Another Epstein Court Order, Another DOJ Compliance Failure (Part 2) (7/6/26)

Lesley Groff And The Transcript From Her Epstein Related Trip to Congress (Part8) (7/6/26)

Lesley Groff told the House Oversight Committee that she worked for Jeffrey Epstein from February 2001 until July 2019 as his secretary/administrative assistant, handling scheduling, calls, travel coordination, calendars, and staff logistics. Her central position was that Epstein kept her separated from his criminal life, that she never witnessed abuse, never had a victim disclose abuse to her, and did not knowingly help Epstein or Maxwell commit crimes. She described Epstein as a “master manipulator” who lied to her and kept his “legitimate” world apart from his abuse, while acknowledging that she scheduled massage appointments when Epstein provided names and numbers, sometimes circulated calendars that included those appointments early on, and understood the massages as routine at the time. She said she did not personally meet the massage providers, did not know they were minors or young women, and assumed they were masseuses, even though members pressed her on why an extremely wealthy man would use rotating names and phone numbers instead of a professional massage service. The questioning also focused heavily on Epstein’s network and whether Groff had knowledge of powerful men being provided access to girls or young women through Epstein or Maxwell. Groff repeatedly answered no when asked whether she had arranged massages for prominent figures, knew of sexual activity involving minors or young women, or knew of anyone who knowingly facilitated Epstein’s crimes. She acknowledged scheduling or connecting Epstein with high-profile contacts, including Prince Andrew, Ehud Barak, Larry Summers, George Mitchell, John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Bill Clinton-related circles, and Donald Trump phone calls, but denied arranging Trump travel during her employment and denied knowledge of Trump-related law enforcement communications. She also said she never suspected Epstein or Maxwell of working with any intelligence service. Overall, Groff’s testimony was defensive and narrow: she admitted to being part of the machinery that kept Epstein’s calendar and contacts moving, but insisted she never saw the criminal operation underneath it and never knowingly enabled it. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source:   Lesley-Groff-Transcript.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Lesley-Groff-Transcript.pdf]

Another Epstein Court Order, Another DOJ Compliance Failure (Part 2) (7/6/26)

The DOJ, under Todd Blanche and Donald Trump, is once again accused of treating an Epstein-related court order as optional, this time in connection with Judge Emmet Sullivan’s order in Katie Phang’s lawsuit seeking Epstein-related documents from the government. Sullivan made clear that DOJ needed to produce less-redacted material or justify the continued withholding, but instead of straightforward compliance, the department has leaned into delay, resistance, and procedural maneuvering. The central criticism is that this is not an isolated paperwork dispute, but another example of the DOJ’s long-running pattern in the Epstein matter: hiding behind redactions, process, victim-protection language, and vague claims of sensitivity while refusing to provide the public with the full accounting Congress, the courts, survivors, and citizens have demanded. The broader point is that the Epstein case has become a test of whether powerful institutions are actually bound by the law they enforce on everyone else. If a regular citizen ignored a court order, consequences would come quickly, but when DOJ slow-walks or resists disclosure, it is treated as a legal disagreement rather than defiance. The essay argues that Judge Sullivan, Congress, the courts, and the OIG must stop accepting excuses and start imposing real consequences, whether through contempt, sanctions, sworn explanations, redaction logs, subpoenas, or independent review. Until someone with authority finally steps up and forces compliance, the DOJ will continue to manage the Epstein narrative, protect institutional reputations, and deny survivors and the public the transparency they were promised. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Another Epstein Court Order, Another DOJ Compliance Failure (Part 1) (7/6/26)

The DOJ, under Todd Blanche and Donald Trump, is once again accused of treating an Epstein-related court order as optional, this time in connection with Judge Emmet Sullivan’s order in Katie Phang’s lawsuit seeking Epstein-related documents from the government. Sullivan made clear that DOJ needed to produce less-redacted material or justify the continued withholding, but instead of straightforward compliance, the department has leaned into delay, resistance, and procedural maneuvering. The central criticism is that this is not an isolated paperwork dispute, but another example of the DOJ’s long-running pattern in the Epstein matter: hiding behind redactions, process, victim-protection language, and vague claims of sensitivity while refusing to provide the public with the full accounting Congress, the courts, survivors, and citizens have demanded. The broader point is that the Epstein case has become a test of whether powerful institutions are actually bound by the law they enforce on everyone else. If a regular citizen ignored a court order, consequences would come quickly, but when DOJ slow-walks or resists disclosure, it is treated as a legal disagreement rather than defiance. The essay argues that Judge Sullivan, Congress, the courts, and the OIG must stop accepting excuses and start imposing real consequences, whether through contempt, sanctions, sworn explanations, redaction logs, subpoenas, or independent review. Until someone with authority finally steps up and forces compliance, the DOJ will continue to manage the Epstein narrative, protect institutional reputations, and deny survivors and the public the transparency they were promised. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Judge Warns Melania Trump’s Lawyers Over Sanctions Push Against Michael Wolff (7/6/26)

A Manhattan federal judge warned Melania Trump’s lawyers to be careful as they pursue sanctions against journalist and Trump biographer Michael Wolff, even after the court had already dismissed Wolff’s anti-SLAPP lawsuit against her. Wolff had filed the case after Melania Trump threatened a $1 billion defamation suit over comments he made linking her to Jeffrey Epstein, allegations her side has rejected. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil previously dismissed Wolff’s lawsuit as an improper attempt to head off a defamation case before it was filed, but when Trump’s lawyers said they still wanted sanctions against Wolff, the judge cautioned that sanctions require more than simply arguing that the lawsuit was weak or wrong. The hearing framed the fight as a continuing legal clash over press speech, defamation threats, and courtroom strategy. Melania Trump’s team argued that Wolff’s lawsuit was frivolous and deserved punishment, while Wolff’s side argued the sanctions push was another escalation meant to intimidate and drain him financially. Vyskocil appeared skeptical of turning the dismissed case into a sanctions battle, noting the high bar for punishment and warning Trump’s attorneys not to overreach. The result is that Melania Trump won the first round by getting Wolff’s case tossed, but the judge signaled that trying to keep the fight alive through sanctions may be a much harder sell. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Judge cautions Melania Trump against trying to sanction journalist Michael Wolff | Courthouse News Service [https://courthousenews.com/judge-cautions-melania-trump-against-trying-to-sanction-journalist-michael-wolff/]

Mega Edition: What Did Author Barry Levine Say About Maxwell And Epstein (7/6/26)

Barry Levine, the investigative journalist and author of The Spider: Inside the Criminal Web of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, has described Epstein and Maxwell not as two separate scandals, but as partners inside a long-running criminal ecosystem. Levine’s reporting frames Epstein as a wealthy predator who built a world of access, intimidation, money, sex trafficking, elite protection, and social leverage, while Maxwell served as one of the central figures who helped make that world function. In his telling, Maxwell was not merely Epstein’s girlfriend or social companion. She was the bridge into high society, the recruiter, the organizer, the legitimizer, and the woman who helped put young victims at ease before they were pulled deeper into Epstein’s orbit. His book is presented as an account of Epstein’s life, death, and “criminal web,” including Maxwell’s role inside that machinery. Levine has also emphasized that Maxwell’s importance came from her ability to give Epstein credibility. She came from money, media power, and elite circles, and that made Epstein look less like a suspicious outsider and more like someone who belonged around royalty, politicians, billionaires, scientists, and celebrities. In Levine’s broader framing, Epstein’s crimes were enabled by that access: the dinners, introductions, flights, friendships, donations, and silence that allowed him to keep operating even after allegations and investigations should have destroyed him. Maxwell, in that account, was not some passive woman standing beside a monster. She was part of the architecture of the operation — a facilitator whose social polish helped mask the abuse, whose loyalty protected Epstein for years, and whose conviction finally confirmed that the story was never just about Epstein alone. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com