Episodios

  • Caught in Black and White: How Epstein Emails Expose Howard Lutnick’s Lies (2/9/26)

    Caught in Black and White: How Epstein Emails Expose Howard Lutnick’s Lies (2/9/26)
    Feb 9 2026
    In the newly released tranche of the Epstein files—millions of internal emails and documents made public by the U.S. Department of Justice—correspondence involving Howard Lutnick has revealed details that contradict his long-held public statements about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Lutnick had repeatedly claimed that he and his wife cut ties with Epstein around 2005 and that he had “limited interactions” with the disgraced financier, even saying at one point that he would “never be in a room” with him again after a weird encounter as neighbors in New York. However, the newly disclosed emails show that in 2012, years after Epstein’s conviction on sex offense charges, Lutnick and his family actually planned and carried out a visit to Epstein’s private Caribbean island, Little Saint James, agreeing to lunch with him there and coordinating logistics via email. Other messages show continued email contact into 2017 and references to Epstein contributing to a charitable dinner associated with Lutnick, undermining his repeated assertions that he had cut all contact decades earlier.

    These revelations have significantly weakened Lutnick’s credibility on this issue because they directly contradict his public narrative of distancing himself from Epstein after 2005. Instead of “limited interactions,” the emails indicate ongoing contact and social engagement well into the 2010s, including family travel arrangements and personal communication long after Epstein’s criminal conduct was widely known. When confronted with these files, Lutnick’s office has downplayed the interactions and reiterated that he was never accused of wrongdoing, but the factual email trail—showing lunches, island visits, and cordial correspondence—stands in stark contrast to his earlier statements of severance and minimal contact, raising questions about why he misrepresented the extent of his relationship.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Lutnick and Epstein were in business together, Epstein files show - CBS News
    Más Menos
    12 m
  • Mark Epstein Says His Brother Was Murdered And He Thinks Trump Is Responsible (2/9/26)

    Mark Epstein Says His Brother Was Murdered And He Thinks Trump Is Responsible (2/9/26)
    Feb 9 2026
    Mark Epstein has consistently stated that he does not believe his brother, Jeffrey Epstein, died by suicide and has instead argued that he was murdered while in federal custody. From the beginning, Mark has pointed to what he sees as glaring irregularities in the circumstances of Jeffrey Epstein’s death, including the failure of jail staff to properly monitor him, the broken or unusable surveillance cameras, and the rapid rush by authorities to declare the death a suicide. He has said these failures go far beyond ordinary negligence and suggest, at minimum, a system that allowed Epstein to die when powerful interests may have preferred him silent. Mark has emphasized that his brother had recently been taken off suicide watch and, in his view, showed no signs consistent with an imminent suicide at that moment. He has repeatedly framed these facts as incompatible with the official narrative offered by the Bureau of Prisons and the DOJ.


    Mark Epstein has also cited medical and forensic concerns to support his belief that his brother was killed. He has publicly referenced findings from the autopsy that noted fractures in Jeffrey Epstein’s neck bones, arguing that these injuries are more commonly associated with strangulation than with hanging. Mark has said that the refusal of authorities to seriously address these findings, combined with the lack of accountability for the jail failures, reinforces his suspicion of foul play. He has further argued that Jeffrey Epstein was uniquely dangerous to powerful people because of what he knew, and that his death conveniently prevented testimony, cooperation, or further exposure of co-conspirators. For Mark Epstein, the issue is not just personal grief but what he describes as a profound failure of justice, where unanswered questions have been buried rather than investigated with the seriousness such a death demands.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Trump accused of role in Epstein’s death in explosive email sent to FBI, documents reveal | The Independent
    Más Menos
    12 m
  • Mega Edition: Is The Epstein Investigation Genuine Or Another Attempt To Bury The Truth? (2/9/26)

    Mega Edition: Is The Epstein Investigation Genuine Or Another Attempt To Bury The Truth? (2/9/26)
    Feb 9 2026
    The controversy surrounding the Epstein files has intensified following President Trump’s public directive calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice to launch a new investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s associations—specifically targeting political opponents and several high-profile figures in finance and technology. The timing of this announcement is drawing significant scrutiny, arriving just months after the DOJ and FBI publicly stated that they had already conducted a comprehensive review of all Epstein-related materials, including more than 300 gigabytes of digital evidence, and concluded there was no basis to open any further criminal inquiries. That review asserted that the majority of evidence remained sealed primarily to protect victims and that there was no credible evidence of an Epstein “client list” or coordinated blackmail operation. Critics argue that the sudden reversal raises red flags about political motivations rather than new facts, particularly as Congress moves forward with a discharge petition intended to force the release of unredacted Epstein records to the public.

    Legal scholars and government accountability watchdogs warn that labeling this sudden initiative an “ongoing investigation” could be used to halt congressional access to Epstein-related records and effectively freeze public disclosure for months or even years. Under DOJ policy, active investigations allow the government to withhold documents that would otherwise be subject to subpoenas or release mandates, raising concerns that the move could function as a procedural shield rather than a legitimate inquiry. Critics argue that invoking investigative privilege at this moment—after years of limited transparency and repeated failures to hold institutions accountable—risks undermining public trust in the justice system and may set a dangerous precedent in which politically motivated probes are used to obstruct oversight. With bipartisan pressure continuing to build around the discharge petition seeking full release of the Epstein files, the coming weeks will test whether Congress can assert its authority or whether the executive branch can successfully deploy legal mechanisms to re-seal evidence and control the narrative around one of the most consequential criminal scandals in modern American history.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Más Menos
    1 h y 5 m
  • Mega Edition: Virginia Roberts And Her Memoir Nobody's Girl (2/9/26)

    Mega Edition: Virginia Roberts And Her Memoir Nobody's Girl (2/9/26)
    Feb 9 2026
    In her posthumously published memoir, Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, Giuffre alleges that while she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and his associates she was sent to a “well-known Prime Minister” who raped her “more savagely than anyone had before”. She describes being choked until unconscious, bleeding from multiple wounds, and begging Epstein not to return her to that person — only to be told coldly “You’ll get that sometimes.”

    The identity of the prime minister remains undisclosed in the memoir, but the revelation has stirred renewed scrutiny of the power networks and political complicity surrounding Epstein’s trafficking operations. According to media coverage, Giuffre’s ghostwriter claims to know all the “names in Epstein’s files” and the book has reignited debates about immunity, accountability and how high the cover-up goes.




    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s allegations against her father, Sky Roberts, form one of the most painful elements of her memoir Nobody’s Girl. In it, she writes that the abuse began when she was a young child and continued for years, leaving her emotionally broken and distrustful of the people who were supposed to protect her. She describes her father as someone who manipulated her sense of love and loyalty, creating confusion and fear. This betrayal, she explains, destroyed the foundation of safety that every child should have, and it became the earliest chapter of the exploitation that would later consume her life. Her account frames the abuse as the beginning of a long cycle of predation — one that made her susceptible to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s manipulation as a teenager.

    Sky Roberts has categorically denied the accusations, calling them false and saying he is devastated by the claims. Despite his denials, Virginia maintains that her father’s actions were a key part of the trauma that defined her adolescence and adulthood. She says that being violated by someone within her own family conditioned her to accept mistreatment from others, because she no longer believed she deserved safety or respect. Her allegations have reignited painful conversations about generational abuse and how early trauma can make victims easier targets for predators later in life. For Giuffre, confronting this chapter publicly appears to be both an act of truth-telling and a step toward reclaiming power after years of silence and exploitation.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Más Menos
    32 m
  • Mega Edition: Alex Acosta Defends The Epstein NPA (2/8/26)

    Mega Edition: Alex Acosta Defends The Epstein NPA (2/8/26)
    Feb 9 2026
    Alex Acosta’s appearance before Congress was nothing short of a masterclass in bureaucratic nonsense and evasive cowardice. Instead of accountability, he offered the same tired excuses and jargon-filled deflections, pretending that the Epstein plea deal was some sort of complicated chess match rather than what it truly was: a grotesque betrayal of justice. He smirked, stammered, and dressed up cowardice as prudence, insisting his hands were tied when in reality, he was the one tying them. It was a performance not of contrition but of arrogance, as if the public should feel lucky that this man even bothered to show up and grace them with his half-truths.

    Worse still, Acosta continues to play his role in the Epstein charade, feeding the illusion that this was merely an unfortunate footnote in a prosecutor’s career rather than a calculated decision that shielded a predator and his powerful friends. By refusing to admit fault or show genuine remorse, he reinforces the same wall of silence that has defined the entire cover-up from day one. His congressional testimony wasn’t about truth—it was about maintaining the narrative, keeping the spotlight off the networks of influence that Epstein served. Acosta wasn’t testifying for the people; he was testifying for the system that thrives on protecting the powerful, and in doing so, he revealed exactly why history will remember him as a coward who sold out justice and stood by it with a smirk.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Alex Acosta: Former US attorney defends Epstein’s 2008 plea deal in hours-long appearance on Capitol Hill | CNN Politics
    Más Menos
    53 m
  • Donald Trump Is Terribly Sad About Disgraced Prince Andrew's Exile

    Donald Trump Is Terribly Sad About Disgraced Prince Andrew's Exile
    Feb 9 2026
    When asked about Prince Andrew’s exile from royal life and the Epstein scandal that forced King Charles to strip his brother of his military titles and patronages, Donald Trump struck a tone of sympathy — not for the victims, but for the Windsors. Speaking aboard Air Force One, Trump said, “I feel very badly. It’s a terrible thing that’s happened to the family. That’s been a tragic situation. It’s too bad. I mean, I feel badly for the family.” In classic Trump fashion, the comments came off as tone-deaf, framing the ordeal as a misfortune that befell the royals rather than a reckoning for Andrew’s own actions or associations. He offered no mention of Virginia Giuffre, the survivors, or the broader scandal surrounding Epstein’s network — only sorrow for the House of Windsor’s discomfort.


    The remarks were quickly criticized as another example of Trump’s tendency to sympathize with power over accountability. Rather than condemning Andrew’s behavior or the pattern of privilege that shielded him for years, Trump painted the royals as victims of circumstance — as if Andrew had simply stumbled into bad luck rather than disgrace of his own making. His comments echoed the same populist-elite paradox that defines his persona: railing against “the establishment” while showing deference to its crowned members when they fall. For many observers, the takeaway was clear — once again, Trump’s empathy seemed to extend only upward, toward the powerful, not toward the people whose lives were destroyed by Epstein and the system that protected him.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Trump says he feels 'badly' for royal family over Andrew-Epstein scandal
    Más Menos
    14 m
  • A Throne Built on Denial: Why Andrew Fears the Witness Chair

    A Throne Built on Denial: Why Andrew Fears the Witness Chair
    Feb 9 2026
    If Prince Andrew is truly serious about clearing his name, there’s only one path left to take—and it doesn’t involve hiding behind palace walls or issuing carefully worded press releases. It means sitting down with investigators, under oath, and answering every question about his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Public opinion won’t shift through PR stunts or vague denials; the only thing that could restore even a shred of credibility is the kind of transparency that comes with sworn testimony. Anything less will always look like evasion, and at this point, the court of public opinion has already rendered its verdict.

    By avoiding formal questioning, Andrew reinforces every suspicion surrounding him. His silence isn’t a shield—it’s a confession of fear. If he genuinely has nothing to hide, he should welcome the chance to confront the allegations head-on, with evidence and truth as his defense. Until he does, every statement he makes will sound hollow, every “no recollection” another nail in his reputation’s coffin. The door to redemption is open, but only if he’s willing to walk through it and face the same scrutiny as the people he once surrounded himself with.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    ‘If he wants to clear his name, he will come forward’: Andrew under fresh pressure from Congress to testify over Epstein
    Más Menos
    18 m
  • Bill Clinton Has Time for Everything Except His Epstein Deposition

    Bill Clinton Has Time for Everything Except His Epstein Deposition
    Feb 9 2026
    Bill Clinton continues to dodge a formal deposition about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein despite having ample time for public appearances, marathons, and speeches. The same lawmakers who claim that “no one is above the law” have shown no urgency in questioning the former president who welcomed Epstein to the White House seventeen times, accepted his seed money for the Clinton Foundation, and invited Ghislaine Maxwell to his daughter’s wedding. While they posture about accountability, their silence and inaction reveal a political double standard that shields their own. Clinton’s carefully managed image — complete with polished smiles and “I don’t recall” evasions — remains intact because those in power prefer the illusion of justice to the risk of truth.


    The spectacle has become political theater. Committees hold hearings, the media offers soft profiles, and the powerful continue to protect each other while victims are left waiting for real answers. Clinton’s absence from the witness chair is more than an oversight — it’s proof that justice in America operates on a sliding scale determined by status and influence. Every public event he attends is a reminder that accountability is optional for the elite, and every unasked question deepens the rot at the core of the system that claims to serve justice but exists only to preserve power.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Más Menos
    17 m