Ghislaine Maxwell And The Musician

Bill Gates’s attempts at damage control over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein have always sounded less like sincere apologies and more like carefully worded PR spin. He repeatedly leaned on the same tired line that he “made a mistake” by meeting Epstein, as if multiple visits, a cozy dinner at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, and repeated interactions could somehow be reduced to a one-off lapse in judgment. His apologies are weasel-like because they dodge the central issue: Gates didn’t just bump into Epstein—he engaged with him knowingly, long after Epstein was a convicted sex offender. Instead of admitting that he chose power networking over morality, he frames it as a regrettable oversight, a minor slip in judgment, as though the public should simply nod along and accept that excuse.Even worse, Gates couches his apologies in a tone of self-pity, acting as though he’s the real victim because people keep asking him about it. Rather than grappling with the disgust of survivors who know exactly what Epstein was, Gates seems more concerned about how the association tarnishes his image and legacy. He wants the world to believe that his proximity to a predator was an innocent blunder, when in reality it was deliberate and calculated—Epstein had money, connections, and a reputation Gates clearly found useful. The result is an apology that reeks of arrogance and evasion, a weasel-like maneuver to deflect blame while never fully owning the gravity of choosing to keep company with a man everyone knew was radioactive.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

24 Sep 48min

Virginia Roberts Giuffre said after dropping her lawsuit against Alan Dershowitz that while she had long believed she was trafficked to him by Jeffrey Epstein, she now recognized that she may have been mistaken in identifying him. She explained that she was very young at the time, trapped in what she described as an intensely stressful and traumatic environment, and that confusion over events and people was possible under those circumstances. Giuffre emphasized that Dershowitz had always denied her accusations, and in light of the toll the legal battle had taken on her and her family, she wanted to bring the matter to an end.She added that the years of litigation had been deeply burdensome and draining, overshadowing her attempts to heal and move forward with her life. Ending the case, she said, was about closing a chapter of pain and conflict rather than prolonging it in court. Giuffre’s statement underscored her wish to put the fight behind her and redirect her energy toward her family and her future, instead of reliving the traumatic past through more legal battles.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

24 Sep 35min

Jeffrey Epstein claimed he was being stalked by a strange figure he described as a “mafia ninja,” allegedly tied to the Gambino crime family. According to reports, this person dressed in black and appeared near Epstein’s homes, moving stealthily in a way that unnerved him. Epstein supposedly told others about the sightings, framing it as organized crime intimidation rather than random harassment, and presenting the “ninja” as part of a network of threats aimed at keeping him in line.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.the-sun.com/news/351095/jeffrey-epstein-mafia-mob-ninja-gambino/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

24 Sep 11min

Geoffrey Berman, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, made it clear that Prince Andrew was a person of interest in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Berman said that despite Andrew’s public claims of being willing to help, he provided “zero cooperation.” His office sought to interview Andrew about his ties to Epstein and the allegations from survivors, but Andrew and his legal team consistently stonewalled. Berman even accused the Prince of “shutting the door” on the investigation after repeated attempts to engage with him were ignored.Andrew, through his representatives, pushed back by claiming Berman’s statements misrepresented the facts, insisting that he would cooperate “if required.” Yet no voluntary interview ever took place, and the Justice Department confirmed that the Prince had not provided the assistance they requested. This public standoff highlighted the perception that Andrew’s royal status shielded him from the scrutiny that other Epstein associates might have faced, leaving survivors and prosecutors deeply frustrated.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

24 Sep 21min

Ken Starr, once known for his independent counsel’s investigation into President Bill Clinton, was later tied to Epstein in essentially the opposite role: legal defense. Starr joined Epstein’s defense team in 2007 just before Epstein’s widely criticized plea-deal in Florida. Starr was “in the room” when then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta negotiated the agreement that allowed Epstein to plead to lesser state charges, serve a relatively light sentence, and avoid a deeper federal trafficking prosecution. Critics argue Starr helped mount what has been described as a “scorched-earth campaign” in which he and Epstein’s attorneys pressured the U.S. Justice Department to drop or reduce charges, undermining accountability for Epstein’s alleged trafficking of minors.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Sep 15min

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.

23 Sep 11min

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.

23 Sep 16min