Supreme Court
OrganizationRelationship Network
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010523.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a book detailing the legal proceedings involving Jeffrey Epstein in July 2006, specifically focusing on the perspective of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter. It describes the grand jury's decision to charge Epstein with a single count of solicitation, omitting charges related to minors, and notes the lack of notification to the police regarding his surrender and release on bail. The text also touches on Reiter's interactions with federal prosecutor Acosta.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023404.jpg
This is a page from a legal document (Westlaw printout, stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023404) regarding the case 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.' It contains legal arguments requesting the court defer decision on TVPA (Torture Victim Protection Act) claims pending a Supreme Court decision, and argues that organizations (not just individuals) should be liable under the TVPA. It also argues that the lower court improperly dismissed negligence and intentional tort claims related to the 9/11 attacks. While the prompt identifies this as 'Epstein-related,' the visible text strictly concerns 9/11 litigation case law and corporate liability, likely included in the House Oversight files as legal precedent or research material.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023399.jpg
This document is page 39 of a legal brief or court opinion (Westlaw) regarding 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001'. It discusses the legal liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and Alien Tort Statute (ATS) for defendants who provided financial and material support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, specifically noting funding provided in Sudan in the early 1990s. The document bears the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023399', suggesting it was part of a congressional investigation, likely related to financial institutions involved in terrorist financing.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023202.jpg
This email thread from December 2015 shows Jeffrey Epstein advising Lisa New on how to persuade Woody Allen to allow the release of taped footage. Lisa New provides lists of high-profile individuals she has already interviewed (including Bill Clinton and Al Gore) or who have agreed to be interviewed (including Joe Biden) to demonstrate the caliber of her project. Epstein suggests this is a 'better list to present woody' after Lisa notes that Allen's legal team has blocked the use of their footage.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015457.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or article titled 'Alternative Facts' found within House Oversight discovery materials. The text is a highly critical political commentary contrasting the 2000 election of George Bush with the 2016 election of Donald Trump, focusing heavily on the electoral college and Hillary Clinton's involvement in both eras. The author, a former columnist for the New York Press, recounts sending a letter to Clinton regarding her unkept promise to abolish the electoral college.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015420.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a memoir or essay included in House Oversight evidence files. The narrator (contextually likely Paul Krassner) discusses their claim to inventing the term 'soft-core porn' in the magazine 'The Realist' in the late 1950s. It also describes a gathering on New Year's Eve 1967 at Abbie and Anita Hoffman's apartment to plan a counter-convention to the Democratic Party's event in Chicago.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015380.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or memoir included in House Oversight evidence. It details anecdotes about comedian George Carlin, including a conversation about drug use methods, a comparison of his legacy to Richard Nixon's, and a specific discussion with producer Dan Pasley about why racial slurs were excluded from his famous 'Seven Dirty Words' routine. The page concludes with a mention of his daughter, Kelly, reading his burial instructions from 1990 at his memorial service.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015285.jpg
This document appears to be an excerpt from a report or article detailing prison censorship policies and legal challenges. It discusses *Prison Legal News* preparing to sue the Utah Department of Corrections over book restrictions, policies in Los Angeles County jails regarding books, and the removal of law libraries in Montana following a Supreme Court ruling. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it is part of a larger congressional inquiry.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015135.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a memoir or narrative account included in House Oversight files (stamped 015135). The text describes the narrator's decision to leak Anita Hill's statement regarding Clarence Thomas to NPR reporter Nina Totenberg during the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation process. It details the narrator's motivation (outrage over hypocrisy regarding abortion) and recounts specific testimony where then-Senator Joe Biden interrupted Hill during a discussion about Roe v. Wade.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015067.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a narrative or memoir submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee (stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015067). It details the narrator's involvement as a plaintiff in a 1970 lawsuit challenging New York's abortion laws, their operation of an underground abortion referral service, and their reflections on Dr. Spencer (a provider who died in 1969). The text mentions 'Lefcourt' (likely attorney Gerald Lefcourt) recalling the legal history.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015055.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a satirical essay, story, or manuscript found within House Oversight evidence files (stamped 015055). The text adopts a simplistic 'Dick and Jane' narrative style to critique New York divorce laws, specifically the requirement of proving adultery and the ruling by Justice Benjamin Brenner regarding the legality of raiding private residences versus hotels. It concludes with a satirical comparison of divorce-seekers in Alabama to the 'Freedom Riders' of the Civil Rights era.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015025.jpg
This document outlines Kenneth Starr's legal defense of Blackwater regarding the 2004 Fallujah Ambush and his role in securing a non-prosecution agreement for Jeffrey Epstein. It draws parallels between intelligence assets like Erik Prince and Bin Laden, suggesting government complicity in using such figures for operations outside standard political restrictions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015011.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a larger submission to the House Oversight Committee (marked HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015011). It contains allegations against John and Avery Gunther regarding a cover-up for IBM and abuse of their children, alongside complaints about the NSF and the 'Deep State.' The second half of the document is a letter to the Washington Post criticizing Kenneth Starr for his representation of Blackwater and Jeffrey Epstein, while questioning the focus of the original Starr Report.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013385.jpg
This page from a legal filing (page 16) argues that attorney Edwards was entitled to seek discovery regarding Jeffrey Epstein's friends and past abuse to support claims for punitive damages, characterizing Epstein as a 'predatory pedophile' who assaulted 'dozens and dozens of minor girls.' The document further argues that Epstein's own lawsuit should be dismissed because he has refused to participate in discovery, instead invoking the Fifth Amendment when questioned.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013312.jpg
Page 9 of 15 from a legal filing in the case of Edwards vs. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). The document argues that the 'litigation privilege' should not protect Epstein from claims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process because his actions were malicious, unfounded, and targeted the Plaintiff's counsel without a legitimate judicial goal. It distinguishes Epstein's actions as an individual party from legal precedents involving attorneys.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029173.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a draft manuscript or article (indicated by 'MORE TK') discussing the conflict between Robert Mueller and Donald Trump. It analyzes the legal strategy of a potential indictment, the clash between the Justice Department and the White House, and speculates on how the Supreme Court and the 'November election' might influence the outcome. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029171.jpg
This document, stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029171, appears to be a page from a narrative report or manuscript discussing the internal legal analysis of the Mueller Special Counsel team. It details their concerns regarding the President's potential strategies to end the investigation, including firing the Attorney General or Rod Rosenstein, refusing budget requests, or using pardon powers. The text analyzes the legal ramifications of these hypothetical actions in relation to obstruction of justice.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025202.jpg
An email from Jeffrey E. (Epstein) to Paul Krassner dated September 18, 2018. Epstein responds with the single word 'great' to an email from Krassner that contains a satirical or investigative piece titled 'Why I Leaked the Anita Hill Affidavit,' which describes a 1991 conversation between Clarence Thomas and Senators Hatch and Simpson.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029793.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a political analysis or book included in a House Oversight Committee production (Bates stamp 029793). The text critiques the legacy of Shimon Peres, contrasting his reputation as the peacemaker of the 1993 Oslo Accords with his earlier actions as Defense Minister (1974-1977). It details how Peres undermined Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by facilitating Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories, specifically mentioning Elon Moreh and Ofra.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029706.jpg
This excerpt critiques the political legacy of Shimon Peres, contrasting his later role as the architect of the Oslo Accords with his earlier actions as Defense Minister under Yitzhak Rabin in the 1970s. It highlights how Peres undermined Rabin by supporting Jewish settlements like Elon Moreh and Ofra in Palestinian territories, earning him the label of "an indefatigable intriguer" from Rabin.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029312.jpg
This document is page 8 of a 2013 CCH Tax Briefing titled 'Expert Analysis'. It details the tax and benefit implications following the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), specifically analyzing impacts on Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), COBRA/FMLA, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While the document contains a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, the text itself is a generic legal analysis of federal tax law changes regarding same-sex marriage and contains no specific mention of Jeffrey Epstein or his associates.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029311.jpg
This document is page 7 of a CCH Tax Briefing dated June 27, 2013. It details the tax and benefit implications of the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), specifically regarding estate tax portability, gift taxes, and employee benefits for same-sex couples. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029311' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production to the House Oversight Committee, likely found within the files of the subject of an investigation (presumably Epstein or related entities, given the prompt context, though his name does not appear in the text).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029306.jpg
This document provides detailed analysis of the Supreme Court's 2013 rulings in United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry regarding same-sex marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). It explains the tax implications of striking down DOMA, specifically concerning the federal estate tax marital deduction, and summarizes Justice Kennedy's majority opinion that DOMA was unconstitutional because it violated equal protection and due process principles.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014068.jpg
This document is page 89 of a 2014 legal article (likely a law review) analyzing Crime Victims' Rights, specifically critiquing the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of when the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) applies. The text argues that the OLC incorrectly limits protections by claiming a complaint filing does not trigger the CVRA, and it refutes the OLC's reading of Sixth Amendment case law. The document is stamped 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014068', indicating it was gathered as evidence during the House Oversight Committee's investigation, likely regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein plea deal and the violation of victims' rights.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021387.jpg
This document page (marked HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021387) appears to be an excerpt from an academic text discussing the evolutionary and theological rationales for medicine. It contrasts the concept of 'inclusive fitness' and eugenics (citing Francis Galton and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' support for sterilization) with the medical and religious imperative to care for the sick regardless of their genetic fitness or reproductive capacity. It draws on Christian theology (Aquinas) to explain altruism beyond kinship.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity