Epstein Secrets

rd-Party Plaintiff, ) ) V. ) ) JAMES EDWARD STALEY ) ) Third-Party Defendant. ) ) STIPULATED

who had three meetings scheduled with Epstein in 2014. Jeffrey Epstein's Private Calendar: CIA Director William Burns. Goldman Sachs's Top Lawyer. Noam Chomsky - WSl. As detailed below, in response to Ms. clear-eyed, prescient report, and despite subsequent repeated red flags that Epstein trafficked girls and

rector William Burns. Goldman Sachs's Top Lawyer. Noam Chomsky - WSl. As detailed below, in response to Ms. c

r William Burns. Goldman Sachs's Top Lawyer. Noam Chomsky - WSl. As detailed below, in response to Ms. c

was a large dose of chutzpah. The leading case affirming the power of government to censor porn was Roth v. United States. But in a more recent case, Stanley v. Georgia, the court carved out an exception to the exception. A divided court ruled, in an opinion by Justice Thurgood Marshall, that the state had

Court ruled only on [home] possession in the Stanley case,” but I argued that there was no real difference between possession and exhibition: Surely Stanley could not have been prosecuted under Justice Marshall’s decision if he were caught putting the film in the 8mm projector and showing the film to him

I have engaged in public debates and controversies with some of the most contentious and influential figures of the age including William F. Buckley, Noam Chomsky, Rabbi Meyer Kahana, Rabbi Adan Steinzaltz, Justice Antonin Scalia, Ken Starr, Elie Wiesel, Vaclav Havel, Golda Meir, Red Auerbach, William Kunstler,

res of the age including William F. Buckley, Noam Chomsky, Rabbi Meyer Kahana, Rabbi Adan Steinzaltz, Justi

h respect to public distribution in the full sense, and that restricted distribution, adequately controlled, is no longer to be condemned. If a rich Stanley can view a film, or read a book, in his home, a poorer Stanley should be free to visit a protected theater or library. We see no reason for saying he

se we assume that the film is obscene by standards currently applied by the Massachusetts courts. He then went on to discuss the implications of the Stanley decision, which the prosecutor had argued was “irrelevant” to this case and which, at the beginning of my argument, thought was not relevant to movie

hed either for denying or proclaiming that an historical event occurred. Several years ago I became embroiled in a heated controversy with Professor Noam Chomsky over the issue of Holocaust denial and the proper role of a civil libertarian in defending the right of Holocaust deniers, without defending the subs

cturer received threats from irate survivors. The University of Lyon, claiming that it could not guarantee his safety, suspended him for a semester. Chomsky sprang to Faurisson’s defense, not only on the issue of free speech, but on the merits of his “scholarship” and of his “character.” Chomsky signed a

l. hoffman, hoie sinofsky, sheldrake, suzlberger, jes staley, joscha bach, joi ito. . HBJ berge, miro, anas ra

d, saks, john kery, george mitchell, mandelbbrot. chomsky, barrack barak, zagat, nathan, brian greene, yau,