Is this investigation A Search For Truth Or An Attempt To Bury The Epstein’s Files Forever? (Part 2) (11/17/25)

According to sources Ghislaine Maxwell was melancholy when first arriving at the Prison in Florida but now, after having time to settle in, she is also participating in activities such as interdormitory competitions such as checkers. She has also found a group of friends to pal around with. Let's take a look! to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11412785/Ghislaine-Maxwell-seen-walking-galpal-cushy-regimen-Florida-prison-revealed.html#commentsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 17min

In lawsuits filed beginning in 2022–2023, the central allegation is that Leon Black sexually assaulted a then-teenage girl inside Jeffrey Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse in 2002. The plaintiff, referred to as “Jane Doe,” claims she was trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell—and that Epstein directed her to provide Black with a “massage” that escalated into rape in a third-floor massage room. She further contends she was autistic and born with Mosaic Down Syndrome, vulnerabilities that the complaint says were exploited; she alleges Black used force, sex toys, and violence, inflicting physical injuries and psychological trauma.Black’s legal team forcefully denies the accusations, calling them baseless and “frivolous.” He has sought to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, challenging the statute of limitations, the revival of old claims under New York law, and jurisdictional issues. A federal judge declined to dismiss one version of the claim, ruling that the victim’s pleading under New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law could proceed, while other lawsuits—such as one by Cheri Pierson making similar claims—have been withdrawn or dismissed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 12min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 19min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 14min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 11min

Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive who later became CEO of Barclays, has alleged in court filings that he discussed Jeffrey Epstein directly with Jamie Dimon, including whether the bank should continue its relationship with Epstein after his 2008 conviction. According to Staley, Dimon was aware of Epstein’s accounts and engaged in conversations about them, contradicting the narrative that JPMorgan’s top leadership was in the dark. Dimon, however, has firmly denied this, testifying under oath that he never met Epstein, exchanged emails with him, or played any role in decisions about his accounts.Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive who later became CEO of Barclays, has alleged in court filings that he discussed Jeffrey Epstein directly with Jamie Dimon, including whether the bank should continue its relationship with Epstein after his 2008 conviction. According to Staley, Dimon was aware of Epstein’s accounts and engaged in conversations about them, contradicting the narrative that JPMorgan’s top leadership was in the dark. Dimon, however, has firmly denied this, testifying under oath that he never met Epstein, exchanged emails with him, or played any role in decisions about his accounts.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 27min

Ian Maxwell asserted that Andrew had “no option” but to settle the case against Roberts, arguing that the allegations would have caused “immense pain” to the Queen and that Andrew needed to “fold his tent” and do the “best he could” by the Crown. According to Maxwell, the settlement was in part driven by concerns over the monarchy’s reputation and the personal embarrassment and stress the scandal was bringing to the royal family. He also suggested that social pressures — including the #MeToo movement and evolving societal norms about believing victims — made a trial even more perilous.Maxwell’s remarks drew attention to the optics of a royal figure choosing to settle rather than contest the accusations in court. He framed the move as less about guilt or innocence and more about damage control, portraying Andrew’s decision as one made under duress from public, familial, and institutional pressures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 26min

There’s been persistent speculation that Jamie Dimon, long-time CEO of JPMorgan Chase, might make a run for the U.S. presidency or at least take a high-tier government role. Some analysts and commentators have pointed to his reputation as a steady, pragmatic leader who speaks openly on economic and geopolitical issues as evidence that he could mount a compelling candidacy. For instance, a Yale SOM piece noted that his stature as a “systemic stabilizer,” combined with his willingness to critique U.S. policy, gives him appeal in periods of political turbulence.Despite this, Dimon has consistently downplayed or rejected the idea of running. He has said the notion of him winning is unlikely, and he has emphasized the demands of his family life, the lack of prior political experience, and his commitment to JPMorgan as reasons he wouldn’t pursue it.In his deposition held on May 26, 2023, Jamie Dimon asserted under oath that he had never met, emailed, or communicated with Jeffrey Epstein, and claimed he was not involved in any internal decisions regarding Epstein’s bank accounts.  He acknowledged that a 2011 internal email from JPMorgan’s then-general counsel, which said Epstein “should not be a client, period,” was not known to him at the time, though he said he was aware of it later and agreed that had the bank known what we know now about Epstein’s criminal behavior, the relationship would have been severed earlier.He acknowledged that a 2011 internal email from JPMorgan’s then-general counsel, which said Epstein “should not be a client, period,” was not known to him at the time, though he said he was aware of it later and agreed that had the bank known what we know now about Epstein’s criminal behavior, the relationship would have been severed earlier.  Afterward, JPMorgan argued internally that his testimony was “crystal clear” and sought to block any further depositions of Dimon in the case, saying the existing record showed no involvement.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 32min