Mediaboss Marketing

Netflix's new documentary series Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich was released on Wednesday, May 27. OVer the four episodes, the series looks at the allegations against Epstein and hears testimony from his accusers. During the documentary, there is harrowing and graphic descriptions of the alleged abuse.

The programme starts off with Epstein being questioned in January 25, 2012 as part of a deposition in which hes questioned under oath by a lawyer.

As part of his sworn evidence, he states he has holiday homes in New Mexico, Palm Beach, Paris and New York.

Epstein confirms he has been convicted of a crime, saying there are two counts one for soliciting prostitution and the other procuring a minor for prostitution.

When asked whether he committed these acts, Epstein says: Im going to invoke my Fifth Amendment right.

The interview continues and hes asked more questions including how many times hes solicited a minor for prostitution and where he's solicited minors.

READ MORE:Jeffrey Epstein Filthy Rich Netflix release date: How many episodes?

Each time Epstein invokes his Fifth Amendment right and says same answer as he refuses to answer any questions.

A second lawyer is heard saying: Lets take a break. Were going to go off the record.

The lawyer asking Epstein the questions then asks: So you are terminating the deposition at this time?

The second lawyer says: We are recessing the deposition.

While this conversation is going on, Epstein can be seen removing his microphone and walking away from the desk.

READ MORE:Ghislaine Maxwell disappearance: Where is Ghislaine Maxwell now?

The Fifth Amendment is one of the first 10 Amendments of the US constitution, which makes up the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights outlines the rights and privileges enjoyed by American citizens in relation to the government.

Other civil liberties mentioned in the Bill of Rights include the freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right against cruel and unusual punishment.

The wording of the Fifth Amendment reads: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

DON'T MISS...Filthy Rich Jeffrey Epstein documentary Netflix release date[EXPLAINER]Royal shock: Why Westminster Abbey bells WILL ring for Prince Andrew[ANALYSIS]Epstein saga has long way to go, say RICHARD AND JUDY[COMMENT]

By invoking this right, a person can stop themselves from self-incrimination either during an interrogation or voluntarily.

This also means a person would not be forced to testify against themselves.

The Fifth Amendment prevents double jeopardy, which means a person cant be tried twice for the same crime.

Other stipulations of the Fifth Amendment are the due process of law, which means all levels of the American government must act within the law and in criminal cases has the right to a grand jury.

READ MORE:Jeffrey Epstein: How did Jeffrey Epstein make his money?

An article from the Michigan Law Review from Yale University, has analysed the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment with the authors Akhil Reed Amar and Renee B. Lettow describing it as an unsolved riddle of vast proportions.

In the past, people have pled the Fifth both inside and outside the courtroom.

According to the Constitution Center, the Fifth Amendment Privilege can be used by any witness and the defendant in a criminal trial.

Additionally, the Fifth can be used by any witness in a civil trial, legislative hearing, grand jury, and any other government proceedings.

Essentially, the self-incrimination clause means a witness should not have to give responses which could be used against them in either present on future criminal cases.

Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich is streaming on Netflix now

Read the original:
Jeffrey Epstein Netflix documentary: What is the 5th amendment right? - Express

Since the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in Knick v. Township of Scott (2019) 139 S.Ct. 2162 eliminated the requirement for a plaintiff to exhaust state court remedies before pursuing a takings challenge in federal court, there has been a significant uptick in federal lawsuits alleging a Fifth Amendment takings claim. For example, as we recently reported, a federal lawsuit was filed earlier this month alleging that the response by California agencies to the COVID-19 situation violated the state and federal Constitutions, and resulted in a partial or complete taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment. But as we noted in that post, there are serious questions as to the viability of alleging a Fifth Amendment takings claim in federal court against a state agency, given that Knick did not contain any discussion of eliminating a states sovereign immunity, and at least two courts have expressly held that Knick did nothing to abrogate a states sovereign immunity in the takings context. We now have a California district court decision to add to that growing list.

In ONeil v. California Coastal Commission, a property owner filed an action in federal court alleging that the actions of the California Coastal Commission and a local public agency violated his substantive due process rights and resulted in a taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment. In response the Coastal Commission filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that because the Commission was an arm of the state, the doctrine of sovereign immunity recognized in the Eleventh Amendment to the United State Constitution prohibited the claim. In an effort to sustain his claim, ONeil argued that after Knick the Eleventh Amendment was no longer a viable defense to a federal takins claim. The district court disagreed with Mr. ONeil, and dismissed the takings claim against the Coastal Commission.

Addressing the Knick decision, the district court stated: Knick did not address Eleventh Amendment immunity. Thus, as [the Coastal Commission] argues, Knick did not conceive of an additional exception to the Eleventh Amendment immunity. The district court also noted that while the Ninth Circuit has not yet addressed this specific issue, two other circuits have, and in each instance the Circuit Court found that the Eleventh Amendment barred the takings claim.

The district court also found that the plaintiff could not rely on the Ex Parte Young exception to the Eleventh Amendment which permits a plaintiff to sue a state official in federal court in order to seek prospective injunctive relief because it could not characterize ONeils relief request as prospective as he seeks just compensation, or damages, for the prior allegedly unconstitutional taking.

So even after Knick, the federal courthouse doors continue to remain closed to Fifth Amendment takings claims against the state or arms of the state.

Go here to see the original:
Cant Sue Here Federal Court Closed to Takings Claim - JD Supra

I am 82-plus years old, with two heart defects, making me exceptionally vulnerable to death should I get COVID-19. The ideal for me, of course, would be community lockdowns until a vaccine is found. But that cant be what is best for society. Last month 21 million Americans lost their jobs to lockdowns. The month before that nine million became unemployed. America is being destroyed financially. I can only imagine the intense financial and emotional devastation of those millions of people.

We need to get the country working again. Of course, when human contact increases, so too will the spread of the coronavirus. Still, individuals in large measure can take precautions, even in the workplace. And people over 65, the most vulnerable to the bug, can take special precautions. The reason we see so many young people attending, say, a rodeo or public beaches in California is that they likely view themselves as nearly invincible, having only a 1 or 2 percent risk of death should they be infected.

We are now living in a country where governors have seemingly become despots benevolent despots, but despots nonetheless. And these good people have run their states inconsistently. The automobile industry in Michigan can go back to work despite high numbers of infected in the state, but that same industry in California cant. My own view is that, say, Elon MuskElon Reeve MuskNASA, SpaceX and the private-public partnership that caused the flight of the Crew Dragon SpaceX capsule successfully docks at space station Trump calls Floyd death 'grave tragedy,' decries violent protests in Florida speech MORE will make his employees safe and should be permitted to do so. A California assemblywoman yelled, F--- Elon, but I think she is misguided. What is her view on the four million people in California who have lost their jobs to the virus?

There is another problem I have with state lockdowns: the U.S. Constitution has been tossed out the window. As former chief of staff to Chief Justice Warren Burger, I am especially protective of the human rights that the Constitution recognizes and protects. The Commerce Clause has been tossed: we generally cant travel or even leave our homes. First Amendment religious freedom has been altered so that we cant go to church even in a safe manner. The First Amendment right to assemble is gone. The right to private property as especially enumerated in the Fifth Amendment has been denied, as has due process. That amendment reads: we cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Yet governors deny our shops and jobs without due process or just compensation. Thirty million people so far have been left out in the cold. Some get a relatively small stimulus payment from the government but note that this government money was initially taken from taxpayers or borrowed or printed.

Another problem I have is with the cheap criticism pervasive throughout the country. I think President TrumpDonald John TrumpFauci says his meetings with Trump have 'dramatically decreased' McEnany criticizes DC mayor for not imposing earlier curfew amid protests Stopping Israel's annexation is a US national security interest MORE, California Gov. Newsom (D) Michigan Gov. Whitmer (D), New York Gov. Cuomo (D), Dr. Fauci, and all the other leaders in the country are trying to do the best they can. But this universal nightmare of worldwide contagion by an invisible bug is so big and so multifaceted that no one knows fully how to handle it. Even the trusted and revered Dr. Fauci, in a radio interview with host John Catsimatidis on Jan. 26, said about the coronavirus outbreak in China, Its a very, very low risk to the United States.... It isnt something that the American public needs to worry about or be frightened about.

Dr. Fauci, governors, and officials in Washington, D.C., are not omniscient, but they are doing their best and should be spared nasty criticism. Try walking a mile in their moccasins. G. K. Chesterton once observed that something can be so big that many do not see it. COVID-19 is as big as the world. No one should be expected to have all solutions.

Ronald L. Trowbridge, Ph.D., is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute. He was appointed by President Reagan to the United States Information Agency and later became chief of staff for Chief Justice Warren Burger.

Excerpt from:
An old man like me should be made more vulnerable to death by COVID-19 | TheHill - The Hill

Why not $1,203?

Like most Americans, I had anticipated my $1,200 CARES Act payment to be electronically deposited into my bank account. Instead, I received an envelope from the U.S. Department of the Treasury containing a paper check. At the time, I dismissed that inefficient delivery method. Perhaps, I even enjoyed the experience of touching a check.

What happened next is what bothers me. A week later, I received a follow-up letter, this time bearing the return address Internal Revenue Service stating that it contained Notice 1444. Naturally, I opened this envelope with even greater speed than the one from the Treasury Department. Instead of hopeful anticipation of its contents, the IRS return address had sent my mind into a temporary panic mode.

Fortunately, I quickly realized that Notice 1444 was merely a notification confirming that I will be receiving, or should have already received, a $1,200 check or debit card. Whew.

Surprisingly, the mysterious notice was merely a form letter printed with The White House as its letterhead, and it contained an image of the presidents signature. Am I the only person who found the essence of Notice 1444 to be a political mailing issued at the taxpayers expense?

Maybe I should give President Donald Trump a break and even follow his lead. Perhaps, every time I pay my bills, I should send follow-up letters informing my vendors/creditors what a good guy I am to have sent them the payments that were already due to them. I wonder if the government printing office will produce my Notice 1444 letters/envelopes at taxpayer expense, then arrange for the post office deliver them, postage free.

I estimate that copies of Notice 1444 cost our government (yours and mine) over $3 each. Quite frankly, I would rather have seen everyone receive $1,203. Wouldnt you?

James Donovan

Waikoloa

Greens idea would make Hawaii safest destination

Lt. Gov. Josh Greens idea for diagnostic testing of tourists before travel to Hawaii (Travel with Aloha) and serial testing once arrived, would make the Hawaiian Islands the safest vacation destination in the world. People would want to come here. For starters, a testing arrangement could be made with western states like California, Washington, and Alaska, and countries like Japan. Those locations would want their travelers tested before their return home. It would be a win-win. If the Hawaiian Islands become a hot spot, tourism may take years to recover.

Barbara Feliciano

Waimea

A restriction of a right?

Can Gov. David Ige restrict tourists from coming to Hawaii? My first impression as a Constitutional lawyer is absolutely not.

Under the U.S. Constitution, the right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. The right to travel, to go from place to place as the means of transportation permit, is a natural right subject to the rights of others and to reasonable regulation under law.

And, guess what? This provision, which is a very powerful one, also applies to inter-state travel. So therefore, Iges Proclamation or Executive Order restricting us from traveling between islands is unconstitutional on its face.

So, the issue under the Constitution is whether the governors proclamation restricting us as American citizens, and tourists, as American citizens was reasonable. My answer is No. Whats your answer?

Lei Kihoi

Kailua-Kona

Fact or fiction?

Claims that nearly 70% of our countys property taxes come from the luxury home developments that are on the west side of the Big Island? Philanthropy from the targeted tax group? There are only absentee owners whose properties exceed $2 million in value. Give millions a year into the local charities of their choice? Are these really the jewels of our economy as he suggests? Why have I never read about all of this philanthropy in WHT? We always hear about the Sayre Foundations philanthropy.

There are many luxury homes on the west side that are exempt from the proposed tax increase just look at the real estate section in your Sunday paper under $2 million, of course the ultra wealthy never want to pay their fair share. Just look at Bill and Melinda Gates: opposes the 2% wealth tax on wealth over $50,000 but likes to be known as a great philanthropist.

Mark Zuckerberg, who also does not pay his fair share of taxes, recently gave $1 million to some charity of his choosing. Truth is society would be much better off if all of these super rich people and corporations would just pay their fair share to fund the social functioning of the societies in which they live, occupy, and rely on.

Come on Hawaii County Council and Mayor Harry Kim do the right thing by your constituents.

Rusty Iijima

Waikoloa Village

Letters policy

Letters to the editor should be 300 words or less and will be edited for style and grammar. Longer viewpoint guest columns may not exceed 800 words. Submit online at http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/?p=118321, via email to letters@westhawaiitoday.com or address them to:

Editor

West Hawaii Today

PO Box 789

Kailua-Kona, HI 96745

Go here to read the rest:
Letters to the Editor: May 29, 2020 - West Hawaii Today

Activism in the cause of something you deeply believe in, when carried out by a private citizen is a noble thing and a precious right of our Republic.

But when institutions, put in place to serve the public in a fair and impartial fashion step over the bias line, it harms the very foundation of liberty and justice for all our nation was founded on.

I am going to deal with three.

Of course, the media went rogue a long time ago, which being in most cases private entities is their prerogative, although they violate their original mandate, to deliver news, untainted by personal political preferences.

One only has to look at the actions of Judge Emmet Sullivan in his handling of General Michael Flynns case to see the American judicial system at its worst.

Judge Sullivan has evidently decided that he will be prosecuting attorney, judge, jury and arbiter of jurisprudence, in essence reopening a case where the charges have been dropped by the prosecution, charges that were obviously bogus to begin with.

Or Dallas County Judge Eric Moye, who took it upon himself to sentence a woman to seven days in jail for violating a reopen order, when, if any penalty at all, a small fine would have been more in keeping with the actions of a lady who just wanted to feed her family.

Yet, just because he could and because of his personal feelings Judge Moye decided it would be better to incarcerate her in a jail where actual criminals, who had committed seriously harmful crimes had been turned back out on the street for fear of a Coronavirus spread in the jail.

When the premier law enforcement and finest investigative agency in the world stoops to the deceptive antics they have been guilty of the last few years, indictment by trickery, threats of financial ruin, trying to script testimonies, lying to obtain warrants and sullying the reputations of a time-honored agency like the FBI, it is a dark day for due process, and an even darker day for the thousands of honest and dedicated men and women who make up the rank and file.

James Comey is a national disgrace and a dangerous loose cannon, who, as the Bible says, gags on a gnat and swallows a camel.

Hillary Clinton used an unsecured internet server to conduct the business of the United States State Department, destroyed thousands of subpoenaed documents and Comey, in spite of mountains of evidence of criminal wrongdoing, exonerated her.

And Comey, along with other FBI officials signed FISA warrant applications issued on information they knew to be false.

Why was Lois Lerner, who weaponized the Internal Revenue Service never pursued past her fifth amendment plea?

Easy answer, because the trail would have led to places the powers to be at the time didnt want to go.

Why was Susan Rice not questioned about the supposed video that so angered the Islamists in Libya they attacked an embassy killing four Staff including a US ambassador, while four more Americans were left to fend for themselves for 13 hours while Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton twiddled their thumbs.

Was the person who made and released the video ever identified and his case tried for whatever crime the Obama administration deemed him guilty of?

Why did it take a swat team the size of a small army to arrest Roger Stone in the middle of the night? Was such a show of force with armored vehicles and frogmen for the benefit of the CNN crew that just happened to be in the neighborhood in the wee hours of the morning?

The three institutions Im speaking about, media, law enforcement and judicial system have the conglomerate power to hound, charge, or not charge, convict and sentence innocent people to jail time, to defend or condemn, to investigate or ignore, to pass out light or heavy sentences or no sentences, all dependent on politics, ideology or sometimes, just personal like or dislike.

These three, acting in concert could subvert justice to the point where it doesnt even really exist.

Agenda driven media, activist judges and crooked law enforcement are the things that make up nightmares and dictatorships.

Pray for our troops our police and the peace of Jerusalem.

(PUB. NOTE: Charlie Daniels is an iconic, best-selling American recording artist, singer, songwriter, fiddle player, and author whose recordings including The Devil Went Down to Georgia have sold in the tens of millions. He is a member of The Grand Ole Opry and The Country Music Hall of Fame. Readers can follow Charlies SoapBox blogs on his website, http://www.charliedaniels.com, where you can also find his tour schedule and news of upcoming events.)

Read the original here:
SOAP BOX: Judicial, media and agency activism: the scourge of the twenty-first century - Therogersvillereview