Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch in New Mexico was far more than a secluded estate—it was a fortress of influence, shielded by political connections, legal loopholes, and geographic isolation. Acquired in the early 1990s through ties to the powerful King family, the sprawling property benefited from a sex offender registry loophole that allowed Epstein to avoid public monitoring after his 2008 conviction. With friends like former Governor Bill Richardson, proximity to the elite Santa Fe Institute, and state trust land leases that expanded his buffer of privacy, Epstein found in New Mexico a jurisdiction uniquely suited to let him operate unchecked.

Despite credible victim accounts placing abuse at the ranch, New Mexico authorities never conducted a serious investigation, choosing instead to hand the matter over to federal prosecutors. This “punting” avoided the political fallout that might have come from probing Epstein’s local connections and land deals, but it also ensured that years of potential evidence went uncollected. By the time the federal case took center stage in 2019, Zorro Ranch was little more than a missed opportunity for justice—proof that in New Mexico, as elsewhere, the powerful can secure safe harbor when the right people look the other way.


to contact  me:

[email protected]

Rinaldo Rizzo, the Dubins’ former house manager, delivered a harrowing deposition recounting one of the most disturbing moments later revealed in court documents. He described finding a distraught 15-year-old Swedish girl in the Dubins’ kitchen—visibly shaking, silent, and terrified. Through tears, Rizzo recalled how she whispered that she’d been held against her will on Epstein’s private island, where Ghislaine Maxwell and Sarah Kellen had demanded sex, taken her passport and phone, and threatened her into silence. The girl seemed to have been trafficked, stripped of autonomy, and dropped into the Dubin home, stripped of any ability to call for help.


Rizzo further testified that Maxwell and Epstein were both involved in the girl’s situation, and that after the conversation at the Dubin residence, she was soon sent back to Sweden. The Dubins have publicly denied the account, calling it false and defamatory. Nonetheless, Rizzo’s sworn statement, combined with his emotional delivery in court, has been widely cited as one of the most disturbing firsthand accounts to emerge from the Epstein–Maxwell legal proceedings, placing the Dubin household in direct proximity to an alleged trafficking victim.


to contact me:

[email protected]



Source:

Butler for wealthy NYC couple says he met Swedish girl, 15, who was Jeffrey Epstein's 'sex slave' | Daily Mail Online

Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) are set to co-host a bipartisan press conference at the U.S. Capitol on September 3, 2025, where survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse will speak—some for the first time—about their experiences. The event is part of a broader push to advance the Epstein Files Transparency Act and a discharge petition aimed at forcing Attorney General Pam Bondi to release Epstein-related legal documents in a fully searchable, downloadable format. The lawmakers say the purpose is not only to give the survivors a national platform but also to press Congress to confront the lack of accountability and secrecy that has long surrounded the case.


The move comes amid growing bipartisan momentum, including support from a dozen Republicans, to bypass House leadership and force a vote on releasing the documents with victim-protective redactions. Opposition has been notable from figures like House Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Trump, who have dismissed or downplayed the effort—Johnson citing privacy concerns and Trump labeling it a “hoax.” Massie, Khanna, and their allies counter that transparency with safeguards is both achievable and necessary, framing the event as a test of whether Congress will side with survivors or perpetuate the culture of secrecy that shielded Epstein and his network for decades.




Also...


A federal judge has rejected the Justice Department’s bid to unseal grand jury documents from the Ghislaine Maxwell case, ruling that the material would add virtually nothing to what was already made public during her 2021 trial. The judge emphasized that the records in question did not include victim or witness testimony but rather law enforcement summaries that revealed no new names, crime scenes, or substantive investigative details. This effectively dismantled the DOJ’s framing of the request as a major transparency effort, revealing it instead as an overhyped move with negligible informational value.

The decision exposes the DOJ’s ongoing pattern of performative transparency in the Epstein matter—announcing high-profile actions that, when examined closely, produce no real accountability. By seeking the release of redundant documents under the guise of public disclosure, the Department appears more interested in optics than substance, further fueling skepticism over whether it is genuinely committed to uncovering the truth. Rather than clarifying the historical record, this latest maneuver reinforces the perception that the DOJ is managing the Epstein scandal as a political distraction rather than confronting its deep-rooted failures.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Trump Nemesis Is Bringing Epstein Victims to Capitol to Push for Files Release


Epstein files: A judge confirms the Trump team’s smokescreen | CNN Politics

In a scathing 31-page ruling, Judge Paul Engelmayer rebuffed the Trump administration’s push to unseal grand jury transcripts in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s key enablers. He asserted that the DOJ’s argument—that the transcripts would shed “meaningful new information” about Epstein’s or Maxwell’s crimes—was "demonstrably false" and that anyone expecting revelatory disclosures would be left feeling “disappointed and misled.” The judge bluntly concluded there is "no ‘there’ there," noting the materials added nothing substantive beyond what was disclosed during Maxwell’s 2021 trial and civil proceedings.

Moreover, Engelmayer criticized the DOJ’s motion not merely for its emptiness but also for its apparent tactical intent, describing it as a "diversion" rather than a genuine transparency effort. He emphasized that releasing these transcripts could do real harm to the foundational secrecy of grand jury proceedings, which protect both the integrity of investigations and the reputations of uncharged individuals. With no victim testimony included—only summaries from two law enforcement officers—the request was deemed not only unnecessary but dangerous in precedent.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Manhattan judge denies Trump admin bid to unseal Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury transcripts

Joe Rogan has spoken extensively about Jeffrey Epstein across various episodes of his podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience. Rogan has often expressed skepticism and outrage over the circumstances surrounding Epstein's wealth, his crimes, and his mysterious death. He frequently discusses the alleged connections between Epstein and powerful figures in politics, business, and entertainment, questioning how Epstein managed to escape scrutiny for so long. Rogan has described Epstein as emblematic of a deeply corrupt system, suggesting that his private island, "Lolita Island," and the activities there reflect a broader web of influence and exploitation. He has also raised doubts about the official narrative of Epstein's death, often referencing conspiracy theories that allege foul play, including claims that Epstein was murdered to prevent him from revealing information about high-profile individuals.


Rogan's commentary often ventures into the implications of Epstein's connections and their impact on public trust in institutions. He has discussed Epstein's ties to figures such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Prince Andrew, highlighting the lack of accountability for those who may have been complicit or associated with Epstein's actions. Rogan has criticized mainstream media for not investigating these connections more thoroughly, framing the Epstein case as indicative of systemic corruption and elite impunity. Overall, Rogan's discussions on Epstein emphasize the bizarre and unsettling nature of the case, reflecting broader concerns about secrecy and unchecked power among the world's elite.


to contact me:

[email protected]

The Prince Andrew interview on BBC Newsnight came about after Buckingham Palace sought to clear his name amid growing scrutiny over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. The idea was first pitched when Prince Andrew’s then-private secretary, Amanda Thirsk, was in discussions with BBC journalist Emily Maitlis and Newsnight editor Esme Wren about a possible interview. Initially, the palace wanted to use the interview to refute allegations that Prince Andrew had sexually abused Virginia Giuffre, who alleged she was trafficked to him by Epstein when she was 17. Thirsk and Andrew saw it as an opportunity to publicly address the controversy, believing it would help him regain credibility. The interview was arranged through direct negotiations between Thirsk and the Newsnight team, with Prince Andrew ultimately agreeing to the sit-down, which was filmed inside Buckingham Palace in November 2019.

However, the interview turned into a public relations disaster for Prince Andrew. Instead of clearing his name, his lack of remorse, bizarre explanations, and contradictions only fueled greater criticism. He infamously claimed he could not have been with Giuffre on the alleged night because he was at Pizza Express in Woking and insisted he could not sweat due to a medical condition. The broadcast led to intense backlash, forcing Andrew to step back from royal duties days later. BBC journalist Sam McAlister, who negotiated the interview, later revealed that Andrew and his team failed to anticipate how damning his answers would sound, leading to what is now regarded as one of the most disastrous royal interviews in history.

to contact me:

[email protected]

Jes Staley and his relatioship with Jeffrey Epstein was well known to everyone by the time he was hired by Barclays, yet it was not an issue when they decided to bring him on board. After he was hired, and the scrutiny began over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, Barclays was forced to initiate an internal investigation.

Upon completion of this investigation, the board and the company backed Jes Staley, even though they were aware of the disturbing messages that Staley was trading back and forth with Jeffrey Epstein.

In this episode, we take a look at how Barclays protected Staley from the storm and how their motivations for doing so, seem to be driven by nothing other than the bottom line.



to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Jeffrey Epstein’s long shadow falls on JPMorgan and Barclays once more | Financial Times (ft.com)

When Scotland Yard announced it was closing its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein in 2021, it sparked widespread criticism and renewed allegations of institutional cowardice. The Metropolitan Police had previously reviewed several allegations involving Epstein and his associates—including claims made by Virginia Giuffre that she was trafficked to Prince Andrew in London—but ultimately concluded there was “no further action” to be taken. Despite international pressure and mounting evidence, the decision signaled that UK authorities were unwilling to pursue meaningful accountability, especially when it involved proximity to the royal family. Critics saw the move as a transparent effort to shield powerful figures from exposure rather than a genuine conclusion based on lack of evidence.

The announcement reinforced a pattern familiar to Epstein’s victims: doors closing, institutions retreating, and justice slipping further out of reach. Scotland Yard’s explanation leaned heavily on jurisdictional limitations and a vague assertion that the case had already been “reviewed twice,” but it did little to explain why the London portion of Giuffre’s allegations—where she claimed she was trafficked and abused at Ghislaine Maxwell’s residence—wasn’t pursued with greater urgency. For many, the decision served as yet another reminder that Epstein’s network didn’t just corrupt individuals—it hollowed out the very systems that were supposed to stand against him.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11138849/Met-Police-drop-investigation-disgraced-Jeffrey-Epstein-absence-information.html

Prince Andrew was widely regarded as one of Jeffrey Epstein’s most prized connections—a walking symbol of power, prestige, and access to the British monarchy. Epstein’s entire operation revolved around influence, and having a member of the royal family in his inner circle lent him instant credibility in elite circles. Andrew’s presence at Epstein’s residences in New York, Palm Beach, and the Caribbean, along with their public stroll in Central Park, sent a message to the world: if Epstein could keep a prince close, he couldn’t possibly be dangerous—or so many wanted to believe. That royal association helped Epstein further integrate into high society, recruit new victims under the guise of legitimacy, and deflect scrutiny from authorities and journalists alike.

For Epstein, Prince Andrew was more than a social trophy—he was living, breathing protection. That relationship served as both a status symbol and a buffer, shielding Epstein from the kind of isolation that might have followed his 2008 conviction. Andrew, in return, enjoyed the benefits of Epstein’s lavish lifestyle and the company of Ghislaine Maxwell, with whom he shared a long, murky friendship. Their ties were so close that Maxwell was even a guest at royal events, including Princess Beatrice’s birthday party. By keeping Andrew close, Epstein insulated himself with royal proximity, creating an illusion of untouchability that proved devastatingly effective—for a time.


to contact me:


[email protected]


source:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10683877/Prince-Andrew-gave-Ghislaine-Maxwell-veneer-respectability-elite-social-circles.html

Glenn Dubin is an American billionaire financier and investor. His relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender, has attracted significant attention and scrutiny.
Dubin's connection with Epstein primarily revolved around philanthropic and social circles. Dubin and his former wife, Eva Andersson-Dubin, had a personal and professional relationship with Epstein for several years.

They reportedly met Epstein in the early 2000s through a mutual friend, and Dubin invested money with Epstein's hedge fund.Their friendship became more prominent as Dubin and his wife became involved in Epstein's charitable foundation, the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation, and supported various causes together.

The Dubins' relationship with Epstein came under intense scrutiny following Epstein's arrest in 2019 on federal charges of sex trafficking of minors. Epstein died in jail by apparent suicide a month later. During the subsequent investigations and legal proceedings, Glenn Dubin was mentioned in court documents related to Epstein, with allegations made by one of Epstein's accusers, Virginia Giuffre, who claimed that she was forced into a sexual encounter with Dubin, which he denied.

Meanwhile, Vivek Ramaswamy, the man who claims he will out those who were involved with Jeffrey Epstein if he becomes President is also taking 100K from Glenn Dubin, a man who has been credibilty accused in not only the enabling of Jeffrey Epstein, but also taking part in the abuse himself.



to contact me:


[email protected]




source:

Friends of Jeffrey Epstein have given more than $100,000 to Vivek Ramaswamy's 2024 run even as he demands full transparency of disgraced financier's clients | Daily Mail Online