Episodios

  • Federal Agencies Dismiss Purported Epstein–Nassar Letter (12/27/25)

    Federal Agencies Dismiss Purported Epstein–Nassar Letter (12/27/25)
    Dec 27 2025
    The recent news linking Larry Nassar and Jeffrey Epstein stems from a document that appeared in a large federal release of Epstein-related records, described as a handwritten letter from Epstein to Nassar. Almost immediately, officials said the letter was not authentic, citing technical issues with handwriting, mailing details, and dates. On paper, that explanation is straightforward. But given the long history of mishandled evidence, delayed disclosures, and shifting narratives in the Epstein case, it is not unreasonable that the appearance of such a document—however brief—triggered questions before being dismissed.

    The government’s position is that there is no verified connection between Epstein and Nassar beyond this disputed item, and no evidence the two ever corresponded. Still, the episode highlights a recurring problem with how Epstein material has been released: documents surface without context, provenance, or explanation, leaving the public to parse authenticity after the fact. Even if the letter is exactly what authorities say it is, the way it entered the public record reinforces skepticism—not about any specific claim, but about a process that repeatedly introduces confusion into a case where clarity and credibility have already been in short supply.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

    source:

    Letter to Larry Nassar, signed by ‘J. Epstein,’ cites “our president” | CNN Politics
    Más Menos
    15 m
  • “Inappropriate Friends”: What Prince Andrew Was Really Asking Ghislaine Maxwell (12/27/25)

    “Inappropriate Friends”: What Prince Andrew Was Really Asking Ghislaine Maxwell (12/27/25)
    Dec 27 2025
    Newly released files from the U.S. Justice Department’s ongoing Epstein Files Transparency Act disclosures include email exchanges from 2001–2002 between Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted Epstein accomplice, and an individual identified only as “A” who signs off the messages with “The Invisible Man” and “A”—widely reported by multiple outlets as former Prince Andrew, now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. In one August 2001 message sent from Balmoral, the British royal family’s Scottish residence, the correspondent asks Maxwell whether she has “found me some new inappropriate friends,” a line that has drawn fresh scrutiny because of its phrasing and context. In response, Maxwell wrote she had only been able to find “appropriate friends,” and the exchange also touches on personal matters such as travel plans and the death of a longtime valet.


    Other documents in the same tranche show Maxwell arranging for introductions or social plans involving “girls” and a supposed friend referred to as “Andrew,” including correspondence related to a planned 2002 trip to Peru in which Maxwell described seeking “friendly and discreet and fun” companions and forwarding contact details to the person signing as “A.” While the emails do not on their own prove criminal conduct and there is no indication that law enforcement has charged Mountbatten-Windsor in connection with this material, the exchanges add to longstanding public and legal scrutiny of his ties to Epstein and Maxwell. Andrew has previously denied wrongdoing and has consistently rejected allegations related to Epstein’s network; earlier civil allegations were resolved through a settlement and he has since been stripped of royal titles and duties amid controversy over his association with Epstein.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
    Más Menos
    14 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 8)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 8)
    Dec 27 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    15 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 7)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 7)
    Dec 27 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    18 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 6)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 6)
    Dec 27 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    11 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 5)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 5)
    Dec 27 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    14 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 4)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 4)
    Dec 27 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    12 m
  • Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 3)

    Drake And The Lawsuit Filed Against UMG (Kendrick Lamar) (Part 3)
    Dec 26 2025
    In January 2025, rapper Drake filed a defamation lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), alleging that the company promoted Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us," which falsely accuses Drake of pedophilia. Drake contends that UMG prioritized profit over his safety and reputation, as the song's release allegedly led to violent incidents, including a shooting at his Toronto residence. He also claims that UMG employed bots and engaged in payola schemes to artificially inflate the track's popularity.


    UMG has denied these allegations, describing them as "offensive and untrue," and asserting that they would not undermine an artist they have heavily invested in. Legal experts suggest that proving defamation in this context may be challenging due to First Amendment protections of artistic expression. Some speculate that Drake's lawsuit could be a strategic move in his contract negotiations with UMG. The case underscores the complex interplay between artistic freedom and personal reputation in the music industry.



    (commercialat 8:54)

    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Microsoft Word - 2025.01.15 New Operative Defamation Complaint(9377666.8)
    Más Menos
    11 m