Episodes

  • That Time The Arch Bishop Of Canterbury Came Out In Support Of Andrew (11/5/25)

    That Time The Arch Bishop Of Canterbury Came Out In Support Of Andrew (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    In late May 2022, Justin Welby, then the Church of England’s Archbishop of Canterbury, was asked during an interview about Prince Andrew and the public reaction to him. Welby said that “forgiveness really does matter” and that “we have become a very, very unforgiving society,” adding that there is a “difference between consequences and forgiveness.” He noted that regarding Prince Andrew, “we all have to step back a bit. He’s seeking to make amends and I think that’s a very good thing.” At the same time, he acknowledged that issues of alleged abuse are “intensely personal and private for so many,” which means no one can dictate how others should respond.

    Following a backlash, Welby’s office clarified that his comments on forgiveness were not intended to apply specifically to Prince Andrew, but rather were a broader comment about the kind of more “open and forgiving society” he hoped for around the time of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. The statement emphasised that while consequences remain important, forgiveness is also part of Christian understanding of justice, mercy and reconciliation — but it explicitly did not amount to a call for the public to re-embrace the prince or dismiss accountability.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Show More Show Less
    17 mins
  • Alex Acosta Goes To Congress: Transcripts From The Alex Acosta Deposition (Part 11) (11/5/25)

    Alex Acosta Goes To Congress: Transcripts From The Alex Acosta Deposition (Part 11) (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    When Alex Acosta sat before Congress to explain himself, what unfolded was less an act of accountability and more a masterclass in bureaucratic self-preservation. He painted the 2008 Epstein plea deal as a “strategic compromise,” claiming a federal trial might have been too risky because victims were “unreliable” and evidence was “thin.” In reality, federal prosecutors had a mountain of corroborating witness statements, corroborative travel logs, and sworn victim testimony—yet Acosta gave Epstein the deal of the century. The so-called non-prosecution agreement wasn’t justice; it was a backroom surrender, executed in secrecy, without even notifying the victims. When pressed on this, Acosta spun excuses about legal precedent and “jurisdictional confusion,” never once admitting the obvious: his office protected a rich, politically connected predator at the expense of dozens of trafficked girls.

    Even more damning was Acosta’s insistence that he acted out of pragmatism, not pressure. He denied that anyone “higher up” told him to back off—even though he once told reporters that he’d been informed Epstein “belonged to intelligence.” Under oath, he downplayed that statement, twisting it into bureaucratic double-speak. He even claimed the deal achieved “some level of justice” because Epstein registered as a sex offender—a hollow justification that only exposed how insulated from reality he remains. Acosta never showed remorse for the irreparable damage caused by his cowardice. His congressional testimony reeked of moral rot, the same rot that let a billionaire pedophile walk free while survivors were left to pick up the pieces.



    to contact me:


    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Acosta Transcript.pdf - Google Drive
    Show More Show Less
    12 mins
  • Andrew of Arabia: The Imagined Future of Andrew’s Arabian Hideaway (11/5/25)

    Andrew of Arabia: The Imagined Future of Andrew’s Arabian Hideaway (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    This season, the scandal goes global. After a spectacular fall from grace, a certain royal exile trades his crown for a keffiyeh in what can only be described as the most bizarre royal reinvention since abdication became trendy. Whisked away by an Arabian billionaire with a taste for damaged prestige, the disgraced duke lands in a desert mansion where luxury drips from every gold faucet — and the only thing drier than the climate is his credibility. The British press calls it “a fresh start.” The rest of the world calls it “a cover story wrapped in SPF 50.”

    Welcome to Prince Andrew of Arabia — the sun-scorched satire you didn’t know you needed. In this absurd royal odyssey, the Queen’s most infamous son discovers that while the desert may hide many sins, it can’t bury them all. From falcons to faux humility, from scandal to sandstorms, watch as the world’s least self-aware aristocrat tries to turn disgrace into destiny — and ends up sweating under a hotter spotlight than ever before.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
  • Lawmakers Demand Answers From The DOJ About Why The Epstein Investigation Was Shut Down (11/5/25)

    Lawmakers Demand Answers From The DOJ About Why The Epstein Investigation Was Shut Down (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    Lawmakers led by Jamie Raskin are demanding full transparency from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) over the abrupt termination of the investigation into alleged co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. According to the letter from Raskin, nearly fifty survivors supplied detailed testimony identifying at least twenty individuals as part of a sophisticated trafficking ring, yet the probe—originally active under the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York—was transferred to DOJ headquarters and effectively halted in January 2025. Investigators then issued a memo stating they had found no evidence warranting further charges, a conclusion Raskin faulted as ignoring the victims’ credible disclosures.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    House Democrats press DOJ for details on Epstein co-conspirators probe that was "inexplicably killed" - CBS News
    Show More Show Less
    18 mins
  • The Blame Game: Feds vs. Banks in the Epstein Scandal (11/5/25)

    The Blame Game: Feds vs. Banks in the Epstein Scandal (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    Federal regulators say the financial sector — particularly big banks — failed to act on obvious red flags in the case of Jeffrey Epstein’s financial network, and now they’re pointing fingers at each other. Agencies like the U.S. Treasury Department and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency assert that banks should have detected and reported Epstein’s suspicious transactions years ago and triggered law-enforcement action. Meanwhile, some banks claim they did file reports or raise internal alarms but regulators ignored or delayed follow-up investigations, essentially accusing federal agencies of failing to enforce or respond to the alerts.

    On the flip side, financial institutions argue they were operating under murky guidance and rely on regulators to interpret complex anti-money-laundering laws — now they say the feds didn’t act promptly or clearly once files were submitted. This blame-game has escalated as lawsuits proliferate: banks claim regulators pushed responsibility back onto them, while regulators argue that banks willfully overlooked their compliance duties and expect bail-outs or leniency rather than accountability. The result is a stalemate where neither side wants to claim full fault, and victims of Epstein’s crimes are still waiting for clarity and justice.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    JPMorgan Flagged Epstein Suspicions in 2002, Years Earlier Than Known
    Show More Show Less
    23 mins
  • The Billionaires Playboy Club: A Memoir By Virginia Roberts (Chapter 20 )(11/5/25)

    The Billionaires Playboy Club: A Memoir By Virginia Roberts (Chapter 20 )(11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s unpublished memoir The Billionaire’s Playboy Club recounts her recruitment into Jeffrey Epstein’s world as a 16-year-old working at Mar-a-Lago, where she says Ghislaine Maxwell lured her in with promises of opportunity and travel. The manuscript describes how she became trapped in Epstein’s orbit, allegedly forced into sexual encounters with powerful men, including Prince Andrew, and ferried across his properties in New York, Florida, and the Virgin Islands. Giuffre paints a detailed picture of coercion, psychological manipulation, and the disturbing normalization of exploitation within Epstein’s high-society circle.


    In this episode, we begin our journey through that memoir.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Virgina Giuffre Billionaire's Playboy Club | DocumentCloud
    Show More Show Less
    13 mins
  • The OIG Report Into Jeffrey Epstein's Non Prosecution Agreement (Part 34) (11/5/25)

    The OIG Report Into Jeffrey Epstein's Non Prosecution Agreement (Part 34) (11/5/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    The Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement (NPA) of 2007-08, reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), detailed how federal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida negotiated a deal that effectively ended an active federal investigation into Epstein’s alleged trafficking and abuse of underage girls. The agreement granted broad immunity to Epstein and unnamed “potential co-conspirators,” allowed him to plead guilty to state charges instead of facing major federal sex-trafficking counts, and did so without informing or consulting the victims before the deal was executed. The OPR found that while no evidence of corruption or impermissible influence was uncovered, the decision represented “poor judgment” by the prosecutors.


    Further, the report underscored significant procedural deficiencies: victims were not made aware of the NPA, the USAO did not meaningfully engage with them in accordance with the Crime Victims’ Rights Act’s principles, and the immunity granted in the NPA curtailed future federal prosecution of Epstein’s associates—even as investigation into other victims and broader criminal conduct may have persisted. In short, the OPR concluded that the case resolution was legally within the prosecutors’ discretion, but deeply flawed in its execution and fairness to those harmed.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    dl (justice.gov)
    Show More Show Less
    12 mins
  • The OIG Report Into Jeffrey Epstein's Non Prosecution Agreement (Part 33) (11/4/25)

    The OIG Report Into Jeffrey Epstein's Non Prosecution Agreement (Part 33) (11/4/25)
    Nov 5 2025
    The Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement (NPA) of 2007-08, reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), detailed how federal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida negotiated a deal that effectively ended an active federal investigation into Epstein’s alleged trafficking and abuse of underage girls. The agreement granted broad immunity to Epstein and unnamed “potential co-conspirators,” allowed him to plead guilty to state charges instead of facing major federal sex-trafficking counts, and did so without informing or consulting the victims before the deal was executed. The OPR found that while no evidence of corruption or impermissible influence was uncovered, the decision represented “poor judgment” by the prosecutors.


    Further, the report underscored significant procedural deficiencies: victims were not made aware of the NPA, the USAO did not meaningfully engage with them in accordance with the Crime Victims’ Rights Act’s principles, and the immunity granted in the NPA curtailed future federal prosecution of Epstein’s associates—even as investigation into other victims and broader criminal conduct may have persisted. In short, the OPR concluded that the case resolution was legally within the prosecutors’ discretion, but deeply flawed in its execution and fairness to those harmed.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    dl (justice.gov)
    Show More Show Less
    14 mins