Doug Band And His Epstein Related Congressional Transcript (Part 6) (7/23/26)

Tyler Robinson's Motion to Halt Further Testing of Bullet Fragment (Part 1) (7/23/26)

Tyler Robinson’s defense asked Judge Tony Graf to immediately prohibit prosecutors and investigators from conducting any additional testing on a bullet-jacket fragment recovered during Charlie Kirk’s autopsy until the court resolves the dispute. The defense argued that further forensic work could permanently alter, consume, or destroy the fragment, preventing its experts from independently evaluating its condition and evidentiary value. Robinson’s attorneys requested that a defense firearms expert first be allowed to examine and photograph the fragment. As alternatives, they asked that their expert be permitted to observe any additional testing or that the entire process be video-recorded so the defense can later scrutinize exactly what was done. The motion was filed after an ATF examination was unable to conclusively identify the damaged bullet fragment as having been fired from the rifle attributed to Robinson. The result was inconclusive rather than an exclusion, meaning the fragment did not contain enough usable markings to either match it to or rule it out as having come from the rifle. With the FBI reportedly planning additional comparative and lead analysis, the defense maintained that basic fairness and Robinson’s right to challenge the prosecution’s evidence required preserving the fragment before potentially destructive testing occurred. The motion does not ask the judge to declare the evidence exculpatory; it seeks to ensure that the defense has a meaningful opportunity to inspect and document the evidence before its original condition is changed forever. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: tyler-robinson-ballistics-motion.pdf [https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2026/04/tyler-robinson-ballistics-motion.pdf]

Doug Band And His Epstein Related Congressional Transcript (Part 6) (7/23/26)

Doug Band told the House Oversight Committee that his personal contact with Jeffrey Epstein was limited, infrequent and largely incidental to his work as Bill Clinton’s longtime aide. He said he barely knew Epstein, did not recall receiving gifts from him and had no knowledge of Epstein’s abuse or other criminal conduct while they were acquainted. Band nevertheless described Epstein and Clinton as appearing to be friends, pointing to the time they spent together, Epstein’s aircraft and his potential value as a supporter of Clinton’s post-presidential work. He acknowledged accompanying Clinton on trips aboard Epstein’s plane and visiting Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, but said he did not remember witnessing private conversations between the two men or seeing anything improper. Band described a more substantial relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell, admitting that they developed a friendship through Clinton’s orbit while firmly denying that it was ever romantic or physical. He said he began hearing troubling reports about Maxwell around 2011 and responded by removing her from Clinton’s contact lists and attempting to cut her out of the former president’s world. Much of the questioning focused on emails suggesting social familiarity, dinners, travel arrangements, birthday plans and flirtatious language, but Band repeatedly said he could not remember the communications or the events being discussed. His testimony therefore presented Epstein as a peripheral acquaintance and Maxwell as a former friend, while leaving lawmakers with numerous instances in which documentary records appeared more detailed than Band’s recollection. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Band-Final-Transcript-7.16.26.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Band-Final-Transcript-7.16.26.pdf]

Doug Band And His Epstein Related Congressional Transcript (Part 5) (7/23/26)

Doug Band told the House Oversight Committee that his personal contact with Jeffrey Epstein was limited, infrequent and largely incidental to his work as Bill Clinton’s longtime aide. He said he barely knew Epstein, did not recall receiving gifts from him and had no knowledge of Epstein’s abuse or other criminal conduct while they were acquainted. Band nevertheless described Epstein and Clinton as appearing to be friends, pointing to the time they spent together, Epstein’s aircraft and his potential value as a supporter of Clinton’s post-presidential work. He acknowledged accompanying Clinton on trips aboard Epstein’s plane and visiting Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, but said he did not remember witnessing private conversations between the two men or seeing anything improper. Band described a more substantial relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell, admitting that they developed a friendship through Clinton’s orbit while firmly denying that it was ever romantic or physical. He said he began hearing troubling reports about Maxwell around 2011 and responded by removing her from Clinton’s contact lists and attempting to cut her out of the former president’s world. Much of the questioning focused on emails suggesting social familiarity, dinners, travel arrangements, birthday plans and flirtatious language, but Band repeatedly said he could not remember the communications or the events being discussed. His testimony therefore presented Epstein as a peripheral acquaintance and Maxwell as a former friend, while leaving lawmakers with numerous instances in which documentary records appeared more detailed than Band’s recollection. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Band-Final-Transcript-7.16.26.pdf [https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Band-Final-Transcript-7.16.26.pdf]

Former New Mexico Attorney General Alleges DOJ Stonewalled Epstein Probe (7/23/26)

Former New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas has offered to assist the state’s renewed investigations into Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, alleging that federal authorities effectively shut his office out of the case after he began investigating in 2019. Balderas said his team interviewed one survivor and was developing a potential first-degree criminal sexual penetration charge against Epstein when federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York intervened. Although federal officials indicated they would share evidence with New Mexico once their prosecution concluded, Balderas says the promised records never arrived and repeated requests from his office were ignored. Balderas has now contacted current Attorney General Raul Torrez and the chairwoman of New Mexico’s Epstein Truth Commission, offering his records and cooperation as they investigate what occurred at the ranch and how authorities handled the allegations. Torrez, who has reopened the state investigation, said Balderas’ account confirms that the Justice Department repeatedly failed to honor its commitments to share information. He has threatened legal action unless the DOJ turns over specific unredacted records, arguing that New Mexico needs the evidence to protect survivors, determine whether state laws were violated and hold anyone responsible accountable. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Jes Staley Is Set To Face Congress Today Over His Epstein Ties (7/23/26)

Jes Staley’s appearance before Congress centers on the collapse of his long-running effort to portray his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein as distant, professional and misunderstood. The record suggests something far closer: years of communication, visits, continued contact after Epstein’s 2008 conviction and descriptions of the relationship that went well beyond ordinary banker-client business. Staley has repeatedly leaned on selective memory and claims of ignorance, but those defenses are difficult to reconcile with his experience as one of the world’s most sophisticated financial executives. Regulators in Britain already concluded that he misleadingly characterized the relationship, and the documentary evidence has made his attempts to minimize it increasingly untenable. Congress now has an obligation to confront Staley with the emails, travel records, regulatory findings and contradictions he has spent years trying to explain away. His loss of status and career should not be confused with the suffering endured by Epstein’s victims, and he should not be allowed to recast himself as another casualty of Epstein’s deception. The central question is not whether Staley can survive another hearing with his reputation partially intact, but whether his narrative can survive direct comparison with the facts. For once, wealth, prestige and selective memory should not be enough to shield a powerful man from accountability. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com