EFTA01031837.pdf

From: J <jeevacation®gmail.com> To: Lilly Sanchez Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL and ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2019 19:59:57 +0000 What do you suggest On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 1:15 PM Lilly Sanchez < > wrote: Hi Spoke to darren. Sony for the delay but I was at my nieces first holy Communion. I have reviewed the New York Times article and the draft letter to the editor and I have told Darren that you can add my name. Let's also talk further about the press. Reid was in Vancouver the rest of last week and was going to call me this week and I am still waiting to hear from him Lilly Ann Sanchez The LS Law Finn On Mar 2, 2019, at 9:32 AM, J <[email protected]> wrote: Forwarded message From: Martin Weinberg <1 Date: Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 9:22 AM Subject: CONFIDENTIAL and ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE To: Ken Starr , Martin Weinber ,Alan Dershowitz Kathy Ruemmler , Darren Indyke , J <[email protected]> A very quick morning stab at a possible letter to editor.- hopefully to motivate edits, discussion, revisions, I think this route makes far more sense than uninvited Op-Eds. Also consistent with a draft being edited to be sent to Sen Sasse. The NYT Editorial is enraging in its political bias - and is deeply damaging. Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. 20 Park Plaza Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 - Office - Cell This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. On Sat, 3/2/19, J [email protected]> wrote: Subject: time sensitive EFTA01031837 To: "Ken Stan" .cm , "Martin Vi iale>, "Alan Dershowitz" , "Kathy Ruemmler" , "Darren Indyke" Date: Saturday, March 2, 2019, 12:42 AM now that the NYT , the paper of record has gotten so many facts and conclusions wrong. I thought a direct response to the editorial board was now appropriate. . thoughts on more than one member of the team on the byline?. . starting with the suggestion that 5 professional criminal defense attorney somehow colluded with alex acosta is preposterous. . it was reviewed by many sets of eyes at DOJ / reference sloman letter.? . the attack on the decision to require Epstein to plead in the state.rather than in fed court . was an outcome dictated by the fact that this was a quintessential state case. A florida case of sex for money. . The ages of a minority of the women actually under 18 at the time. and the govt contending with the fact that many of them said they had misrepresented their age to epstein and the clubs at which they worked. ? . There was never a sex party. Epstein does not have parties. . he had a science gathering and allegations were made that one of the women was required to have sex with academics world leaders. academics including stephen hawkings.. ? the guest list were used to accuse people of sex assault. ). President Clinton was never ever on his island. no proof , neither was al gore. . at some point a newspaper , should take a step back and in its desire to craft a story re a trump cabinet member and check its facts. ? etc. thoughts. . please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for EFTA01031838  the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved <DRAFT LETTER TO EDITORS.doc> please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA01031839