Epstein Secrets

"pink tide" sweeping Latin America. Along with these governments, Chavez described his policies as anti-imperialist, being a prominent adversary of the United States' foreign policy as well as a vocal critic of the US-supported neoliberalism and laissez-faire capitalism. He supported Latin American and Caribbean

rican and Caribbean cooperation and was instrumental in setting up the pan- regional Union of South American Nations, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas, the Bank of the South, and the regional television network TeleSur. However, Chavez had extensive disputes with Colombia, and supported rebels in

- The Mouse That Roared - of the 1955 satirical novel by Irish- American writer Leonard Wibberley, an impoverished backward nation declares a war on the United States of America, hoping to lose, but things don't go according to plan. The Plot: The tiny (three miles by five miles) European Duchy of Grand Fenwick, supposedly l

stand that he had been seriously played by Cheney, in the administration's last days, Bush refused to pardon his right-hand man, Lewis I. "Scooter" Libby, who had been convicted of obstruction of justice and perjury in the Valerie Plame case (though he did commute Libby's prison sentence). Unrepentan

zier, 944 F.2d 820, 825 (11th Cir. 1991) (even a witness who testifies before a grand jury is not required to keep his testimony secret); Blalock v. United Slates, 844 F.2d 1546, 1551 (11th Cir. 1988) ("Rule 6(e)(2) only protects information revealing what has occurred, or will occur, inside the grand jury ro

he Court's earlier finding. The Government also candidly admits that since then "the delay from October 28, 2010 through early March 2011 was due to the United States' efforts to reach [an] amicable resolution of the case . . . .. Gov't Resp. at 46 n.22. 9 The CVRA does not appear to impose specific timelines for v

ring before Epstein and Groff that had nothing to do with the inner workings of the grand jury. There is abundant caselaw to that effect. See, e.g., United States v. Frazier, 944 F.2d 820, 825 (11th Cir. 1991) (even a witness who testifies before a grand jury is not required to keep his testimony secret); Blal

he W.R. Grace case. See, e.g., United States v. W.R. Grace, 408 F.Supp.2d 998, 1016 (D. Mont. 2005) (Community Advisory Group set up in the town of Libby, Montana to ensure compliance with the CVRA during criminal prosecution for mass environmental crime involving hundreds of community members). 22

18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(4)." United States. Okun, 2009 WL 790042 at *2 (E.D.Va. 2009). Still another decision at odds with the Government's position is United States' Rubin, 2008 WL 2358591 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). This decision is instructive because it not only explains that victims have rights before the formal filing

he Court's earlier finding. The Government also candidly admits that since then "the delay from October 28, 2010 through early March 2011 was due to the United States' efforts to reach [an] amicable resolution of the case . . . ." Gov't Resp. at 46 n.22. 9 The CVRA does not appear to impose specific timelines for v

he W.R. Grace case. See, e.g., United States I. W.R. Grace, 408 F.Supp.2d 998, 1016 (D. Mont. 2005) (Community Advisory Group set up in the town of Libby, Montana to ensure compliance with the CVRA during criminal prosecution for mass environmental crime involving hundreds of community members). 22

d-liners, increase its interest in perhaps actually acquiring a nuclear weapon someday, and cause the other members of the P5+1 to part company with the United States. The neoconservative worldview also exaggerates the efficacy of military force and downplays the value of diplomacy. Military force is an essential

the ayatollahs attempting to kill the deal during negotiations. In the second row were former congresswoman Michele Bachmann and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Cheney aide whose tenure led to a prison sentence. Surely, those who would like to see Congress undo the nuclear agreement can't expect that r

ing juror sympathy."). Any attempt to encourage such sympathy is therefore an attempt at nullification, which is itself plainly improper. See, e.g., United States v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606, 615 (2d Cir. 1997) (Jury nullification is "by no means a right or 3 Evidence of the defendant's motive may be relevant evid

15 Cr. 238 (SI), 2017 WL 5260784 (D. Or. Nov. 13, 2017).27, 28, 29 United States v. Labansat, 94 F.3d 527 (9th Cir. 1996) 26, 30 United States v. Libby, 461 F. Supp. 2d 3 (D.D.C. 2006) passim United States v. Lumpkin, 192 F.3d 280 (2d Cir. 1999) 20,21,22,31 United States v. Mathis, 264 F.3d 321 (

25, 2016) 13, 16 United States v. Lewis, 35 F.3d 148 (4th Cir. 1994) 28 United States v. Lewis, 517 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2008) 32 United States v. Libby, 429 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2006) 24 United States v. Manzano, 945 F.3d 616 (2d Cir. 2019) 13, 17 United States v. McGuinness, 764 F. Supp. 888 (S

tes v. Southland Corp., 760 F.2d 1366, 1372 (2d Cir. 1985) ("Ignorance of the law is no defense to a charge of purposeful and intentional action."); United States v. Rosenfield, 469 F.2d 598, 601 n.2 (3d Cir. 1972) ("As long as the inexcusable intent is present, it is not necessary that the defendant know that