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 |
DOJ-OGR-00001493.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for the detention of a defendant by highlighting her characteristics as a significant flight risk. The prosecution points to the defendant's extensive international ties, including being born in France, raised in the United Kingdom, and holding citizenship and passports for the US, UK, and France. Her frequent international travel, including at least fifteen flights in the last three years, and her financial means are presented as evidence supporting the argument that she could easily flee and live abroad.
DOJ-OGR-00001279.jpg
This legal document is a court order from March 22, 2021, reaffirming the decision to detain a defendant. The Court concludes that the Government has shown the defendant is a flight risk and that no proposed conditions can reasonably assure her appearance. The Court's assessment of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g), including the presumption of detention and the weight of the evidence, remains unchanged despite the defendant's new arguments.
DOJ-OGR-00001217.jpg
This page is from a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in Case 20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text discusses the legal standards for bail and detention, specifically addressing 'flight risk' and the burden of production. While the court acknowledges the defendant met a limited burden regarding family ties and finances, section B explicitly states that 'The new information does not alter the Court’s initial determination,' implying a denial of the renewed motion for bail based on factors including the nature of the offense (involving a minor victim).
DOJ-OGR-00000869.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court order filed on March 22, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court denies the Defendant's third request for release on bail, concluding that she remains a significant flight risk and that no conditions can reasonably assure her appearance. The judge cites the nature of the charges involving a minor victim as a strong factor favoring continued detention.
DOJ-OGR-00000796.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 18, 2019, discusses the legal principles and precedents surrounding the presumption of remand for serious offenses, emphasizing that this presumption is not easily erased and requires deference to Congress's judgment. It highlights that the U.S. Pretrial Services Department, following an interview with Mr. Epstein, issued a report on July 8, 2019, recommending to the Court that Mr. Epstein continue to be remanded, concluding that no conditions could ensure his compliance or public safety.
DOJ-OGR-00000795.jpg
This document is page 12 of a government legal filing from July 18, 2019, arguing for the pretrial detention of Jeffrey Epstein. It details evidence found during a July 6-7, 2019 FBI search of Epstein's NYC mansion, specifically a 'vast trove' of CD's containing thousands of nude photographs of underage girls and women, which the government labels as 'photographic trophies.' The prosecution argues this evidence, along with his 2008 conviction, demonstrates that Epstein poses an ongoing danger to the community.
DOJ-OGR-00000793.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against the pretrial release of Mr. Epstein, asserting he is a danger to the community. It cites testimony from a bail hearing on July 15, 2019, where a victim, Annie Farmer, stated she met Epstein as a minor, was flown to New Mexico, and that he was 'inappropriate' with her. The document uses this testimony to support the government's position that Epstein's release would result in the harassment and abuse of victims.
DOJ-OGR-00000691.jpg
This court transcript from September 3, 2019, captures a judge's opinion that the law is outdated regarding civil cases against deceased individuals. A representative for Mr. Epstein's victims then states their intention to pursue legal action against not only Epstein's estate but also his co-conspirators and enablers, who they allege were essential to his crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00000690.jpg
This document is a court transcript from September 3, 2019, where an attorney argues against an article by Professor Green that opposes victim participation in legal proceedings. The attorney contends this view is inconsistent with the Crime Victim Rights Act, especially in the context of Mr. Epstein's prosecution, and asserts that the purpose of modern criminal law is to mitigate harm to victims. The attorney also informs the court of their advice to their clients that the government must move to dismiss the case.
DOJ-OGR-00000574.jpg
This document is page 64 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, related to Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. A prosecutor is arguing before the judge ('Your Honor') regarding the legal presumption (likely for detention) and rebutting defense arguments that a lack of recent convictions or charges (specifically regarding obstruction or witness tampering) should work in the defendant's favor. The speaker emphasizes that Congress intended for sex crimes against children to carry lifelong liability.
DOJ-OGR-00000569.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, where a speaker identified as Mr. Weinberg argues against the imposition of monetary bail conditions. He supports his position by referencing the federal Bail Reform Act of 1984, a similar movement in Massachusetts, and a broader societal shift away from the overcriminalization policies of the 1980s. Weinberg contends that defendants should not be incarcerated simply because they are unable to pay bail.
DOJ-OGR-00000541.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in which an attorney, Mr. Weinberg, argues against the detention of his client, Mr. Epstein. Weinberg contends that after he rebuts the presumption of danger, the burden of proof falls on the government, and he asserts that the government has found no allegations of illegal sexual activity by Epstein since 2005, despite a lengthy investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00000494.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from July 18, 2019, argues for the pre-trial detention of the defendant, Mr. Epstein. The prosecution asserts that the severity of the charges, which carry a maximum sentence of 45 years, creates a presumption for remand. The document outlines the strength of the evidence, including victim and witness testimony, physical evidence, and reports of witness tampering, and notes Mr. Epstein's prior felony convictions in Florida involving minors.
DOJ-OGR-00000484.jpg
This legal document argues for the continued pretrial detention (remand) of Mr. Epstein. It cites legal precedents establishing a strong presumption of detention for defendants charged with certain serious offenses, arguing this presumption is not easily overcome. The document concludes by highlighting that the U.S. Pretrial Services Department, after interviewing Mr. Epstein, issued a report on July 8, 2019, recommending to the court that he remain in custody.
DOJ-OGR-00000483.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for the pretrial detention of Mr. Epstein. The prosecution contends that a July 2019 search of his New York City mansion uncovered a 'vast trove' of sexually suggestive photographs of young women and girls, which they describe as 'photographic trophies.' This evidence, combined with his 2008 Florida sex crime convictions, is presented to demonstrate that he poses an 'ongoing and forward-looking danger' to the community and should not be released pending trial.
DOJ-OGR-00000481.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, outlines the court's finding that Mr. Epstein poses a danger to the community. It details that victims have expressed fear for their safety should he be released and highlights the testimony of one victim, Annie Farmer. Ms. Farmer, represented by counsel David Boies, testified that she met Epstein at age 16, was flown to New Mexico, and that he was 'inappropriate' with her, leading her to oppose his pretrial release.
DOJ-OGR-00000348.jpg
This document is Page 6 of a legal filing (likely a bail/detention memorandum) submitted to Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman on July 8, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein. The prosecution argues for detention based on overwhelming evidence, including an 'extraordinary volume' of nude photographs of minors found at Epstein's New York residence and call records linking him and his agents to victims. The document also argues that the previous Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with the Southern District of Florida does not prevent the Southern District of New York from prosecuting this case.
DOJ-OGR-00000284.jpg
This document is page 11 of a defense memorandum filed on July 11, 2019, arguing for Jeffrey Epstein's pretrial release. The defense asserts that Epstein is not a flight risk, citing his stable family background in the U.S., his business ties, and his history of compliance with sex offender registration requirements in Florida, New York, and the Virgin Islands over the previous decade. It acknowledges his wealth and Paris residence but emphasizes that the majority of his assets are in the U.S. and offers a sealed financial disclosure.
DOJ-OGR-00000016.jpg
This is page 15 of an appellate court decision (likely the Second Circuit) dated September 17, 2024, affirming legal interpretations in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The court rejects Maxwell's argument regarding the statute of limitations for Counts Three, Four, and Six, citing the 'facts of the case' approach over the 'categorical approach' and referencing testimony from a victim named 'Jane' regarding interstate transportation and sexual abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00000015.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal opinion (likely from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals) affirming a District Court's decision to deny Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss charges based on timeliness. The court rejects Maxwell's arguments regarding the statute of limitations and the applicability of the 2003 amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3283, ruling that the offenses involving sexual abuse of minors fall within the extended statute of limitations. The document cites legal precedents including Weingarten v. United States and United States v. Sampson.
DOJ-OGR-00021109.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for a specific interpretation of statute § 3283. It cites legal precedents from cases like Bridges, Scharton, and Noveck to support the claim that § 3283 does not modify the statute of limitations for § 2423(a) violations. The document contrasts this with a 2001 action by Congress, which used explicit language to eliminate the statute of limitations for certain terrorism offenses, arguing that Congress knows how to be specific when it intends to be.
DOJ-OGR-00021104.jpg
This legal document, from Case 22-1426 dated February 28, 2023, presents an argument concerning the statute of limitations under 18 U.S.C. § 3283. It traces the legislative history of the statute from the 1994 Crime Bill to the 2003 PROTECT Act, arguing that the lifetime statute of limitations introduced in 2003 cannot be retroactively applied to offenses committed before its enactment. The document also contends that § 3283 does not apply to the specific counts in question because the nature of the offense does not match the statute's requirements.
DOJ-OGR-00021050.jpg
This document is a Table of Contents page (page ii) from a legal appeal filed on February 28, 2023. It outlines arguments regarding the Statute of Limitations (Point II) and allegations that Juror No. 50 made false statements during voir dire, denying Ms. Maxwell a fair trial (Point III). The document specifically references the Mann Act, Section 3283, and the McDonough Test regarding juror bias.
DOJ-OGR-00021042.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 28, 2023, in which a judge explains the legal basis for applying specific sentencing enhancements to a defendant. The judge refutes the defendant's arguments that guideline 4B1.5(b) requires a finding of future danger and outlines the necessary factual findings for applying a leadership role enhancement under guideline 3B1.1(a).
DOJ-OGR-00021041.jpg
A page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426, related to the Ghislaine Maxwell appeal) documenting a judge's ruling during sentencing. The judge finds the defendant engaged in a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct with a minor on at least two occasions. The judge overrules a defense objection that argued the sentencing enhancement should only apply if the defendant posed a continuing danger to the public, citing that the text of the Guidelines is unambiguous.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity