appropriate time is not to kill Rallies, which could lift our Nation by 10, 15, and even 20 GDP points in a year — and maybe even more than that! A Nation can never be Economically GREAT if “eggheads” are allowed to do everything within their power to destroy the upward slope. We are going to be encouraging the Good Market to get better, rather than make it impossible for it to do so. We are going to see numbers that are far more natural, and far better, than they have ever been before. We are going to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! The United States should be rewarded for SUCCESS, not brought down by it. Anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed Chairman! Political/Rights https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003309528805470611?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2003266300832038926?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003271819705389139?s=20   interfere with immigration operations. https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2003378383862817224?s=20 https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/2002573015142576350?s=20 https://twitter.com/TriciaOhio/status/2002801058897142114?s=20   This was a targeted operation to arrest Fernandez Flores, a criminal illegal alien from Honduras with a criminal conviction for making a false police report. Flores entered the United States illegally at unknown date and location without inspection by an immigration officer. He will remain in ICE custody pending further immigration proceedings. If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, we will find you, we will arrest you, and you will not return. https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/2003130997198713329?s=20https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2003214521419333695?s=20 https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/2003214521419333695?s=20 WATCH: Justice Department Releases Shocking Recreation Video of Jeffrey Epstein Trying to Kill Himself The Justice Department on Monday released recreation video of Jeffrey Epstein inside of his jail cell trying to kill himself. The video – which was revealed to be computer-generated – is timestamped August 10, 2019 at 4:29 am ET – Epstein was found dead at 6:30 am ET on August 10, 2019. Prosecutors previously said that the two CCTV cameras positioned outside of Epstein's cell had malfunctioned. The 10-second recreation video shows Epstein sitting on the floor of his cell attempting to kill himself. WATCH:  Source: thegatwaypundit.com  https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003476301970133417?s=20  “a circular line of erythema at the base of the neck” along with other marks of friction and bruising on his knee. Epstein told prison staff he didn't remember what happened but was afraid to return to the Special Housing Unit, saying it was “where he had gotten marks on his neck and he does not know why it happened.” He said he had only slept 30 minutes a night for five days due to noise and stress. His cellmate, ex-cop Nicholas Tartaglione, had reportedly been harassing him, and Epstein claimed “he tried to kill me.” Staff noted Tartaglione had been aggressive and was seen mocking Epstein with a string around his neck. Despite these signs, the incident was labeled a “possible suicide attempt.” https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003292687835787393?s=20  were actively tracking and attempting to contact 10 individuals connected to Epstein’s crimes. The email references attempts to contact Brunel (modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, who later died in prison), Maxwell (Ghislaine, now serving 20 years), and mentions “Ohio contacting Wexner.” Les Wexner is the billionaire L Brands founder who gave Epstein his $77 million NYC mansion and served as his primary financial benefactor for years. A separate confidential document from law firm Debevoise & Plimpton lists SDNY matters they appeared in, including one entry: “Wexner: Epstein investigation.” 10 co-conspirators. Only Maxwell was ever charged. The names behind those black boxes are the real story here. https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/2003358231780032675?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003480729624412240?s=20  and his residence as Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Profession listed: “Manager.” It's part of a trove of thousands of Epstein-related files released overnight. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2003436034709995730?s=20   from Epstein's properties – computers, hard drives, disks, the digital nervous system of the operation. And they can't get it. At one point, frustration boils over into honesty: “The FBI is completely fucking us on this.” That's not a tweet. That's an internal DOJ message. Translation: the prosecutors responsible for bringing cases did not have a clear, reliable accounting of the evidence in the FBI's possession. Not what was seized. Not what was imaged. Not what was searchable. Not what was missing. This isn't incompetence in a vacuum. It's structural. Evidence control is power. Whoever controls the data controls the pace, the scope, and the fallout. And remember: Epstein died before trial. Maxwell was prosecuted narrowly. No broader conspiracy case ever materialized. Prediction: this is why. Not because the evidence didn't exist- but because it never cohered into something prosecutors could safely touch without detonating their own case. The scandal isn't just who was on the tapes. It's that even the feds couldn't tell you where the tapes went. That's not a cover-up movie plot. That's a system quietly eating itself. https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/2003457025695719784?s=20  and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 Election. To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already.” New: More Epstein Files Drop, and Donald Trump Appears to Be the Star This Time Around So, what incriminating evidence against President Trump is to be found in this latest drop? Apparently, an email from January 2020 in which a federal prosecutor from New York – of course – to an “undisclosed person” claiming Trump had flown on Jeffrey Epstein’s private plan at least eight times during the 1990s, and one time there was a 20-year-old woman on the flight.  Here’s more: The email, which was sent in January 2020 from a federal prosecutor in New York to an undisclosed person, says, “For your situational awareness, wanted to let you know that the flight records we received yesterday reflect that Donald Trump traveled on Epstein's private jet many more times than previously has been reported (or that we were aware), including during the period we would expect to charge in a [Ghislaine] Maxwell case.”  This big revelation is that Trump traveled a few more times than we previously knew, although this was during a time period that the president has already acknowledged having had an association with Epstein. Note the timing of the email – January 2020 is when the presidential election would be kicking into full swing. This anonymous federal prosecutor clearly thought they had a gotcha moment, but there’s a pesky little detail that puts things in perspective: “[Trump] is listed as having traveled with, among others and at various times, Marla Maples, his daughter Tiffany, and his son Eric.”  Source: redstate.com The specific document you’re referring to appears to be the complaint filed in the 2020 civil lawsuit Doe v. Indyke et al. (Case No. 1:20-cv-00484, S.D.N.Y.), which was part of the recently released Epstein files by the U.S. Department of Justice.  This lawsuit was brought by an anonymous plaintiff (“Jane Doe”) against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate (Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn) and Ghislaine Maxwell, seeking compensation for alleged sexual abuse and trafficking by Epstein.How Trump’s Name Appears in the DocumentOn page 4 of the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that during one of her encounters with Epstein (around the 1990s), he took her to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida when she was 14 years old. Epstein reportedly introduced her to Donald Trump (then the owner of Mar-a-Lago), elbowed him playfully, and asked, referring to the girl, “This is a good one, right?” Trump is described as smiling and nodding in agreement, after which they both chuckled. The plaintiff states she felt uncomfortable but was too young to understand why at the time. The document does not accuse Trump of any criminal wrongdoing or involvement in Epstein’s abuse; it frames this as part of the broader context of her grooming and exploitation by Epstein.How the Name Got Into the DocumentTrump’s name was included as part of the plaintiff’s personal allegations detailing her experiences with Epstein. The complaint is a legal filing where the victim recounts specific incidents to support her claims against Epstein’s estate and associates. It reflects her firsthand account, not a court-verified fact or evidence from other sources.  There is no mention of independent corroboration (e.g., witnesses, photos, or records) in the filing itself, and it has not been adjudicated in court as true.Source of the AllegationThe source is the anonymous plaintiff (“Jane Doe”), who claims to be a victim of Epstein’s abuse starting from age 13 or 14.  She was reportedly recruited at a summer camp in Michigan and alleges ongoing grooming and assaults by Epstein over several years. This Doe is distinct from other known accusers like Virginia Giuffre, though a similar incident (Epstein introducing a 14-year-old to Trump at Mar-a-Lago without the “good one” comment) was testified to by another accuser (“Jane”) during Ghislaine Maxwell’s 2021 criminal trial.  https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2003236602374713557?s=20 DOGE Geopolitical https://twitter.com/BreannaMorello/status/2003196698974191914?s=20   that are protected under the Constitution. Under D.C. law, anyone wishing to own a firearm must register it with the MPD. However, the D.C. Code imposes a sweeping ban on the registration—and thus the legal possession—of a wide range of firearms. This broad prohibition, the Justice Department argues, infringes on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to keep and bear commonly owned firearms for lawful purposes. Trump's DOJ Sues Washington, D.C. Police Department Over Unconstitutional Ban on Semi-Automatic Firearms The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the District of Columbia's Metropolitan Police Department for enforcing a ban on semi-automatic firearms in violation of the Second Amendment. The lawsuit alleges that D.C.'s gun laws require registration of all firearms with the MPD; however, the D.C. Code imposes a sweeping ban on numerous protected weapons, making it legally impossible for residents to own them for self-defense or other lawful purposes. The DOJ said in a press release announcing the lawsuit: “MPD's current pattern and practice of refusing to register protected firearms is forcing residents to sue to protect their rights and to risk facing wrongful arrest for lawfully possessing protected firearms.” “Today's action from the Department of Justice's new Second Amendment Section underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. Bondi continued, “Washington, DC's ban on some of America's most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation's capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.” Echoing this sentiment, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division added, “This Civil Rights Division will defend American citizens from unconstitutional restrictions of commonly used firearms, in violation of their Second Amendment rights. The newly established Second Amendment Section filed this lawsuit to ensure that the very rights D.C. resident Mr. Heller secured 17 years ago are enforced today — and that all law-abiding citizens seeking to own protected firearms for lawful purposes may do so.” The case draws directly from the landmark 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, where the Court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to own semi-automatic weapons in their homes for self-defense. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2003192220753723840?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2003238094057955337?s=20 War/Peace https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2003334956479558072?s=20 there will be no escalation into broader conflict, and the decision has already been made. However, precision air strikes on cartel assets seems like a probable outcome. Trump is neutralizing Deep State assets around the globe, and South/Central American drug cartels are assets of the Deep State. They are transnational criminal organizations responsible for the drug, weapon, and human trafficking of the Western hemisphere, and their racket feeds the Deep State machine. My guess is, that cartel drug factories and assets are going to get smoked by the US MIL via precision air strikes, and the other powerful leaders of the world have already agreed to some sort of deal with Trump and no one will interfere. Just like Iran and Syria. I think most of the leaders/nations of the world agree with Trump that these transnational criminal organizations must be eradicated, and stability must be brought to the world. President Unveils ‘Trump Class’ Of Warships, Huntington Ingalls Shares Jump    build two new “Trump-class” battleships, to acquire 20-25 of these ships in the coming years.   In his address, the President noted these 30,000-40,000 ton ships will carry a large quantity of missiles, including hypersonic missiles, and will also be outfitted with electromagnetic rail guns and directed energy lasers. Trump-class battleships will also carry nuclear-armed sea launched cruise missiles (currently under development) adding an additional element of nuclear deterrence to the Navy. Trump-class destroyers appear to be designed as the center of enhanced command and control networks at sea, as the Navy looks to field more autonomous assets and traditional vessels in the coming years.   The first “Trump-class” battleship will be named USS Defiant, and it will be even longer than the Iowa-class battleships of the World War II era. However, at 35,000 tons, it will only weigh about half as much, and have a smaller crew of between 650 and 850 sailors; the Iowa had some 2,700 sailors. The new ships — which are being called “guided missile battleships” —  are part of larger vision for a “Golden Fleet.” The Navy has rolled out a website to promote that concept. Sources tell AP that construction of the Defiant is expected to start in the early 2030’s, with another 19 to 24 Trump-class ships to follow.   Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2003231263520379120?s=20   that kind of money, they HAVE to build quickly!”   “We want the dividends to go into the creation of production facilities. We’ll be talking about CapEx, dividends and the pay.” “Also, buybacks…they want to buy back their stock. I want them to put their money in plants and equipment! So they can build these planes FAST, like, IMMEDIATELY!” Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/2003224842078675311?s=20  of American institutions or threats to our food supply, economy, or public safety. Protecting the homeland means vigilance: every time, no exceptions. https://twitter.com/ThomasMoreSoc/status/2003262595566850541?s=20  precedent-setting victory, a federal court has permanently blocked California AG Rob Bonta and the CA Dept. of Education from forcing teachers to lie to parents about their own children’s secret gender transitions—declaring parents have a constitutional right to know and teachers have a constitutional right to share the truth. [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2003205278796501397?s=20  larger scale. Don't forget that the Malthusians are antihuman and that they believe that 7 out of every 8 human lives on the planet must be terminated in order to save the world. Nearly 100 Minnesota Mayors Send Panicked Letter to Lawmakers Complaining About Fraud Scandal and the Leadership of Tim Walz Almost 100 mayors in the state of Minnesota have sent a letter to state lawmakers complaining about the fraud scandal and how it is going to impact the communities they serve. They are clearly not happy with the leadership of Governor Tim Walz and his connections to the fraud scandal that has rocked the state in recent weeks. The scandal is still unfolding and it's unclear what the final tally will be, but it's looking like something in the tens of billions. FOX News reports:  You can see the full letter here. These mayors should have demanded that Tim Walz resign. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2002771316345327905?s=20 Our crooked politicians have set up the biggest money laundering operation in the world and that 38 trillion in debt is almost all tied to fraud. this is the tip of the iceberg. Buckle up, its all being exposed. Your harder earned money was used to support a criminal syndicate.  President Trump's Plan  https://twitter.com/DcLidstone/status/2003338615917806050?s=20 John Brennan Lawyers Confirm Their Client is a “Target” of a Grand Jury Investigation Lawfare lawyer Kenneth Wainstein representing former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed in a proactive litigation letter to Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, their client is a “target” of a grand jury investigation. The word “target” is important here, because the letter specifically outlines how Brennan has received subpoenas for documents and information surrounding his construct of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. The letter notes that prosecutors from the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason Reding Quiñones, have advised Mr. Brennan that he is “a target” of a grand jury investigation.   [SOURCE] Pay attention to the footnotes being cited by Brennan's lawyers as they begin to pull in some of the commentary by voices who have publicly given opinion about the overall Trump targeting operation.  Mike Davis name appears frequently in this letter, as the Brennan defense team begins to frame the conspiratorial nature of some claims against their client. In essence, the Brennan legal team are attempting to refute the evidence by pointing to the blanket of some crazy commentary that covers it. This is exactly what I have been cautioning about {SEE HERE}. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/TheStormRedux/status/2003448097930662069?s=20  Cannon's courtroom. FANTASTIC. https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2003133420021424297?s=20   Thune objected the president would be able to adjourn Congress for ten days and get his full team on the field. https://twitter.com/DavidShafer/status/2002953961595449763?s=20 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Contains Hidden Election Integrity Gem – Could Have Huge Implications for Voting Machines    With the National Defense Authorization Act signed by President Donald Trump on December 18th, 2025, a little-known section was snuck into the 3000+ page bill:  Section 6805. Requiring Penetration Testing As Part Of The Testing And Certification of Voting Systems. This section amends the Help America Vote Act of 2002 by adding a “Required Penetration Testing” section that “provides for the conduct of penetration testing as part of the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software” by an accredited laboratory. The amendment now requires the penetration testing as a condition of certification from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and allows consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology or any other federal agency on “lab selection criteria” and “other aspects of the program.” While this is still short of a legitimate attempt at ensuring election integrity, it is an effort toward scrutinizing the voting systems by finally requiring cybersecurity experts to do what Clay Parikh was restricted from doing during his time as a VSTL contractor. Hand-marked paper ballots hand-counted at the precinct level, is being utilized in Dallas County, TX for the 2026 midterm primaries, and is still the ultimate goal of the election integrity community to ensure free and fair elections in the United States. Source: thegatewaypundit.com Penetration testing, often abbreviated as “pen testing,” is a cybersecurity practice where authorized experts simulate real-world cyberattacks on a computer system, network, or application to identify and exploit vulnerabilities before malicious actors can do so. The goal is to uncover weaknesses in security measures, such as software flaws, misconfigurations, or inadequate defenses, and provide recommendations for remediation. It typically involves several stages: Planning and reconnaissance: Gathering information about the target system. Scanning: Using tools to probe for potential entry points. Gaining access: Attempting to exploit vulnerabilities to breach the system. Maintaining access: Testing how long access can be sustained without detection. Analysis and reporting: Documenting findings, risks, and fixes. In the context of Section 6805 of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which incorporates provisions from the SECURE IT Act (H.R. 6315), penetration testing is mandated as part of the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification process for voting system hardware and software. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) must implement this requirement within 180 days of enactment, with accreditation of testing entities handled through recommendations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). This ensures that voting systems used in federal elections undergo rigorous cybersecurity assessments to detect and mitigate vulnerabilities, enhancing election security Poll: Trump's Approval Rating Lands at 50 Percent, 9 Points Above Water President Donald Trump enjoys a 50 percent approval rating, with a net approval rating of plus 9 points, according to the latest polling from InsiderAdvantage.  Source: breitbart.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

For years, the relationship between Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein was framed as trivial and incidental, a narrative reinforced through repeated denials and aggressive spin from Clinton's defenders. That framing has unraveled as photographic evidence and documented associations demonstrate a level of proximity that contradicts claims of distance and ignorance, particularly Clinton's social interactions with Ghislaine Maxwell well after Epstein's conviction. The issue is not an allegation of direct criminal conduct by Clinton, but the repeated misrepresentation of his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell, which helped preserve Epstein's legitimacy and influence. By minimizing those ties, Clinton contributed to an environment where Epstein could continue abusing victims under the protective aura of elite association. That deception matters because power and credibility are currency in trafficking networks, and Clinton's stature provided both.The controversy is compounded by Clinton's continued evasiveness, including disputing survivor accounts such as those of Virginia Giuffre and resisting full transparency through legal processes. Deflections rooted in whataboutism or claims of unfair targeting miss the core point: accountability is not partisan, and scrutiny is not persecution. Photographs, documented social access, and contradictory statements establish a pattern of dishonesty that deserves examination regardless of political affiliation. The public outrage reflects frustration with a double standard that shields powerful figures while demanding silence from victims. This is not about sides or symbolism; it is about truth, credibility, and the real-world consequences that flow when influential people lie to protect themselves and, in doing so, protect abusers.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

GET HEIRLOOM SEEDS & NON GMO SURVIVAL FOOD HERE: https://heavensharvest.com/ USE Code WAM to save 25% plus free shipping! GET YOUR WAV WATCH HERE: https://buy.wavwatch.com/WAM Use Code WAM to save $100 and purchase amazing healing frequency technology! BUY TICKETS HERE! https://anarchapulco.com/ Use Code WAM & Save 10%! BUY GOLD HERE: https://firstnationalbullion.com/schedule-consult/ Avoid CBDCs! Get Your SUPER-SUPPLIMENTS HERE: https://vni.life/wam Use Code WAM15 & Save 15%! Life changing formulas you can't find anywhere else! Josh Sigurdson reports on the latest release of so-called "Epstein Files" which have reached headline worldwide as photos of Jeffrey Epstein with the rich and powerful go viral. For the umpteenth time this year, the Department Of Justice has released what they call "Epstein Files." The vast majority of the documents are entirely redacted. There are hundreds of pages of pure black ink. In fact, one of the stipulations of the release according to the DOJ is that it cannot affect current government officials. How is that not a cover up? How is that transparency? Why are they openly acknowledging their involvement with Epstein and getting away with openly redacting such information? Once again, we must remind people that there are no "Epstein Files" in the incarnation most think there are. Jeffrey Epstein gathered blackmail on the most powerful and those people knew exactly what they were getting into. In fact, more information comes out regularly that ties him completely to Israeli intelligence. He's even seen wearing an IDF shirt on more than one occasion. He boasted about being Israeli intelligence to his girlfriends. Virginia Giuffre spoke of being brutally attacked by Ehud Barak to which Epstein was afraid to remedy for Virginia and told her to just put up with it. Countless examples of video evidence was taken from Jeffrey Epstein's New York home by the FBI and magically it was lost. Many can surmise where that video went. They're not going to release the blackmail they have on people they're still controlling. However, evidence is leaked out every few months which is of some benefit, even if the goal is simply dividing the political paradigm against each other so people can keep pointing fingers and saying "what about." Whataboutisms when it comes to politics and child trafficking is truly an immoral example of people not actually caring about the children at all and instead attempting to gain political points. The photos that have come out this time show some pretty wild settings. Bill Clinton in a jacuzzi with apparent Epstein victims as well as Ghislaine Maxwell. Mick Jagger with Epstein. Michael Jackson with Epstein (though this one is controversial as many believe it was a set up after he sought Epstein's help financially through a mutual friend). There was even a strange photograph of two women tied up in the woods under a tree. People feel insulted by perpetually being told by both sides that there's nothing to see. For years democrats called it a hoax. Now, Republicans are calling it a hoax. Yet both sides have enough time to point their fingers at each other. Apparently it's not a hoax when the other side does it. This is why we can't have nice things. In this video, we break down what this latest set of documents means and what comes next. Stay tuned for more from WAM! HELP SUPPORT US AS WE DOCUMENT HISTORY HERE: https://gogetfunding.com/help-keep-wam-alive/# Get local, healthy, pasture raised meat delivered to your door here: https://wildpastures.com/promos/save-20-for-life/bonus15?oid=6&affid=321 USE THE LINK & get 20% off for life and $15 off your first box! DITCH YOUR DOCTOR! https://www.livelongerformula.com/wam Get a natural health practitioner and work with Christian Yordanov! Mention WAM and get a FREE masterclass! You will ALSO get a FREE metabolic function assessment! GET YOUR APRICOT SEEDS at the life-saving Richardson Nutritional Center HERE: https://rncstore.com/r?id=bg8qc1 Use code JOSH to save money! SIGN UP FOR HOMESTEADING COURSES NOW: https://freedomfarmers.com/link/17150/ Get Prepared & Start The Move Towards Real Independence With Curtis Stone's Courses! GET YOUR FREEDOM KELLY KETTLE KIT HERE: https://patriotprepared.com/shop/freedom-kettle/ Use Code WAM and enjoy many solutions for the outdoors in the face of the impending reset! PayPal: ancientwonderstelevision@gmail.com FIND OUR CoinTree page here: https://cointr.ee/joshsigurdson PURCHASE MERECHANDISE HERE: https://world-alternative-media.creator-spring.com/ JOIN US on SubscribeStar here: https://www.subscribestar.com/world-alternative-media For subscriber only content! Pledge here! Just a dollar a month can help us alive! https://www.patreon.com/user?u=2652072&ty=h&u=2652072 BITCOIN ADDRESS: 18d1WEnYYhBRgZVbeyLr6UfiJhrQygcgNU World Alternative Media 2025

For years, the relationship between Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein was framed as trivial and incidental, a narrative reinforced through repeated denials and aggressive spin from Clinton's defenders. That framing has unraveled as photographic evidence and documented associations demonstrate a level of proximity that contradicts claims of distance and ignorance, particularly Clinton's social interactions with Ghislaine Maxwell well after Epstein's conviction. The issue is not an allegation of direct criminal conduct by Clinton, but the repeated misrepresentation of his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell, which helped preserve Epstein's legitimacy and influence. By minimizing those ties, Clinton contributed to an environment where Epstein could continue abusing victims under the protective aura of elite association. That deception matters because power and credibility are currency in trafficking networks, and Clinton's stature provided both.The controversy is compounded by Clinton's continued evasiveness, including disputing survivor accounts such as those of Virginia Giuffre and resisting full transparency through legal processes. Deflections rooted in whataboutism or claims of unfair targeting miss the core point: accountability is not partisan, and scrutiny is not persecution. Photographs, documented social access, and contradictory statements establish a pattern of dishonesty that deserves examination regardless of political affiliation. The public outrage reflects frustration with a double standard that shields powerful figures while demanding silence from victims. This is not about sides or symbolism; it is about truth, credibility, and the real-world consequences that flow when influential people lie to protect themselves and, in doing so, protect abusers.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

For years, the relationship between Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein was framed as trivial and incidental, a narrative reinforced through repeated denials and aggressive spin from Clinton's defenders. That framing has unraveled as photographic evidence and documented associations demonstrate a level of proximity that contradicts claims of distance and ignorance, particularly Clinton's social interactions with Ghislaine Maxwell well after Epstein's conviction. The issue is not an allegation of direct criminal conduct by Clinton, but the repeated misrepresentation of his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell, which helped preserve Epstein's legitimacy and influence. By minimizing those ties, Clinton contributed to an environment where Epstein could continue abusing victims under the protective aura of elite association. That deception matters because power and credibility are currency in trafficking networks, and Clinton's stature provided both.The controversy is compounded by Clinton's continued evasiveness, including disputing survivor accounts such as those of Virginia Giuffre and resisting full transparency through legal processes. Deflections rooted in whataboutism or claims of unfair targeting miss the core point: accountability is not partisan, and scrutiny is not persecution. Photographs, documented social access, and contradictory statements establish a pattern of dishonesty that deserves examination regardless of political affiliation. The public outrage reflects frustration with a double standard that shields powerful figures while demanding silence from victims. This is not about sides or symbolism; it is about truth, credibility, and the real-world consequences that flow when influential people lie to protect themselves and, in doing so, protect abusers.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On today's episode, CORINNE FISHER and KRYSTYNA HUTCHINSON put their gaydar to the test to let one listener know the sexual status of her crush. Krystyna spills the Epstein tea after reading Virginia Giuffre's book, “Nobody's Girl.” C&K then welcome stand-up comedian, KATIE BOYLE, back to the studio. The trio discuss reuniting with your high school crush, the consequences of talking about your abortion on Irish radio, her feud with Conor McGregor, and “pro-lifers” threatening death. Follow KATIE on IG @KatieBoyleComic Follow CORINNE on IG @PhilanthropyGal Follow KRYSTYNA on IG @KrystynaHutch Follow ERIC on IG @EricFretty Want to write into the show? Send us an email SorryAboutLastNightShow@gmail.com Music credit for today's episode:Ellisa SunWho Knew⁠https://open.spotify.com/track/1DJJeHLV2xtPVSEh4aWBdF?si=398f38ad74b74846⁠ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The funeral for 87 year old Bondi victim Alex Kleytman held today, the youngest and oldest victims of the Bondi terror attack farewelled on the same day; The government will look to strengthen migration laws to ensure people with anti-Semitic views cannot visit or emigrate to Australia after the Bondi massacre; There are calls for the federal govt to bolster hate speech laws; A man who allegedly threatened a member of the Jewish community during a flight from Bali has been arrested; Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir Nobody's Girl has officially sold 1 million copies, her family saying the milestone is a bitter sweet moment; The Oscars will look very different in 2029, ending their partnership with broadcast partner ABC and moving to YouTube END BITS Bondi Beach condolence book Support independent women's media CREDITS Host/Producer: Claire MurphyBecome a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)

In the defamation case Virginia Giuffre brought against Ghislaine Maxwell beginning in 2015, Maxwell responded with a motion for summary judgment—arguing that Giuffre's allegations were not legally defamatory and that Maxwell was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. That motion aimed to avoid a trial by asserting that even if all of Giuffre's allegations were true, they did not meet the legal threshold for defamation. The motion, along with supporting documents, was filed under seal during pre-trial proceedings. Ultimately, the district court did not grant the motion, and the case was later settled out of court under confidentiality terms in 2017.When third parties later moved to unseal portions of the sealed record, particularly filings related to the summary judgment motion, the courts determined that these materials were judicial documents subject to a strong presumption of public access. A federal appeals court ordered their partial release because Maxwell had not shown sufficient reasons to overcome the public's right of access. In other words, although Maxwell sought to dispose of the case quietly and legally via summary judgment—and shield that process from public view—those efforts were rejected, and important portions of the case were ultimately made part of the public record.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Docs - DocumentCloud

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)

In the defamation case Virginia Giuffre brought against Ghislaine Maxwell beginning in 2015, Maxwell responded with a motion for summary judgment—arguing that Giuffre's allegations were not legally defamatory and that Maxwell was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. That motion aimed to avoid a trial by asserting that even if all of Giuffre's allegations were true, they did not meet the legal threshold for defamation. The motion, along with supporting documents, was filed under seal during pre-trial proceedings. Ultimately, the district court did not grant the motion, and the case was later settled out of court under confidentiality terms in 2017.When third parties later moved to unseal portions of the sealed record, particularly filings related to the summary judgment motion, the courts determined that these materials were judicial documents subject to a strong presumption of public access. A federal appeals court ordered their partial release because Maxwell had not shown sufficient reasons to overcome the public's right of access. In other words, although Maxwell sought to dispose of the case quietly and legally via summary judgment—and shield that process from public view—those efforts were rejected, and important portions of the case were ultimately made part of the public record.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Docs - DocumentCloud

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Meghan Markle is reported to have deleted Thomas Markle's phone number and has no plans to visit him as he recovers in a Philippine hospital following a leg amputation, despite a letter said to have been hand delivered to him this week. Sources question why she will not call, while Page Six claims she has no trip planned, as the Sussexes prepare for a Montecito Christmas and an overseas New Year's getaway. Meanwhile, Prince Andrew is stripped of his final remaining military rank, formally demoted by the Defence Council, as renewed Epstein scrutiny swirls again. The Metropolitan Police also says it will take no further action over allegations Andrew sought information about accuser Virginia Giuffre. Add in fresh reporting on Andrew's looming exit from Royal Lodge, including a temporary “shoebox-sized” stop at Sandringham and claims of a slow, room-by-room clear-out, and it is another messy chapter for the York story.Hear our new show "Crown and Controversy: Prince Andrew" here.Check out "Palace Intrigue Presents: King WIlliam" here.

Investigative biographer Andrew Lownie joins the show to unpack the rise and fall of Prince Andrew, from his troubled childhood and war-hero image to financial corruption, Epstein, and royal protection at the highest levels. We explore Andrew's marriage to Sarah Ferguson, the Trade Envoy scandals, intelligence entanglements, the Virginia Giuffre case, the infamous Newsnight interview, Andrew's and Fergie's relationship to Epstein, and why Lownie believes the monarchy enabled Andrew for decades.  Guest bio: Andrew Lownie is an award-winning investigative biographer, journalist, and publisher, widely regarded as one of Britain's most relentless royal historians. He is the author of Traitor King, The Mountbattens, and his latest book Entitled, which examines Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson. Known for deep archival research and award-winning writing, Lownie has built a reputation for exposing power, corruption, and institutional cover-ups at the highest levels of the British establishment. Subscribe to The Zach Show 2.0 to gain early access to all future episodes, exclusive AMAs, the ability to suggest guest questions, bonus content, and more: https://thezachshow.supercast.com/ ANDREW LOWNIE LINKSEntitled: https://bit.ly/3YpacFTWebsite: https://andrewlownie.me/Substack: https://andrewlownie.substack.com/All Books: https://andrewlownie.me/books THE ZACH SHOW LINKS: The Zach Show 2.0: https://thezachshow.supercast.com/Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3zaS6sPYouTube: https://bit.ly/3lTpJdjWebsite: https://www.auxoro.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/auxoroTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thezachshowpod If you're not ready to subscribe to The Zach Show 2.0, rating the show on Spotify or Apple Podcasts is free and massively helpful. It boosts visibility, helps new listeners discover the show, and keeps this chaos alive. Thank you: Rate The Zach Show on Spotify: https://bit.ly/43ZLrAtRate The Zach Show on Apple Podcasts: https://bit.ly/458nbha

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.Virginia Giuffre's response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for summary judgment was a direct challenge to Maxwell's attempt to dismiss the case without a trial. In her filing, Giuffre argued that Maxwell's statements denying any wrongdoing were not only defamatory, but made with actual malice—because Maxwell knew they were false when she made them. Giuffre's legal team submitted sworn testimony, supporting documentation, and detailed timelines to establish that Maxwell had played a central role in Epstein's trafficking operation and that her denials were part of a broader effort to discredit and silence victims.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Giuffre-unseal.pdf (courthousenews.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the defamation case Virginia Giuffre brought against Ghislaine Maxwell beginning in 2015, Maxwell responded with a motion for summary judgment—arguing that Giuffre's allegations were not legally defamatory and that Maxwell was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. That motion aimed to avoid a trial by asserting that even if all of Giuffre's allegations were true, they did not meet the legal threshold for defamation. The motion, along with supporting documents, was filed under seal during pre-trial proceedings. Ultimately, the district court did not grant the motion, and the case was later settled out of court under confidentiality terms in 2017.When third parties later moved to unseal portions of the sealed record, particularly filings related to the summary judgment motion, the courts determined that these materials were judicial documents subject to a strong presumption of public access. A federal appeals court ordered their partial release because Maxwell had not shown sufficient reasons to overcome the public's right of access. In other words, although Maxwell sought to dispose of the case quietly and legally via summary judgment—and shield that process from public view—those efforts were rejected, and important portions of the case were ultimately made part of the public record.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Docs - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the defamation case Virginia Giuffre brought against Ghislaine Maxwell beginning in 2015, Maxwell responded with a motion for summary judgment—arguing that Giuffre's allegations were not legally defamatory and that Maxwell was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. That motion aimed to avoid a trial by asserting that even if all of Giuffre's allegations were true, they did not meet the legal threshold for defamation. The motion, along with supporting documents, was filed under seal during pre-trial proceedings. Ultimately, the district court did not grant the motion, and the case was later settled out of court under confidentiality terms in 2017.When third parties later moved to unseal portions of the sealed record, particularly filings related to the summary judgment motion, the courts determined that these materials were judicial documents subject to a strong presumption of public access. A federal appeals court ordered their partial release because Maxwell had not shown sufficient reasons to overcome the public's right of access. In other words, although Maxwell sought to dispose of the case quietly and legally via summary judgment—and shield that process from public view—those efforts were rejected, and important portions of the case were ultimately made part of the public record.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Docs - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Metropolitan Police says it has decided not to investigate newspaper reports that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor asked his close protection officer to gather information fourteen years ago about Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of sexual assault. He has not commented on the reports, but has consistently denied all the allegations against him. Also: Buckingham Palace says the King's delighted with the worldwide reaction to his call for more people to be screened for cancer, and: it's believed that more than 600 migrants have crossed the channel today in small boats.

C dans l'air du 13 décembre 2025 - Dossier Epstein : le compte à rebours est lancé pour TrumpDonald Trump ne parvient pas à se sortir de l'affaire Epstein. Suite à une loi signée par le président américain, un juge fédéral a ordonné mercredi, et pour la troisième fois en quelques jours, la levée du secret sur des documents judiciaires relatifs à l'affaire du criminel sexuel Jeffrey Epstein. Les révélations pourraient avoir lieu d'ici au 19 décembre, date butoir fixée par la loi.Après avoir dévoilé il y a peu les photos de la résidence de Jeffrey Epstein à Little Saint James, l'île privée des Caraïbes où il aurait organisé son trafic sexuel, des élus démocrates ont rendu publiques cette nuit de nouvelles photos. Donald Trump apparaît sur plusieurs d'entre-elles. La pression est maximale sur le locataire de la Maison-Blanche. D'autant que son comportement interroge. Alors qu'il avait estimé durant sa campagne qu'il fallait faire toute la lumière sur ce dossier, il a semblé vouloir tout faire pour étouffer l'affaire une fois revenu au pouvoir.L'affaire Epstein n'est pas la seule à agiter l'actualité américaine. La bataille entre Netflix et la Paramount pour racheter le géant du divertissement Warner Bros Discovery fait elle aussi les gros titres outre-Atlantique.Entre Netflix, le champion mondial du streaming, et la Warner, l'affaire semblait entendue. Mais la Paramount a contre-attaqué, avec une offre à 108 milliards de dollars. L'entreprise est dirigée par David Ellison, le fils du milliardaire Larry Ellison, proche de Donald Trump. L'affaire prend donc un tour politique. D'autant que l'offre comprend le rachat de la branche média de la Warner, propriétaire de la chaine de télévision CNN. Donald Trump accuse depuis longtemps cette chaine de servir ses opposants démocrates et d'être un « ennemi du peuple ». Un changement de propriétaire et de ligne éditoriale ne serait pas pour lui déplaire. S'il se défend de toute ingérence dans ce dossier, il argue que Netflix, pour des raisons juridiques anti-trust, ne pourrait peut-être pas racheter la Warner.Le président américain n'est pas la seule personnalité au cœur du scandale Epstein. Andrew, le frère de l'actuel roi Charles III, était également très proche du criminel sexuel. Virginia Giuffre, principale plaignante de l'affaire Jeffrey Epstein, avait pris la parole pour expliquer qu'Andrew l'avait violé. Andrew a depuis été déchu de son titre de prince et s'est vu retirer toutes les distinctions honorifiques liées à celui-ci.Que savait Donald Trump des crimes de Jeffrey Epstein ?Comment le président américain compte-t-il peser dans le rachat de la Warner ?Combien de personnalités ont-elles été impliquées dans les crimes de Jeffrey Epstein ?Nos experts :- Laurence HAIM - Journaliste, ancienne correspondante aux États-Unis - Auteure de « Ghislaine Maxwell, une femme amoureuse »- Lucas MENGET - Grand reporter- Jean-Bernard CADIER - Journaliste, ancien correspondant aux Etats-Unis - Auteur de « Néron à la Maison Blanche »- Anne TOULOUSE - Journaliste franco-américaine - Auteure de « L'art de trumper »

C dans l'air du 13 décembre 2025 - Dossier Epstein : le compte à rebours est lancé pour TrumpDonald Trump ne parvient pas à se sortir de l'affaire Epstein. Suite à une loi signée par le président américain, un juge fédéral a ordonné mercredi, et pour la troisième fois en quelques jours, la levée du secret sur des documents judiciaires relatifs à l'affaire du criminel sexuel Jeffrey Epstein. Les révélations pourraient avoir lieu d'ici au 19 décembre, date butoir fixée par la loi.Après avoir dévoilé il y a peu les photos de la résidence de Jeffrey Epstein à Little Saint James, l'île privée des Caraïbes où il aurait organisé son trafic sexuel, des élus démocrates ont rendu publiques cette nuit de nouvelles photos. Donald Trump apparaît sur plusieurs d'entre-elles. La pression est maximale sur le locataire de la Maison-Blanche. D'autant que son comportement interroge. Alors qu'il avait estimé durant sa campagne qu'il fallait faire toute la lumière sur ce dossier, il a semblé vouloir tout faire pour étouffer l'affaire une fois revenu au pouvoir.L'affaire Epstein n'est pas la seule à agiter l'actualité américaine. La bataille entre Netflix et la Paramount pour racheter le géant du divertissement Warner Bros Discovery fait elle aussi les gros titres outre-Atlantique.Entre Netflix, le champion mondial du streaming, et la Warner, l'affaire semblait entendue. Mais la Paramount a contre-attaqué, avec une offre à 108 milliards de dollars. L'entreprise est dirigée par David Ellison, le fils du milliardaire Larry Ellison, proche de Donald Trump. L'affaire prend donc un tour politique. D'autant que l'offre comprend le rachat de la branche média de la Warner, propriétaire de la chaine de télévision CNN. Donald Trump accuse depuis longtemps cette chaine de servir ses opposants démocrates et d'être un « ennemi du peuple ». Un changement de propriétaire et de ligne éditoriale ne serait pas pour lui déplaire. S'il se défend de toute ingérence dans ce dossier, il argue que Netflix, pour des raisons juridiques anti-trust, ne pourrait peut-être pas racheter la Warner.Le président américain n'est pas la seule personnalité au cœur du scandale Epstein. Andrew, le frère de l'actuel roi Charles III, était également très proche du criminel sexuel. Virginia Giuffre, principale plaignante de l'affaire Jeffrey Epstein, avait pris la parole pour expliquer qu'Andrew l'avait violé. Andrew a depuis été déchu de son titre de prince et s'est vu retirer toutes les distinctions honorifiques liées à celui-ci.Que savait Donald Trump des crimes de Jeffrey Epstein ?Comment le président américain compte-t-il peser dans le rachat de la Warner ?Combien de personnalités ont-elles été impliquées dans les crimes de Jeffrey Epstein ?Nos experts :- Laurence HAIM - Journaliste, ancienne correspondante aux États-Unis - Auteure de « Ghislaine Maxwell, une femme amoureuse »- Lucas MENGET - Grand reporter- Jean-Bernard CADIER - Journaliste, ancien correspondant aux Etats-Unis - Auteur de « Néron à la Maison Blanche »- Anne TOULOUSE - Journaliste franco-américaine - Auteure de « L'art de trumper »

In her Second Amended Response to Maxwell's discovery demands, Virginia Giuffre pushed back aggressively, refusing to yield to Maxwell's attempts to broaden discovery into intrusive and irrelevant personal and psychological domains. She objected to Maxwell's sprawling requests as overly burdensome, unduly invasive, and aimed at discrediting her through unnecessary exposure rather than legitimate legal pursuit. Giuffre instead reinforced her focus on evidence directly tied to the defamation claims and trafficking allegations, contesting any effort by Maxwell to turn the process into a fishing expedition or reputation‑smearing exercise under the guise of legal procedure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:epstein-documents-943-pages - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In her Second Amended Response to Maxwell's discovery demands, Virginia Giuffre pushed back aggressively, refusing to yield to Maxwell's attempts to broaden discovery into intrusive and irrelevant personal and psychological domains. She objected to Maxwell's sprawling requests as overly burdensome, unduly invasive, and aimed at discrediting her through unnecessary exposure rather than legitimate legal pursuit. Giuffre instead reinforced her focus on evidence directly tied to the defamation claims and trafficking allegations, contesting any effort by Maxwell to turn the process into a fishing expedition or reputation‑smearing exercise under the guise of legal procedure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:epstein-documents-943-pages - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In her Second Amended Response to Maxwell's discovery demands, Virginia Giuffre pushed back aggressively, refusing to yield to Maxwell's attempts to broaden discovery into intrusive and irrelevant personal and psychological domains. She objected to Maxwell's sprawling requests as overly burdensome, unduly invasive, and aimed at discrediting her through unnecessary exposure rather than legitimate legal pursuit. Giuffre instead reinforced her focus on evidence directly tied to the defamation claims and trafficking allegations, contesting any effort by Maxwell to turn the process into a fishing expedition or reputation‑smearing exercise under the guise of legal procedure.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:epstein-documents-943-pages - DocumentCloudBecome 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 Online

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.

According to public autopsy records, many people regarded as whistleblowers have died by s*icide.  Virginia Giuffre is one of Epstein's most outspoken victims who has spent her life fighting to bring Epstein and Ghislaine to justice.  At 17 years old she is photographed with “Prince” Andrew whose hand is wrapped around her waist.  By her late 20s she's best known for exposing that picture to the public and testifying to the trafficking she was subjected to by some of the world's elite.  Yet now, as of April 25th, 2025, Virginia Giuffre is dead. Leaving behind a manuscript titled “Nobody's Girl” detailing the 2 years she was trafficking by Epstein to limitlessly powerful people. Before her death she emails two confidants:  “In the event of my passing, I would like to ensure that “Nobody's Girl” is still released...” Sent April 1, 2025. April 25, 2025, Virginia Giuffre will be found dead. Her death ruled as a s*icide less than a month after her email and a few years after she made the following tweet on X:  “I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape, or form am I s*icidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP– if something happens to me– in the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quieted.”  Now, a lot can change in a few years, including someone's mental state. But with the Epstein case and files...  Everyone feels like a suspect.Everyone has money. Everyone has power. And everyone has a lot to lose.   Full show notes available at RottenMangoPodcast.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

According to public autopsy records, many people regarded as whistleblowers have died by s*icide.  Virginia Giuffre is one of Epstein's most outspoken victims who has spent her life fighting to bring Epstein and Ghislaine to justice.  At 17 years old she is photographed with “Prince” Andrew whose hand is wrapped around her waist.  By her late 20s she's best known for exposing that picture to the public and testifying to the trafficking she was subjected to by some of the world's elite.  Yet now, as of April 25th, 2025, Virginia Giuffre is dead. Leaving behind a manuscript titled “Nobody's Girl” detailing the 2 years she was trafficking by Epstein to limitlessly powerful people. Before her death she emails two confidants:  “In the event of my passing, I would like to ensure that “Nobody's Girl” is still released...” Sent April 1, 2025. April 25, 2025, Virginia Giuffre will be found dead. Her death ruled as a s*icide less than a month after her email and a few years after she made the following tweet on X:  “I am making it publicly known that in no way, shape, or form am I s*icidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP– if something happens to me– in the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quieted.”  Now, a lot can change in a few years, including someone's mental state. But with the Epstein case and files...  Everyone feels like a suspect.Everyone has money. Everyone has power. And everyone has a lot to lose.   Full show notes available at RottenMangoPodcast.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Epstein survivor Anouska De Georgiou says Ghislaine Maxwell introduced her to Donald Trump with a clear intention of trafficking her to the billionaire. But Anouska says Trump refused: “at no time did President Trump behave with any impropriety with me.” De Georgiou – a friend of the lated Virginia Giuffre – joins with other Epstein survivors including model Lisa Phillips, who are urging Trump to release the full Epstein files to the public. Comedian Ryan Sickler discusses his battle with Factor V Leiden, a rare blood clotting condition, and Chef Gruel joins with pro turkey tips for Thanksgiving. Anouska De Georgiou founded the Kintsugi Foundation to support women in recovery. She grew up between London and the south of France and is a survivor of abuse and trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. She has been in recovery since age 26 and now supports women healing from trauma. More at https://instagram.com/anouskadegeorgiou Lisa Phillips is an Epstein survivor who has advocated for the full release of Epstein's case files. She suffered abuse at 21 and continues to speak publicly about accountability and transparency surrounding the case. She is a model who has appeared on multiple magazine covers. Learn more at https://instagram.com/iamLisaPhillips⠀Ryan Sickler is a comedian and host of The HoneyDew. His special Live & Alive is available on YouTube and Patreon, and his 2018 album Get a Hold of Yourself reached #1 on Billboard and iTunes. Follow at https://x.com/ryansickler Chef Andrew Gruel is a food entrepreneur, Huntington Beach City Councilor, and founder of American Gravy Restaurant Group. He hosts American Gravy on Rumble and is active in small business advocacy. Follow at https://x.com/ChefGruel 「 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS 」 • AUGUSTA PRECIOUS METALS – Thousands of Americans are moving portions of their retirement into physical gold & silver. Learn more in this 3-minute report from our friends at Augusta Precious Metals: ⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/gold⁠⁠⁠ or text DREW to 35052 ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• FATTY15 – The future of essential fatty acids is here! Strengthen your cells against age-related breakdown with Fatty15. Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit Subscription at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/fatty15⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/paleovalley⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • VSHREDMD – Formulated by Dr. Drew: The Science of Cellular Health + World-Class Training Programs, Premium Content, and 1-1 Training with Certified V Shred Coaches! More at https://drdrew.com/vshredmd • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twc.health/drew⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 「 ABOUT THE SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kalebnation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) and Susan Pinsky (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/firstladyoflov⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠e⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Executive Producers • Kaleb Nation - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kalebnation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • Susan Pinsky - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/firstladyoflove⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Content Producer & Booking • Emily Barsh - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/emilytvproducer⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Hosted By • Dr. Drew Pinsky - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/drdrew⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we bring you an episode from Question Everything, another KCRW podcast. Host Brian Reed brings together the reporters who know the Jeffrey Epstein case best – along with one of their Trump-supporting producers – for drinks and a candid, no-holds-barred conversation. They compare notes, challenge each other's assumptions, and reveal what it really takes to separate fact from rumor in a story that has tested the limits of journalism.It's one of the most provocative and confronting discussions Brian's ever hosted about power, accountability and what's at stake when the media goes up against billionaires and their networks.Check out the Question Everything Substack, by the way, where we get into juicy behind the scenes details and other good stuff from our episodes. “Question Everything” is a production of KCRW and Placement Theory.Drinking and fact-checking don't always go hand in hand, so clarifying and correcting a few statements from the conversation here – which honestly in themselves give a sense of just how many crannies of global power the tendrils of the Epstein story reach into. We reached out to Anouska De Georgiou to see if she wanted to comment, but we didn't hear back. Leslie Wexner is not the founder of Victoria's Secret – he bought the company in 1982, and he said Jeffrey Epstein had stolen $46 million from him, not $60 million. Meanwhile investor Leon Black paid Epstein $170 million for supposed tax advice – not $160 million. Virginia Giuffre sued Prince Andrew as an individual, not the Crown itself. Tara Palmeri's reporting that Elon Musk dm'd Virgina Giuffre saying Trump would release the files is based on Virginia telling her this – Tara didn't see the DM. At one point, Eric says that in 2015, Roger Stone called Epstein's island a “democrat orgy island.” Really, Stone wrote a book excoriating the Clintons called The Clinton's War on Women, and there's a chapter in there called Orgy Island, which highlights Bill Clinton's friendship with Epstein. So Roger Stone didn't call Epstein's island a democrat orgy island. Just “orgy island.” And last, but not least: the pope who was in a picture with Jeffrey Epstein, which was displayed on Epstein's credenza, was John Paul II.

On Wednesday's Mark Levin Show, in chapter two of "American Marxism," titled "Breeding Mobs," it explains how mass movements devour individual identity and uniqueness, rendering people indistinguishable while assigning group identities based on race, age, or income to foster class distinctions and divisions.  These movements attract disenchanted, disaffected, and maladjusted individuals who blame external factors like the system or others for their conditions, lured by utopian promises and criticisms of society, where improving their lot ties to the cause and disparaging the successful becomes a tactic to instill meaning and self-worth.  Ultimately, these movements rely on deceit, propaganda, intimidation, and force, leading to scapegoating, violence, and totalitarianism.  Just think of figures like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Nick Fuentes, Steve Bannon, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, and their supporters. Also, Democrats are trying to insinuate that Trump spent significant time with Virginia Giuffre and possibly engaged in untoward behavior. However, Giuffre herself stated in 2016 that Trump was never involved in any improper conduct with her and that she witnessed nothing inappropriate. Democrats redacting Giuffre's name in leaked emails was intentional to fabricate a scandal, similar to the Russia hoax. Later, Gov Greg Abbott calls in and explains that he shut down the proposed EPIC center in the Dallas area, an Islamic-only development, through a new law that bans no-go zones, prohibits discriminatory land sales or rentals based on Islam, mandates disputes be resolved under Texas laws and courts rather than Sharia law, and empowers the Attorney General to close such projects. He also outlined a multi-point plan to make housing more affordable by reducing property taxes. Finally, Professor Emeritus John Ellis calls in and argues that to save universities from radical political zealots who have replaced knowledge promotion with fringe ideology indoctrination, urgent reform is essential, as evidenced by radicalized graduates influencing society, such as New York's communist mayor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices