Epstein Secrets

t "prejudice" the court should consider — "all relevant evidence is `prejudicial' in that it `may prejudice the party against whom it is admitted." Mullen v. Princess Anne Volunteer Fire Co., 853 F.2d 1130, 1134 (4th Cir. 1988). 4. The existence of unusual circumstances militating either for or again

Document 96 Entered on FLSD Docket 09:1672011 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR "LIMITED" INTERVENTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN COM

t "prejudice" the court should consider — "all relevant evidence is 'prejudicial' in that it 'may prejudice the party against whom it is admitted." Mullen v. Princess Anne Volunteer Fire Co., 853 F.2d 1130, 1134 (4th Cir. 1988). 4. The existence of unusual circumstances militating either for or again

Document 96 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/16/2011 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR "LIMITED" INTERVENTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN COM

BBC (09/08, Ahmadi), CNN (09/08, Yan, Smart, et al.), Fox News (09/08, Wolf, McAdams), The Independent (09/09, Liddell), NBC News (09/08, Alsharif, Mullen), Newsweek (09/08, Sundel, Stanton, Lemon), New York Post (09/08, Blair, Nelson) (2), The New York Times (09/08, Medina, Fausset, Cochrane), Politi

reuninger), CNN (09/08, Blake), The Center Square (09/08, Sweeney), The Atlantic (09/08, Chait), The Daily Beast (09/08, Esposito), Deadline (09/08, Johnson), Forbes (09/08, Folk), The Guardian (09/08, Dunbar, Lowell) (2), The Hill (09/08, Samuels, Beitsch), The Independent (09/08, Baragona) (2), NBC New

ing a no-fly zone in Libya, Gates went on the record saying what a bad idea he thought that was. "It's an open secret Bob Gates didn't like it, and Mullen didn't like it, because they know what happens when you do this no-fly zone," says Gelb, who writes a column for The Daily Beast. "If you think you

china had absorbed the historical lessons of these earlier experiences. Perhaps Robert S. McNamara, defense secretary under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, had the least excuse for this neglect. Having helped to supervise the strategic bombing of Nazi Germany and Japan, he, of all people, should have

660 F.3d 149, 157 (2d Cir. 2011) ("the Fifth Amendment does not protect against hard choices" (internal quotation marks omitted)); United States v. Mullen, 536 F.2d 997, 1000 (2d Cir. 1976) (there is a difference between "those choices which are physically or psychologically coerced and those which ar

except in the most extraordinary circumstances." Forde, 740 F.Supp.2d at 412 (citing Gaudin, 515 U.S. at 522-23). As the Supreme Court explained in Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461 (1997), "there is no doubt that materiality is an element of perjury under § 1623," and its precedent "therefore dict