Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02661302DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02661302

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02661302
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2018 12:44 AM To: Noam Chomsky Subject: Re: Marital Trust You might add that if they feel a lawyer can explain= the mutual release you have one that will sign off On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 11:26 PM Noam Chomsky > wro=e: I'm glad that you find=the idea interesting and think that you might consider it, though you have=to consult lawyers first. My own view is different. T= me the proposal I suggested seems to be a very simple way of settling thi= matter, which to me is extremely troubling. I realize that this is =ust another case of a longstanding difference in the way we approach these=problems, a difference that has been clear ever since we were discussing t=e interest on the loan from the Trust and found that we could not communic=te because I mistakenly assumed that it was a discussion among family memb=rs while your letters made it very clear and explicit that you saw it as a=legal issue to be settled among lawyers and Bainco, perhaps with a mediato= in the adversary proceeding. All matters I find it very hard to com=rehend, and to live with, but so be it. So by all means con=ult with your lawyer, or perhaps a battery of lawyers, to make sure that y=ur interests are properly protected. I don't need any lawyer'=s advice. The matter is perfectly clear and straightforward. 5= there is no reason for me to hire a lawyer to deal with the question and =o have a lawyer contact yours and initiate a discussion in which we all pa=ticipate. The matter is very simple. We can proceed w=thout delay if you agree to settle the issue in the simple manner that I s=ggested. As for your proposals in your letter of March 29, =s I wrote you, the letter was so shocking that it was hard for me to bring=myself to respond, but I did, in detail, but decided not to send it. =Perhaps I should. Will think about it. As for your pr=posals, my response was the obvious one. I'm sorry for the stres= you had to endure, but your efforts were a waste of time for reasons I ha= already fully explained before you undertook them. As I'm sure =ou recall, a few years ago, I requested tax payments from the marital trus= when my IRA was being rapidly depleted by my advisers who were distributi=g half to family and using the other half to pay management fees and taxes=for the entire estate, so that to pay Alex's medical expenses and the =xpenses for Wellfleet I had to withdraw excess funds with exorbitant taxes= all that before withdrawing even a cent to live on again with exorbitant =axes. Your response was to refuse the request unless I agreed to int=usive and insulting financial investigations -- of a kind I never consider=d when providing funds to you for something you needed. I made it cl=ar and explicit at the time that I would not submit to this procedure. =AO Since your efforts and proposals simply repeat the same procedure, they=were a waste of time. There were some things in your letter=that were correct. You're right that despite what has happened, ='m still a "wealthy man," with income well above the median,=though lacking a pension and accumulated property, not at the level of my =eers. Furthermore, I can supplement my income by teaching large unde=graduate courses, something I'd never done and that is not that common=for people approaching 90, but something that I enjoy. And you too a=e a wealthy man, for the same reasons: the reasons are that I've worke= hard all my life, lived fairly simply (and live even EFTA_R1_01909505 EFTA02661302 more simply today), =nd was therefore able to put aside enough money to ensure that my children-and grandchildren are very well cared for, indefinitely. =div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-seritfont-size:12=8px;font-style:normal;font-variant- ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:norm=l;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:starttext-indent:0px3=xt- transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb=255,255,255);text-decoration- style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">=br> But I again suggest that we put all of this aside, and deal quick=y and simply with what appears to be the one outstanding issue: dividing t=e Marital trust and then dissolving it, all very simple, needing no lawyer=, at least on my part. 0 On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 1=44 PM, Harry Chomsky wrote: As I wrote a l=ttle while ago, I did write a long response to your last -- deeply depress=ng -- letter, but decided not to send it. I may return to that lette= later but will keep to some factual matters that ought to be cleared up.<=iv> But now I'm writing just about one point, which seem= to be the core of the problem -- a problem, which, again, I don't und=rstand. But let's put that aside, though I hope we can clear it =p soon. All of this is a painful cloud that I never would have=imagined would darken my late years. The core iss=e seems to be the marital trust. I've explained how M and I actu=lly set it up with Eric, which seemed to us just plain common sense. =I've also explained Max's different interpretation. I've=asked you for yours, but haven't heard it. But let's put tha= aside too, and just resolve the matter, as can be done very simply -- wit= no need for lawyers to explain the fiduciary responsibility of the truste= I appointed years ago to replace me, something I never paid any attention=to before. The simple solution is to divide the t=ust into two parts. One part will go to you, to use as you wish. =A0 One part will go to me, for me to use without any investigations of my =inancial situation and other such intrusions that I won't accept. =AO Then the trust can simply be dissolved, and it is all over. <=1" So I suggest that we proceed this way, and end the whole matt=r -- at least, whatever it is that I understand about what is of concern t= you. 0 =br> please n=te The information contained in this communication is confident=al, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside informatio=, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property=of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communicat=on or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If y=u have received this communication in error, please notify us immediate=y by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:jeevacation@gmail.=om> , and destroy this commu=ication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -a=l rights reserved 2 EFTA_R1_01909506 EFTA02661303 --000000000000685c57056c987c83-- conversation-id 5434 date-last-viewed 0 date-received 1526777061 flags 8590195713 gmail-label-ids 7 6 remote-id 822595 3 EFTA_R1_01909507 EFTA02661304

Technical Artifacts (5)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone2661302
Phone2661303
Phone2661304
Phone6777061

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.