From: (USAFLS)" To: (USAFLS)" Subject: FW: Epstein Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:44:36 +0000 Importance: Normal What do you think: Hi - - My trial is over, so I now have to time to focus back on this case and our e-mail exchange. There are several points in your e-mail that I would like to address, and I also would like to address where we are in the case. First, I wanted to address the comment about jumping the chain of command. After that concern was brought to my attention several months ago, I have tried ve hard to be cognizant of the chain of command, and, as was evident at the meeting with Epstein's attorneys, and I have discussed the case extensively. My orMial e- mail asking for everyone's input was addressed to you, and M , and was cold. and I also have discussed the case in great detail.) The response to your e-mail was addressed only to you because I thought you would want to discuss privately our disagreement. It was addressed to Was well because you said that you had Blackberry and it was a holiday when you would be out of the office. If there is a particular instance of violating the chain of command that you would like to discuss, I would be happy to discuss it with you. Second, the reason why I sent the original e-mail to everyone was to see if anyone had any objections to the proposed language. I waited several days to send out the e-mail to to get everyone's response. In your response, you did not raise any concerns, nor did anyone else. Given your indication that the U.S. Attorney would be satisfied with an agreement involving no federal prosecution, I certainly didn't think that an agreement involving some federal component would be objectionable. MI M , you, and I all have discussed the greater flexibility of a pre-indictment plea. The statement that I have not respected position regarding the prosecution of the case demonstrates why you hear the frustration in the tone of my e-mail. For two and a half mont