Mega Edition: A Look Back At The Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (Part 3) (7/11/26)

Summary

The Epstein Chronicles — Mega Edition: A Look Back At The Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (Part 3) Host: Bobby Capucci • Date: July 12, 2026

---

Episode Overview

In this "Mega Edition," Bobby Capucci takes listeners through Day 8 of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial and contextualizes trial proceedings with a focus on the persistent failures and complicity of the legacy media in both the Epstein and Maxwell sagas. Capucci weaves first-hand courtroom updates with pointed commentary about the broader cultural, legal, and media landscape that allowed Epstein’s network to flourish unchecked for decades. The final segment of the episode is dedicated to a detailed reading and analysis of a Guardian article by Ed Pilkington, which traces the history of U.S. media’s reluctance to report on Epstein’s abuse—highlighting the pivotal exception of Miami Herald reporter Julie Brown.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Courtroom Proceedings — Day 8 Recap

Witnesses Overview (00:30 — 31:00)

• No direct accusers on the stand today. Focus was on foundational testimony from Epstein’s staff:
  • Janine Gil Velez (Mar-a-Lago employee): Provided evidence confirming Virginia Roberts' father's employment, helping corroborate accuser stories (10:00–12:00).
  • Sean (boyfriend of accuser Carolyn): Offered strong corroborative testimony about Carolyn’s story and the context of her involvement with Epstein.
    • Discussed the socioeconomic divide between West Palm Beach and Palm Beach and how Epstein/Maxwell targeted the vulnerable ("The prosecution is looking to establish more of a pattern..." 15:51–16:16).
  • Nicole Hess (Epstein housekeeper): Testified she was hired by Maxwell; corroborated phone messages from accuser Carolyn to Epstein, supporting prosecution’s case that Maxwell was not just a bystander but an active participant.
  • David Rogers (Epstein’s original pilot): Provided information about Epstein’s flight logs, blacked-out columns, and passenger lists—including noting Virginia Roberts flew with Epstein 32 times. Emphasized Maxwell's central management role.

Critical Points About Prosecution and Defense Tactics

• Why haven't high-profile victims (like Virginia Roberts or Maria Farmer) been called to testify?
  Capucci expresses skepticism about prosecution strategy, suggesting a lack of confidence in the federal government's willingness to pursue the case to its fullest (14:00–15:00).
• Defense attempts to sow doubt:
  • Questions accuracy of employment documentation and whether employees personally witnessed events.
  • Attempts to distance Maxwell from direct accusation by highlighting other associates (notably Sarah Kellen Vickers) and noting unindicted co-conspirators.

Commentary on the Physical and Social Environment

• Epstein and Maxwell picked their victims from the "other side of the tracks":
  Capucci highlights the deliberate targeting of socially and economically vulnerable girls, many already in cycles of poverty and abuse.
  • Quote: “Prosecution is looking to establish more of a pattern in the MO of Epstein and Maxwell here... they want to show you that Maxwell and Epstein went after the most vulnerable people, the poorest amongst us, the least likely to report them…” (15:51–16:16)
• Opaque nature of flight manifests and government secrecy:
  Question raised: "Why in the hell would this [manifest] be blacked out? We don’t have a right to see who was on these planes at this point?" (27:40–28:00)

Prosecution’s Case-Building: Blocking “Victim or Perpetrator” Narratives

• Capucci notes how the prosecution continues to dismantle the idea that Maxwell was victimized by Epstein, instead positioning her as an active, managing participant—"Maxwell was not a victim here, but... an able and willing part of all of this." (21:35–22:05)

Defense Recurring Themes

• Attempts to highlight unrelated wealthy associates (Wexner, Dubin, etc.) as distractors or implicit character referees—but Capucci expresses open disdain for this approach.

Notable Quotes & Moments:

• On media complicity:
  “Where are the panels on Rachel Maddow? Where are Sean Hannity and the rest of them bringing in all the specialists and all of the experts on the case?... They’d much rather have us fighting with each other… and pumping out all sorts of rage porn. And it’s not even disputable.” (03:20–04:30)
• On blacked out flight logs:
  “Why in the hell would this be blacked out? We don’t have a right to see who was on these planes at this point? What, are we gonna embarrass them?” (27:40–28:05)
• On unindicted co-conspirators:
  “You look at R. Kelly and all of his assistants caught up. You look at Keith Raniere, all his assistants caught up. But here in this case, these people, they’re gonna slide free... It’s just crazy to me.” (16:47–18:05)
• On systemic failure:
  “Think about how many presidencies we have had that Jeffrey Epstein has been running around inactive, him and Ghislaine Maxwell... all the way from Clinton, right all the way through. Nobody stopped him, nobody did a thing. In fact, he was helped along his merry way.” (07:45–08:45)
• On Maxwell’s alleged relationship with Epstein:
  “I think that Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, they’re not capable of being in a relationship like you or I would be able to be in. These people are different… they were a means to an end.” (30:40–31:05)

---

Media Malfeasance: The “Whitewash” of the Epstein Story

Historical Overview & Article Analysis (33:33 — end)

Capucci uses a 2019 Guardian article by Ed Pilkington as a springboard to dissect why the U.S. media largely ignored the Epstein story—apart from the groundbreaking reporting by Julie K. Brown (Miami Herald).

Key Narratives:

• Police chief Michael Ryder’s frustration: Despite providing evidence and talking to multiple reporters about Epstein’s crimes, nothing came of it—he told Brown the media “had squashed the story.” (35:00–36:00)
• Media capitulation and intimidation:
  • Brown’s persistent reporting forced the issue into the public eye.
  • Epstein and his attorneys used intimidation and their own investigations to chill coverage (e.g., “hiring security to go after you,” 36:30–37:30).
• Non-prosecution deal exposed:
  Brown broke the story of the secret 2008 non-prosecution agreement, underscoring government corruption and media disinterest.
  • Capucci notes: “Do you really think that some... prosecutor from Miami has the ability to push this kind of prosecution on his own, this kind of indictment? Of course not.” (46:00–46:40)
• Legacy media circles the wagons:
  Capucci denounces how the same personalities showed up at Epstein’s gatherings and then declined to run stories that might hurt their social/professional peers.

The Vicki Ward/Vanity Fair Example

• Vicki Ward’s experience:
  Her initial profile of Epstein was gutted after pressure from Epstein and/or editorial staff, leading to the deletion of paragraphs detailing abuse claims. Later, Ward wrote about Epstein in surprisingly positive or euphemistic terms, which Capucci excoriates: “Epstein’s crimes were sexual peccadillos. That’s what you call assaulting young girls and saying it was prostitution. Those are sexual peccadillos to you, huh?” (59:20–60:10)
• Editorial cowardice:
  “Most significantly, [Carter claimed] the women themselves were unwilling to go on the record. Yeah, since that really matters now, huh? How many nameless sources have we seen in the past four, five, six years? And I’m talking huge blockbuster stories.” (59:09–59:45)
• Lack of accountability among media leaders: Even when confronted, those involved pass the blame or claim “legal reasons” for not publishing.

The MeToo Movement and Media Shift

• Increased attention to sexual exploitation stories in the wake of MeToo—but Capucci remains skeptical of “belated scruples.”
  • “So we’re gonna give them a pass, right? Because they just... They were just ignorant up to that point. Sorry, not gonna do it.” (70:00–70:35)
• On collective failure:
  “He [Acosta] paid the price for his own actions... They focused on him because the media at that time, it was politically expedient. But they didn’t go any deeper...” (68:48–69:10)

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• “You would think that this would be wall to wall, this case, but it’s not. Where are all the people camped out? Where’s all of the gigantic push by these big networks? ...It really comes down to they don’t want to embarrass their friends.” (04:00–05:30)
• “All you have to do is take a look at how ABC quashed the story about Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts so they didn’t lose their access to Prince Andrew.” (09:00–09:35)
• “Once again, how is it that Virginia keeps being brought up, but she is not being called on to give testimony?” (28:30–28:50)
• “If you had this kind of information in front of you... wouldn’t you say to your bosses, screw you, I’m gonna become a whistleblower?... 13 and 14 year old kids, and then this guy gets this kind of immunity deal...” (46:50–47:40)

---

Important Segments & Timestamps

• Opening context and anti-media critique: 00:30–05:30
• Courtroom procedural rundown: 10:00–31:00
• Commentary on prosecution and defense strategies: 14:00–23:00
• Flight manifests, secrecy, and government critique: 27:00–31:00
• Analysis of legacy media failings (Guardian article): 33:33–72:00
• Discussion of Vicki Ward, Vanity Fair, and editorial decisions: 54:00–61:00
• Analysis of MeToo’s effects and lingering skepticism: 69:50–71:00

---

Tone & Style

• Direct, candid, and frequently caustic. Capucci does not mince words in critiquing elites, media organizations, and defense tactics.
• Conversational, sometimes irreverent. Speaks directly to listeners as allies seeking truth beyond official narratives.
• Victim-centered. Consistently empathizes with survivors, decrying the indifference of institutions and elites.

---

Takeaways for New Listeners

• The Maxwell trial is as much about unraveling the failures of systems—media, government, law enforcement—as it is about convicting one perpetrator.
• Legacy media failed disastrously, shielding abusers for social/professional gain; it took dogged local reporting to break through.
• Even now, the trial reveals the myriad ways the powerful are protected, records are hidden, and survivors are sidelined.
• Capucci’s account is fiercely independent, skeptical of institutional motives, and relentless in centering survivor voices and exposing cover-ups.

Transcript

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

You ain't heard about Moto Casino? Moto has real Vegas slots. Any game you can find on the floor in Vegas, you can play it on Moto. I like my slots hot. Moto's free to play like food stamps in line at the grocery store at a funeral in traffic. Keep your eyes on the road. Hop on Moto Casino. Moto Casino Got jackpots that are bigger than my belly. Moto America's hottest free to play social casino.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today. Moto Casino is a social casino. We're prohibited. No purchase necessary. Visit Moto Us for more decades.

[Bobby Capucci]

What's up everyone? And welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Today marked day number eight of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial and we saw several witnesses take the stand. Now, today, there were no accusers who took the stand. Basically just foundational testimony from employees of Epstein. One who was a part time housekeeper and then the other, David Rogers, who was Epstein's original pilot. He also gave testimony. And we also heard from Carolyn, the accuser, who we heard from yesterday from her boyfriend, Sean. So that's how it lined up this morning inside of the courtroom. Another thing that came out of the courtroom that shocked some people, not us, however, but some folks, was the timeline, meaning that Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell knew each other for a lot longer than the official timeline originally stated. And when I say the official timeline, I don't mean the timeline that, you know, we've dug into. I'm talking about what the unsullied talk about, you know, all of the blue check marks, all of the so called journalists who have just shown up and all of a sudden think they have a full grip on this case. To them, they were all shocked, I mean, shocked that Epstein and Maxwell knew each other longer than the official narrative has it. But in reality, when you look at this in the big picture and you look at all of the players on the stage and you look at all of the different timelines, it's rather obvious that Maxwell and Epstein knew each other previously. To them hooking up in New York for their, oh, I don't know, three and a half, four decade run of, you know, human trafficking for Jeffrey Epstein for sure, and allegedly for Ghislaine Maxwell. But the whole entire premise of Epstein and Maxwell meeting just because Maxwell needed a rich man after her father died has always been ridiculous. All you have to do is listen to the survivors themselves and they'll tell you. But I guess that's a little too much for the legacy media to do. They're way too busy, right? Way too busy with their Steve Bannon talk or talk about aoc. I mean, really, who cares about any of that nonsense? You would think that this would be wall to wall, this case, but it's not. And people will conflate that comment, right, and say, oh, well, it is being covered. Hey, look, it's being covered in my local newspaper.

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

I.

[Bobby Capucci]

All right, well, my question is this. Why is it not being given the same kind of tread that, say, Gabby Petito's case did? Or say, for another example of a trial, what about Rittenhouse? Now, I'm not saying that it should be broadcast live from the courtroom. We know that can't happen due to federal regulations. But where are the panels on Rachel Maddow? Where are Sean Hannity and the rest of them bringing in all the specialists and all of the experts on the case? Where is a panel of all of the survivors being brought in to talk about what occurred here? But you have every Tom, Dick, Harry and John who has an opinion about something like the Rittenhouse trial getting all kinds of spin, getting all kinds of airtime. And you know why, right? Because it can be used to move the political needle. They want us focused on hating each other. They don't want us focused on things like this where we all look at each other and say, holy shit, both sides are in on it. Both sides are corrupt. They'd much rather have us fighting with each other, at each other's throats and pumping out all sorts of rage porn. And it's not even disputable. You know, there'll be some journalists or people who consider themselves journalists who are offended by those kinds of statements, but it's the truth. Where's all the people camped out? Where's all of the gigantic, gigantic push by these big networks? And it goes for all of them, right? Not just one or the other, all of them. And what it really comes down to is they don't want to embarrass their friends. And it's unfortunate. It's really unfortunate. You can just take a look at the different figures in the media throughout the history of, of Jeffrey Epstein that were hobnobbing with him from George Stepanopoulos to Katie Couric to Mike Wallace. It's just, you know, a who's who, Charlie Rose and how many that we don't know about. We know that the Cuomo were, were. Were connected via one of the books. So again, look, all of these people, the so called elite, they were on cover for each other. And when this whole thing first broke, Nancy Pelosi's daughter came out and said, well, some of our faves are gonna be caught up in this. And for me, I don't look at any politician as my fave. I'm not into hero worshiping, especially when we're talking about grifters and psychos like the people running the world. So there'll be no hero worshiping from me. And all of these people were sent to do a job and I feel like all of them have failed completely and miserably. And it's not just now, it's throughout years. You have to think, think about how many presidencies we have had that Jeffrey Epstein has been running around inactive, him and Ghislaine Maxwell all the way from Clinton, right all the way through. Nobody stopped him, nobody did a thing. In fact, he was helped along his merry way. And it's, it's disgusting. Honestly, it's really one of the most egregious miscarriages of justice I have ever seen ever in my life. And you know for a fact that if this was politicians children who were being abused in this gigantic ring, that they certainly would have had a few more conferences and probably would have had a few more meetings up there on Capitol Hill up about what occurred. But if it's the Franklin situation or these girls, eh, we'll get to it, you know, someday when the public pressures enough to push us in that direction. So the legacy media has done nothing but cover the whole entire time as well. Now don't get me wrong, when I say the legacy media, I don't mean the whole media. There's a lot of good journalists who have done a lot of good work here. I'm talking about the major players in news, the people who are making the decisions. Those are the people that are scum, the absolute scum. And all you have to do is take a look at how ABC quashed the story about Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts so they didn't lose their access to Prince Andrew. And how many stories like that occur that we don't know about that there isn't a whistleblower telling us about. You have to think a bunch, right? So that was the only time it's ever happened. So that's why it's laughable to me when these journalists, who frankly I have never even heard of before, all of a sudden position themselves as experts in the Jeffrey Epstein case. Meanwhile, they can't even keep the basic timeline down, right? The real timeline. So anyway, with that said, let's Jump into some of the proceedings today, and let's take a look at what went on in the courtroom. All right, so the. The proceedings got off to a bit of a slow start this morning due to one of the jurors having an issue getting there. Now, for those of you who are familiar with New York, you know that there's some issues with the subways. I've been caught up many times in subway nightmares, either coming down from Westchester on the Metro north or heading back up to Westchester via the subway. And I can't tell you how many times I have been stuck and caught in, you know, an issue with the subway, the car, whatever it may be. So I feel for this juror. No doubt about it. There's nothing worse when you are, you know, using public transportation and. And you're stuck. Right. Nothing you can do about it. So it took about 45 minutes for the juror to get there. And once the juror got there, they got underway. The first witness in the box was a lady named Janine Gil Velez. And she worked for Mar a Lago, where Virginia Roberts was working or was at when she met Maxwell prosecution. They were asking her how long she had worked at the property, and she says that she's been there for 50 years, 15 years. Now, the main reason that they were calling her up there is they had a redacted exhibit that they wanted to show her, and it had to do with the hiring of Virginia Roberts dad, Sky Roberts, at Mar a Lago in 2000. Now, what they're trying to do is continue to build that foundation we've been talking about. Right. All right. So we said that Robert's dad worked here. Well, now, here's the documentation to prove it. And here is an employee from the company who can tell you that this is actual paperwork confirming that he did work here. Um, so it was very short for the prosecution basically just to set that up and to add that into evidence to continue to build that foundation. So they turned him over to Bobby Sternum Sternheim, who is. Who was handling the cross for this section of it. Um, they asked some questions regarding the hiring of Sky Roberts and if she knew, meaning the witness, if she knew personally of the hiring. She says that she did not have any personal knowledge of that hiring. And what I'm guessing the defense is doing here is to try and show the jury that while that paperwork is in, it could have been from anybody. Again, trying to, you know, sow some seeds of doubt. Now, after this line of questioning, they're done with the Witness as well. So very short, right? And the next person that they bring up is Sean. Now, Sean, we heard about yesterday when Carolyn was giving her testimony. She was discussing Shawn being her boyfriend, etc, etc. So today Sean is on the stand and he did a pretty good job, in my opinion, of corroborating Carolyn's story. When you look back at what we heard from Carolyn yesterday, gut wrenching account, right? I mean, how can you not feel for somebody went through abuse themselves from their own family, then the abuse of Epstein, drug addiction, the whole. The whole gamut, right? And that's the whole. A lot of these girls fall into girls. Not just girls, men too. Anybody who comes from this kind of lifestyle where they're abused and the abuse is continuous. This is the sort of tale that a lot of them tell, unfortunately. And these people aren't to be dis. You know, just disregarded, thrown into the trash. These are human beings, right? And just because someone has a drug problem or had a drug problem, doesn't make them a bad person. So prosecution starts by asking some questions about who Shaun is, such as what his age is and what he did for work, you know, setting up the profile. He says that he's 38 years old and that he is a salesman. He also tells the court that he has attended a little bit of college. Then the questions turn to Carolyn, who gave her testimony yesterday. And the questions range from how old she was when they dated. He says that she was 14 and he was 17. And they also asked other questions about how Carolyn met Jeffrey Epstein to this. He said that she met Jeffrey Epstein through Virginia Roberts. And again, it makes me question, with as much as Virginia's name is being brought up, you would think that they would have her testify here. You would think that they would bring her in to tell her story. Why haven't they? Why isn't Maria Farmer brought in as a witness? Or insert any of these girls that got caught up in Epstein's abuse, why aren't they being brought in? I. I know I sound like a broken record at this point, but you would think that, you know, we would be seeing some serious testimony by now, but for some reason we have not seen that yet. And again, look, I'm. I'm not some trial specialist. This isn't something that I do in my free time, follow trials like this and what goes on in courtrooms. So, you know, this kind of thing where it might seem completely weird to me, maybe prosecution has something up their sleeve that I just can't see, but I just don't have confidence in the federal government at this point to, you know, really see it all the way through. So I would think that you would want somebody like Virginia Roberts to come and give her testimony. Considering she is the most high profile of the Epstein survivors as far as being in the media and stuff, I would think that her testimony would go a long way here. Uh, the prosecution then starts to ask Sean what the differences are between the part of town he was from, West Palm beach, and where Jeffrey Epstein was from, Palm Beach. Now, it might as well be the moon and earth, okay? When you're talking about the discrepancy in wealth besides the, you know, between these two places, it is massive. Massive. And people like Sean, people like Carolyn, people like Jane, they come from, quote, unquote, the other side of the tracks, right? They don't have the opportunities. They don't have family members showering them with money. Hell, they don't even have family members giving them love. So when they talk about the other side of the tracks and you talk about West Palm beach and Palm beach, that's what you're talking about. And Sean answers that. That way, you know, he says, like anyone, like anyone would, it was about money. But of course, he is cut off by Maxwell's lawyer, and Judge Nathan sustains the objection. He's not wrong, though. It's the truth. Literally, the other side of the tracks. Prosecution is looking to establish more of a pattern in the MO of Epstein and Maxwell here. Right?

[Moto Casino Announcer]

They.

[Bobby Capucci]

They want to show you that Maxwell and Epstein went after the most vulnerable people, the poorest amongst us, the least likely to report them to the authorities. The prosecution goes on to ask Sean how often he visited Palm Beach. And Sean says to the court that he wasn't even able to afford things at the gas station in. In. In Palm Beach. So he didn't go there very often.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Here's golf legend John Daly. Hell, yeah.

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

These wins are piling up faster than my divorces.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

I only spent on Moto, America's social casino.

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

You know, I. A couple of majors. And on Moto, I've won majors, grands, and epic jackpots on their classic Vegas slots. With huge, huge bonus rounds.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Moto Casino adds new games and awards

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

players free coins every single day. Grip it and spend it on Moto Casino.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today. Moto Casino is the social casino board. We're prohibited. No purchase necessary. Visit Moto us for more details.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

America Social Casino.

[Bobby Capucci]

Now, this line, this questioning, it touches on many different things, such as how the sessions were set Up. And Sean tells the court that a lady with a foreign accent and Sarah would call his phone. Now obviously Sarah is Sarah Kellen Vickers. And it makes us wonder why in the hell is Sarah Kellen Vickers not indicted yet? Is there a sealed indictment we don't know about? Is the government gonna bring her out as a witness here against Maxwell at some. Who knows, right? But how in the world is she not at this trial under oath? At the very least she has been able to slide through all of this. Ever since being named in the non prosecution agreement down in Florida, she has been able to avoid all of this. And it is unimaginable to me. You look at R. Kelly and all of his assistants caught up. You look at Keith, Ray Neary, all his assistants caught up. But here in this case, these people, they're gonna slide free the, the. The unindicted co conspirators. I mean it's, it's just crazy. It's honestly crazy to me. And the fact that the government doesn't have them lined up one after the other here, it just shows you that they're not willing to go all the way. At least it seem. Sean was also asked about the time frame of the stays at Epstein's. And he said that they were usually. Well, that they were there when he was there for an hour or an hour and five minutes or so. When asked if. If he went to Epstein's with anyone else, he responded that he did with Amanda and Melissa Laszlo. And when he was asked the age of these girls, he responded that Amanda was 15 and. And Melissa was 16 at the time. And according to his testimony, when Melissa left Epstein's house after their journey, she had hundred dollar bills. Now this once again hammers home the fact that Epstein was paying minors for massages and Maxwell was there for every step of the way. It looks to me that the prosecution is having a better day today. It looks to me as if the prosecution is doing a better job hammering home their points. Now, before Sean is turned over to, to Pagliucha for cross, he is asked by prosecution about his past criminal record once again as a preemptive strike. Right to beat prosecutor, to beat the defense to the punch here. And when they asked him what he got popped for, he responds that he was nailed for possession of meth and being a felon and in possession of a firearm. Again, these people who have lived these kinds of lives inevitably end up having it rough, end up with a drug addiction. Drug addiction leads to other crimes, other felonies. And before you Know it, you have a rap sheet and you're looked at as a felon. So again, people like Carolyn, people like Jane, these are the people that Epstein's of the world prey upon. And it's not even debatable. Now the high priced Harvard squad takes over the cross and they begin, begin to set the table how they see it. They ask him about his trip to Epstein's in 2002 and then they slyly throw in that it was Sarah who called him, once again trying to put some insulation between their client and the truth. And you notice that throughout this trial they've been throwing out these names. Sarah, Kellen, Vickers, they've thrown out, you know, Clinton, they've thrown out Trump's name. You know, multiple, multiple high profile people trying to get the spotlight off of their client, basically telling the jury and the court, hey, well what about these people? And while I agree that those people should be looked at as well, I don't think that their tactic here is going to work. I think that the jury is going to be able to discern what's going on here and I think that the jury will be able to see through this tactic. It must be said once again, however, that Sarah Kell and Vickers should be under the microscope here and, and that the non prosecution agreement that the, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals declined to squash once again is rearing its ugly head and gumming things up. Now if they would have gotten rid of that non prosecution agreement, things would be a lot different in not only this Maxwell trial, but in this whole entire thing overall with that non profit prosecution agreement, it really provides the co conspirators who were named in it and, and those who are not named by the way, a lot of protection. Pagliucca continues to pepper him with questions about various things such as when he met the, when he, when he met with the government and when he had this meeting, how he had said that the accent was French. Well, he says that he said that it was foreign, not French. So after this exchange, Pagliucha is finished with Sean and we get ready for the next witness to take the stand, who is Nicole Hess and she's a former employee at Epstein's Palm beach house on El Brio Way in 2003 is when she was employed there. Now this is a pretty short one as well. So prosecution asks her basic questions, such as what her job duties entailed, what her responsibilities were, to which she responds that she was tasked with taking care of the home. And then when asked who hired her, she Says it was Ghislaine Maxwell. She was also tasked with, you know, writing down messages, etc, etc, if phone calls came in. What this does is, once again, it continues to build the case that Maxwell was not a victim here, but in fact, an able and willing part of all of this. She was also shown, meaning Nicole, she was also shown some sealed evidence about a phone call made by Carolyn to Epstein. And when shown this evidence, she said that. That it was a message that she took. And what it does is, again, corroborates Carolyn's earlier testimony. So I thought that that was a, A, a pretty interesting slide in there by the prosecution. Just a little quick one, right, to continue to try and build those foundational blocks. And finally today on the stand, after they were done with Nicole Hess, is David Rogers. Now, I have an episode about David Rogers. And he was Epstein's main pilot. He was the one who hired Larry Vasoski. Right. And both of these guys have their connections to Columbus. We also know who has connections to Columbus. The Crypt Keeper himself, Les Wexner. So prosecution, they asked Mr. Rogers questions, such as where the flights were going, where they were arriving. And he goes on to tell the court about Epstein's planes and how they started off in a Gulf Stream and then they had a Cessna before moving up to the 727, the plane where, you know, the horribleness took place. The flying house of horrors. When asked about privacy issues on the Gulf Stream, he said that there was a door that was always closed. So when he was on the Gulf Stream, the door was always closed. Right. He wasn't going back there, wasn't hanging out with Epstein, none of that jazz. According to his testimony, prosecution also asked about the logbooks and if he, as a pilot, kept one, and he responded that he did. They offer up this logbook, and they offer it as sealed. I know you guys are shocked about that. And according to reports from the courtroom, an entire column of this logbook was blacked out. Why in the hell would this be blacked out? We don't have a right to see who was on these planes at this point. What, are we gonna embarrass them? I mean, really, if you're flying around with Jeffrey Epstein, I think that should be public knowledge. Um, the questioning moves along, and he is asked about some of the names of passengers and how he found out who was aboard his plane. He says that he didn't always know who was aboard his plane. And he tells the court that he wouldn't always, you know, have a full accounting. Now, Look, I'm not an aviation guy, but isn't that a little weird? Like, especially if people are being transported across state lines for the purposes of being trafficked. Isn't that what the man act was created for? I mean, the pilots here, Vassaski and Rogers both. I have been not a fan of from Jump street. Tell me you guys have been ferrying around Epstein and all of these young girls for all of these years and you saw nothing, huh? You knew nothing, huh? It just is one step too far for me to go. I just can't believe that. It is ludicrous, honestly. And then we heard, you know, Larry vassoski describing a 14 year old talking about how she, you know, her breasts and how she's an adult. So really, these guys are absolute knuckleheads, first of all. Second of all, anyone who's working for Epstein all of this time, especially after the first arrest, should have their heads examined. So right around this time, when they were talking about the names of passengers and, you know, the logs, Nathan calls lunch. So after the lunch break, they come back and prosecution refers to a sealed exhibit and asks Rogers about a name that it contains. He is asked not to say the name in open court, but to confirm if that. If that passenger was ever on his plane. He says that they were. When asked about this flight or this flight or that, he responds that this one from Palm beach, this one was from Palm beach to New Jersey. He says that Jane was on that flight. According to reports, no other context was given here and nobody else who was present on the flight was discussed. Then prosecution goes on to ask him about a specific flight from Van Nuys to Santa Fe, and that was Flight 818. Now, when I went to Santa Fe to talk to people who were hip to Epstein's bs, one of those people was an airport employee who had seen the young girls with their own eyes, had seen these gaggles of girls and the transportation of them from the airport, etc, etc. They said that it was an open secret and the whole city of Santa Fe knew. In fact, the lady who checked me into my hotel room said as much. You know, when you go to a hotel room and you're talking to the front desk person about what you're doing in the city, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It came up why I was there. I started talking about Epstein and she was like, oh yeah, that's one of. It's one of those open secret type things. I mean, wow. And then you have the attorney general in New Mexico who sat on their hands, the Whole entire time. And it's just one gigantic shit show. Unfortunately, when it comes to Zorro Ranch, when Rogers is asked about Virginia Roberts and how many times that she was on his plane, and he replies with a staggering number of 32 times. Once again, how is it that Virginia keeps being brought up, but she is not being called on to give testimony? When asked if there was one other person on the flight at the time with Virginia, Roger, Virginia Roberts. Rogers affirms this. Other flights are discussed. Europe, North Africa, etc. And on these trips, according to Rogers, Maxwell was present during his questioning. He was also asked about Maxwell and Epstein and their romantic involvement, to which he responded that they were involved at first, but not later on. Look, I have my doubts that they were ever really romantically involved, okay? I think it was a cover from Jump Street. I think that Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, they're not capable of being in a relationship like you or I would be able to be in. These people are different. And there's just no way, in my opinion, that they were ever romantically inclined. Did she might have a crush on him, maybe Epstein, not with her. They were a means to an end. Rogers also says that Maxwell was Epstein's number two in general. He wasn't referring to the human trafficking crimes, but it's very obvious what the government was angling for here. Getting him to, you know, him. Him admitting that he was the number two of Ghislaine Max, that Ghislaine Maxwell was Epstein's number two in general. It really shows you, right, if you're that much of his confidant, that you're in charge of his household, you're in charge of all of this stuff, it would lead people to believe that you're also involved here. When other people are pointing that out, when other people are putting you at the scene of the crime and these girls are also saying that you abused them. Uh, prosecution finishes up after this with Rogers, and now it's time for Mr. Harvard Christian Everdell to take over and cross examine the witness. Uh, just like with Vasoski, they asked him about the cockpit door and if it was always closed.

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

He.

[Bobby Capucci]

He says that it was not always closed, meaning on the bigger plane. The questioning stays in this zip code as Everdell asks about any sort of refuse that might have been found in the cabin after Epstein got off the plane, such as condoms or an unaccounted for dildo or something like that. Once again, the defense is trying to make it seem like Rogers or Vassocki didn't see anything. Oh, I have my doubts about that, honestly. That it couldn't have happened.

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

Right?

[Bobby Capucci]

Since those guys didn't see it, then how did any of this stuff happen? So what about when those doors were closed? What, what about when Vasoski or Rogers were flying the plane, you know, across the the country? Nothing was going on in the, in the cabin. They don't know one way or the other.

[Moto Casino Player]

Every dating app swap is another loss. Jim Bros. Fake CEOs, straight up losers. So now the only app I open is my Moto Casino. Because at least there I'm surrounded by winners, real winners, thousands of them. While everyone else is in the single swamp, I'm at home relaxing while stacking bonuses, hitting wins and playing all my favorite Vegas style games. Moto Casino the only app worth your time.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today must

[Moto Casino Announcer]

be 21/ Moto Casino America Social Casino.

[Bobby Capucci]

Before they go to another break, they touched on the topic of the ownership of Jeffrey Epstein's planes and how they are registered. Now, according to Rogers, it's common for these planes to be registered, you know, one at a time, separately, so they aren't, you know, for liability purposes. And I don't really even understand honestly what all of that was about that whole entire exchange. A little silly if you're asking me. I'm guessing that what they were trying to establish was this is just a normalized process for rich people who own planes, that they register them separately as their own entity for liability purposes. But you know, I'm lucky I can afford a car, nevermind a plane. After the break, the question and the questioning picks back up with Everdell asking questions about Jane and, and if Rogers knows her. Another setup for the scummy tactics they've been using the whole time, by the way, because Everdell states that Jane has the same real name as one of Epstein's assistants. Nice little backdoor doxxing they have going on here, huh? And they just continue to do it over and over again. They don't get admonished, nothing happens to them. Brilliant. Everdell then moves on to discussing some of the other big names who were close to Epstein and on some of these flights, such as Eva Dubin, a former model and an ex of Jeffrey Epstein who remained close to even after marrying her husband, hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin. And they were so close, in fact, that Jeffrey Epstein was the godson to her daughter and they called him Uncle Jeffy. That's a whole different ball of yarn to untangle. And I obviously have an episode about that as well. I'll upload that later. He also brings up Les, Les Wexner and the trips to Ohio, discussing those trips to Ohio. I mean, are they really trying to use Wexner and the Dubins as character witnesses for Ghislaine Maxwell here? I mean, really, you're talking about Glenn Dubin and Les Wexner. Right. Both of these men are credibly accused by Virginia Roberts of sexually assaulting her. I mean, what's next? They're going to call in the Green River Killer as a character witness. So before the, before they even get to all of that, you know, with the Glenn Dubin stuff, I mean, this is a guy that was very, very close to Jeffrey Epstein. We've heard about the 15 year old in Glenn Dubin's kitchen crying their eyes out. So there's a whole sordid story and a whole tale to be told about Glenn Dubin. There's no doubt about that. And I'll definitely upload some more episodes offering some more context on Glenn Dubin. Now, right before the proceedings wrap up, Rogers is asked if he ever saw Annie Farmer on his plane. He says that he did not. Now, Annie is going to give some testimony here as well, and I think that it's going to be pretty powerful testimony. The situation with Annie and what she went through, gut wrenching stuff, folks. Just like all of this stuff and all of the testimony from these survivors. And I don't anticipate it getting any easier when Annie gets onto the stand. The story she's going to tell, it's a gut wrenching one and it's sad. Just there's really no other words to describe the whole entire ordeal. Right? It's just super sad, all of it, the pain, the suffering and the years of unaccountability, not only by the people who were involved here, but by the people who were supposed to protect these girls. Now, four decades later, the battle for justice continues and hopefully things spin the right way. Hopefully, Ghislaine Maxwell gets convicted here. But we have a few more days at the very least to see what's going on, to see what, what pops up. And whenever the prosecution decides to rest their case, which we hear might be tomorrow, then of course, the defense will get a chance to, you know, go through things themselves. So we'll see where everything lands. We'll continue to be here at least two times a day covering what's going on. And we'll continue to swim through the muck together, folks, as we search for some clarity. If you'd like to contact me? You can do [e-mail] that's B O B B Y C A P U C c [e-mail] youm can also find me on Twitter obby C A P U C C I alright everybody, I will be back tomorrow morning. I hope that all of you have a great night. What's up everyone? And welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Today, proceedings inside of the courtroom were cut short after one of the prosecutors came down with some kind of illness. Now, Judge Nathan says that the illness was not Covid related and that they will resume with proceedings tomorrow. So what I thought we would do today is go back to the vault and pull out an article that talks about how the media, the legacy media, whitewashed this whole entire story until Julie Brown came came around. And I saw a lot of media types today being indignant, talking about how, oh, there is so much coverage of this Ghislaine Maxwell trial and I've heard people parrot that same stuff. But you're not going to gaslight me. I know what I see in front of my face. I know what's on the tv. Look, for instance, I very rarely watch the cable news stations, very rarely. And if I ever do, it just happens to be I'm in passing. And I might stop on one to see what kind of nonsense is being spit out of their mouths. But today I went there on purpose. Right after I saw all the indignant journalist types complaining that people were saying that there wasn't as much wall to wall coverage of this trial as there were for cases such as Rittenhouse or even when Gabby Petito was missing. So when I went to CNN today, MSNBC and Fox, they were all playing the same exact thing. Bob Dole lying in state at the Capitol. And now, no disrespect to Mr. Bob Dole, but do we really need all three major news stations broadcasting the same exact thing? Some guy playing the bagpipes or whatever. I don't think people are understanding what wall to wall coverage is. Wall to wall coverage means wall to wall coverage. All of these talk shows on TV panels, experts coming in and out discussing things, prosecutors, ex prosecutors, FBI agents, you know, like they do for all of these other cases that move the political needle. Now, on the flip side of that, I won't sit here and act like nobody's covering this or like there's no journalists on the ground covering it. That's not the case. There certainly is. And there's a lot of people doing really Good work. But to act like this is getting wall to wall coverage, that's, that's disinformation. We all know what wall to wall coverage is. And if this, if that was the case and this was wall to wall coverage, it would be on every single station. There would be 1520 minute segments on all of these talk shows about it. Well, you don't see that. So now when we talk about the print media, the print media has, has covered this case, there's no doubt about that. But it hasn't been the big outlets, it hasn't been the so called legacy media. In fact, like we're going to hear in this article, the legacy media was busy whitewashing the whole entire Jeffrey Epstein escapade for years and years and years and years. So now that the trial is here, they're gonna show up and start patting themselves on the back like they've been the vanguard. Just ask the survivors themselves what they feel about the legacy media. And again, don't get it twisted. I'm not talking about the actual reporters for the most part who are trying to put these stories together and bring the news. I'm talking about the decisions that are being made in editorial rooms and by these absolute morons who are in control of these news stations. Is it not obvious what they try to do, what they're attempting to do every single time they have one of these, you know, big stories that they latch onto. But yet when there's a story like this Epstein, Maxwell, there's no interest in them digging deep. And then you have people like the jurors or some of you who are just stumbling upon this story just recently. Don't you feel like the legacy media failed you? Isn't it their job to provide information about what's going on in the world that's impactful to you? You would think that that's what they should be doing, right? But that's not the case a lot of times. And as we all know, the, the narrative basically is controlled by a handful of people. And for these people it's all about what click what, what kind of clicks they can get. And the, the best thing for them is divisiveness. Keep pumping out that rage porn.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

My fellow American. This July we're celebrating America's birthday at Motor Casino by giving away one 1,776,000 in prize. And one lucky winner is going to take home 1,000,000 SC. Happy 250th birthday, America. You're welcome. Download Moto Casino today.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today. Moto Casino the Social Casino when we're prohibited, no purchase necessary. Visit Moto US for more details.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Moto Casino America Social Casino

[Bobby Capucci]

and meanwhile, they're neglecting to educate people on very important stories such as this. So since we don't have anything to really go over as far as transcripts or there's not even any really news to get to as far as updates of things that we might have missed, so I thought that we would jump into this article instead. And this article is from 2019 and it's from the Guardian. The author is Ed Pilkington. Jeffrey EPSTEIN how the U.S. media, with one star exception, whitewashed the Story When Julie K. Brown of the Miami Herald approached a former police chief of Palm Beach, Florida in 2017, hoping to get him to open up about his investigation of the child sex crimes for which the wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein had been fleetingly jailed a decade earlier, she was surprised by how unresponsive he was. Well, when you have dealt with the nonsense that Michael Ryder dealt with, when you have dealt with legacy media that doesn't have the courage to go after somebody like Epstein, of course you're going to be a bit hesitant to deal with somebody coming to you from the legacy media. Michael Ryder told Brown he had been down this road many times and was sick of it. As Brown recalled in a WNYC interview last month, Ryder said he had talked to many reporters and told them precisely where to find damning evidence against Epstein, but nothing ever came of it. He was convinced that a lot of media had had squashed the story and he was fed up, she said. So again, look, this is not me telling you this, right? And that's why I use these articles when we have these discussions. So, you know, I'm not just sitting here making up some wild nonsense. The fact of the matter is the people who were involved in this, people like Michael Ryder, have said this over and over again, that the legacy media had zero interest and diving in here. And that's a tragedy, isn't it? Because if they would have done their job right, if they would have listened, the voices were there, the story, the stories were there, but they didn't have the willpower. And a lot of that, again, has to do with the scumbags who are running these editorial rooms, the people who are making these decisions at the top. And who do you think that they're palling around with at the country club? They're palling around with people like Jeffrey Epstein. So why would they want stories? Or why would they want to run stories about their friends. Ryder warned Brown that what would happen were she to continue digging. Somebody's going to call your publisher and the next thing you know you are going to be assigned to the obituaries department. And that, that's was the, the M.O. right? That's what, what these guys were up to. Anytime there was any digging into Jeffrey Epstein or his behavior, he would respond by hiring security to go after you. In fact he had security, private, private investigators going through the trash of the police even. So when we talk about this runs deep. This isn't, you know, just, that's not hyperbole, right? This is a guy who really had no boundaries when it came to keeping his activities out of the public eye. And he was never ever, ever above trying to intimidate and threaten people. Brown did not heed his warning. She flung herself at the investigation and eventually persuaded Ryder to go on record. Her resulting award winning three part series last November exposed a vast operation in which 80 potential victims survivors were identified, some as young as 13 and 14 at the time of the alleged abuse. She persuaded eight to tell their stories. Now think about that, all right, 80, just 80 from this one expose that Julie K. Brown did. One lady, right, one fantastic reporter who you know, dug deep here and got this story out there for people to see. But one person, you mean to tell me that the New York Times, the Washington Post, et cetera, et cetera, couldn't have ponied up resources to dig deeper here? This has everything that they usually love, salaciousness, politicians, celebrities, you name it, the story has it. So again I have to ask myself, and I'll ask you, why wasn't the big dogs in the legacy media willing to go hard? Brown also exposed a government cover up in which Epstein got away with an exceptionally light sentence that saw him serve only 13 months in jail. She discovered that a non prosecution agreement had been negotiated secretly in 2008 by the then, by, by the then top federal prosecutor in Miami, Alexander Acosta. That gave Epstein and his co conspirators immunity from federal prosecutor, from federal prosecution. And to add a little more context there, sure it was Acosta who was the man on the ground, right? He was the quote unquote point man. But do you really think that some attorney, federal attorney, prosecutor from Florida, from Miami, has the ability to push this kind of prosecution on his own, this kind of indictment? When you have somebody who has the ties that Epstein had and obviously the friends that Epstein had? Of course not. So Alexander Acosta, spineless worm that he is was certainly the fall guy here. When in reality, why weren't all eyes moved to Mukase, who was the acting Attorney General at the time? His office had to sign off on this. And then when you go look at the paperwork, it shows you exactly who signed off on it. So it wasn't just Acosta in a vacuum making this decision. Right, but there's no doubt that he was a spineless worm. And if you had this kind of information in front of you and your bosses from D.C. were pressuring you to not go after them federally and instead punt the ball to the state, which never happens in cases like this, for the most part, wouldn't you say to your bosses, screw you, I'm gonna become a whistleblower. At this point, we're not, you know, we're talking about the most heinous of crimes. 13 and 14 year old kids, and then this, this guy gets this kind of immunity deal, and then it comes out later on that during this time where the, the negotiation between Acosta and Epstein's lawyers is going on about this immunity deal, Well, a year's worth of those emails just happened to disappear. Just add it to the coincidence box. Just like the evidence from the first alleged suicide attempt of Epstein. Just like the videos. Just coincidences. Right? That's all it is. In 2017, Acosta was appointed by Donald Trump as Labor Secretary, a post that ironically, is responsible for combating sex trafficking. So again, Acosta, worm, spineless, should have never been in that position because he obviously showed that he was a coward when he didn't stand up to Mukase and the Department of Justice when they tried to make him punt this ball away and serve it up to Krisher instead. So he is another coward. Right? And he shouldn't be in a position that deals with human trafficking. The media's handling or mishandling of the Epstein affair is a story of extremes. It is a heartwarming success story of how one intrepid reporter pierced the veil of secrecy and found the truth. Brown's coverage has had consequences. Epstein was arrested. Remember, this is from 2019, last Saturday. And indicted on new sex trafficking charges by New York prosecutors who praised her work. In the fallout, Acosta was forced to resign. And now we know all of the other people who have fallen in the wake of this, at least professionally speaking for some of them. Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner, Leon Black Prince Andrew. We know that obviously Ghislaine Maxwell's on trial. Jean Luc Brunel is rotting away in a jail in Paris as We speak. So there definitely has been some fallout here. But you don't you question how it took Julie Brown to do this? The investigators in New York, they had a meeting in 2016 with some of the survivors and the lawyers, and they declined to pursue charges then, even. But all of a sudden, Julie K. Brown has this story, breaks this story, and now they're interested. Now the prosecutors are praising her work. You guys have had a mountain of evidence as high as Mount Everest that at least started when Maria Farmer called you clowns and told you what was going on, and none of you wanted to listen. So, again, great job by Julie K. Brown. One of those, you know, jobs that I was talking about earlier. One of those people who actually was on the ground doing journalist work right now. The rest of these clowns in the legacy media, they had access to all of this, especially the ones in New York. The ones in New York are the. They crack me up the most. They're supposed to be at the epicenter of information, the epicenter of the world of information. And they want us to believe that they had just overlooked what was going on with Epstein. They just missed all of this. You know what? Lies of omission are still lies. But there is also a less cheerful narrative. Why did the police chief's appeals to the media fall on deaf ears? Why would so many years pass before the shocking extent of Epstein's crimes and the Costa Sweetheart deal, Mukase and Acosta Sweetheart Deal were revealed by a local newspaper with severely limited resources. And again, I ask you, where was the New York Times? Where was the Washington Post? Where was the LA Times, the Chicago Times, any of these outlets with a tremendous amount of resources? None of them were around. In fact, the two extremes of the story are directly linked. But Brown told wnyc, one of the reasons she began looking into Epstein was that she was puzzled about the public silence surrounding him. There really was nobody pursuing this at all, she said. That was one of the things that intrigued me about this case. Why isn't anyone standing up and screaming facts? And it's one of the main reasons that I got interested in it as well. When you look at it, not only is it the absolute depravity that was showed by Epstein and his friends towards the treatment of these girls, but the way the government conducted themselves and the way the FBI conducted themselves, for me, that's what got me interested in this case originally was the government malfeasance that was obviously taking place. That silence stretches all the way back to 2003, when Vicky Ward wrote a profile of Epstein for Vanity Fair. During her reporting, she was introduced to a mother and her two daughters from Phoenix, Arizona, who alleged Epstein assaulted the girls, one of whom was 16 at the time. Ward told the Guardian she spent a lot of time with the family discussing whether they should go public. They were frightened, she said. The mother told me that every night when she walked the dog, she. She looked over the shoulder. Over her shoulder. Eventually, the women agreed to go on record, Ward said, and when Epstein was told about their accounts, he went berserk. Epstein had already threatened to get a witch doctor to put a curse on Ward's unborn children. Again, this isn't fantasy land. This is the kind of shit Jeffrey Epstein was into. He was a very weird dude, folks. A very weird dude. She was pregnant at the time with twins. And now he campaigned to stop Vanity Fair publishing, the allegations even turning up unannounced at the office of the then editor, Graydon Carter. Publication was delayed. Then Ward was told paragraphs of the abuse of the women had to be deleted. And again, right there, that should stop you in your tracks. What sort of journalist does that? Oh, you're gonna lose your job. Who cares? I mean, really, you go find another job, you bring your story to another editor, and I'm sure they'll run it, but instead decides to go along, get along to go along, so you can, you know, continue to climb that ladder of success, right? Of personal and professional success. Doesn't matter that girls were being abused. It doesn't matter that the people that they're talking about here were living in fear of their lives. As long as you still got a job, right? I was extraordinarily upset, she said. I asked the woman what they were doing, what they were going to do, and they said they would lick their wounds and retreat, as this was exactly what they feared would happen, should that ever be the case. Ask yourselves that. Should we have a legacy media where a guy like Jeffrey Epstein is moving the dial like that? And if you think he's the only one, you are sorely mistaken. It is absurd that this story wasn't told for this long. Ward believes Carter caved under Epstein's pressure. She recalls confronting the editor about the excised paragraphs and said she has a note in her archives that has Carter saying, I believe him. I'm Canadian. So it comes down to he said. She said, right. And I'm sure what Vicki would say is, well, he was the editor, and that's fine, and I dig that. I can. Okay, perfect. But are you working there as an indentured servant.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Moto Casino America's social casino.

[Moto Casino Player]

Welcome to Motocasino, where the excitement never ends.

[Bobby Capucci]

With thousands of the hottest free to play social casino games. Fastest payouts and the best promotions in the industry.

[Moto Casino Player]

No tricks or gimmicks.

[Bobby Capucci]

Owned and operated in the USA, MotoCasino

[Moto Casino Promoter]

is a free to play social casino. No purchase necessary. 21 plus to play. Void we're prohibited.

[Moto Casino Player]

Sign up today for a generous welcome bonus.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Moto Casino America's social casino.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Motocasino app today.

[Bobby Capucci]

You can't bring your story elsewhere. And that's really the rub for me. You know there's always a choice, right? And sometimes it's a shit choice, sometimes it's a choice that might come with a lot of personal sacrifice or professional steps back. But at what point do you say to yourself, not only do I have to respect my craft as a journalist, but I have to respect these, these girls who are abused. And as a reporter, the onus is on me to report this. And I think way too many of these folks have forgotten that. Way too many of these folks that are in the legacy media, they want to be the story. And I guess that comes with that hefty, hefty salary that all of them are getting to sit around and read off teleprompters. Carter remembers events very differently. In his account, there were legal issues around the women's stories that prevented publication. Most significantly, that the women themselves were unwilling to go on the record. Yeah, since that really matters now, huh? How many nameless sources have we seen in the past four, five, six years? And I'm talking huge blockbuster stories. Whole, entire narratives have been framed around anonymous sources. But bitch ass Graydon Carter, too scared to go for the, go for the kill here. Too scared to run this story. We all know why. They were running in the same circles. They had the same homies. One quick phone call. Hey, you know what? We'll make sure this goes away, old Jeffy old boy. Don't worry. Make sure I can come to your next Edge dinner. In a statement to the Guardian, Carter said. I respected the work Vicky Ward did at Vanity Fair. But unfortunately her recounting of the facts around the Epstein article is inaccurate. There were not three sources on the record. And therefore this aspect of the story did not meet our legal and editorial standards. Oh, that's such bullshit. Wow. We could, we could go through literally 150 stories at this point of gigantic international and national narratives that have been crafted by people who wouldn't go on the record. But now when it has to do with Jeffrey Epstein and a story of sexual abuse, now it's, you know, we. We can't go off the record here. It's. It's legitimately laughable. And they wonder why nobody trusts them. Ward says she has. She had document documentary evidence that shows the women were emphatically prepared to go public, including fact checkers and legal emails to Epstein from Vanity Fair asking for his response to the allegations made by both sisters. The Guardian spoke to the mother of the girls, Janice Farmer. She said that all three did speak to Ward in 2003 and told her on the record what Epstein had done, including allegations he had invited her youngest daughter, then 16, to his new Mexico ranch and molested her. And now we're obviously talking about Maria Farmer and Annie Farmer. We're going to hear from Annie Farmer tomorrow. She's going to give testimony. But, Julie, I mean, Vicki Ward really did the Farmer sisters wrong and. And dirty. And to be honest with you, it's straight trash. So, I mean, she could say whatever she wants, but this is a matter of public record, right? This is something that happened. She had the story. Let's look at the facts. Okay, you had the story, Vicky Ward, you and your company, you decided not to run it. Those are the facts. All of the other stuff, well, words are wind, okay? I was hesitant to go public because I worried about the safety of my daughters. By that point, I didn't trust Jeffrey at all, Farmer said. But I did want him to be exposed, she said she recalls vividly agreeing with Ward, along with her daughters, for their stories to be told. In her Vanity Fair profile, she also said she recalls vividly her reaction when she learned that part of the piece was not to be published. I felt angry, she said. I felt like Jeffrey's money, power, connections, whatever had been put into play. Yeah, no, no shit. That's exactly what happens. That's what they do. And over and over and over again, the men of always continue to have their foot on the throat of the children of Never. There is another complicating element to the story. In 2011, after Epstein had gone to jail, Ward wrote a blog post for Vanity Fair. In it, she used language that was strikingly uncritical of Epstein, referring to him as not without humor and praising him for being highly knowledgeable. She referenced Epstein's sex crimes as sexual peccadillos and Referred to her 2003 Vanity Fair profile of him, saying it had alluded to his sexual relationships with young women. But didn't really go there. Focusing instead on how Jeffrey made his money. Breaking news. You did a shitty job at that, too. Nobody knows how Epstein really made his money. And you clowns in the legacy media, you ain't doing anyone any favors unearthing anything. So Vicky Ward's whole shtick is bs, folks, all right? That's just the way it goes. Just the facts, you know. And all you gotta do is read what she says. Her own words. Epstein's crimes were sexual peccadillos. That's what you call assaulting young girls and saying it was prostitution. Those are sexual peccadillos to you, huh? Boy, we certainly live in way two different worlds, the piece went on. This is not to say I didn't hear stories about the girls. I did. But not knowing quite whom to believe, I concentrated on the intriguing financial mystery instead. So basically saying that she didn't believe the farmers. And the evidence for that is the story wasn't run. So let's just get down to it, right? Let's trim the fat. We don't need all the bs. The facts are the facts, and that's what they are. And Vicki Ward decided not to run. Not to run the story. Her and Graydon Carter. And then when, you know, it came out that Epstein was this sick bastard that they obviously knew. Oh, well, it wasn't my fault. Well, it wasn't my fault. It's nobody's fault, folks. Just the way it goes. Nobody's ever going to be held responsible here. The Guardian put this blog post to Ward, and she said she regretted writing it at that point. She said the victims she had interviewed were not willing to talk. But nonetheless, this blog did not need to be written. Here I am towing the Vanity Fair party line. And again, not taking responsibility. Oh, it's the Vanity Fair party line. Well, you're the one towing it. You're the one who's been towing it for years. They've been paying your bills, haven't they? But, you know, I guess when it comes to stuff like this, it's more important to make sure you're locked and loaded and got your job safe. At Vanity Fair, my journalism benefited from MeToo. Fast forward to 2007, when Acosta reached his bizarrely lenient plea deal with Epstein. Let's say when the Department of Justice did. Okay, let's be honest. By then, the investigators had identified 35 potential victims who said they had been lured into Epstein's Palm beach mansion and sexually assaulted. Yet records obtained by the Miami Herald showed prosecutors led by Acosta and actively worked with Epstein's attorneys to minimize media coverage. And they were good at it. Right? Look, Jay Lefkowitz, Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, several other people, and we're talking about some of the most high profile lawyers in the world. Jay Lefkowitz is very good at what he does. One of Acosta's prosecutors. One of Acosta's prosecutors wrote in an email to Jay Lefkowitz, an Epstein lawyer, on an avoid the press note, I can file the charge in district court in Miami, which will hopefully cut the press coverage significantly. Do you want to check that out? That's what the prosecutor for Acosta wrote to Lefkowitz, Epstein's lawyer, running it by him. You want to check that out? Like he has an option? Do you think me or you would have an option if we were being prosecuted?

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Yeah.

[Bobby Capucci]

Nah, there's no malfeasance here, man. The government was right online. Anybody questioning the institutions in this country is crazy. You conspiracy theorist. Anyone who's saying that. Anyone who's saying, well, I don't know how people question the institutions. I don't trust anything they have to say. They were probably the same people that are still trying to peddle that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That Acosta felt that he had to resign on Friday was an indication that the collective failure of US Media to grapple with the story of serial sex trafficking and abuse that had been hiding in plain sight for years no longer holds true. In the wake of Brown's exemplary reporting, the rest of the American media has fallen in line. And Acosta paid the price.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

Yeah, look.

[Bobby Capucci]

No, guess what? He paid the price for his own actions. Now, he is somebody who is a small part of this, right? A small player. They focused on him because the media at that time, it was politically expedient. But they didn't go any deeper, right? Did they tell you about Mukasey? Did they tell you about the Department of Justice and their meddling at as far as this prosecution goes? Nah, they didn't tell you any of that, did they?

[Moto Casino Advertiser]

You ain't heard about Moto Casino Moto has real Vegas slots. Any game you can find on the floor in Vegas, you can play it on. Moto. I like my slots hot. Moto's free to play like food stamps in line at the grocery store at a funeral in traffic Keep your eyes on the road Hop on Moto Casino Moto Casino got jackpots that are bigger than my belly Moto America's hottest free to play Social casino.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today. Moto Casinos, a social casino, but were prohibited. No purchase necessary. Visit Moto Us for more details.

[Bobby Capucci]

That may be in part thanks to the MeToo movement that had not erupted when Brown began her investigation, but did draw attention to her work when it was published. As she told MSNBC after Epstein's arrest last weekend, my journalism benefited from me too, as we started giving these cases much more scrutiny. Mary Angela Bach, associate professor in the University of Texas at Austin School of Journalism, said MeToo had dented the prevailing patriarchy that had existed in newsrooms for decades and that had led to sexual crimes being overlooked as merely the way of the world. MeToo has led to greater awareness among journalists that this is not okay, she said. This is not boys being boys. This is rape and sexual exploitation of children. So we're gonna give them a pass, right? Because they just. They were just ignorant up to that point. Sorry, not gonna do it. They all knew what was going on. George Stephanopoulos, Katie Couric, Mike Wallace, Charlie Rose. And that's just a few of them all going over to Epstein's for a little bit of chow, little party to hang out with the Prince. Meanwhile, you got outlets like Vanity Fair, who buried this story, other outlets that had no desire in covering it, and now some of these very same outlets are showing up like they're the ones who are, you know, the saviors of the story. Meanwhile, I'm just sitting back, taking it all in and shaking my head as these knuckleheads continue to expose themselves. Alright, folks, that's gonna do it for this episode. So tomorrow morning, we'll be right back at it, you know, getting ready for the day, discussing what might be coming next, taking a look at some of the headlines that might have cracked off overnight. And we will buckle our seatbelts and see where the prosecution goes in what looks like their final days. If you'd like to contact me, you can do [e-mail] that's B O B B Y C A P U C c [e-mail] youm can also find me on Twitter. B O B B Y Underscore cap U C C I. All right, everybody, the link that we discussed will be in the description box. As for me, I'll be back later on. Hope that all of you have a great day.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

My fellow Americans, this July, we're celebrating America's birthday at Moto Casino by giving away 1,776,000 in prize. And one lucky winner is going to take home 1 million SC. Happy 250th birthday, America. You're welcome. Download Moto Casino today.

[Moto Casino Promoter]

Download the Moto Casino app today. Moto Casino is a social casino. We're prohibited. No purchase necessary. Visit Moto US for more details.

[Moto Casino Announcer]

America's social casino.