Trove
Sign In Sign Up

United States

Location
Mentions
4439
Relationships
532
Events
654
Documents
2024
Also known as:
United States of America USVI (United States Virgin Islands) United States Virgin Islands (USVI) Vermont, United States United States (US) United States (U.S.) United States Capitol United States / US United States (implied by US Intelligence/Government) America / US / United States United States / US / American United States (America) United States (American) America / U.S. / United States United States / America / U.S. United States/America Palm Beach County, United States The States / United States United States (implied by 'US narrative') United States / The States United States / America Carlucci Auditorium, United States Institute of Peace United States District Courthouse United States (implied by 'American') continental United States United States (implied by U.S. venture capital benchmarks) USA / United States / America Office of the United States Attorney USA - UNITED STATES Zip 11968 (United States)
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
532 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Legal representative
32 Very Strong
72
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
10
View
person Epstein
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
19
View
person MAXWELL
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
9
View
organization Iran
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
7
View
person Davis
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Bodmer
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Dreier
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
4
View
person English
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
4
View
person Boustani
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Torres
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
4
View
location China
Unknown
10 Very Strong
4
View
person Smith
Legal representative
9 Strong
5
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Legal representative
9 Strong
4
View
location China
Geopolitical rivals
9 Strong
2
View
person Sampson
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person Carrillo-Villa
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Petrov
Legal representative
8 Strong
3
View
person Dominguez
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Hung
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Abdellatif El Mokadem
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Rowe
Legal representative
8 Strong
3
View
person Alindato-Perez
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Crowell
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
person Deutsch
Legal representative
8 Strong
2
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
2019-01-01 Legal case Citation for United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79. 2d Cir. View
2019-01-01 Legal proceeding Decision in the case of United States v. Watkins. 2d Cir. View
2019-01-01 Legal case The case of United States v. Davis, which stated that a statutory phrase should have a fixed mean... N/A View
2019-01-01 Legal case Legal case United States v. Duncan, No. 18 CR 289, 2019 WL 2210663 is cited. S.D.N.Y. View
2019-01-01 Legal case The court case United States v. Gaudet, 933 F.3d 11, 15–16 (1st Cir. 2019) is cited as a preceden... 1st Cir. View
2019-01-01 Legal case Decision in the case of United States v. Boustani. 2d Cir. View
2019-01-01 Court ruling Ruling in the case of United States v. Eldred. 2d Cir. View
2019-01-01 Legal ruling Ruling in the case of United States v. Boustani. E.D.N.Y. View
2018-12-05 Legal case The date of the cited case, United States v. Raniere. E.D.N.Y. View
2018-12-05 Legal proceeding A court decision was made in the case of United States v. Raniere. E.D.N.Y. View
2018-12-05 Legal ruling A ruling in the case of United States v. Raniere, which is cited as precedent. E.D.N.Y. View
2018-12-05 Court decision In United States v. Raniere, the court noted that since it had already held one detention hearing... E.D.N.Y. View
2018-10-02 Court ruling In United States v. Hussain, the defendant was granted a $100,000 personal recognizance bond with... Southern District of New York View
2018-09-26 Court ruling Ruling in the case of United States v. Williams. E.D.N.Y. View
2018-08-09 Legal case The date of the United States v. Pierre-Louis case cited in the footnote. S.D.N.Y. View
2018-08-09 Court decision Decision in the case United States v. Pierre-Louis. U.S. District Court for the... View
2018-04-10 Court decision Decision in the case United States v. Pizarro. U.S. District Court for the... View
2018-04-10 Legal case Legal case: United States v. Pizarro, No. 17 Cr. 151 (AJN). S.D.N.Y. View
2018-02-04 Legal case United States v. Patrick Ho, where the defendant was ordered detained based on risk of flight, st... S.D.N.Y. View
2018-02-04 Legal case United States v. Patrick Ho, 17 Cr. 779 (KBF), Dkt. 49 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2018) Southern District of New York View
2018-01-31 Legal case Legal case: United States v. DeFilippo, No. 17 Cr. 585 (WHP). S.D.N.Y. View
2018-01-01 N/A Revision of the US-South Korea trade agreement. N/A View
2018-01-01 N/A South Korea is excluded from US steel tariffs in exchange for capping its steel exports. N/A View
2018-01-01 Legal case Citation of United States v. Miller, 911 F.3d 638 (1st Cir. 2018). 1st Cir. View
2018-01-01 Legal proceeding The case United States v. Guerrero, 910 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 2018) was decided. 2d Cir. View

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022375.jpg

This document is a one-page political analysis report from EY, dated 'Election 2016,' discussing the results and implications of the 2016 U.S. election. It analyzes the Republican majorities in the House and Senate, potential legislative challenges like the Senate's 60-vote cloture rule, and the change in the number of GOP House seats. The document contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or related activities.

Political analysis report
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022372.jpg

This document is a post-election analysis from Washington Council Ernst & Young dated November 9, 2016. It details Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton in the presidential election, the Republicans retaining control of Congress, and outlines potential policy agendas and political challenges, such as filling the Supreme Court vacancy. The document contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Political analysis / post-election briefing
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022342.jpg

This document is a page from a table of contents for a 2013 publication called 'Tax Topics', identified by the Bates number HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022342. It lists significant US tax-related events, court cases, and IRS rulings from January to September 2000, covering topics like estate tax, inheritance tax, and tax law interpretations. Although the user prompt described it as 'Epstein-related', the document itself contains no mentions of Jeffrey Epstein, his known associates, or related activities.

Table of contents / index for a publication titled 'tax topics', likely part of a collection for a house oversight committee investigation.
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022334.jpg

This document is a table of contents from a 2013 publication, 'Tax Topics,' listing subjects covered in 2007 and 2008 regarding U.S. tax law, including legislation, IRS rulings, and court cases. The document, bearing the identifier 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022334,' was produced as part of a congressional investigation but does not contain direct information about Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or his activities.

Table of contents for a 'tax topics' publication, produced as evidence in a house oversight committee investigation.
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022330.jpg

This document is the 2013 table of contents for a 'Tax Topics' publication series from Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management, featuring articles by Blanche Lark Christerson. It lists various tax-related subjects published throughout the year, including legal cases like United States v. Windsor and updates on tax law. The document's content is about general U.S. tax matters and does not mention Jeffrey Epstein or his known associates, though the footer 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022330' suggests it was collected as part of a congressional investigation.

Table of contents for a publication on 'tax topics'
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022327.jpg

This document is page 3 of a 'Tax Topics' briefing dated December 20, 2013, which analyzes recent changes in U.S. tax law. It details the new 3.8% net investment income tax under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the implications of the Supreme Court's Windsor decision on same-sex marriage for federal taxes, and the troubled rollout of HealthCare.gov. The document is a general overview of tax law and contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein or associated individuals.

Tax topics report/briefing page
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022320.jpg

This document is a page from the U.S. Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing rules and procedures of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). It outlines employee rights, employer obligations regarding posting notices, and the process for filing charges for non-compliance. The document has no discernible connection to Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or any related investigations.

Federal register publication (rules and regulations)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022317.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing a Final Rule (29 CFR Part 104) from the National Labor Relations Board. The rule establishes the definitions and obligations for employers to post notices informing employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. This document is a standard government regulatory publication and contains no information, names, locations, or events related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Federal register final rule, stamped 'house oversight 022317'
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022316.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing public comments and the issuing agency's response to a new labor rule requiring employers to post notices of employee rights regarding unionization. The document discusses the economic impact of the rule, its classification under the Congressional Review Act, and its exemption from the Paperwork Reduction Act. This document is related to U.S. labor law and contains no information whatsoever about Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or any related matters.

Federal register publication (rules and regulations section)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022313.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, containing a dissenting opinion regarding a new rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The author argues the rule, which compels employers to post notices of employee rights, is a flawed and unauthorized attempt to increase union density. The document also details the Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, which estimates a minimal compliance cost for businesses, a figure contested by industry commenters. The content of this specific document does not pertain to Jeffrey Epstein or related matters.

Federal register notice on rules and regulations
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022312.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register, dated August 30, 2011, containing a dissenting opinion regarding a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) proposed rule. The author argues that the Board majority's plan to mandate the posting of employee rights notices is based on insufficient evidence and is therefore 'arbitrary and capricious'. The document is related to U.S. labor law and has no connection to Jeffrey Epstein.

Federal register publication (dissenting opinion on a proposed rule)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022311.jpg

This document is page 54040 from the Federal Register, dated August 30, 2011, detailing a legal argument against a new rule by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The author contends the NLRB overstepped its statutory authority, citing legal precedents on agency power and the 'arbitrary and capricious' standard. Despite the user's framing, this document is entirely about U.S. labor law and contains no information whatsoever related to Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or any of their activities.

Government publication / congressional exhibit
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022309.jpg

This document is a dissenting opinion from a Federal Register publication, arguing that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) lacks the statutory authority to require employers to post notices of employee rights. The author contends that unlike other labor laws where Congress explicitly mandated such postings, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) contains no such provision, and the Board's attempt to create one is an overreach of its authority.

Federal register publication
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022305.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, discussing a rule by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) concerning the statute of limitations for unfair labor practice claims. The footer 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022305' suggests it was cataloged as an exhibit for a congressional committee. The content of the document itself is purely about U.S. labor law and contains no information, names, or events related to Jeffrey Epstein or his associates.

Federal register publication page, potentially used as an exhibit for the house oversight committee, based on the footer stamp.
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022304.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) rules regarding an employer's failure to post employee rights notices. It discusses why this failure is an unfair labor practice and justifies the equitable tolling of the six-month statute of limitations for filing charges when required notices are not posted. Despite the prompt's framing, the document's content is entirely about U.S. labor law and has no connection to Jeffrey Epstein; the footer 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022304' is a Bates number, likely indicating it was an exhibit in a congressional document production.

Federal register publication (rules and regulations)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022301.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing a final rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on posting employee rights notices. It discusses the Board's decisions on public comments concerning electronic posting methods, compliance with Department of Labor rules, and exemptions for certain employers. The document has no discernible connection to Jeffrey Epstein; its content is strictly related to U.S. labor law and regulatory procedure, and the footer 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022301' likely indicates it was collected as an exhibit for a congressional committee.

Federal register / rules and regulations
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022299.jpg

This document from the Federal Register details the Board's response to public comments on a proposed rule requiring employers to post a notice of employee rights. The Board addresses concerns about enforcement, application to remote and dispersed workforces, the 11x17-inch poster size, and language requirements for non-English speaking employees. Ultimately, the Board retains most of the proposed rule, including the poster size and language requirements, but removes the mandate for color printing to reduce employer costs.

A page from the federal register discussing rules and regulations regarding employer notice posting.
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022293.jpg

This document is page 54022 of the Federal Register from August 30, 2011, detailing a final rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). It explains the Board's reasoning for the precise content of a mandatory workplace notice informing employees of their rights under the NLRA, including the right to unionize and the right to refrain from union activity. Despite the 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' footer and the prompt's framing, the document's text is exclusively about U.S. labor law and contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein or associated individuals.

Government publication (federal register)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022291.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) final rule on a notice of employee rights. The text summarizes and responds to public comments from various groups on the language of the notice, particularly concerning the balance between the right to unionize and the right to refrain from union activity. Contrary to the prompt's implication, this document has no connection whatsoever to Jeffrey Epstein or any related matters; it is strictly a regulatory document concerning U.S. labor law.

Federal register publication (rules and regulations section)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022288.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register where the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) responds to public comments on a proposed rule requiring employers to post notices of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Board refutes claims that employees are already aware of their rights or that posted notices are ineffective, citing comments that demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the NLRA by both employers and employees. The Board argues that physical and electronic postings are a necessary and direct way to inform the workforce, even if not every employee reads them.

Federal register publication
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022287.jpg

This document is page 54016 of the Federal Register from August 30, 2011, discussing public comments on a proposed National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rule. The rule would require employers to post notices informing employees of their rights to unionize and engage in other protected activities. The document contains no information related to Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or any related activities.

Page from the federal register, specifically from the 'rules and regulations' section. a stamp at the bottom reads 'house oversight 022287', suggesting it is part of a collection for a congressional committee.
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022286.jpg

This document from the Federal Register details public comments on a proposed rule by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) requiring employers to post notices of employee rights under the NLRA. One side argues that employees are already aware of their rights to unionize or can easily find information online, making the rule unnecessary. The opposing view, supported by the Board and various worker advocates, contends that many employees, particularly immigrants, are uninformed about their rights, and a posting requirement is a reasonable and low-cost way to increase awareness.

Federal register publication
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022279.jpg

This document is a page from the Federal Register dated August 30, 2011, detailing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) legal justification for its rulemaking authority under the NLRA. It refutes comments from organizations opposing a proposed rule by citing numerous Supreme Court precedents that affirm broad rulemaking powers for federal agencies. This document is purely a legal and administrative text and contains no information whatsoever related to Jeffrey Epstein or any associated individuals.

Federal register notice / legal document
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022272.jpg

This document is an email chain from March 2014 where Jeffrey Epstein complains to Vinit Sahni (likely of Deutsche Bank) about a 4-hour delay in getting a quote for oil options. The nested emails reveal the delay was because Deutsche Bank had stopped making markets in OTC oil options, and includes a detailed geopolitical and financial analysis from Nav Gupta to Epstein predicting market turmoil and a rise in oil prices due to the impending Crimea referendum and Russia-West tensions.

Email chain
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_020476.jpg

This document outlines recommendations for the U.S. Congress regarding its approach to China. It advocates for promoting transparency through congressional oversight, integrity by distinguishing real threats like espionage from manageable issues like Confucius Institutes, and reciprocity by carefully considering the broader bilateral relationship and potential consequences before taking action. The page concludes with a detailed list of sources cited in the section.

Policy report page
2025-11-19
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
0
Total
0
No communications found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search