Sixty UK Landings: How Did Jeffrey Epstein Move Women Through British Airspace Unchecked? (2/26/26)

According to newly surfaced documents and flight records, Jeffrey Epstein continued to traffic women through British airports and even military airfields up until a month before his arrest in July 2019. Analysis of his private jet’s movements shows Epstein’s aircraft landed at UK airports — including Luton, Stansted, Heathrow and RAF bases like Northolt — more than 60 times, and that he booked commercial and private flights for women into and out of the UK as late as June 2019. Police in multiple regions, including the Metropolitan Police and several county forces, are now investigating whether these flights were part of a trafficking network that used British airports and airfields as transit points for victims. Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown has urged authorities to release flight logs and pursue these allegations, especially around potential trafficking involving both civilian and RAF facilities.The renewed scrutiny has highlighted gaps in earlier law enforcement responses; British police previously declined to open a full investigation despite claims that girls and young women were flown into the UK on Epstein-linked flights. Records also show his jet landed at RAF Northolt as recently as 2015, two years later than previously believed, and investigators are examining dozens of flight logs for possible trafficking evidence. The issue has also intersected with broader political controversy, notably questions about whether former prince Prince Andrew used RAF bases or chartered flights to meet with Epstein, which Andrew has denied. Critics say more urgent and coordinated action is needed to fully understand how Epstein’s international movements may have facilitated abuse and human trafficking through British airspace.to contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein trafficked women through British airports until just a month before his 2019 arrest as he took more than 60 flights including many to RAF bases | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is scheduled to be deposed today, February 26, 2026, by the Republican-led U.S. House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The closed-door deposition in Chappaqua, New York — near the Clintons’ home — is the first of two back-to-back hearings, with former President Bill Clinton set to testify tomorrow. The committee has pressed the Clintons for information on their past associations with Epstein, including Bill Clinton’s acknowledged flights on Epstein’s private jet and their appearances in Epstein-related documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Hillary Clinton has said she has little direct information to provide, denies wrongdoing, and has accused committee Republicans of pursuing a politically motivated process.The depositions follow months of tension between the Clintons and lawmakers, including threats to hold them in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with earlier subpoenas. Both Clintons initially resisted in-person testimony, offering written statements instead, before relenting to avoid a full contempt vote that could have led to legal consequences. Lawmakers from both parties on the Oversight Committee have said the sessions are meant to shed light on Epstein’s network of influence, the federal government’s handling of his prosecution, and unanswered questions about how Epstein avoided more serious charges after his 2008 conviction, although the proceedings are being conducted privately with transcripts and recordings expected to be released later.to contact  me:[email protected]:Hillary Clinton faces House Oversight Committee in Epstein investigation grilling | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

After newly released government documents and emails revealed a longstanding personal and professional relationship between Larry Summers and Epstein, Summers announced he will step down from his faculty position at Harvard University at the end of the 2025-26 academic year. Harvard confirmed that his decision comes amid an ongoing university review of records related to Epstein’s connections with faculty and leadership, which showed Summers maintained frequent communication with Epstein over several years, including correspondence about personal matters and introductions involving women. Summers has already been on leave since late 2025 and relinquished leadership roles such as co-director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government; he also resigned from high-profile board positions, including at OpenAI, as the controversy expanded.The fallout from the Epstein files has dramatically shifted Summers’s standing in academia and public life. Although there is no evidence he was involved in criminal activity, the release of emails and other documents showing close ties to Epstein — including visits, frequent exchanges, and his name appearing repeatedly in the files — sparked institutional and public pressure. Summers, a former U.S. Treasury secretary and one-time Harvard president, expressed that his decision was difficult and framed it as an opportunity to focus on independent research, but his resignation underscores the broader repercussions that association with Epstein continues to have for powerful figures across academic and professional spheres.to contact me:[email protected]:Larry Summers to resign as Harvard University professor amid Epstein falloutBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, a class action lawsuit titled Jane Doe 1, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. was filed. The complaint represented not only Jane Doe 1, but a broader group of alleged victims who claimed they suffered harm tied to the actions—and alleged inaction—of JP Morgan Chase & Co. The filing formally demanded a jury trial, signaling the plaintiffs’ intention to take the allegations into open court rather than resolve them quietly behind closed doors.The case was framed as both an individual and a class action complaint, raising the stakes considerably for the financial giant. By categorizing it this way, the plaintiffs positioned their claims as part of a larger systemic issue involving an entire group of alleged victims. The filing marked the beginning of what later became one of the most scrutinized legal battles connected to the Jeffrey Epstein network, setting the stage for intense public inquiry into the bank’s role and potential liability.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - 00513854.DOCXBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, a class action lawsuit titled Jane Doe 1, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. was filed. The complaint represented not only Jane Doe 1, but a broader group of alleged victims who claimed they suffered harm tied to the actions—and alleged inaction—of JP Morgan Chase & Co. The filing formally demanded a jury trial, signaling the plaintiffs’ intention to take the allegations into open court rather than resolve them quietly behind closed doors.The case was framed as both an individual and a class action complaint, raising the stakes considerably for the financial giant. By categorizing it this way, the plaintiffs positioned their claims as part of a larger systemic issue involving an entire group of alleged victims. The filing marked the beginning of what later became one of the most scrutinized legal battles connected to the Jeffrey Epstein network, setting the stage for intense public inquiry into the bank’s role and potential liability.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - 00513854.DOCXBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, a class action lawsuit titled Jane Doe 1, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. was filed. The complaint represented not only Jane Doe 1, but a broader group of alleged victims who claimed they suffered harm tied to the actions—and alleged inaction—of JP Morgan Chase & Co. The filing formally demanded a jury trial, signaling the plaintiffs’ intention to take the allegations into open court rather than resolve them quietly behind closed doors.The case was framed as both an individual and a class action complaint, raising the stakes considerably for the financial giant. By categorizing it this way, the plaintiffs positioned their claims as part of a larger systemic issue involving an entire group of alleged victims. The filing marked the beginning of what later became one of the most scrutinized legal battles connected to the Jeffrey Epstein network, setting the stage for intense public inquiry into the bank’s role and potential liability.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - 00513854.DOCXBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In The Spider, Barry Levine portrays Ghislaine Maxwell as far more than Epstein’s social companion — he frames her as the indispensable architect of his operation. According to Levine, she was the “glamorous front” who leveraged her elite British pedigree and high-society connections to normalize Epstein in circles of wealth and power. He argues Maxwell actively recruited young women, groomed them, and managed logistics that made Epstein’s predation function like a system. In his telling, her role wasn’t passive or peripheral; it was managerial and deliberate, making her a co-conspirator rather than a bystander.Levine also emphasizes how Maxwell operated as a bridge between Epstein and institutions of influence. He highlights how she cultivated access to royalty, billionaires, and academics, which insulated Epstein with legitimacy while expanding his reach. Levine makes the case that Maxwell was “the spider at the center of the web” just as much as Epstein himself — an enabler who understood the power structures she was exploiting and weaponized her connections to secure cover for their crimes. The book presents her not only as Epstein’s partner in crime but as the key figure who transformed his abuse into a scalable empire.to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.newsweek.com/ghislaine-jeffery-biography-1545135Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A former housekeeper at Jeffrey Epstein’s New Mexico estate, Zorro Ranch, claimed that Prince Andrew stayed at the property in the early 2000s as a guest of Jeffrey Epstein. According to the housekeeper, a young woman described as a neurosurgeon spent several days with Andrew during his visit. The account alleges that Epstein arranged for her to accompany the prince and that she prepared herbal tea intended to increase arousal while he was at the ranch.The account further alleges that the woman prepared special herbal tea intended to enhance arousal and that Epstein personally oversaw arrangements for Andrew’s stay. Zorro Ranch, depicted as one of Epstein’s most remote and tightly controlled properties, is described as a location where high-profile guests were hosted away from public scrutiny. These claims are framed within the broader controversy surrounding Andrew’s association with Epstein, adding another alleged episode involving one of Epstein’s residences and a prominent visitor during the years before Epstein’s arrest.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A lawsuit claims that senior executives at JPMorgan Chase were aware of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of underage girls while he was still a client of the bank. According to court filings cited by the Daily Mail, internal communications and testimony suggest that high-level officials discussed concerns about Epstein’s behavior for years before cutting ties with him in 2013. The lawsuit alleges that bank employees flagged suspicious cash withdrawals and the nature of Epstein’s relationships with young women, yet he remained a profitable client despite his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor.The legal action argues that JPMorgan not only maintained its relationship with Epstein after his conviction but also potentially facilitated aspects of his trafficking operation by continuing to process large financial transactions. The bank has previously stated that it regrets its association with Epstein and maintains that it ended the relationship once concerns escalated internally.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In 2018, Ghislaine Maxwell—despite years of public allegations connecting her to Jeffrey Epstein’s trafficking operation—was invited to and attended Jeff Bezos’s elite and secretive literary retreat known as Campfire. The event, hosted by Bezos annually, brings together top authors, tech moguls, and media power players at a private location for a weekend of discussions, panels, and informal networking. Maxwell’s presence at the retreat raised eyebrows, not only because of her reputation by that point, but also because it demonstrated how seamlessly she continued to move through the highest levels of elite society even after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. Her attendance revealed a stunning level of normalization and acceptance within powerful circles, despite her growing notoriety.Maxwell reportedly arrived at the Campfire event alongside entrepreneur Scott Borgerson, a figure later revealed to be in a close relationship with her, though he denied any romantic involvement at the time. Attendees included influential figures from Silicon Valley, publishing, and entertainment—none of whom publicly objected to her presence. The revelation of her invitation has sparked renewed scrutiny into how the world’s wealthiest and most influential people continued to welcome Epstein’s known enablers into their inner circles long after the broader public became aware of their roles. It serves as yet another example of how elite spaces often insulate their own, regardless of the crimes that surround them.source:https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/01/jeffrey-epstein-friend-ghislaine-maxwell-was-guest-at-jeff-bezos-event.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.