The Glaring Holes In The Epstein OIG Report

Jeffrey Epstein and his relationship with Bill Gates is well documented by now and every new confirmed crumb that we get adds to the fact that Bill Gates has done nothing but tell fantastical stories when it comes to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. In this epsiode we dive into an article from Vice discussing Epstein and Gates and why Bill Gates still needs to answer questions.(commercial at 10:11)to contact me:[email protected]:What We Know—and Don't Know—About Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein (vice.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The moronity of Prince Andrew is the stuff of legend at this point, and he just continues to build on that foundation of stupidity by the day. When Prince Andrew was originally nailed for hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein, after the picture of the two emerged during a walk in central park, the Joe Exotic of the Windsor family told us that he was only there to do the honorable thing: Break up with his bff in person. At the time, we called it BS.Breaking news:It's still a load of manure. In this episode, we hear how Prince Andrew was trying to get Jeffrey Epstein involved in a 200 million dollar scheme to fund an energy company while he was supposed to be "breaking up" with Epstein.(commercial at 7:42)to contact me:[email protected]:Court documents reveal Prince Andrew asked Jeffrey Epstein for help over $200million oil deal | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

As the lawsuit filed by the USVI continues to grow, we are learning more and more about the allegations that they are making and those allegations are damning for JP Morgan if verified. According to new reports, executives at JP Morgan well fully aware of who and what Jeffrey Epstein was, and even made jokes in emails about him and Miley Cyrus (who was on Hannah Montana at the time.) This runs directly head on into the narrative that JP Morgan has been trying to pitch where they, instead have blamed Jes Staley. The trial is set to begin on October 23rd.(commercial at 7:14)to contact me:[email protected]:JP Morgan execs were familiar with Jeffrey Epstein's abuse of young girls, new lawsuit claims | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender who died in 2019, had a relationship with JP Morgan, one of the largest and most well-known financial institutions in the world. This relationship primarily revolved around Epstein's financial dealings, investments, and banking activities.Epstein had established connections with various individuals in the financial and business sectors, and he managed investments for wealthy clients. His association with JP Morgan reportedly involved managing funds for some of the bank's clients, as well as utilizing the bank's services for his own financial activities. Now, even from the grave, Jeffrey Epstein is haunting those who counted him as friend or associate. In this episode, we dive into the relationship between Sergey Bryn and Jeffrey Epstein and how that led to Bryn being onboarded as a client at JP Morgan.(commercial at 8:11)to contact me:[email protected]:JPMorgan catered to Epstein as Google account advisor: court docs (nypost.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Government has submitted a brief response to the defendant’s letter dated January 24, 2025 (Dkt. No. 135), which contains new and unsubstantiated allegations of misconduct. The defendant's claims are based on declarations filed by the Government and the Bureau of Prisons in response to the Court’s January 3, 2025 Order. These declarations, referenced as Dkt. No. 123, Dkt. No. 131-1 (“Pros. Team Decl.”), and Dkt. No. 131-2 (“Investigator-1 Decl.”), were submitted to address specific inquiries from the Court.In its response, the Government maintains that the defendant's allegations lack factual support and do not accurately reflect the content of the submitted declarations. The Government emphasizes that its filings were made in compliance with the Court’s directives and that the assertions of misconduct raised by the defense are without merit. The response seeks to clarify the record and ensure that the proceedings remain focused on the legal and evidentiary issues at hand.AlsoThe Government has submitted a response opposing the defendant’s motion to modify the terms of the Protective Order, which seeks to require the electronic production of specific videos referenced in Paragraphs 12(a) and 12(c) of the Indictment (Dkt. 129). The Government argues that the Court should deny this request, as the sensitive nature of these videos justifies their current designation under the Protective Order, which allows only for in-person inspection. The Government asserts that the existing restrictions are necessary to protect the integrity and confidentiality of the evidence.Additionally, the Government highlights the defendant’s alleged violation of the Protective Order by improperly disclosing details of the videos in his motion without the required redactions. This breach, according to the Government, further supports the need for strict safeguards regarding the handling of these materials. The response emphasizes that allowing electronic production would increase the risk of unauthorized disclosure, making it essential to uphold the current protective measures.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.138.0.pdfgov.uscourts.nysd.628425.136.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Government has submitted a brief response to the defendant’s letter dated January 24, 2025 (Dkt. No. 135), which contains new and unsubstantiated allegations of misconduct. The defendant's claims are based on declarations filed by the Government and the Bureau of Prisons in response to the Court’s January 3, 2025 Order. These declarations, referenced as Dkt. No. 123, Dkt. No. 131-1 (“Pros. Team Decl.”), and Dkt. No. 131-2 (“Investigator-1 Decl.”), were submitted to address specific inquiries from the Court.In its response, the Government maintains that the defendant's allegations lack factual support and do not accurately reflect the content of the submitted declarations. The Government emphasizes that its filings were made in compliance with the Court’s directives and that the assertions of misconduct raised by the defense are without merit. The response seeks to clarify the record and ensure that the proceedings remain focused on the legal and evidentiary issues at hand.AlsoThe Government has submitted a response opposing the defendant’s motion to modify the terms of the Protective Order, which seeks to require the electronic production of specific videos referenced in Paragraphs 12(a) and 12(c) of the Indictment (Dkt. 129). The Government argues that the Court should deny this request, as the sensitive nature of these videos justifies their current designation under the Protective Order, which allows only for in-person inspection. The Government asserts that the existing restrictions are necessary to protect the integrity and confidentiality of the evidence.Additionally, the Government highlights the defendant’s alleged violation of the Protective Order by improperly disclosing details of the videos in his motion without the required redactions. This breach, according to the Government, further supports the need for strict safeguards regarding the handling of these materials. The response emphasizes that allowing electronic production would increase the risk of unauthorized disclosure, making it essential to uphold the current protective measures.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.138.0.pdfgov.uscourts.nysd.628425.136.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the Investigation Discovery docuseries "The Fall of Diddy," Phillip Pines, who served as Sean "Diddy" Combs' senior executive assistant from 2019 to 2021, made serious allegations against the music mogul. Pines claimed that during his tenure, Combs coerced him into engaging in sexual acts to demonstrate his loyalty. He recounted an incident where Combs, after a day of heavy drinking, pressured him to participate in a sexual encounter during an event referred to as a "freak-off." According to Pines, Combs handed him a condom, directed him toward a woman, and insisted he prove his loyalty. Feeling intimidated and fearing potential repercussions, Pines complied, though he later expressed deep remorse over the incident.Beyond this specific event, Pines described a broader environment of manipulation and coercion. He alleged that his responsibilities included facilitating Combs' sexual activities, which encompassed procuring various items for events known as "Wild King Nights." These gatherings reportedly involved young women and substances such as alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs. Pines emphasized the significant power imbalance present, noting that many of the women involved were impressionable and lacked influence, making them more susceptible to exploitation. He also highlighted Combs' volatile behavior, stating that witnessing Combs' anger toward employees who resisted his demands contributed to his own fear and compliance. In December 2024, Pines filed a lawsuit against Combs, accusing him of sexual battery, harassment, and trafficking. Combs' legal team has denied all allegations, asserting his innocence and expressing confidence in the judicial process.to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy ordered me to have sex to 'prove loyalty to my king' at notorious Freak Off party, claims ex-assistant | The SunBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case against Bryan Kohberger, accused of the November 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, Ada County District Judge Steven Hippler has announced plans to release a redacted transcript of a previously closed-door hearing held on January 23, 2025. This hearing focused on the defense's motion to suppress DNA evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argue was gathered unconstitutionally. The court has provided both the prosecution and defense with unredacted copies of the transcript, granting them 14 days to propose redactions before the document is made public.The decision to unseal the transcript comes after considerations of the public's right to access court proceedings and the need to maintain the integrity of the judicial process. Initially, the hearing was closed to prevent potential prejudice within the jury pool, given the high-profile nature of the case. By releasing a redacted version, the court aims to balance transparency with the defendant's right to a fair trial. This move is anticipated to shed light on the legal arguments surrounding the use of IGG in the investigation and its implications for Kohberger's defense.to contact me:[email protected]:Bryan Kohberger's closed-door IGG hearing transcript to be released | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 2:24-cv-12647 before Hon. Judith Levy, the defendant, Sean Combs, has filed a motion for sanctions against the plaintiff, alleging misconduct in the litigation process. The motion argues that the plaintiff has engaged in actions that are frivolous, abusive, or otherwise in bad faith, including making baseless allegations and improperly using the legal system to damage the defendant’s reputation. Combs' legal team asserts that such behavior has caused significant harm, including unnecessary legal expenses and damage to his professional and personal standing.The motion requests that the court impose appropriate sanctions to deter further misuse of the judicial process. Potential remedies sought include the dismissal of certain claims, reimbursement of legal fees incurred by the defendant, and other punitive measures deemed fit by the court. Combs' legal team emphasizes the importance of maintaining the integrity of the legal system and argues that allowing such alleged misconduct to continue unaddressed would set a dangerous precedent for future cases.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.mied.380235.70.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In April 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice announced indictments against 28 members of Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel, including three sons of Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, known collectively as "Los Chapitos." The charges encompassed fentanyl trafficking, weapons offenses, and other related crimes. The indictments detailed the cartel's operations, highlighting their role in manufacturing and distributing large quantities of fentanyl into the United States, contributing significantly to the opioid crisis.The legal actions targeted not only the leadership but also key operatives within the cartel's network. This included individuals responsible for the production and distribution of fentanyl, as well as those managing the cartel's security and financial operations. The indictments underscored the cartel's extensive and organized structure, aiming to disrupt its operations comprehensively.The Sinaloa Cartel is a drug trafficking organization based in the Mexican state of Sinaloa. It was founded in the late 1980s and is named after its home state. The cartel is one of the largest and most powerful drug trafficking organizations in the world, with operations in the United States, Europe, Asia, and South America.The Sinaloa Cartel is led by Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada and was previously led by Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, who was extradited to the United States in 2017 and sentenced to life in prison in 2019.The cartel is involved in the production, transportation, and distribution of drugs, including marijuana,fentanyl, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine. It is known for its use of violence and intimidation to maintain its power and control over drug trafficking routes and territories.Despite numerous efforts by law enforcement to dismantle the cartel, it continues to operate and remains a significant force in the global drug trade. Its operations have been linked to corruption, money laundering, and violence, and have had a significant impact on the social and economic fabric of the regions in which it operates.In this episode, we take a look at some of the biggest revelations from the indictment of the Los Chapitos and their associates.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.