Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
For those of you who couldn't get enough of the
Prince Andrew interview with BBC, well you're in luck. They're
making a movie about the interview, and according to this
report from Deadline, they want Hugh Grant to play Prince Andrew.
So let's dive into this article from Deadline and let's
see what's up. Headline Prince Andrews bombshell BBC interview to
become a hot movie. Hugh Grant rumored to be on
the wish list to portray the disgraced royal in Scoop.
So the name of this movie is going to be
Scoop and they want Hugh Grant to play Prince Andrew's
bitch ass. I think that would be a good job,
actually a good casting. Hugh Grant, very good actor, and
I think you'd be able to hammer it home. The
author of this article is Boz Bombing Boy. The story
of how the BBA obtained the bombshell interview with Prince
Andrew about his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein
is to become a film called Scoop and Hugh Grant
is one of the unconfirmed names on the wish list
to portray the disgraced royal Deadline has learned, so anything
with Hugh Grant attached to it is gonna come with
a tremendous amount of publicity.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: So when you get a lead character such as that,
you're doing yourself a favor from the beginning, and then
you add to it the solicious nature of all of this,
and you have yourselves a hit on your hands. All
you have to do is have a half competent script
and people are gonna flock to see this movie. I
know I'll be going to see it the day it
comes out. Acclaimed your Honor. Screenwriter Peter Moffatt is writing
the Scoop screenplay for the Lighthouse Film and TV production Company,
which was launched two years ago by Hillary Salmon, Radford
Neville and Nick Bess along with British indie Voltage TV.
So this is an English production company and they're going
all in. They want to make a movie on how
this interview came about. And I'll tell you what, it's
interesting content. We heard from the producer who put it
all together and it was very, very telling and interesting
to get a look behind the curtain how something like
this comes about. Because remember, Prince Andrew wasn't forced into
that interview. He could have turned it down. He could
have said, no, thanks, want nothing to do with it.
I'll speak to the authorities and that's it. But he
didn't do that, right, So you got to tip your
cap to BBC and to mate List and the rest
of the crew for securing the interview in the first place.
Now to get the inside story with sort of like
a biopic almost, I am in one hundred percent.
Speaker 2: I love movies like this, movies.
Speaker 1: Like The Big Short, you know where they go and
replay the scene for you. I love that kind of stuff,
especially when the actual content, the original story, is compelling.
The news is likely to be greeted with little amusement
from Andrew's mother, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth IID and other
members of the royal family. Buckingham Palace had hoped that
when it came to the errant royal the less seen
and heard the better. Well, again, they have no one
to blame but themselves. They could force exile on this guy,
but they haven't done it. Right now, we know Charles
and William have had a few things to say, But
the real issue at hand here is the Queen is
blocking everybody from making a move on Andrew.
Speaker 2: He's her favorite.
Speaker 1: She doesn't want to see anything else happen to him,
so she's putting the kabash on things. But the more
you keep him in the public eye, the more he's
out there, people are gonna want to dissect what happened,
and people are gonna want to know more information. And
that's why this movie such as this is going to
be a blockbuster, because people want more information. The car
crash interview had such an impact that the Duke of
York was banished from royal duties. He was notably an
absentia during the Queen's Platinum jew Belief festivities last month.
Well remember he had COVID, right, Or that's what he said.
With COVID being so transmittable, don't you think some other
people that were part of his staff or he was around,
they would have came down with it as well. Or
was him getting COVID just a bit of a crafted
storyline so he could save some face. Moffitt and Salmon
both confirmed the news today, telling Deadline that production will
be set up quickly. They intend for shooting to begin
in November. A director has not yet been assigned, nor
has cast him begun, although pitches have been made to
selected agents. The reaction is always the same, Oh wow.
Salmon said, if people want to be involved in a
production like this, they understand this is going to be
a big hit. People are gonna want to see this,
and not just in the United States, not just in England, everywhere.
So if you can get attached to something like this
as an actor, one hundred percent, it's something you want
to be involved with. When pushed on casting, Salmon said,
we have, of course thoughts, but stressed no one is
attached and she wouldn't comment on reports that Grant is
in the mix. Moffatt explained that Scoop is about how
the BBC Newsnight team got the scoop, then the actual
filming of it, adding the other thing is why did
he agree to do it? And I think that's one
of the most pressing questions. Right, Prince Andrew should have
never agreed to that interview, at least from his perspective, right,
it was a bad idea and if he had Brettler
as his counselor at that point, he would have never
been involved with that interview, And if Prince Andrew was smart,
he would have put all the blame on Epstein. Oh,
I had no idea. I didn't know she was underage,
I was blackmailed, whatever. But he couldn't even come up
with something like that. How was it that he decided
it was a good idea to do a great, big,
long interview with Emily Matitless on the BBC. Moffatt asked
incredulously as he reflected on the Duke's arrogance, ignorance and
his charm, which he said quite often covers up for
the bad stuff. That's what I think. And yeah, look,
when you have a scumbag behind closed doors, a lot
of times in public they have a different face on,
but when that door closes, that face comes off and
the serpent shows itself. Scoop will be based on Scoops
behind the Scenes of the BBC's Most Shocking Interviews by
Sam McAllister, a former Newsnight producer, which Samon said she
optioned almost immediately. So that's the producer Sam McAllister that
we had heard from previously about how this came about
and about how she was able to secure this interview.
With Prince Andrew and now they're going to put it
into a movie form. And let me tell you what
I am here for it, folks, I am excited about
this one, packed with juicy, jaw dropping detail. McAllister accounts
how she matelist as Me Wren, former Newsnight Editor Now
with Channel four, and Stuart McLain, then deputy editor at
Newsnight Now It's editor, secured the interview with the Duke
of York, which broadcast in November of twenty nineteen, two
months after Epstein was found dead in his jail cell.
And I remember when the interview was happening. It was
just mind blowing that this guy was such a boob.
Speaker 2: I couldn't believe it.
Speaker 1: Honestly, if I had any reservations up to that point,
they were all stuffed after I heard him bumble his
way through that interview. Salmon and Moffatt have collaborated previously
on Undercover Silk, Criminal Justice, and on current AMC show
sixty first Street, which stars Courtney b vance Onnajan u
Ellis and Toastin Cole. A second season has been completed.
I am not familiar with any of those shows, but
I'm sure they're pretty decent. I know that that's sixty
first Street. A lot of people are talking about it,
so I hope that the movie will be good too.
But with the content that you have here, you'd have
to really screw it up big time for it not
to be entertaining, right.
Speaker 2: Maitliss?
Speaker 1: Then Newsnight's lead presenter forensically examined the Duke's relationship with
Epstein and his paramore, Glene Maxwell. Paramore you mean co conspirator, general,
all around scusbag and fellow child abuser. That's what you meant, right,
who last year was convicted of child sex trafficking and
other offenses. During the interview, the Prince said that he
regretted continuing to associate with Epstein after the financier pedophile
pled guilty to soliciting underage sex in two thousand and eight. However,
the fact that he offered no apology to Epstein's survivors
caused uproar and global headlines Life in a bubble, Samon said,
And yeah, look, it was a big thing when it
was happening him not coming out and having any empathy
for these girls.
Speaker 2: It was a big tell.
Speaker 1: And if he really cared about what happened, and he
wanted to do the right thing. He would have stepped
up to the plate, wouldn'ty. He would have talked to
the police, the FBI, somebody. The story Moffitt wants to
tell is how Sam and those two extraordinary women Emily
and Esmy made the interview happen under real stress and pressure,
because once it was agreed, it happened in secret. Almost
nobody inside the BBC could know about it for fear
it would leak.
Speaker 2: He said.
Speaker 1: Think about the stress leading up to it, not wanting
it to leak, keeping it under wrap, and hoping beyond
hope nobody within your own company leaked it out, because
you know there's a bunch of royalists at the BBC.
He added, what Andrew was going to say was going
to be extremely relevant in court later, a real responsibility,
particularly to Epstein's survivors. It was our one shot at
looking at what Andrew had to say about Epstein. The
seriousness with which Emily, Esmey and Sam were taking it,
of course, was right, and they all deserve a big
pat on the back. This was a big deal interview
and one of the bigger ones in the case. There's
no doubt about that, And if we had a real
Justice Department and a real Bureau of Prisons and FBI
and the rest of it, Andrew would be in serious
jeopardy over this interview. Admitting that this sounds a little crass,
Moffett observed that behind the scenes activities involving the BBC
team and members of the Duke household is Private Secretary
Amanda Thirsk and his daughter Princess Beatrice, who who accompanied
her father to a meeting with the BBC, makes for
very thrilling drama.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Look, because they're gonna dramatize it. Obviously, we're gonna get
a look behind the scenes at what Prince Andrew and
his team were up to. We're gonna get a look
at his daughter and Amanda Thirsk, and at least get
a dramatized version of what his mind space was at
the time. And for me, that's very interesting when it
comes to a movie such as this. You have so
much good content here. You'd have to really be bad
at making a movie to not make this interesting and enthralling.
Salmon noted how sections of McAllister's book, which created a
stir when it was serialized in the Daily Mail and
published today July fourteenth, show how out of touch the
Duke was. All the opportunities that Emily gave him to
say the right things, to justify his French with Epstein,
to say how sorry he was were wasted opportunities on
the Duke's part. Well, that's because he really believes he
didn't do anything wrong. The hubris and the ego and
the narcissism. It won't let him have any sort of
self reflection and he truly believes he did nothing wrong. Meanwhile,
we all know that's not the case, and most of
us out here believe everything Virginia has to say about
this guy. Moffatt added that he has subsequently learned that
once the cameras had stopped rolling, Maitlis had repeated her
offer for him to go back in front of the cameras.
Newsnight couldn't have been fairer to him.
Speaker 2: He said.
Speaker 1: The Duke was oblivious to how his performance had gone
down in the room. He thought it had gone extremely well,
said Salmon. The trouble with the Duke is that everybody
laughs at his jokes all of the time, added Moffatt,
who went on to say I don't think anybody ever
interrupts him when he's talking, and I think both of
those things give you a level of entitlement. He always
feels in control of the time and space around him. Well,
that goes back to his childhood and his rearing and
his upbringing. But it certainly tracks with everything else we know.
The way he treated the higher help, the way he
yelled at people, the way he lorded over people, certainly
falls into line with the persona that we have seen
from Andrew.
Speaker 2: Throughout the past.
Speaker 1: McAllister cites in our book such an example, when the
interview is being set up in a stateroom in Buckingham Palace,
the Duke gave advice to the sound engineers about how
they should wire everything up. He's a sixty year old
guy who's just used to all that stuff, said Moffatt.
Imagine being a sound guy and having this knucklehead tell
you how to put the mics on correctly. Here's an idea,
Prince Andrew. Stick to what you know. That's grifting and
being an asshole. Chunks of the Newsnight interview will be
recreated for Scoop, but no real BBC footage will be used.
Moffittt said that McAllister has been a huge help. But
asked if cordiers at Buckingham Palace had participated in Moffatt's research,
Salmon responded carefully, We've reached out to a wide variety
of people who are involved behind the scenes of the
interview and we're still in that process. Sam McAllister's book
Scoops is published by One World Productions. McAllister is represented
by Jen Thomas at United Agents, who negotiated the film rights. Well,
another bit of media about Epstein, Maxwell or Andrew is
in the works, folks, And I'll tell you what. This
will be a good one for those of you who
were interested in the interview and what went on behind
the scenes. This is going to be your chance to
get a good hard look, all right, folks. That's gonna
do it for this episode. If you'd like to contact me,
you can do that at Bobby Capuci at ProtonMail dot com.
That's bo b b Y c apu Cci at ProtonMail
dot com. You can also find me on Twitter at
Bobby Underscore cap Ucci. The link that we discussed can
be found in the description box. What's up everyone, and
welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Sam McAllister, the producer
who was responsible for wrangling up the Prince Andrew interview,
is now facing backlash from her former colleagues at the BBC,
as unnamed sources, unnamed people working at the BBC have
come out and said that they're not too happy that
she is cashing in here.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: The question is why is BBC so worried about what
Sam McAllister is doing? Did she or did she not
wrangle this interview? And if she did, well, stop with
the sour grapes. It's also been reported that there are
some in the royal family who aren't too happy as well.
My response to that is who cares at this point?
Who really cares what those people think? What are you
gonna lose access to being able to visit Prince Andrew?
Speaker 2: Ah shucks.
Speaker 1: So today we have an article from the Telegraph and
the author of this article is Victorio Wood headline BBC
anger as ex producer steals glory for Emily maitlist Prince
Andrew interview. Sam McAllister catches in on scoop with her book,
which is now being turned into a film, also ruffling
some feathers in the royal family. Wouldn't it be scales
in the royal family. Aren't they lizard people? So how
would they have feathers? Isn't that what some of the
conspiracy theorists talk about. They're lizard people, so I don't
understand the feather comment here. All right, all kidding aside,
let's dive in. It was the scoop of the decade,
an extraordinary encounter that brought an abrupt end to the
Duke of York's royal career. But the mastermind behind the
Duke's now infamous Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis is facing
a backlash at the BBC, where senior figures are frustrated
that she appears claiming all the glory while at the
same time exploiting the process for financial gain. What what
is BBC doing? Doesn't BBC exploit everything for financial gain,
Every single heartbreaking story there is, they have to run
it on the front page. Any sort of divisive bullshit,
they have to run it on the front page. But
now that Sam McCallister is trying to make a couple
of bucks on the back of her work. By the way,
let's not act like she's stealing somebody else's glory here,
she's the one who wrangled up these interviews. Yes or no,
nobody's come out and said that she's not. So what's
the sour grapes about?
Speaker 2: Are you mad?
Speaker 1: Because she he's getting some glory here and the unnamed
figures at BBC, Well, go on the record and say it.
I can't stand all of these anonymous sources. Just go
on the record and stop being a chunk. Sam McAllister,
the former BBC producer who helped negotiate the November twenty
nineteen interview, wrote a book detailing her version of events,
which was recently snapped up by a film production company,
And why wouldn't it be? There's obviously a lot of
interest in the story. Still, there's obviously a lot of
interest in Ms McAllister's version of the story, So why
wouldn't a company swoop in and buy the rights? If
I was producing films, I'd want as much content like
this as I possibly could get. The book was serialized
in a national newspaper, and McAllister has done a myriad
of interviews in which she details every meeting, conversation and
negotiation that preceded the interview. BBC sources are quietly seething
at what they perceived to be McAllister taking the lion's
share of credit when the success of the interview was
considered very much a team effort. So again, whoever over
at the BBC, they have to have a little bit
of the credit, right. They can't go through their life
knowing somebody else who did a lot of work gets
the credit. So the big shots, the unnamed sources, the
seething BBC sources, instead talk to the Telegraph. It's typical
for media organizations or corporations to do stuff exactly like that.
They'll cherry pick their favored members of the media that
write good, wholesome stories about them even when they shouldn't,
and then they'll have that person in the media or
that outlet run a puff piece on them. And that's
basically what's going on here BBC. Some jerk off at BBC,
some unnamed source reached out to the Telegraph, a paper
that's been relatively friendly to Glenn Maxwell, by the way,
and now they're running this story talking about how Sam
McAllister shouldn't be trying to steal all the glory, trying
to put her in a light like she's doing something
wrong by trying to cash in and make a few bugs.
None dispute that the former producer played a critical role
in securing the award winning scoop, but many of her colleagues,
including Matelists, who won Interview of the Year for the
program at the British Journalism Awards in twenty twenty, are
reduced to peripheral figures in various publicity interviews and webinars. Well,
you know why, because everybody's the hero in their own story, folks.
I know that's breaking news, but I mean, come on,
what is she supposed to say she's trying to sell
a book. I was the central figure and get this interview,
and no one's disputing that she played a critical role
in securing them. So why even be childish and run
to your friends over at the Telegraph and winge and cry.
There is irritation and upset that the interview and events
leading up to it have been monetized. One of the
main reasons the Duke agreed to go on Newsnight was
because of the program's gravitas and reputation for conducting in depth,
hard hitting interviews. Sources contend. Sources contend their sources over
at the Telegraph I'm guessing are Prince Andrew himself and
his circle. They have run many, many favorable pieces in
the Telegram for I mean the Telegraph, for Prince Andrew
throughout this whole entire thing, and even for Glenne Maxwell.
So the Telegraph is one of those outlets that I
look at kind of like here in America, the same
way I look at something like, you know, guard garbage ass.
Washington Post another one of these outlets that really has
no desire to truly educate. They only want to divide.
And furthermore, who cares what Prince Andrew understood? Oh well,
he chose to go with these guys because they wouldn't
spill the beans on him. Afterwards, Well, guess what it's
about time someone spilled the beans on his bitch ass.
Speaker 2: In this case, it has been.
Speaker 1: Blown wide open with every cough and spit repeated time
and time again. A BBC insider said there is internal
disappointment because it is not the done thing to expose
how you go about these journalistic practices, and also because
a lot of people who did a considerable amount of
work on this show are being written out of the
process in pursuit of one person's career. Former colleagues find
that disappointing. Here's an idea, write your own book. And furthermore,
these journalistic practices, what is this a magician shop? What
do you phil fucking Dunfey over here? Oh, I can't
tell you the secrets of my magic trick. Take it easy, okay.
Nobody cares about your journalistic internal practices. We all know
your scumbags, we all know how you roll, and we
all know that you were running cover for Epstein and
Maxwell and probably Jimmy Saville as well, at both BBC
and Buckingham Palace. There is also a frustration that McAllister's
version of events is being accepted as fact.
Speaker 2: Oh here we go.
Speaker 1: So the Palace says jump, and the telegraph says, well,
how high? And it goes over and over and over again.
You know, it's pretty funny when you see outlets, especially
journalistic outlets like this, try and whitewash bullshit. You mean
to tell me that the BBC can't write their own
version of events. If you take dispute with what Sam
McAllister has to say, write your own book. Nobody's stopping you.
One royal source echoed the Queen on the subject, Riley,
noting that recollections may vary. There are specific critical details
which several insiders can test. Oh, I'm sure there are.
And you notice they say insiders sources, they never give
you a name. So I'm gonna go with maybe the
Telegraph's just running bullshit here? How about that?
Speaker 2: I don't even know if I believe them?
Speaker 1: Who are their sources? I have a big problem with
the whole unnamed sources thing. Now, when you're talking about
unnamed sources for national security reasons, that's one thing.
Speaker 2: But what are you so worried about going on the
record for here?
Speaker 1: If you work at BBC, if you're pissed off at
Sam McAllister, why try and take shots at her underhanded,
coward like in the media instead of just calling her
up and addressing it directly. Another said they certainly do
not recognize everything that has been stated.
Speaker 2: Oh, I'm sure.
Speaker 1: So here's the thing, Samic mac allisters went on record
saying this with her name a book, doing a media tour,
and unnamed sources are saying some of it's not true.
So until you people go on record and you know,
put your name behind your bullshit, kind of hard to
believe what you have to say. McAllister claims the Duke
agreed to the interview after she taunted him about his
Randy Andy nickname. Multiple sources can test McAllister's claim that
Donald McCabe, the Queen's Communication secretary, only fleetingly popped into
the interview room and left before the camera started rolling,
a move she brands a missed opportunity. In fact, they
say mister McCabe was in the room throughout, diligently making notes.
Well if that's the case, isn't that even worse? How
don't you stop the interview? You just let it happen. So,
mister McCabe, even if he was there is an absolute
toolbag way to go. Mister McCabe, you should be fired
right along with Amanda Thirsk. For the Duke, the fallout
from the interview was catastrophic. It came after Virginia Roberts,
who was widely trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender,
claimed she was flown to London and forced to have
sex with him when she was seventeen. Quiz by matlists,
the Duke failed to express any regret over his friendship
with Epstein. Or empathy for his victims, not victims survivors.
What I mean, it's the telegraph, okay, Like did the
whole entire newsroom fallen at their head? Why are you
still calling people victims survivors? Is your first day or
is it an underhanded uh, you know, slap towards the survivors.
There's no reason to still be calling these ladies victims
after all of these years, and especially after they themselves
have come out and said that they'd prefer not to
be called that. He insisted he had no recollection of
meeting Miss Roberts and said he was at Pizza Express
and woking on the night in question, also revealing that
he did not sweat to u to a peculiar medical condition.
I mean, imagine coming out and saying that in an interview. Well,
I couldn't have done what you said I did because
I can't sweat. Oh I'm also allergic to horses, but
I just rode one over here. It's the kind of bullshit,
ludicrous nonsense. This guy has been pitching like he was
Max Scherzer for the last ten years. Within days, he
had been effectively sacked as a working member of the
royal family, Several months later, he was served with court
papers in a civil sex abuse case that ended with
him paying Miss Roberts around twelve million pounds without admitting liability.
Yep again, because everybody who has never done anything like
this is just gonna pay all this money out that
they don't even have.
Speaker 2: Bro is broke.
Speaker 1: If it wasn't for his mom and there drifting, what
would he be doing for a living? What exactly is
his skill set? Despite the dramatic consequences, the monetization of
the interview was not expected, and many at the Palace
consider it unedifying. Oh okay, that's nice. So in other words,
we don't want you to make a book, so we're
gonna come out and say that it's all a cash grab.
They're so transparent at this point, they're so transparent, they're translucent.
How can anyone look at the royal family and not
just want to mock them and be sarcastic about the
stupidity that they're getting up to. A friend of the
Duke told the Telegraph, you notice how the Telegraph knows
a lot of Prince Andrew's friends, and how they're quick
to go and talk to the Telegraph. Oh I wonder
why the latest exploitation for financial gain of a book
and now a film of what was and remains a
very difficult time for the family is unwelcome, not least
as the account of events leading up to and around
the interview appear to have elements of dramatic license. So
this is really ironic, isn't it. They're out here talking
about how this is unwelcome. You know what else was unwelcome?
And I'm pretty sure I can speak for people when
I say this. The fact that Prince Andrew was palling
around Jeffrey Epstein, the fact that Prince Andrew was at
Jeffrey Epstein's house while someone was getting raped, the fact
that Prince Andrew allegedly was engaged in the abuse himself.
So you want to talk about unwelcome, all of that's
unwelcome too. Sorry that the royal family's being put on blast,
But guess what, it's not the year ten ninety nine anymore.
It's not the year fourteen hundred, and there's no tutors
coming to chop off anyone's head. So you're gonna have
to deal with the criticism like everybody else. Put on
your big boy pants, your big girl pants and get
to it. And if you don't want criticism like this,
here's an idea conduct yourselves correctly. Recent claims in the
media surrounding the alleged existence of a shocking photograph of
the Duke, said to have been captured by a photographer
working for the BBC on the day of the interview,
have also been dismissed as nonsense. No one involved is
said to have seen or heard of such a photograph.
Speaker 2: No one but the people. Huh.
Speaker 1: So again this this is a puff piece right here, folks,
I want you to understand what this article is. This
article is trying to run cover for the Royals, for
BBC and for Prince Andrew. That's exactly what it is.
And the Telegraph has been at it since the beginning.
In her book Scoops, McAllister repeats a celebratory tweet from
Asmi Wren, the Newsnight editor, who paid full credit to
her for securing the world exclusive. The producer writes, credit
is a tricky issue. Others had worked with me and
had borne the strains too. I wanted to make sure
everyone got mentioned every time. After all, there was enough
credit to go around for everyone. So why is everyone
crying now because Sam was smart enough to cash in
on it. I cannot stand sour grapes. And I really
don't like people who hate on other people for success.
That's the worst shit in the world. It's like everybody
with an opinion who has never done shit. Oh, I
can do this better, I can do that better, I
can make this better.
Speaker 2: Then do it?
Speaker 1: What do you say and around for go and do
it and shut your yap. A spokesperson for One World,
the publisher of scoops set, Sam's book speaks for itself
and she shares credit in it and in interviews. A
BBC spokesman declined to comment, noting that once staff have
left the BBC, they have left. Buckingham Palace declined to comment. Boy,
this sure sings to me like sour grapes, folks. And
if you do work as far as being a producer
a field journalist, you should get all the credit in
the world for that, because guess what you think, Sean
Hannity's bitch ass, Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, They're out on
the ground getting these stories. No, it's these producers that
are doing the real work. And then your favorite newsreaders
who are making as much as athletes, by the way,
just mimic and parrot what is put in front of them.
So yeah, Sam McAllister, other field producers, they should get
some credit. And if they want to make a book,
God bless and if the people at the BBC and
the Royal family don't like it, well you know what
they can do, right, they can all shut their yaps.
All right, everybody that's gonna do it for this episode.
I'll be back later on with a little bit more
and I hope that all of you have a fantastic Sunday.
If you'd like to contact me, you can do that
at Bobby Kapuchi at ProtonMail dot com. That's b O
B B y C A p u C c I
at ProtonMail dot com. If you like to find me
on Twitter, you can do that at Bobby Underscore C
A p u Cci. The link that we discussed can
be found in the description box.