Epstein Secrets

led to allege spe- cific tort or place tort occurred); Kline, 685 F.Supp. at 391 (finding tort exception inapplicable where victim was abducted in Mexico City and brought to the United 25. Judge Robertson recognized the same diffi- culty. Although he did consider Plaintiffs's claims under the tort excepti

en on the liberal standard of Rule 12(b)(6)." De Jesus v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 87 F.3d 65, 70 (2d Cir

ons of conscience.” Specifically, he said he objected to the CIA’s covert support of Latin American dictators. After contacting the Soviet embassy in Mexico City, he defected to Cuba, where he leaked infor- mation that exposed CIA operations. Although Agee insisted he was a whistle-blower, and he adamantly den

espionage services. When I was interviewing James Jesus Angleton—the CIA’s legendary ex- counterintellige

mpromised. Nor did any of them ever return to the United States. Martin changed his name to Vladimir Sokolodsky, married a Russian woman, and died in Mexico City on January 17, 1987. Mitchell vanished from sight and was reported to have died in St. Petersburg on November 12, 2001. Hamilton, after telling Russi

y specialized corporate “head- hunters,” as James Jesus Angleton described the process to me during the C

sons of conscience.” Specifically, he said he objected to the CIA’s covert support of Latin America dictators. After contacting the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, he defected to Cuba, where he leaked information that exposed CIA operations. Although Agee insisted he was a whistle-blower, and he adamantly denie

res that sprung from the “paranoid mind” of James Jesus Angleton. When I then cited the signature line fr

ven on the liberal standard of Rule 12(b)(6).” De Jesus v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 87 F.3d 65, 70 (2d Cir.19

failed to allege spe- cific tort or place tort occurred); Kline, 685 F.Supp. at 391 (finding tort exception inapplicable where victim was abducted in Mexico City and brought to the United 25. Judge Robertson recognized the same diffi- culty. Although he did consider Plaintiffs’s claims under the tort exceptio