📅 Dec 29, 2018

Re:

From: CARLUZ TOYLO

To: jeevacation@gmail.com

Ok Sir we'll check it Carluz N. Tovlo On Dec 29, 2018, at 08:51, J <jeevacation®gmail.com> wrote: i think the dining area air conditioner is not blowing cold please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may

Ok Sir we'll check it

Carluz N. Tovlo

On Dec 29, 2018, at 08:51, J <jeevacation®gmail.com> wrote:

i think the dining area air conditioner is not blowing cold

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

📅 Dec 29, 2018

(no subject)

From: Noam Chomsky

To: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of ha

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's

fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

📅 Dec 29, 2018

(no subject)

From: Noam Chomsky

To: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, it's true, in fact True. Any response is "mansplaining," another power play, reinforcing the charge. You've seen I'm sure what happened to Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn't even considered. It's like trying to discuss rationally with religious fanatics Noam

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, it's true, in fact True. Any response is "mansplaining," another power play, reinforcing the charge. You've seen I'm sure what happened to Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn't even considered. It's like trying to discuss rationally with religious fanatics

Noam

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Noam Chomsky

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons,many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which

were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffreys otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Noam Chomsky

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc. I have been exploring the AI world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :)/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media ap

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc.

I have been exploring the AI world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :)/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media approx transmitters. . It provided constraints and rules for some underlying interactions. It doesnt exist in a physical sense but either does conciousness. which it appears to me as an evolutionary advantage and provides the brain with rules memories. ( culture again ) . and constraints. . tribes when attacked , act like a self . . compete like selves. etc. The world we call physical . follows rules that we have created, most unknowingly. I assume language acts like an effective transmittier. . some language like adrenaline. some like dopamine. . do some extent the hormones of the culture. ?

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Noam Chomsky

cultures swept by craziness, isnt it the same for an individual.. the brain sends signals based on faulty sensors or information.. to see if the brain is functioning. there are word tests. memory tests. etc.. why isnt conciousness the property of those things. like culture is to fads etc.

cultures swept by craziness, isnt it the same for an individual.. the brain sends signals based on faulty sensors or information.. to see if the brain is functioning. there are word tests. memory tests. etc.. why isnt conciousness the property of those things. like culture is to fads etc.

📅 Dec 29, 2018

(no subject)

From: Noam Chomsky

To: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

From the point of view of a jihadi, Klan, evangelical Christian, my ultra-orthodox grandfather,.... it's the rest of the world that's crazy. I think we can do better than just to take the fall-back position that craziness is a value judgment, but not so easy. On consciousness, my suspicion is that we'll never do much better than Russell's picture: what we understand with highest confidence is our own immediate conscious experience. The rest of our intellectual efforts (science especially) are a

From the point of view of a jihadi, Klan, evangelical Christian, my ultra-orthodox grandfather,.... it's the rest of the world that's crazy. I think we can do better than just to take the fall-back position that craziness is a value judgment, but not so easy.

On consciousness, my suspicion is that we'll never do much better than Russell's picture: what we understand with highest confidence is our own immediate conscious experience. The rest of our intellectual efforts (science especially) are an attempt to make sense of that (and in the course of doing so, instructs us that our experience is a construct of our internal modes of cognition acting on an external world that we (naively?) assume to exist. And it also tells us, I think, that consciousness is a thin and superficial fringe of an internal mental life that is inaccessible to introspection.

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

Fwd:

From: jeevacation@gmail.com

To: Richard Kahn

call him ask him why he does not reespond Forwarded message From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com> Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:15 AM Subject: To: Kyle reavis answers? please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and

call him ask him why he does not reespond

Forwarded message
From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:15 AM
Subject: 
To: Kyle reavis

answers?

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: CARLUZ TOYLO

i think the dining area air conditioner is not blowing cold please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by retur

i think the dining area air conditioner is not blowing cold

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

Re:

From: jeevacation@gmail.com

To: Noam Chomsky

cultures swept by craziness, isnt it the same for an individual. .. the brain sends signals based on faulty sensors or information. . to see if the brain is functioning. there are word tests. memory tests. etc. . why isnt conciousness the property of those things. like culture is to fads etc. On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:09 AM Noam Chomsky > wrote: Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, i

cultures swept by craziness, isnt it the same for an individual. .. the brain sends signals based on faulty sensors or information. . to see if the brain is functioning. there are word tests. memory tests. etc. . why isnt conciousness the property of those things. like culture is to fads etc.

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:09 AM Noam Chomsky > wrote:

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, it's true, in fact True. Any response is "mansplaining," another power play, reinforcing the charge. You've seen I'm sure what happened to Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn't even considered. It's like trying to discuss rationally with religious fanatics.

Noam

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:41 AM J <jeevacation@gmail.cotn> wrote:

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc.

I have been exploring the AI world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :I/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media approx transmitters. . It provided constraints and rules for some underlying interactions. It doesnt exist in a physical sense but either does conciousness. which it appears to me as an evolutionary advantage and provides the brain with rules memories. ( culture again ) . and constraints. . tribes when attacked , act like a self . . compete like selves. etc. The world we call physical . follows rules that we have created, most unknowingly. I assume language acts like an effective transmittier. . some language like adrenaline. some like dopamine. . do some extent the hormones of the culture. ?

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM Noam Chomsky <> wrote:

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

EFTA01010029

On Sat, Dec 29,2018 at 8:33 AM J <jeevacation@gmaiLeom> wrote:

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorneys Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's

EFTA01010030

not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the govemment required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a govemment list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Govemment Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

EFTA01010031

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010032

📅 Dec 29, 2018

Re:

From: Noam Chomsky

To: jeevacation@gmail.com

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, it's true, in fact True. Any response is "mansplaining," another power play, reinforcing the charge. You've seen Fm sure what happened to Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn't even considered. It's like trying to discuss rationally with religious fanatics. Noam On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:41 AM J <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening. We're in one of those phases now. If there's a charge, it's true, in fact True. Any response is "mansplaining," another power play, reinforcing the charge. You've seen Fm sure what happened to Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn't even considered. It's like trying to discuss rationally with religious fanatics.

Noam

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:41 AM J <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc.

I have been exploring the Al world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :)/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media approx transmitters. . It provided constraints and rules for some underlying interactions. It doesnt exist in a physical sense but either does conciousness. which it appears to me as an evolutionary advantage and provides the brain with rules memories. ( culture again ) . and constraints. . tribes when attacked , act like a self . . compete like selves. etc. The world we call physical . follows rules that we have created, most unknowingly. I assume language acts like an effective transmittier. . some language like adrenaline. some like dopamine. . do some extent the hormones of the culture. ?

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM Noam Chomsky > wrote: It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:33 AM J <jeevacation(ii)gmail.com> wrote:

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

EFTA01010033

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

EFTA01010034

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand July's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

EFTA01010035

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of WE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010036

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Kathy Ruemmler

catch up today? ive had your cold please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to j

catch up today? ive had your cold

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010037

📅 Dec 29, 2018 REDACTED

(no subject)

From: Noam Chomsky

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of hav

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN REDACTED

(no subject)

From: jeevacation@gmail.com

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government

EFTA01010038

intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attomey in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attomey's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by

EFTA01010039

the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

please note

EFTA01010040

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010041

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

Re:

From: jeevacation@gmail.com

To: Noam Chomsky

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc. I have been exploring the Al world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :)/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media ap

As the stories get wilder and the writers make the girls younger. prostitution is a tabloid s dream , . I wondered if having something out in the cyber world that let some people point to rational arguments might allow some to defend themselves from their wives . " how could you " etc.

I have been exploring the Al world with the cutting edge people. I remind them of your comments re machines thinking :)/ I thought that culture was the conciousness of a society. tribes were like self. . media approx transmitters. . It provided constraints and rules for some underlying interactions. It doesnt exist in a physical sense but either does conciousness. which it appears to me as an evolutionary advantage and provides the brain with rules memories. ( culture again ) . and constraints. . tribes when attacked , act like a self . . compete like selves. etc. The world we call physical . follows rules that we have created, most unknowingly. I assume language acts like an effective transmittier. . some language like adrenaline. some like dopamine. . do some extent the hormones of the culture. ?

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

Re:

From: jeevacation@gmail.com

To: Noam Chomsky

Great thx. On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM Noam Chomsky < wrote: It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've s

Great thx.

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:20 AM Noam Chomsky < wrote:

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:33 AM J leevacation@gmail.corn> wrote:

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of

EFTA01010042

prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many victims who collectively received

EFTA01010043

many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010044

📅 Dec 29, 2018

Re:

From: Noam Chomsky

To: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of hav

It's a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the "where there's smoke there's fire" kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to adjudicate conflicting claims. I've seen this happen over and over on other matters -- many years of having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness -- but that's not the public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.

The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it, and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then, diminishing over time.

Noam

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:33 AM J <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attomey's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the intemet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Govemment Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of WE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010047

📅 Dec 29, 2018

Fwd:

From: Valeria Chomsky

To: jeevacation@gmail.com, Noam Chomsky

My suggestion is that you shouldn't do it. It is going to encourage the other side a strong reaction. The sensible approach, from my point of view, is that you keep reinforcing your actions towards good causes. Valeria -Forwarded message- From: J<jeevacation@gmail.com> Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 5:33 AM Subject: To: Noam Chomsky Valeria Chomsky Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the mor

My suggestion is that you shouldn't do it. It is going to encourage the other side a strong reaction.

The sensible approach, from my point of view, is that you keep reinforcing your actions towards good causes.

Valeria

-Forwarded message-

From: J<jeevacation@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 5:33 AM
Subject:
To: Noam Chomsky Valeria Chomsky

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

EFTA01010048

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Govemment Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

EFTA01010049

please note

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of

JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010050

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Kyle reavis

answers? please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and

answers?

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation®gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

📅 Dec 29, 2018 FROM EPSTEIN

(no subject)

From: J <jeevacation@gmail.com>

To: Noam Chomsky, Valeria Chomsky

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!" So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorneys Office conducted an extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein's home. After months of negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should have.

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorneys Office extensively and aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, targeted

EFTA01010052

minors, or used the Internet or traveled interstate in the process. But that's not what this was and that's not what happened. That is precisely why the federal authorities' ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the state was the right one.

However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury's indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attorneys to bring claims against him on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim's identities by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds' demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same (including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities.

Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability — moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey's offenses of yesteryear, which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once and for all.

please note

please note

EFTA01010053

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01010054