The Epstein Chronicles

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Doug Band, once one of Bill Clinton’s closest aides and a key figure in Clinton’s post-presidential world, sat for a closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. According to sources familiar with the interview, Band repeatedly said he could not recall details about his interactions with Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and related communications. Lawmakers pressed him on his past ties to both Epstein and Maxwell, including emails between Band and Maxwell from 2001 to 2004 that included personal nicknames, innuendo, and discussions of meetings. Band reportedly confirmed that an email address connected to Clinton in the Epstein files was his and that no one else had access to it, but said he did not remember sending specific emails to Maxwell. He also said he had no evidence or information that Clinton ever went to Epstein’s island, despite having told Vanity Fair in 2020 that Clinton had visited Little St. James.Band also reportedly told the committee that he took steps to shield Clinton from Maxwell once he became aware of allegations, denied any sexual contact with Maxwell, and said he did not remember being introduced to any woman or girl connected to her. He also said he did not recall conversations with Epstein during the flights he took with Clinton on Epstein’s private plane. Flight records made public in civil litigation show Clinton, often with Band and others, flew on Epstein’s plane more than two dozen times in 2002 and 2003, though ABC reports those logs do not show trips to Little St. James. Clinton, Maxwell, and Epstein have all denied that Clinton visited the island, and Clinton has denied knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. Band has not been accused of wrongdoing, and his voluntary interview was not recorded; the committee is expected to release transcripts after review and redaction.to contact me:[email protected]:Doug Band, former aide to Bill Clinton, repeatedly tells panel he cannot recall interactions with Epstein: Sources - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A woman identified in the Epstein files as Jane Doe 4 is reportedly “staying off the grid” and living in fear of retaliation from the Trump administration, according to a relative who spoke to The Guardian. Jane Doe 4 gave four FBI interviews in 2019 after Epstein’s arrest, alleging that Epstein abused her in the 1980s and that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her when she was between 13 and 15 years old. Trump and the White House have denied the allegations, calling them “completely baseless” and unsupported by credible evidence. The FBI did not bring charges tied to Jane Doe 4’s claims, and there is no indication the bureau continued investigating after her 2019 interviews, which ended after she told agents she believed she was being followed.The handling of Jane Doe 4’s files has become a flashpoint in the fight over the Epstein records because the Justice Department released some records but still has not produced handwritten FBI interview notes from her sessions. A federal judge ordered acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to produce unredacted versions of already released Epstein files by July 2 or explain why they cannot be released, and also ordered the DOJ to turn over interview notes related to Jane Doe 4’s allegations. The controversy has intensified because Blanche, Trump’s former personal attorney and nominee for permanent attorney general, oversaw the DOJ’s Epstein files release, which critics say exposed victim information, withheld millions of documents, and mishandled politically sensitive material. Victims’ advocates argue Jane Doe 4 should not have to keep coming forward and that the DOJ should be responsible for taking her FBI testimony seriously and releasing the records required under the Epstein transparency law.to contact me:[email protected]:Alleged Epstein victim and Trump accuser living in fear of retaliation, relative says | Jeffrey Epstein | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black appeared before the House Oversight Committee for a closed-door interview about his decades-long relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, but the session escalated when Black refused to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements involving women. Chairman James Comer issued two subpoenas: one compelling Black to return for a deposition on July 16, and another demanding records related to those NDAs. Comer said lawmakers want to know whether Epstein was involved in drafting, funding, arranging, or otherwise using the agreements to silence women. Black’s attorney Susan Estrich called the subpoenas a “planned political stunt” and said Epstein had no involvement with any NDAs, whether they exist or not.Black denied abusing women, denied trafficking, denied being blackmailed, and denied paying Epstein for access to women, saying the more than $170 million he paid Epstein was for tax and estate-planning advice. He described Epstein as living a “Jekyll and Hyde” existence, saying he knew Epstein’s connected, useful side but not his criminal side, and claimed Epstein lied to him about the nature of his 2008 conviction. Lawmakers were openly skeptical, especially because Black’s payments gave Epstein a massive post-conviction financial lifeline, and because newly released Epstein files reportedly mention Black thousands of times. The appearance left Black still insisting he was deceived, while Congress signaled that his Epstein relationship, private settlements, and financial dealings are far from finished business.to contact me:[email protected]:Comer subpoenas Leon Black after his refusal to answer some Epstein questions from panel - ABC NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became impossible for Apollo Global Management to contain once reporting revealed that Black had paid Epstein staggering sums after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. Black insisted the payments were for legitimate tax, estate, and financial-planning work, and an Apollo-commissioned review said it found no evidence that Black participated in Epstein’s crimes or that Epstein did business with Apollo. But the review still confirmed the central problem: Apollo’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive had maintained a massive financial relationship with Epstein long after Epstein was known publicly as a convicted sex offender. That alone shook investor confidence, damaged Apollo’s reputation, and raised serious questions about Black’s judgment.Black initially announced that he would step down as Apollo’s CEO while remaining chairman, presenting the move as part of a leadership transition. But the pressure did not stop there. The Epstein revelations had turned Black from Apollo’s greatest asset into a liability, creating reputational risk for the firm, tension inside the boardroom, and concern among clients and shareholders. Within months, Black gave up the chairman role as well, leaving Apollo’s leadership and clearing the way for Marc Rowan to take over. In the end, Black was not forced out because Apollo proved he committed Epstein’s crimes; he stepped down because his personal ties to Epstein became too damaging for one of the world’s most powerful investment firms to keep defending.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The U.S. Virgin Islands’ battle against Jeffrey Epstein’s estate was contentious from the beginning because it was not just a fight over money; it was a fight over accountability, secrecy, and control of Epstein’s remaining assets. After Epstein’s death, the territory accused his estate, companies, and representatives of helping preserve the infrastructure that allowed him to abuse and traffic girls and young women on Little St. James and Great St. James. The USVI sought to freeze assets, claw back profits, obtain records, and force the estate to answer for how Epstein used the islands as a base of operations. The estate, meanwhile, pushed back by arguing that the government was overreaching, that many claims should be handled through the victim compensation process, and that continued litigation would drain resources that could otherwise go to claimants.The fight became even more heated because the USVI was also under scrutiny for its own failures and contradictions. Epstein had received generous tax benefits and operated openly in the territory for years, which raised obvious questions about what local officials knew, ignored, or allowed. Still, then-Attorney General Denise George pressed aggressively, eventually reaching a settlement worth more than $105 million, plus half the proceeds from the sale of Little St. James and additional money for environmental remediation. That settlement was significant, but it did not erase the larger tension: the USVI was trying to hold Epstein’s estate accountable while also answering for how Epstein was able to build, fund, and protect so much of his operation in the territory in the first place.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Faith in Leon Black was badly shaken once the scale of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein became public, because Black was not a distant acquaintance or a casual social contact — he had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein’s 2008 conviction while remaining the dominant figure at Apollo Global Management. Investors, board members, employees, and clients were suddenly forced to ask how the head of one of the world’s most powerful private-equity firms could have maintained such a lucrative relationship with Epstein and still claim he had no real idea who Epstein was. Apollo commissioned an outside review that found no evidence Black had been involved in Epstein’s crimes or that Epstein had done business with Apollo, but the review still confirmed enough damaging facts to make Black’s position unstable. The issue was no longer just reputational embarrassment; it became a question of judgment, governance, disclosure, and whether Black could still lead a major financial institution while carrying Epstein’s shadow into every room.That loss of confidence helped turn Apollo’s boardroom into a battleground. Black’s planned transition out of the CEO role was supposed to look orderly, but the Epstein revelations intensified old rivalries inside the firm, especially between Black, Josh Harris, and Marc Rowan. Harris reportedly saw the crisis as an opening to gain influence or control, while Rowan ultimately emerged as the successor with enough board support to take over. Black, meanwhile, accused Harris of trying to exploit the Epstein scandal to push him out, while Harris denied wrongdoing and the courts later dismissed Black’s racketeering claims. In the end, Epstein’s relationship with Black did not just damage one billionaire’s reputation; it fractured trust at Apollo, exposed power struggles among its founders, accelerated Black’s exit, blocked Harris from taking command, and cleared the way for Rowan to become the face of Apollo’s post-Epstein reset.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

For years, the idea that those in power were entangled in the Epstein operation was dismissed as paranoia because it threatened faith in institutions. As evidence accumulated through court records, testimony, and financial trails, that denial became impossible to maintain. The Epstein case revealed not an isolated criminal but a system of protection built through legal maneuvering, institutional silence, and strategic indifference. Media failures, intelligence implications, and repeated patterns of immunity exposed how power shields itself, often at the direct expense of victims. What has emerged is a reckoning with the reality that degeneracy was not an exception but a tolerated feature of an unaccountable system.While critics dismissed the inquiry as exaggeration or paranoia, the work continued through document review, testimony analysis, and relentless pattern tracking without institutional backing or public support. Now, many of those same voices have resurfaced as self-styled experts, echoing conclusions they once derided and adopting frameworks they previously rejected. The shift did not come from new courage or insight, but from safety and social permission. The contrast underscores a central truth of the Epstein saga itself: real accountability is driven by persistence under pressure, not by late consensus once the cost of speaking has vanished.to  contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement was always a disgrace, but the unsealed Epstein files rip away the last remaining excuses and expose it for what it truly was: a calculated surrender by federal prosecutors dressed up as discretion. The NPA didn’t just give Epstein a sweetheart deal, it rewrote the rules of accountability to benefit one man and the powerful people around him. By secretly immunizing unnamed co-conspirators, the agreement functioned less like a plea deal and more like a legal firewall for an entire network. Even before the new disclosures, the NPA stood out as an aberration in federal practice, negotiated in secrecy, hidden from victims, and enforced with almost religious devotion despite Epstein’s repeated violations. What the unsealed internal emails now show is that this wasn’t negligence or incompetence, it was intentional. Prosecutors knew the scope of Epstein’s conduct was far broader than what the agreement covered, yet they deliberately constrained the case to preserve the deal. The NPA wasn’t about conserving resources or securing justice, it was about containment. It ensured Epstein did minimal time, protected his associates from scrutiny, and insulated the DOJ from having to confront what a full investigation would uncover. That alone should have invalidated it. Instead, it was defended for years as if it were sacred text.The OIG interview with Alex Acosta, when read alongside the internal emails, makes the disgrace even more damning. Acosta’s explanations shift, soften, and ultimately collapse under their own weight when confronted with contemporaneous records showing active resistance to broader prosecution. His attempts to frame the NPA as the best option under difficult circumstances don’t survive contact with emails revealing prosecutors discussing how to keep victims in the dark and how to preserve Epstein’s leverage. The unsealed records make clear that Acosta and his office weren’t cornered, they were accommodating. They weren’t overmatched, they were compliant. The NPA didn’t just fail the victims procedurally, it betrayed them deliberately, stripping them of their rights while shielding Epstein’s orbit from exposure. In light of these files, continuing to defend the NPA isn’t just wrong, it’s indefensible. It represents a moment where the DOJ chose institutional convenience and elite protection over justice, and then spent years pretending it was an unfortunate but reasonable compromise. The emails and OIG interview finally remove the ambiguity. This wasn’t a bad deal that aged poorly. It was a bad deal from day one, designed to make a monster manageable rather than accountable, and it stands as one of the most corrosive failures of federal prosecution in modern history.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a recently disclosed video from the massive DOJ release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is shown in a sit-down interview with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, during which he directly labels himself a “Tier One” sexual predator. When pressed about what that means, Epstein bizarrely insists that “Tier One” is the lowest level of such categorization, effectively acknowledging his criminal status while trying to minimize how it’s perceived. The footage — recorded shortly before his July 2019 arrest — also includes Epstein defending the legality of his wealth and pointing to philanthropic donations (like polio vaccine funding) to argue against the idea that his money was “dirty money.”The interview reveals Epstein navigating ethical accusations with evasive and self-aware language, trying to reframe both his image and legacy even as the conversation turns to his notoriety. Challenged about whether he is akin to the “devil himself,” he refuses to accept that label outright, offering cryptic responses about mirrors and moral complexity. This peculiar self-classification — admitting he is a predator yet framing it as the lowest tier — adds another unsettling dimension to his portrayal of himself in the final years before his death, and underscores how he attempted to shape public perception even amid overwhelming evidence of his crimes.to contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein calls himself 'Tier One' sex predator in newly released Steve Bannon interviewBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Recent reports in U.S. media and on social platforms surfaced in late January 2026 alleging that TikTok users were experiencing censorship related to the name “Epstein” and other politically sensitive topics. Thousands of users claimed that direct messages containing the word “Epstein” were being blocked or flagged as violations of community guidelines, and some said videos mentioning the Epstein scandal or critical of political figures like President Trump saw suppressed visibility. These complaints emerged shortly after TikTok’s U.S. operations were transferred to a newly formed majority-American joint venture backed in part by Trump-aligned investors, prompting widespread speculation that the platform was intentionally limiting certain content. California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a formal review into whether TikTok violated state law by censoring “Trump-critical content,” highlighting screenshots of failed “Epstein” messages and reports of stalled or unseen political videos as part of the evidence base.TikTok has rejected claims that it is deliberately censoring content or blocking the word “Epstein,” attributing widespread reports of glitches — including blocked messages and low video engagement — to a power outage and cascading systems failures at a U.S. data center rather than to a change in policy or targeted suppression. Independent testing by some outlets and user accounts showed inconsistent behavior, with single-word messages sometimes blocked while the same term used in sentences could go through, complicating claims of systematic censorship. The situation has fueled broader debates over content moderation and platform transparency, with critics warning that algorithmic control could be used — intentionally or otherwise — to limit discussion of high-profile public interest issues, even as TikTok insists the technical problems are being resolved.to contact me:[email protected]:TikTok says power outage behind Epstein, ICE censorship claims for U.S. appBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Warren Buffett has reportedly paused his usual mid-year donation to the Gates Foundation while he waits for the results of an outside review into the foundation’s past ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Buffett has given more than $47 billion in Berkshire Hathaway stock to the foundation over the years, making him one of its most important donors, but renewed scrutiny of Bill Gates’ relationship with Epstein has now put that giving under a cloud. The review was ordered by Gates Foundation CEO Mark Suzman after recently released Justice Department emails showed Epstein communicating with foundation staff and trying to insert himself into Gates-linked philanthropy.Bill Gates has said his meetings with Epstein were about philanthropy and global health funding, while also admitting the relationship was a mistake. During private testimony to House Oversight lawmakers, Gates reportedly said Epstein later tried to pressure him using knowledge of Gates’ extramarital affairs, though Gates denied witnessing criminal activity. Buffett’s decision to hold back until the review is complete shows how Epstein’s fallout is still reaching into the highest levels of philanthropy, raising questions about what the Gates Foundation knew, how close Epstein got to its network, and whether one of its biggest benefactors is willing to keep writing massive checks without clearer answers.to contact me:[email protected]:Warren Buffett freezes Gates Foundation donation as Epstein questions resurface: report | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, reportedly visited Jeffrey Epstein twice in 2009 while he was serving his Florida jail sentence for soliciting a minor for prostitution. The visits allegedly took place at the Palm Beach office Epstein used during his controversial work-release arrangement, which allowed him to leave jail for hours each day. Emails released by the Justice Department and reported by The Telegraph described Ferguson contacting Epstein during a Florida layover and arranging to meet him, including references to his driver picking her up and her bringing charity-related documents. The office was tied to the Florida Science Foundation, a company Epstein used as the basis for his work-release setup.The emails also showed Ferguson writing warmly to Epstein, calling him a “dear spectacular and special friend,” thanking him for looking after her, and continuing to discuss contact and assistance from him despite his conviction. The revelations added to earlier scrutiny over Epstein helping Ferguson financially, including the previously reported £15,000 payment she later called a “gigantic error of judgment.” The damaging part is the timing: Epstein was not merely a disgraced financier at that point, he was actively serving a sentence connected to a minor, yet Ferguson still allegedly met with him through a work-release loophole that has since become one of the most notorious examples of how Epstein received special treatment.to contact me:[email protected]:Sarah Ferguson visited Epstein TWICE at office for a bogus firm he set up while he was serving prison sentence for child sex offence | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lesley Groff, Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime assistant, was questioned by House Oversight lawmakers about Epstein’s use of American Express to book travel for multiple women or girls. CBS reported that Epstein used Amex’s Centurion travel service and a Black Card to arrange hundreds of itineraries, many involving women or girls from Eastern Europe, and that Groff was a key point of contact in those bookings. Groff told lawmakers she did not believe she ever arranged travel for anyone under 18 and said she understood the women to be “traveling assistants” who worked for Epstein. She also denied knowing that any of the travel was connected to sexual activity involving Epstein or anyone in his network.Lawmakers pressed Groff on records that appeared to show “decoy flights,” including a 2016 email where she asked Amex to hold a fake Rome-to-London itinerary for a redacted person who would actually be traveling to Miami to see Epstein. Groff said the woman wanted to hide the real trip from her parents, not obtain a visa, while her attorney pushed back on the idea that the booking was visa-related. In another 2012 exchange, an Amex employee flagged that holding a refundable itinerary for visa purposes was against company policy, but Groff later told lawmakers she was simply arranging a ticket and hotel reservation for someone who needed a visa. American Express declined to comment on Groff’s testimony, but previously said it regretted having Epstein as a customer and terminated his account after federal charges were filed.to contact me:[email protected]:Epstein's longtime assistant grilled by U.S. lawmakers over Amex travel booked for women or girls - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Josh Harris saw the Epstein revelations around Leon Black as an opening to reshape Apollo’s leadership and, according to reporting and later court allegations, pushed to position himself as the natural successor or power center inside the firm. Black’s Epstein relationship had thrown Apollo into crisis, investors were demanding answers, and the firm needed a clean leadership story. Harris had long been one of Apollo’s three founding figures, but his relationship with Black had deteriorated, and Black later accused him of organizing a behind-the-scenes campaign — even a so-called “war council” of advisers, lawyers, publicists, and allies — to weaken Black and seize control as Epstein scrutiny consumed him. Harris denied those accusations, calling them false, and courts later dismissed Black’s RICO claims against him.Harris did not get the prize. Instead, Marc Rowan emerged as the compromise successor and ultimately took over as Apollo’s CEO, while Black’s influence and board support helped block Harris from becoming the dominant figure. The result was a bitter private-equity civil war: Black was forced out by the Epstein fallout, Harris failed to convert the moment into control of Apollo, and Rowan became the beneficiary of the chaos. Harris later stepped away from day-to-day Apollo leadership and eventually focused more on his outside business and sports ownership interests, while Apollo tried to sell Rowan’s rise as a clean reset after the Epstein damage. The irony is brutal: Epstein’s relationship with Black created the opening Harris wanted, but the internal power structure Harris helped build at Apollo ultimately closed around Rowan instead.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Denise George tried to attack Jeffrey Epstein’s operation through the money trail, not just the sex-abuse allegations, by using the U.S. Virgin Islands’ civil enforcement power to subpoena banks and financial institutions that handled Epstein’s accounts, entities, trusts, charities, and shell companies. Her office sought records from major institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, and others, looking for account records, transaction details, communications, cash movements, and the financial architecture around Epstein’s estate and business entities. George later sued JPMorgan, accusing the bank of helping Epstein finance and conceal his trafficking operation, and her office had already reached a settlement of more than $105 million with Epstein’s estate and related defendants. In other words, she was trying to prove that Epstein’s crimes were not just enabled by recruiters and household staff, but by banks, lawyers, accountants, and institutions that moved the money and ignored the warning signs.A separate financial trail later raised similar questions around Ghislaine Maxwell. Reuters reported in 2026 that UBS helped move money connected to Maxwell before her arrest, including funds that ultimately helped purchase her secluded New Hampshire hideout, even after UBS had received a grand jury subpoena seeking information about her financial dealings in a child-sex-trafficking investigation. UBS had told Maxwell it would close her accounts, but documents showed millions still moved through the system before the shutdown was complete. That is what makes the institutional side of the Epstein story so damning: while George was trying to force major banks to explain how Epstein’s money flowed for years, other institutions were still handling Maxwell-linked money in the aftermath, showing once again how elite clients could remain bankable long after the red flags should have been impossible to miss.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with Leon Black detonated inside Apollo Global Management because Black was not just any executive — he was Apollo’s co-founder, chairman, and public face. Once it became clear that Black had paid Epstein enormous sums after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, Apollo had a reputational crisis on its hands. The firm launched an independent review through its board’s conflicts committee, which examined Black’s relationship with Epstein and whether Apollo itself had business ties to Epstein. The review said it found no evidence that Black was involved in Epstein’s criminal conduct and said Apollo had not retained Epstein, but it also confirmed that Black paid Epstein huge fees for personal tax and estate-planning advice. That confirmation was damaging enough that Black announced he would step down as Apollo CEO, and he later left the chairman role as well.The shockwave did not stop with Black’s exit. Apollo had to reassure investors, clients, and partners that Epstein’s relationship was with Black personally and not with the firm, while also overhauling governance and moving leadership to Marc Rowan. Years later, the issue is still haunting Apollo, with the firm again telling clients in 2026 that no one at Apollo other than Black had a business or personal relationship with Epstein, while shareholder litigation has accused Apollo and its leaders of misleading investors about the depth of Epstein-related ties. Black’s Epstein relationship turned into a long-tail corporate contamination problem: it damaged Apollo’s brand, forced a leadership transition, triggered legal and investor scrutiny, and left the company repeatedly trying to prove that Epstein’s shadow stopped at Leon Black and did not extend into Apollo itself.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Eileen Guggenheim, a former aide to then-Prince Charles and now leading the New York Academy of Art, emphatically denied any role in facilitating an introduction between Charles and Jeffrey Epstein. Her statement came in response to recurring tabloid insinuations suggesting that she had served as the conduit linking the future king to the disgraced financier. Her denial was swift and pointed: simply put, she had no involvement in bringing the two into contact.Yet this sort of sweeping, “nothing to see here” denial has become almost a reflex among those who orbited Epstein — a well-rehearsed performance of indignation that sidesteps the deeper questions. Guggenheim can insist she never introduced Charles to Epstein, but the problem is that these denials are often delivered in a vacuum, without transparency, documentation, or a willingness to open the books. In the Epstein ecosystem, too many people have tried to firewall their reputations with carefully worded statements, betting that the press won’t dig past the headline. Whether her claim is true or not, it lands in the same well-worn pattern: elite figures distancing themselves from Epstein only when their names surface, and offering little more than their own word as proof.To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8652923/Prince-Charles-former-aide-denies-introducing-student-Jeffrey-Epstein.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Recent revelations from Jeffrey Epstein’s files have reignited scrutiny of Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor’s relationship with the disgraced financier, including new details surrounding a Russian woman that Epstein allegedly offered to set him up with. Newly released emails show that Epstein described this woman — identified in some reports as a model — as “beautiful” and “trustworthy” and proposed introducing her to Andrew in 2010, shortly after Epstein’s release from house arrest, a period when Andrew had publicly claimed to have ended his association with him. Correspondence also suggests that Andrew continued to maintain some level of contact with Epstein, even inviting him to Buckingham Palace for dinner and appearing open to arrangements that blurred personal, social, and potentially exploitative boundaries amid a broader climate of scandal.These revelations come on top of longstanding allegations from other women that they were trafficked by Epstein to meet or engage sexually with Andrew — most notably Virginia Giuffre, who claimed Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell forced her into sexual encounters with Andrew on multiple occasions in the early 2000s, beginning when she was a minor; that claim was settled out of court in 2022 without his admitting wrongdoing. Additionally, a new accuser has come forward, asserting she was sent to the UK for a sexual encounter with him at his former residence, Royal Lodge, further deepening public concern and criticism of his prolonged ties to Epstein’s network. These developments have compounded the reputational damage to Andrew, contributing to his loss of royal titles and ongoing calls for transparency and accountability.to contact me:[email protected]:'Beautiful' young Russian who Epstein set up for date with Andrew revealed as model who said UK trip was an 'adventure'Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared for a closed-door deposition before the House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his network of associates. Lawmakers questioned her about what she knew regarding Epstein’s activities, his connections to prominent political and philanthropic circles, and whether she had any direct knowledge of his conduct or access to his properties. Clinton stated under oath that she never met Epstein in person, never visited his residences, and had no involvement in or awareness of his criminal behavior during the period in question. The deposition focused in part on her husband’s documented interactions with Epstein, including travel and social contact, and whether she had been aware of those connections at the time.The session took place amid heightened political scrutiny following the release of Epstein-related documents under federal transparency measures. Committee members sought to clarify the extent of the Clintons’ association with Epstein and to address public concerns about accountability and oversight involving powerful figures. Clinton denied wrongdoing and characterized the inquiry as politically motivated, while lawmakers indicated the transcript and video of the deposition would be released publicly. The testimony marked a rare instance of a former secretary of state providing sworn congressional testimony tied to a high-profile criminal investigation with continuing political and legal ramifications.to contact me:[email protected]:Hillary Clinton testifies in House Epstein investigation | AP NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The backlash against Dr. Peter Attia has been swift and unforgiving since newly released documents from the Jeffrey Epstein files revealed an extensive and friendly correspondence between the celebrity longevity doctor and the convicted sex offender — including over 1,700 mentions of Attia in the trove — complete with casual and crude exchanges that reflected an ongoing relationship well after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. Attia’s name popping up repeatedly in the federal materials has shocked many of his followers and critics alike, not least because he built his public brand on health, integrity, and longevity advice while quietly maintaining a social rapport with someone now widely understood as a deeply exploitative predator. One especially unsettling detail — emails joking about sex and lifestyle — has made even the most technical defense of his interactions ring hollow for critics who see this not as harmless professional contact but as an elitist embrace of a man whose abuses were known to the world.The blowback hasn’t been abstract — it’s already cost Attia real-world roles and credibility. He resigned from his position as Chief Science Officer at David Protein and has been forced to apologize publicly, calling the emails “embarrassing, tasteless, and indefensible,” while CBS News reportedly weighs cutting ties with him as a contributor amid internal and public pressure to dissociate from his tarnished judgment. Many observers have labeled his apology as insufficiently contrite and criticized him for not addressing the deeper ethical implications of befriending a convicted child trafficker, arguing that his reputation as a trusted health authority is fundamentally shaken. Rather than confronting how his willingness to hobnob with Epstein reflects on his values and professional integrity, Attia’s defensive framing — insisting he wasn’t involved in criminal activity and emphasizing that he wouldn’t act that way “today” — has been seen by some as tone-deaf and self-protective, feeding into narratives about elites dodging accountability.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Karyna Shuliak, Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime girlfriend and one of the last people known to have spoken with him before his death, was licensed as a dentist in New Mexico, adding another strange thread to Epstein’s Zorro Ranch story. Shuliak was born in Belarus, studied dentistry, and later became connected to Epstein after being introduced through Eastern European contacts. Epstein helped fund her education, including her path through Columbia University’s dental school, and later estate documents showed he intended to leave her a massive share of his fortune, including money, jewelry, and major properties. Her New Mexico dental license stands out because Epstein’s ranch near Stanley, New Mexico, has become a renewed focus of investigators, lawmakers, and survivors looking into what happened there and who was connected to the property.Shuliak has not been charged with crimes tied to Epstein, but her role has drawn attention because she was not just a passing girlfriend. Records and reporting have placed her inside Epstein’s personal, financial, and professional world: she was listed in estate documents as a major beneficiary, associated with Epstein-linked addresses, connected to his Virgin Islands life, and reportedly worked in dentistry while also being tied to Southern Trust, one of Epstein’s key business entities. The New Mexico angle makes the story more significant because Zorro Ranch was one of Epstein’s most important properties and has long been surrounded by unanswered questions about abuse allegations, movement of women, and the state’s failure to fully investigate him while he was alive. Shuliak’s license does not prove wrongdoing, but it places Epstein’s final partner inside yet another jurisdiction now trying to untangle his network.to contact me:[email protected]:'Zorro Smiles': Epstein's girlfriend was licensed dentist in New Mexico | News | santafenewmexican.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black was subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee in the middle of his closed-door testimony about Jeffrey Epstein after he refused to answer questions about possible non-disclosure agreements involving women connected to Epstein. Chairman James Comer said lawmakers wanted the NDAs to determine whether Epstein was involved in writing them, arranging them, funding them, or using them to silence women in his orbit. One subpoena demands the NDA records, and another requires Black to return for videotaped testimony under oath on July 16. Black’s lawyer, Susan Estrich, blasted the move as a “planned political stunt” and said Epstein had no involvement with any NDAs, whether they exist or not.Black told lawmakers he had no role in Epstein’s sex-trafficking crimes, no knowledge of Epstein’s abuse, and never paid Epstein for access to women. He repeated that he hired Epstein for tax and estate planning work, saying Epstein “solved a massive estate problem” and that he believed the fees were partly tax-deductible, even though the total eventually came to about $158 million. Black said Epstein deceived him, describing the relationship as “I knew Jekyll” and “I didn’t know Hyde,” while also pointing to an Apollo-commissioned Dechert review that found no evidence he participated in Epstein’s crimes. The committee’s focus, however, is now moving beyond the old explanation about tax advice and into whether Black’s private legal arrangements with women intersected with Epstein’s network.to contact me:[email protected]:House committee subpoenas Leon Black during Jeffrey Epstein testimonyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, reportedly visited Jeffrey Epstein twice in 2009 while he was serving his Florida jail sentence for soliciting a minor for prostitution. The visits allegedly took place at the Palm Beach office Epstein used during his controversial work-release arrangement, which allowed him to leave jail for hours each day. Emails released by the Justice Department and reported by The Telegraph described Ferguson contacting Epstein during a Florida layover and arranging to meet him, including references to his driver picking her up and her bringing charity-related documents. The office was tied to the Florida Science Foundation, a company Epstein used as the basis for his work-release setup.The emails also showed Ferguson writing warmly to Epstein, calling him a “dear spectacular and special friend,” thanking him for looking after her, and continuing to discuss contact and assistance from him despite his conviction. The revelations added to earlier scrutiny over Epstein helping Ferguson financially, including the previously reported £15,000 payment she later called a “gigantic error of judgment.” The damaging part is the timing: Epstein was not merely a disgraced financier at that point, he was actively serving a sentence connected to a minor, yet Ferguson still allegedly met with him through a work-release loophole that has since become one of the most notorious examples of how Epstein received special treatment.to contact me:[email protected]:Sarah Ferguson visited Epstein TWICE at office for a bogus firm he set up while he was serving prison sentence for child sex offence | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The extent of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse turned out to be far larger than the early public version of the case suggested. At first, the story was often framed around a limited number of victims in Palm Beach and a wealthy sex offender who had somehow received an absurdly lenient plea deal. But as survivors came forward, lawsuits were filed, flight logs were examined, police records resurfaced, and federal prosecutors reopened the case, the scope expanded dramatically. Epstein was no longer just a rich creep abusing a few vulnerable girls in Florida; he was revealed as the center of a long-running, multi-state and international exploitation network involving Palm Beach, New York, New Mexico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Paris, private planes, luxury homes, recruiters, assistants, employees, and powerful people who either enabled him, ignored him, or benefited from being close to him.What made the scale so disturbing was not only the number of alleged victims, but the machinery around the abuse. Epstein allegedly relied on recruiters, schedulers, drivers, pilots, house staff, lawyers, bankers, financial advisers, modeling-world contacts, and social gatekeepers who helped keep his life moving while the abuse continued. Survivors described a system where girls and young women were moved through massages, travel, gifts, pressure, intimidation, and silence, while Epstein used money and status to make himself feel untouchable. The more records came out, the harder it became to believe the original narrow version of the case. This was not a contained scandal. It was a sprawling abuse operation that lasted for years because too many institutions failed, looked away, or decided that Jeffrey Epstein’s money mattered more than the girls he was hurting.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Les Wexner was one of the most important people in Jeffrey Epstein’s rise, yet for years he managed to remain far less publicly radioactive than figures like Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, or Leon Black. Wexner gave Epstein extraordinary access, trusted him with financial power, and allowed him into the center of his personal and business world, including through power of attorney and the management of major assets. But after Epstein’s crimes became impossible to ignore, Wexner largely presented himself as someone who had been deceived, stolen from, and betrayed by Epstein. That framing helped him avoid the kind of sustained public grilling that other Epstein associates faced, even though Epstein’s proximity to Wexner helped give him wealth, legitimacy, and elite credibility.Les Wexner was one of the most important people in Jeffrey Epstein’s rise, yet for years he managed to remain far less publicly radioactive than figures like Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, or Leon Black. Wexner gave Epstein extraordinary access, trusted him with financial power, and allowed him into the center of his personal and business world, including through power of attorney and the management of major assets. But after Epstein’s crimes became impossible to ignore, Wexner largely presented himself as someone who had been deceived, stolen from, and betrayed by Epstein. That framing helped him avoid the kind of sustained public grilling that other Epstein associates faced, even though Epstein’s proximity to Wexner helped give him wealth, legitimacy, and elite credibility.to contat me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Melanie Walker is a physician and neuroscience/global-health figure who worked in Bill Gates’ orbit while also having long-running ties to Jeffrey Epstein. She joined the Gates Foundation in 2006 as a senior program officer and later remained connected to Gates through consulting work and health-related proposals. Reporting from The Wall Street Journal described her as a confidante to both Gates and Epstein, while her lawyer said she was a “survivor of Jeffrey Epstein” who had endured a coercive relationship with him over decades. Walker has not been accused of wrongdoing, but her name matters because she sat at a strange intersection between Epstein’s science-and-philanthropy access game and Gates’ foundation world.Walker fits into the Gates/Epstein fiasco because she appears to have been one of the human bridges between the two men’s worlds, and later one of the people warning Gates about Epstein. Forbes, citing Journal reporting, said Walker emailed Gates in 2014 advising him to keep “a healthy distance” from Epstein on anything personal, warning that she had seen Epstein exploit powerful people’s weaknesses. The Journal also reported that Epstein encouraged Walker to pursue a sexual relationship with Gates, while Gates’ spokesperson said Gates did not know the nature of Walker’s relationship with Epstein and described Walker’s relationship with Gates as consensual and amicably ended. In short, Walker is not presented as an accused participant in Epstein’s crimes; she is presented as a complicated connective figure whose relationships with both men show how Epstein tried to burrow into Gates’ world through philanthropy, science, personal access, and leverage.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The DOJ’s so-called “list” is being framed as transparency, but it reads like controlled optics rather than a serious accounting of Jeffrey Epstein’s network. A genuine disclosure would distinguish between casual mentions and operational roles, provide context, explain methodology, and prioritize the people who facilitated recruitment, logistics, finances, and legal shielding. Instead, the document appears to emphasize ambiguity and volume over clarity, which fuels politicization and confusion. When key operational figures are absent and no structured explanation is offered, it raises legitimate questions about whether the release was designed to inform the public or to exhaust and divide it. Transparency without context isn’t transparency—it’s misdirection.At its core, the issue is institutional credibility. A trafficking enterprise of this scale required coordination, staffing, money flows, and protection, and any meaningful disclosure should illuminate that infrastructure rather than obscure it. If leadership presents a curated list without methodology, document categories, or clear definitions, the public is left to speculate while officials claim compliance. That dynamic erodes trust and shifts attention away from survivors and toward political infighting. The demand is straightforward: show the work, clarify omissions, and provide structured, auditable disclosure. Anything less invites suspicion that the priority is reputational protection, not accountability.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell appeared for a congressional deposition today and immediately invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, refusing to answer substantive questions from lawmakers. According to members of Congress, Maxwell delivered a brief, prepared statement at the outset and then systematically declined to respond to questions about Jeffrey Epstein’s operations, potential co-conspirators, powerful associates, or her own role in facilitating abuse. The deposition, conducted as part of Congress’s oversight inquiry into the Epstein case, was expected by many to yield insight into long-unanswered questions, but instead unfolded as a near-total assertion of constitutional silence.By pleading the Fifth across the board, Maxwell effectively shut down Congress’s ability to extract testimony while insulating herself from potential legal exposure tied to ongoing appeals and post-conviction litigation. Lawmakers publicly acknowledged that her refusal to testify was legally permissible but deeply frustrating, particularly given her central role in Epstein’s criminal enterprise and the public interest in full disclosure. The outcome reinforced a familiar pattern in the Epstein saga: key insiders appearing under oath, yet declining to provide answers, leaving Congress with another formal record of silence rather than clarity about how Epstein’s network operated and who enabled it.to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell deposition: Fifth Amendment plea sparks outrageBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Newly released United States Department of Justice files, as reported by The New York Post, reveal disturbing details about Jeffrey Epstein’s long-standing and unusually close involvement with Celina Dubin, the daughter of his former girlfriend, Eva Dubin. Epstein first met Celina when she was a child through Eva, with whom he had a relationship in the 1980s and early ’90s. Emails in the documents show that even after his 2008 conviction for soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution, Epstein maintained contact with Celina through hundreds of messages in which she called him “Uncle F.” He attended family events — including visits to her home and her high school lacrosse games — and was involved in aspects of her life that went beyond typical family friend interaction, such as offering to help with potential modeling opportunities and academic connections. Records also showed him buying clothes for her as a teenager and arranging professional contacts for her, though plans like a photoshoot never came to fruition.One of the most striking revelations in the documents is that Epstein told acquaintances around 2014 that Celina, then 19, was “the only person he wanted to marry.” While there is no evidence of a romantic or physical relationship, the assertion raised concerns due to his history and the ages involved. Epstein even named Celina a contingent beneficiary of his trust without her knowledge; she later renounced any claim after learning of it. The Dubin family, through a spokesperson, pushed back against the implications, stressing that Celina was unaware of Epstein’s intentions, did not benefit from his estate, and that Eva Dubin would have cut ties had she known about his criminal conduct.to  contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein's obsession with ex Celina Dubin's teen daughterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Today, convicted sex-trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell is scheduled to sit for a deposition before the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee as part of Congress’s ongoing investigation into the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and his network. Lawmakers have arranged for Maxwell to appear—likely by videolink from prison—to answer questions about her role in Epstein’s operations, her connections with powerful individuals, and related matters that have come to light after the release of millions of federal documents linked to the Epstein case. Committee members, including Representative Ro Khanna, outlined specific questions they intend to ask, spanning alleged co-conspirators, unindicted individuals, and high-profile figures with ties to Epstein’s world.However, Maxwell’s legal team has made clear she intends to invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and will refuse to answer substantive questions during this deposition, effectively pleading the Fifth throughout the session rather than provide testimony. According to lawmakers, Maxwell plans to read a prepared statement at the outset and then decline to respond to individual inquiries—citing her constitutional privilege and concerns about jeopardizing ongoing legal matters, including a habeas petition challenging her conviction. This strategy means Congress may not get direct answers from her today, even as it pursues broader scrutiny of Epstein’s activities and associations.to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell is set to plead the fifth as she appears before the US Congress board investigating Jeffrey Epstein today | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

David Boies, Virginia Giuffre’s lawyer, said the settlement with Prince Andrew did not protect Andrew from any possible criminal exposure and did not erase the seriousness of Giuffre’s allegations. Boies said the agreement would lead to the dismissal of the civil case once Giuffre received the settlement, and he emphasized that the resolution included a substantial donation by Andrew to Giuffre’s charity supporting victims’ rights. Giuffre had sued Andrew, saying she was trafficked to him by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell when she was 17; Andrew denied the allegation, but the settlement ended the civil case before he could be forced into a deposition or trial.Prince Andrew’s statement did not admit liability, but it did acknowledge Virginia Giuffre as an “established victim of abuse” and said he regretted his association with Epstein. Andrew also said he had never intended to malign Giuffre’s character, a major shift after months of his side challenging her credibility and trying to get the lawsuit dismissed. Giuffre, through the settlement, secured money for herself and her victims’ rights charity while forcing Andrew into a public statement that recognized Epstein’s abuse network and his own disastrous connection to it, even as he continued to deny wrongdoing.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Judge Alison Nathan was the federal judge who presided over Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal case in the Southern District of New York. Before joining the federal bench, Nathan worked in private practice, served in the Obama administration, and was nominated to the district court in 2011; she was later elevated to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, but continued handling Maxwell’s case by designation. In Maxwell’s case, Nathan oversaw the arraignment, detention fight, discovery schedule, pretrial motions, jury selection, trial, verdict, and sentencing. DOJ records show that Maxwell was ordered detained before trial and that Nathan set the early schedule for discovery, motions, and trial proceedings.Nathan managed the Maxwell trial in a controlled, no-nonsense way, keeping the proceedings moving while handling an avalanche of high-profile issues: secrecy disputes, witness privacy, evidence about Epstein, media attention, juror questions, and repeated defense efforts to narrow or challenge the case. The trial lasted about four and a half weeks, and Maxwell was convicted in December 2021 of helping Epstein recruit and groom underage girls for sexual abuse. Nathan later sentenced Maxwell to 20 years in prison and a $750,000 fine, telling the court that the sentence reflected Maxwell’s role in enabling Epstein’s abuse while also rejecting the idea that Maxwell was being punished for Epstein’s crimes alone.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Sarah Kellen has repeatedly been described as someone who presents herself as another damaged person caught inside Jeffrey Epstein’s world, rather than as one of the people who helped keep that world running. Her defenders and some descriptions of her background have framed her as a young woman who entered Epstein’s orbit early, was manipulated by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, and became trapped in a system where the lines between victim, employee, and participant were deliberately blurred. From that view, Kellen was not the mastermind but another person shaped by Epstein’s coercive environment, someone who has tried to cast herself as a survivor of the same predatory machine that consumed so many others.But many survivors and critics have rejected that framing, arguing that Kellen was not merely present but operationally important. She has been accused in lawsuits and victim accounts of scheduling massages, managing logistics, coordinating travel, and helping move young women through Epstein’s system, which is why she has often been described not as a passive bystander but as an alleged facilitator. To those survivors, Kellen’s self-presentation as a victim feels like an attempt to dodge accountability by hiding behind Epstein’s larger criminality. The result is one of the most contested figures in the Epstein story: someone who says she was also victimized, while others say she helped victimize them.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

There have been multiple documentaries that pulled Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Prince Andrew back into the public spotlight by laying out how Epstein’s abuse network operated, how Maxwell allegedly helped recruit and manage young women, and how Andrew became one of the most infamous powerful men tied to the scandal through Virginia Giuffre’s allegations. These productions helped keep the story alive by showing the pattern around Epstein’s world: money, access, private planes, elite homes, famous friends, and a social circle where people later claimed they either saw nothing, knew nothing, or misunderstood what was happening. Andrew’s downfall became its own major thread because his BBC interview, his friendship with Maxwell, and his settlement with Giuffre turned him into a symbol of how Epstein’s scandal reached directly into the royal family.Victoria’s Secret: Angels and Demons widened that same lens by focusing on Les Wexner, Victoria’s Secret, and the fashion-business world that helped give Epstein status and legitimacy. The series traces Wexner’s rise, the creation of the Victoria’s Secret empire, and the strange, powerful relationship between Wexner and Epstein, who became deeply embedded in Wexner’s financial and personal orbit despite lacking any obvious background that explained that level of trust. It connected the glamour of the Victoria’s Secret brand to a darker world of billionaire access, image-making, models, money, and Epstein’s ability to attach himself to institutions and powerful people who gave him credibility.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

CBS News recently revisited the case of Jeffrey Epstein’s death by analyzing surveillance footage, cell photos, and other previously unreleased materials — and found notable discrepancies between what government officials claimed and what the visual evidence appears to show. While Epstein’s death was officially ruled a suicide by hanging, CBS’s forensic reviewers argued that many standard investigative procedures were ignored: there were no evidence markers in the photos, items inside the cell had been moved, and Epstein’s body was removed before the FBI arrived. That mishandling, CBS reported, made it impossible to establish a clear and reliable timeline of events. The network also noted that Attorney General William Barr’s claim — that footage conclusively showed no one entering the area — was not backed up by the limited field of view in the available video, which fails to capture the entire cell tier or surrounding hallways.Inside the cell, CBS said the scene was in “disarray.” Sheets and bedding were piled in corners, electrical cords were tangled, and personal items were scattered everywhere. The report emphasized that the cell did not appear to have been treated like an active crime scene; no clear photographic documentation was taken before evidence was moved, and no chain-of-custody procedures were followed. Experts told CBS that the messy, undocumented state of the cell effectively compromised the ability to rule out foul play with confidence — even if no conclusive proof of homicide emerged from the review. The overall picture painted by CBS was one of a botched and chaotic investigation that continues to fuel public skepticism about how Epstein died in federal custody.to contact me:[email protected]:In cell where Jeffrey Epstein died, a scene of disarray that never underwent thorough inspection, experts said - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein operated as a free agent in the information market, not as a loyal asset of any single government, intelligence service, or political faction, but as a broker who understood that information itself was currency. He cultivated access to powerful people across finance, academia, politics, intelligence, and royalty, positioning himself as the connective tissue between elites who otherwise would not openly associate. Epstein gathered kompromat not just through sexual abuse, but through proximity—private flights, secluded residences, off-the-books meetings, and social environments where guardrails disappeared. He traded in favors, introductions, secrets, and silence, making himself useful to multiple parties simultaneously. That usefulness is what insulated him for so long: he was not owned, but leased—temporarily valuable to anyone who needed discretion, leverage, or deniability. In that ecosystem, Epstein’s power came not from allegiance, but from optionality.At the core of it all, Epstein’s only loyalty was to himself. He did not operate as a patriot, an ideologue, or a true intelligence operative in the traditional sense; he operated as a survivalist within elite power structures. He provided information where it benefited him, withheld it when it didn’t, and shifted alliances as needed to maintain protection. This is why he could simultaneously assist different governments, ingratiate himself with rival power centers, and still remain untouchable for decades. Epstein’s genius—if the term can be used—was recognizing that being indispensable to everyone meant being accountable to no one. His operation was built on mutual exposure and shared risk, ensuring that when the walls finally began to close in, there were too many people with too much to lose for the system to act swiftly. In the end, Epstein wasn’t a pawn—he was a freelance operator who sold access, secrets, and silence, always in service of preserving his own power and immunity.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Calls for former Prince Andrew—now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor—to face a formal inquiry and cooperate with ongoing investigations have intensified across the UK amid fresh revelations tied to his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Recently released documents from the U.S. Department of Justice have shown extensive correspondence between Andrew and Epstein from when Andrew served as the UK’s trade envoy, prompting critics to argue that these communications raise serious questions about potential misconduct, including sharing sensitive information while in public office. The Director of Public Prosecutions stressed that “nobody is above the law,” and Thames Valley Police, along with other forces, is now assessing allegations of misconduct in public office, adding to demands from figures such as former Prime Minister Gordon Brown and ex-Business Secretary Vince Cable for a full police probe and parliamentary scrutiny of how Andrew’s actions were handled. Anti-monarchy campaign groups have also staged protests calling for an inquiry that would extend to what senior royals knew about his links with Epstein.Alongside these UK pressures, there are domestic demands from MPs and public commentators that Andrew should be compelled to answer questions about his knowledge of Epstein’s network and associated abuses, with calls for him to appear before both British authorities and, in some cases, US lawmakers. The combination of leaked files, growing media scrutiny, and vocal pressure from politicians and advocacy groups has kept the controversy in the spotlight, fuelling debate about accountability, transparency, and the role of UK institutions—including the monarchy—in addressing allegations linked to one of the most enduring scandals involving a member of the royal family.to contact me:[email protected]:Police under renewed pressure to investigate Andrew over Epstein ties after intervention from former minister | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Keir Starmer is increasingly on the defensive as the Epstein scandal widens and scrutiny turns toward the political class that benefited from years of selective blindness. While Starmer has not been accused of direct involvement in Epstein’s crimes, the pressure comes from his positioning as a moral reformer while presiding over a system now exposed as having repeatedly failed victims and protected powerful men. Critics argue that his leadership has coincided with evasive answers, cautious language, and an instinct to manage optics rather than confront the full scale of institutional rot revealed by the Epstein disclosures. For a prime minister who built his brand on legality, integrity, and prosecutorial seriousness, even the perception of hedging or delay has proven politically toxic.What has put Starmer “on the ropes” is not a single revelation but the cumulative effect of public anger: survivors demanding accountability, advocates calling out transatlantic protection networks, and voters increasingly intolerant of leaders who appear more concerned with reputational containment than justice. The Epstein scandal has become a litmus test for whether Starmer will meaningfully challenge entrenched power or default to the same cautious establishment instincts he once criticized. Each non-answer, each procedural dodge, and each appeal to process over accountability feeds the narrative that he is out of his depth—or unwilling—to confront elites implicated by proximity, silence, or prior association. In a moment defined by moral clarity for the public, Starmer’s careful lawyering is being read not as prudence, but as weakness.to contact me:[email protected]:Secret texts with PM's chief aide, what PM knew about Epstein links, and huge 'golden goodbye'... the grim trove of Mandelson papers due for publication that could end Starmer | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The newly released emails between Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew directly contradict the central claims Andrew made during his disastrous Newsnight interview, where he insisted he had severed contact with Epstein years earlier and had no meaningful relationship after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. The correspondence shows sustained, friendly communication well beyond the timeframe Andrew publicly acknowledged, including coordination around meetings, travel logistics, and tone that reflects familiarity rather than estrangement. This is not casual or incidental contact; the emails demonstrate continuity, comfort, and mutual access. Andrew’s insistence that he had “nothing to do” with Epstein post-conviction collapses when placed alongside written evidence showing otherwise. The language used undercuts any claim of a reluctant or distant association. Instead, it paints a picture of an ongoing relationship that Andrew later tried to erase retroactively. The gap between what he said on camera and what he wrote privately is no longer debatable. It is documented.Even more damaging is how the emails dismantle Andrew’s explanation for the now-infamous 2010 meeting at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, which he framed as a one-time, honorable attempt to “end the friendship.” The correspondence shows no clean break, no finality, and no discomfort—only continuity before and after that meeting. This makes Andrew’s Newsnight narrative read less like confusion and more like deliberate misrepresentation. The emails also undermine his claims about memory lapses, timing, and lack of awareness by anchoring events to specific dates and exchanges he cannot plausibly deny. Taken together, the record shows that Andrew didn’t merely misstate details; he constructed a false storyline designed to minimize exposure once Epstein’s crimes became impossible to ignore. The emails prove he wasn’t distancing himself—he was managing optics. And once those private words are read alongside his public denials, the conclusion is unavoidable: Prince Andrew lied, plainly and repeatedly, in an interview meant to salvage his credibility.to contact  me:[email protected]:Girls coming 'after school' and $5,000 cash floats: The full sordid truth about Andrew's wild NINE-DAY visit to Jeffrey Epstein's New York mansion | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The nearly six-hour congressional interview focused on why Bill Gates continued meeting with Jeffrey Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction, what Gates knew about Epstein's conduct, and whether Epstein attempted to gain leverage over him. Gates testified that he met Epstein roughly 12 to 14 times between 2011 and 2014, saying he believed Epstein could help attract major philanthropic donations to global health initiatives through the Gates Foundation. He repeatedly described those meetings as "a mistake," insisted he never visited Epstein's private island, New Mexico ranch, or Florida residence, and said he never witnessed criminal conduct or participated in any of Epstein's illegal activities. Gates told lawmakers he ultimately concluded that Epstein had exaggerated both his financial connections and his ability to raise money for philanthropy.One of the most closely watched portions of the transcript concerned allegations that Epstein sought to pressure Gates using knowledge of Gates' personal life. Gates acknowledged several extramarital affairs and testified that Epstein appeared to have learned about them, later making what Gates described as "veiled" attempts at blackmail by referencing those relationships and seeking money connected to one of the women. Gates said he believed Epstein "contemplated" blackmail but maintained he was never actually blackmailed, never paid Epstein to keep information secret, and never committed crimes with him. Throughout the interview, Gates emphasized that his association with Epstein damaged his judgment and reputation, expressed support for releasing the Epstein files and for continued investigations, and said survivors deserve justice while denying any involvement in Epstein's trafficking operation or abuse of minors.to contact me:[email protected]:Bill-Gates-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.