The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 23) (9/1/25)
On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 16min
The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 22) (9/1/25)
On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 21min
The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 21) (9/1/25)
On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 14min
From Newsnight to 2015: How Prince Andrew Misled the World About Jeffrey Epstein (9/1/25)
Newly uncovered leaked emails show that Prince Andrew remained in contact with Jeffrey Epstein until at least 2015—five years longer than the Duke claimed in his infamous 2019 Newsnight interview. At the time, Andrew insisted he cut ties after meeting Epstein in December 2010, following Epstein’s sex crime conviction. But the emails, originating from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s hacked inbox, include messages where Epstein passed along information attributed directly to “Andrew,” with Epstein confirming the source. These discussions involved potential business ventures, including a private security project in China.The revelations directly contradict Andrew’s carefully crafted public narrative and expose him as a man who misled the public, the monarchy, and investigators about the true extent of his ties to Epstein. By insisting he severed contact in 2010 while secretly maintaining communications for years, Andrew not only damaged his own credibility but also dragged the Royal Family deeper into scandal. His willingness to keep dealing with a convicted sex offender behind the scenes reveals a level of arrogance and dishonesty that makes his 2019 Newsnight denials look like a calculated performance. Far from being a victim of bad judgment, Andrew now appears complicit in sustaining a relationship he knew was toxic, raising the question of what else he has concealed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Prince Andrew 'remained in contact with Jeffrey Epstein five years longer than he claimed in Newsnight interview', emails suggest | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 17min
Morning Update: Jeffrey Epstein, The Treasury Department And The Red Flags That Were Ignored (9/1/25)
Suspicious Activity Reports, or SARs, are confidential filings that financial institutions are legally required to send to the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) whenever they detect transactions that may indicate money laundering, fraud, sanctions evasion, or other criminal activity. They’re not evidence of a crime by themselves, but rather red flags—signals that something looks off. Banks, casinos, brokerages, and even crypto platforms file them routinely, and once submitted, they’re closely guarded, unavailable to the public, and protected by strict “no tipping off” rules. Law enforcement uses SARs to trace illicit networks, connect patterns across different institutions, and build out investigations into everything from drug cartels and terrorist cells to human trafficking and large-scale fraud schemes.Now those same reports sit at the center of a political firestorm. House Oversight Chair James Comer has formally requested that the Treasury Department turn over all SARs connected to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. His demand signals an attempt to pull back the veil on what banks flagged about Epstein’s vast financial web—wires, transfers, shell accounts, and potential facilitators. If granted, the request could provide Congress with a rare inside look at the money trails behind Epstein’s operations, though it also raises thorny questions about confidentiality, precedent, and how much of this intelligence should be made public.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Comer requests Epstein, Maxwell records from Treasury Secretary | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 15min
Mega Edition: Prince Andrew And The Settlement With Virginia Roberts (Part 2) (9/1/25)
Prince Andrew’s settlement with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, announced in February 2022, marked a significant moment in the fallout from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking scandal. Giuffre, who accused Andrew of sexually abusing her when she was a teenager, had filed a civil lawsuit in the United States. Despite years of public denials, including a disastrous BBC interview in which Andrew claimed to have no memory of meeting Giuffre, the prince agreed to an out-of-court settlement reportedly worth several million dollars. This agreement avoided a public trial, sparking widespread criticism that Andrew used his wealth and privilege to sidestep accountability. The settlement, though not an admission of guilt, reinforced perceptions that Andrew prioritized damage control over confronting the allegations directly.Critics argue that Andrew’s decision to settle further tarnished his reputation and that of the British royal family. The settlement came with no public acknowledgment of wrongdoing, leaving lingering questions about the prince’s involvement with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s network. The financial payout also fueled resentment, with many pointing out that Andrew, stripped of his royal duties and titles, appeared desperate to preserve what remained of his public standing. By avoiding a trial, Andrew missed an opportunity to clear his name through transparent legal proceedings, deepening public skepticism. The entire affair underscores the broader issue of how the powerful often evade genuine accountability, leaving victims and the public dissatisfied with a system that appears skewed in favor of the elite.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 1h 24min
Mega Edition: Prince Andrew And The Settlement With Virginia Roberts (Part 1) (9/1/25)
Prince Andrew’s settlement with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, announced in February 2022, marked a significant moment in the fallout from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking scandal. Giuffre, who accused Andrew of sexually abusing her when she was a teenager, had filed a civil lawsuit in the United States. Despite years of public denials, including a disastrous BBC interview in which Andrew claimed to have no memory of meeting Giuffre, the prince agreed to an out-of-court settlement reportedly worth several million dollars. This agreement avoided a public trial, sparking widespread criticism that Andrew used his wealth and privilege to sidestep accountability. The settlement, though not an admission of guilt, reinforced perceptions that Andrew prioritized damage control over confronting the allegations directly.Critics argue that Andrew’s decision to settle further tarnished his reputation and that of the British royal family. The settlement came with no public acknowledgment of wrongdoing, leaving lingering questions about the prince’s involvement with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s network. The financial payout also fueled resentment, with many pointing out that Andrew, stripped of his royal duties and titles, appeared desperate to preserve what remained of his public standing. By avoiding a trial, Andrew missed an opportunity to clear his name through transparent legal proceedings, deepening public skepticism. The entire affair underscores the broader issue of how the powerful often evade genuine accountability, leaving victims and the public dissatisfied with a system that appears skewed in favor of the elite.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 1h 14min
Mega Edition: JP Morgan's Reply Memo In Support Of Dismissing The USVI Lawsuit (8/31/25)
In the case Government of the United States Virgin Islands v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (No. 22-cv-10904-JSR), JPMorgan Chase Bank filed a reply memorandum in support of its motion to dismiss certain claims brought against it. The motion was partially successful.The court granted JPMorgan's motion to dismiss claims under the Virgin Islands Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the Virgin Islands Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (Counts II, III, and IV of the Second Amended Complaint). These claims were dismissed because they were unchanged from previous versions that the court had already ruled on.However, the court denied JPMorgan's motion to dismiss the claims related to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The court had previously considered JPMorgan's arguments against these claims in an earlier motion and had rejected them. JPMorgan reasserted these arguments mainly to preserve them for appeal.This ruling represents a partial victory for both sides: while some claims were dismissed, others, particularly those related to the TVPA, will proceed in the litigation.(commercial 8:09)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.591653.56.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1 Sep 21min
