EFTA02608069

From: Valeria Chomsky < Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 4:44 PM To: jeffrey E.; Noam Chomsky Subject: Tax issues Could Richard K. talk to Vinc=nt about the release? There is =lso a question about the loan that is going to be cancelled that will caus= us tax problems, because it will be considered as income, and Vincent is =oing to consult with a tax person to try to find a way to minimize it. 0= Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:21 AM Valeria Chomsky < <mailto > w=ote: I would like to write the following: There is no "seller's remorse the day=after", and I think you and Jason achieved a very good result.=C2* My point is about the information we have a=ailable, it is not to question the amount of the settlement, but to have t=e truth established about the assets of the trust on December 31, 2014, si=ce they provided a false information. There is no reason to accept the fal=e information when we have the documents proving it. And I don't see why the acknowledgements wouldn't b= possible. Valeria What do you think? Valeria Forwarded message - <mailto From: Vincent =isegna < => > Date: Thu, Jan 1=, 2019 at 10:30 AM Subject: RE: URGENT To: Valeria Chomsky < >, Jason B. Curtin < <mailto:JCurtin@kb- law.com» Cc: Noam Chomsky < -gt; Good morning.=C2. Yesterday, we d=scussed at length the choice you faced. You could settle early on ac=eptable terms but to do so, it required foregoing further investigation in=o the facts of the case. Or, alternatively, you could choose not to settle EFTA_R1_01800340 EFTA02608069 and embark on discovery and a further investiga=ion of the facts. You very clearly chose that further litigation was=not in Noam and your best interests because of the stress that would be in=olved in further litigation and that closure was of paramount importance. Also, the settlement is a very =ood deal for you. This is not an unusual judgment for a client to ma=e and it is also not unusual to have "seller's remorseQ=8* the day after a settlement. I do not think we can rescind the agreement and it doesn't sound like you want to rescind the agreem=nt. We successfully negotiated for a release of you so let's=see what we can put into the release. I do not think we will be able=to negotiate the acknowledgements you reference. Feel free to ca=l if you want to talk about this. Vincent J. Pisegna Krokidas & Bluestein LLP 600 Atlantic Avenue Boston, MA 02210 Tel: Fax: <mailto > </=pan> www.kb-law.com <http://www.kb-law.comi> From: Valeria Chomsky < Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 10:06 AM To: Vincent Pisegna < law.com> Cc: Noam Chomsky < Subject: URGENT Vincent and Jason, <mailto <mailto <mailto > > »; Jason B. Curtin > > First of all, thank you very much for solving this c=nstant and stressful situation in our life. 2 EFTA_R1_01800341 EFTA02608070 I would like to make some comments that I think are =f paramount importance. We keep finding outrageous false information from Ma= and Harry, such as that the funds in the Marital Trust was only $1,000,00= until the Lexington house was sold and incorporated to it. This is = flat lie -- as the documents I sent you prove it (Bainco statement from December 2014 and Harry's e-mail from =ay 2015, when the Lexington house was sold). Also outrageous to say that the Trust was providing = house to Noam, when the apartment in Cambridge was bought with half of a =ortgage with a commercial institution that we were paying monthly and with=half of the funds coming from a loan from the Marital Trust with the highest possible interest rate, when Noam =ould have bought it himself with the funds from his IRA, that was being di=tributed to them. The only reason for this loan from the Marital Tru=t was to have the apartment tied to the trust and not allow to have it as a jointly owned property with me, as=Noam requested many times. Requests very well documented in e-mails =xchanges. There are numberless other examples of them acting i= bad faith and since it has been a pattern from them, with their father be=ng competent and productive, I have to express my concerns for the future,=if Noam and/or I become somehow limited in our cognitive capacities and they try to manipulate again or if Noam di=s before me and they contest Noam's will. Although we preferred a settlement, if we would have=gone to court, much more would be discovered and we would have the documen=s that now we are missing to prove what had been done wrong. With th= settlement we won't have access to them anymore. It seems to me that the moment requires that in thei= releases they acknowledge explicitly that they recognized all the gifts t=ey have received from Noam in the form of trusts for them, trusts for the =randchildren, the Lexington house, the Wellfleet house, royalties for children and grandchildren, payment of =xpenses, distributions from Noam's IRA to them, justifying the settlem=nt, and now the Marital Trust where Noam is waiving most of his rights to =t, and most important also correct through the documents that I provided (Bainco statement and the email from=Harry) that the Marital Trust in December 31, 2014 had a market value of $=,502,581, and that the Lexington house was sold in May 2015, therefore it =as not the proceeds from the house that elevated the assets of the Marital Trust from $1,000,000 to the curre=t value -- as they falsely stated. It also should include that they recognize that the =oney that Noam was left with, it is for him to live his life with his wife= and that if some is left (hopefully Noam will live long enough to use it =11) they agree that Noam decided to leave in his will only to his wife, Valeria. Therefore with this settle=ent, they are not going to contest Noam's will or claim any additional=funds. 3 EFTA_R1_01800342 EFTA02608071 I think we have to address this information, or we w=ll be signing that all the false information they gave us is correct and r=sk to have more problems in the future. We accept the agreement, but we don't have to ac=ept their false information. I should add that the only reason I don't want t= go to Court is because I don't want to cause more stress to Noam. Oth=rwise, I would much prefer to go to Court and have all the issues clarifie=, as I see the non-clarification of them as potential future problems and accusations. Valeria Chomsky Forwarded message From: Valeria Chomsky < <mailto m> > Date: Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:34 PM Subject: Fake news To: Vincent Pisegna < <mailto », Jason B. Curtin a- law.com <mailto:[email protected]» Cc: Noam Chomsky < <mailto > > One of the main characteristics of so-called "p=stmodern" societies is to disregard the difference between objective =nd subjective, truth and lie, reality and fiction. This case is a striking example of the contempt of o=jective reality by a large number of people who have preferred to believe =he lie that coincides with their previous opinions. The famous "fake =ews" prevailed over reality, the belief about reason. The attachment shows the Carol Chomsky Exempt Marita= Trust, on December 31, 2014 with a market value of $2,502,581.<=u> And the email copied below shows that the Lexington =ouse was sold in May 2015. Something is not right in their allegations.<=> 4 EFTA_R1_01800343 EFTA02608072 Valeria Chomsky 5 EFTA_R1_0 1800344 EFTA02608073