Warning: More crap from the Epstein files coming in, and it is truly nauseating. This one includes a lengthy rationalization for Jeffrey Epstein’s behavior, written by Jeffrey Epstein in the third person. We have this email because Epstein wrote to Noam Chomsky (Noam Chomsky!) asking him to critique it.

Im considering submitting this to the oped of the wash post id like your thoughts

Sweetheart deal!” So goes the attack on the resolution of the more than a decade
ago federal investigation involving our client Jeffrey Epstein. The attack is
profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law nor the facts. Nor is it supported
by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected
to an extremely aggressive federal intrusion into what would typically be considered
a quintessentially local criminal matter in south
Florida. The offense investigated — at its core, sexual favors for hire — has long
been treated as a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal
government. The conduct — for which Jeffrey took full responsibility — was a
classic state offense and was treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in
Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, without a request from the state prosecutors, the
federal government intervened. For their own opportunistic reasons, many are now
criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor
Alex Acosta (then-United States Attorney in south Florida), for not going far enough.
The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. They also ignore a fact going to the
heart of fundamental fairness: In the decade since paying his debt to society, Jeffrey
Epstein has led a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of
generosity and good deeds.

So…a guy who has a massage table in his living room, who recruits high school girls for daily masturbation sessions, sees himself as living a life characterized by responsible citizenship, numerous acts of generosity and good deeds. He doesn’t say what the good deeds are, and most of all, he doesn’t explain where he got the huge amounts of money he used to fund his self-aggrandizing charities.

But then, he has all the “facts,” and he’s going to go on and on about his view of the truth. Sorry, this is long.

Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman
with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in illegal conduct that
amounted to solicitation of prostitution. That conduct was wrong and a violation of
Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were
involved, some of the women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were
carefully assessed by experienced state sex crime prosecutors who aggressively
enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the
public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney’s Office conducted an
extensive fifteen-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division.
Mr. Epstein was then indicted by the state grand jury on a single felony count of
solicitation of prostitution.
During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and
analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims,
considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of
exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about
being eighteen years old to be allowed into Mr. Epstein’s home. After months of
negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution
of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with
that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it
should have.
Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorneys Office extensively and
aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human
trafficking ring, targeted minors, or used the internet or traveled interstate in the
process. But that’s not what this was and that’s not what happened. That is
precisely why the federal authorities’ ultimate decision to defer prosecution to the
state was the right one.
However, the federally-demanded resolution was not without conditions. The federal
prosecutors insisted on various unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein’s
experienced defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere.
Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was required to request that the state
prosecutors demand the imposition of a thirty-month sentence that included both jail
time and the strictest conditions of probation: lifetime sex-offender registration. Those
draconian measures were far more than warranted by the state grand jury’s
indictment and would not have otherwise been required under the previously agreedupon state disposition. As part of this highly unusual deal, the government required
Jeffrey to pay for a highly experienced group of attomeys to bring claims against him
on behalf of a government list of asserted victims. Jeffrey was required to waive the
right to challenge those claims without being provided the asserted victim’s identities
by the government until after he was incarcerated. Importantly, the feds’ decision to
decline prosecution in deference to the state in exchange for these extraordinary
requirements was reviewed and approved at the multiple levels of the U.S.
Department of Justice. Jeffrey took full responsibility, complied with the feds’
demands, served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same
(including his time served) as any other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct
while in custody was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial
authorities.
Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. The challenges to his Agreement with
the Government must also be understood as challenges to the millions Mr. Epstein
paid to the asserted victims and their lawyers pursuant to that agreement. Amongst
the beneficiaries of the Epstein-Federal Government Agreement were the many
victims who collectively received many millions as a result of the conditions imposed
on Mr. Epstein that prevented him from meaningfully contesting civil liability —
moneys that would be at issue if requests to invalidate the agreement were granted.
Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women
and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power,
especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey’s offenses of yesteryear,
which were entirely outside of the workplace, have long since been redressed by the
criminal justice system. He fully and faithfully has performed every promise and
obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. In the spirit of the
bedrock American belief in second chances and fundamental fairness, that chapter in
Jeffrey’s otherwise-productive and charitable life should be allowed to close once
and for all.

Again, what productive and charitable life? He’s a rich fuck with no discernible source of income living a life of excess and perversion, pretending to be a victim of an out-of-control state that caught him in one crime, in which he’d been tricked by a woman who said she was over 18.

He’s asking Noam Chomsky if he should publish it. Chomsky tells him no, for various reasons.

It’s a powerful and convincing statement, but my feeling is that it would not be wise to submit it for
publication. Taking the stance of a reader who comes to the matter from afresh, perhaps having
heard some rumors but knowing nothing, the reaction I suspect will be of the “where there’s smoke
there’s fire” kind. Few are willing to think through the arguments and factual details or to try to
adjudicate conflicting claims. I’ve seen this happen over and over on other matters — many years of
having been accused of Holocaust denial, for example.. Ugly and bitter as it is, I suspect the best
course now is not to stir the pot by raising the issue publicly, opening the door to charges and
accusations that can no doubt be answered in the court of logic and fairness — but that’s not the
public domain, where innuendo and suspicion and accusation reign.
Anyway, for what it’s worth, that’s the way it looks to me, in part on the basis of experience.
The great work that you have been doing speaks for itself. My feeling is that you should keep at it,
and simply develop a thick skin to fend off whatever ugliness breaks through now and then,
diminishing over time.
Noam

Great work, my ass. Chomsky is sucking up to a rich patron here, nothing more. Epstein’s crimes were not the product of innuendo and suspicion, but were actually victimizations of women and girls that he used and discarded.

Chomsky makes it worse.

Cultures unfortunately can be swept by craziness. Nazism for example. Or the Great Awakening.
We’re in one of those phases now. If there’s a charge, it’s true, in fact True. Any response is
“mansplaining,” another power play, reinforcing the charge. You’ve seen I’m sure what happened to
Lawrence. Full and complete response, amounts to zero. Isn’t even considered. It’s like trying to
discuss rationally with religious fanatics.
Noam

Poor Lawrence Krauss, a victim of a feminism that is comparable to Nazism.

My opinion of Noam Chomsky has just plummetted down into the basement. Fuck you, Noam.