Congress
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Department of Justice (DOJ)
|
Advisory lobbying |
9
Strong
|
1 | |
|
location
China
|
Unknown |
9
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
President Johnson
|
Political opposition |
8
Strong
|
1 | |
|
person
President Grant
|
Separation of powers |
8
Strong
|
1 | |
|
organization
Chinese government
|
Target of influence operation |
7
|
1 | |
|
location
Taiwan
|
Unknown |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Justice (DOJ)
|
Advisory legislative commentary |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
US congressional delegations
|
Visitor host |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
MIT
|
Lobbying |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
Jimmy Carter
|
Governmental executive legislative communication |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
|
Delegation of authority |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
President Obama
|
Political adversarial |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Justice (DOJ)
|
Adversarial collaborative |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Administration
|
Political alignment on china policy |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Chinese government
|
Target of influence |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Senator Orrin G. Hatch
|
Correspondence |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
John D. Rockefeller IV
|
Correspondence |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Justice (DOJ)
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Christine C. Quin
|
Guest of honor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
President Carter
|
Executive legislative conflict |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
President Wilson
|
Executive legislative conflict |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
President Eisenhower
|
Executive legislative conflict |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
The President
|
Institutional conflict |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
President Grant
|
Constitutional opposition |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
President (Executive Branch)
|
Constitutional separation of powers |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | The 'Blueprint' for tax reform was released by House Republicans shortly before Congress left for... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | US Election (Trump and Republican Congress win) | USA | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Department of Justice's formal opposition to Sections 234 and 236 of a piece of proposed legi... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | Planned discussions between the Administration (DHS, DOJ, HHS) and Congress regarding policies fo... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | The 'fiscal cliff', a pending crisis involving the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts and automatic ... | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ objection to Section 107(a) of an Act, which would limit a country's time on the Tier II Watc... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Passage of the Tenure of Office Act over President Johnson's veto. | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Tenure of Office Act was passed over President Johnson's veto. This act placed restrictions o... | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | The fiscal year for which the Trump administration's first budget proposal and congressional budg... | USA | View |
| N/A | N/A | US Congress is in the midst of a major reevaluation of the American policy of 'engagement' with C... | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | Expected timeframe for a focus on tax reform. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Chinese government used various entities (CCP, CAIFU, CAIFC) and individuals (Jimmy Wong) to ... | China, United States | View |
| 2018-03-05 | N/A | Start of the Party Congress session to change the Constitution and lift term limits. | China | View |
| 2018-03-01 | N/A | Meeting of the National People's Congress | China | View |
| 2018-01-01 | N/A | The House China Working Group remained active, while the House Congressional China Caucus and the... | United States | View |
| 2018-01-01 | N/A | The US Congress unanimously passed the Taiwan Travel Act, which encourages the Trump administrati... | United States | View |
| 2017-01-01 | N/A | Year in which trade legislative issues were expected to figure prominently under the new administ... | United States | View |
| 2016-10-01 | N/A | Passage of the 9/11 Saudi bill | USA | View |
| 2016-09-01 | N/A | US Congress passed JASTA legislation overriding Presidential veto. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2016-02-01 | N/A | Congress approved a customs reauthorization measure that made the Internet Tax Freedom Act perman... | United States | View |
| 2016-01-01 | N/A | 2016 lame-duck session of Congress, during which the fate of tax extenders would be decided. | N/A | View |
| 2015-01-01 | N/A | Passage of the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) through Congress. | United States | View |
| 2015-01-01 | N/A | A bipartisan vote in Congress extended the Community Health Center Fund for two additional years ... | United States | View |
| 2014-02-13 | N/A | Military Times reported that the NSA informed Congress that Snowden had copied a co-worker's pass... | N/A | View |
| 2013-01-02 | N/A | Enactment of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA), which made permanent most of the tr... | United States | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025868.jpg
This document is page 16 of a larger report regarding the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) and its recommendations for improving the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). It details efforts in 2012 and 2013 to implement dispute resolution strategies to avoid litigation, involving pilot programs with agencies like NARA. While the document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, the text itself contains no direct mention of Jeffrey Epstein or his associates; it appears to be administrative documentation likely included in a broader oversight production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025867.jpg
This document page, originating from a House Oversight collection, details the administrative activities of the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) during Fiscal Year 2013. It discusses recommendations made by the GAO and the Inspector General regarding OGIS's methodologies for reviewing FOIA compliance and preventing litigation. Additionally, it notes Director Nisbet's attendance at an international conference in Berlin in September 2013.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025855.jpg
This document is page 3 of a report regarding the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). It details the office's work in resolving Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disputes during Fiscal Year 2013 under the leadership of Director Nisbet. While stamped with 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT,' suggesting it is part of a larger document dump related to a congressional investigation (potentially regarding how agencies handled FOIA requests about specific subjects), the text on this specific page discusses general agency statistics and mission statements rather than specific individuals or cases.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025853.jpg
This document is the introductory 'Message from the Director' for the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) FY 2013 Annual Report. It details the agency's work in resolving FOIA disputes through Alternative Dispute Resolution and notes a 40% increase in case volume. The document bears a House Oversight bates stamp, indicating it is part of a larger congressional inquiry, likely related to document requests regarding the Epstein investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025787.jpg
This document is page 25 of a Standard & Poor's economic research report dated August 5, 2014, titled 'How Increasing Income Inequality Is Dampening U.S. Economic Growth.' The content consists of endnotes (citations 43-61) referencing various economic studies, reports from the IMF, CBO, and academic papers regarding inequality, minimum wage, and economic recovery. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025787' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for the House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025783.jpg
This document is page 21 of a Standard & Poor's economic research report dated August 5, 2014, written by Joe Maguire. It discusses the negative impact of income inequality on U.S. economic growth and advocates for policy rebalancing, including investments in education and infrastructure. The page also includes a 'Glossary of Relevant Terms' defining Market Income (labor, business, capital gains) and Transfer Income based on CBO and Census Bureau methodologies. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025782.jpg
This document analyzes proposals to address U.S. income inequality, specifically discussing the pros and cons of raising the minimum wage and implementing tax reforms. It cites data from the IMF, CBO, and CATO Institute regarding job losses versus poverty reduction, and reviews specific tax proposals from Warren Buffett, academics, and California legislators aimed at reducing the wealth gap. The text cautions that while some redistribution can be beneficial, excessive taxation might negatively impact economic growth.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025779.jpg
This document is a page from a Standard & Poor's economic research report dated August 5, 2014, discussing 'Secular Stagnation' and the impact of income inequality on U.S. economic growth. It cites former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers regarding slow growth and mentions data from the Fed, IMF, CBO, and Bureau of Labor Statistics concerning GDP projections and the rise of low-wage employment. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016206.jpg
This document appears to be a printout or screenshot of a web page featuring a Politico article snippet. The text discusses the upcoming testimony of Robert Mueller before Congress, placing the timeframe around July 2019. It also includes a headline about mass layoffs. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' footer, indicating it is part of a congressional document production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016118.jpg
This document is a page from a Merrill Lynch financial research report dated June 30, 2016, labeled as evidence in a House Oversight Committee investigation. It analyzes the Saudi Public Investment Fund's (PIF) shift from a domestic to a global investor, detailing specific assets and investments such as a $3.5bn stake in Uber. It also discusses the potential economic impact of the JASTA bill ('9/11 bill'), noting Saudi threats to liquidate $750bn in US assets, while predicting that the bill will not significantly hinder Saudi investment in the US due to procedural hurdles and White House opposition.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016068.jpg
This document appears to be page 378 from the book 'Are the Androids Dreaming Yet?', specifically the image credits and permissions section. It lists various photographs, diagrams, and poems used in Chapters 6, 7, and 8 of the book, citing sources such as Shutterstock, Wikimedia, NASA, and specific individuals like James Tagg and Jerrold H. Zar. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' footer, indicating it was part of a document production for a congressional investigation, though the specific content of this page is a bibliography of creative works.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014082.jpg
This document is page 103 of a 2014 legal article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text argues that the CVRA protects victims' rights during the pre-charging phase of a criminal investigation and criticizes the Department of Justice for interpreting the law contrary to this view. The page is stamped as evidence from the House Oversight Committee (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014082), likely related to investigations into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement and the violation of victims' rights under the CVRA.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014066.jpg
This document is page 87 of a 2014 legal academic article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) position that victims' rights only apply after charges are filed, citing the 'Epstein case' (Does v. United States, S.D. Fla. 2011) as a precedent where the court concluded the CVRA contemplates pre-charge application. The text argues that limiting rights to the prosecution phase renders the statutory words 'detection' and 'investigation' meaningless.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014062.jpg
This document page, bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp, is an excerpt from a legal analysis (likely a law review article) criticizing the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that the OLC incorrectly concluded that victims' rights do not apply before an indictment is filed, contradicting the legislative intent of Senator Jon Kyl, a primary sponsor of the Act. The text highlights that even the OLC acknowledged their interpretation might contradict 'good practice' regarding pre-charging plea discussions, a critical legal issue relevant to the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement controversy.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014059.jpg
This document is page 80 of a legal analysis (likely by Paul Cassell) included in House Oversight materials (Bates HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014059). It critiques an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically arguing against the OLC's position that victim rights only apply after formal charges are filed. The text outlines specific rights that logically apply pre-charging (protection, conferencing with government attorneys, and fairness/dignity) and cites case law (US v. Rubin) and legislative history to support a broader interpretation of the Act.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014057.jpg
This document appears to be page 78 of a legal article or brief, likely authored by Paul Cassell (a lawyer for Epstein's victims), arguing for the application of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) prior to the filing of formal criminal charges. It explicitly criticizes a 2011 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum that sought to limit these rights. The text cites various legal precedents (Turner, Searcy) to argue that victims should be treated fairly and allowed to confer with prosecutors during the investigation phase, not just after charges are filed. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation, likely into the handling of the Epstein case.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014051.jpg
This document is page 72 of a legal analysis (likely by Paul Cassell) labeled with a House Oversight Bates number. It argues that the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) applies during the investigative phase of a case, before formal charges are filed. The text cites specific statutory language regarding 'detection' and 'investigation' obligations of the DOJ and venue provisions for pre-prosecution situations to support this interpretation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014050.jpg
This document is page 71 of a 2014 legal analysis (likely a law review article) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It uses the Epstein case as a primary example of why victims need rights before formal charges are filed, specifically citing how Jane Doe Number One and Two were not informed that prosecutors had secretly bargained away sex offense charges. The text argues that the CVRA's plain language supports extending rights to victims throughout the criminal justice process, even before charges are filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014049.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (Cassell et al., Vol 104) submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It argues for the application of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) prior to formal charges being filed. The text specifically cites the Epstein case as a negative example, noting that prosecutors made a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein regarding sex offenses against dozens of victims (including Jane Does 1 and 2) without victim participation, effectively shutting them out of the justice process.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014046.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a legal review or academic paper (dated 2014) discussing the legislative intent behind Crime Victims' Rights, specifically the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It quotes Senators Jon Kyl and Dianne Feinstein regarding the need to prevent 'secondary harm' to victims and allow their participation in the justice system. The page concludes by introducing the Jeffrey Epstein case as a specific illustration of legal issues surrounding victims' rights during the pre-charging phase.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014045.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text or law review article (authored by 'Cassell et al.') included in House Oversight records. It analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), detailing the legislative intent to ensure victims are treated with fairness, dignity, and privacy, and to make them independent participants in the criminal justice process. The text cites U.S. Code and Congressional Records, specifically quoting Senators Feinstein and Kyl regarding the systemic neglect of victims prior to the Act.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014044.jpg
This document is page 65 of a 2014 law review article detailing the history of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It explains that in April 2004, advocates shifted focus from a constitutional amendment to federal legislation due to the difficulty of obtaining a supermajority. The text discusses the limitations of the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act and cites various legal scholars and Senators (Kyl, Leahy, Feinstein) regarding the legislative history. This document appears in the House Oversight collection likely as background material regarding the legal framework relevant to the Epstein case's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014042.jpg
This document is page 63 of a 2014 legal academic publication discussing Crime Victims' Rights. It argues for victim participation during criminal investigations, explicitly citing the 'Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case' as a primary example of why victims need rights before charges are filed. The text also provides historical context regarding the victims' rights movement, referencing the Warren Court and President Reagan's Task Force on Victims of Crime.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014041.jpg
This document is page 62 of a legal article (Cassell et al.) included in House Oversight records. It argues that Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) rights should attach before formal charges are filed, explicitly using the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement in Florida as a case study where victims were denied consultation because charges were not formally filed. The text critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) position and references a 2011 letter from Senator Jon Kyl to Attorney General Eric Holder supporting the broader interpretation of victims' rights.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014040.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a law review article (dated roughly 2014) included in a House Oversight investigation. It discusses the legal interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically focusing on whether victims' rights apply before formal charges are filed. It highlights a 2010 DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion which argued rights do not attach during investigations, and notes that non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) allow prosecutors to avoid notifying victims—a key legal issue in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text mentions Senator Jon Kyl's objection to this DOJ interpretation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity