Re: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE

It will probably have to be cut some and there will be other queries and I continue to smooth and tinker, but this is getting close. How 'bout we speak tomorrow, late morning?

And don't forget Gates comment extolling your talent, virtue, and contributions to the future of the foundation! m.

any issues?

I will read the newest version when i get to computer in 1 hr

Sent from my iPhone

EFTA00861082

thanks,

Just like another reporter who claimed to have spoken with you, Michael Wolff will be subpoenad, deposed, his notes the subject of litigation etc Cassell/Edwards will find a way to insert this into the CVRA case and if god forbid the SJ in the JE/BE case is reversed. Again, I am thinking worst case scenario, legally, and realize there are other perspectives.

not sure what you mean.

Iam thinking worst case scenario (what else do lawyers do) — in the event you were ever in a remedy hrg before j marra or in a punitive damage case with Edwards (you can better assess the odds of that occurring which I am assuming to be low but not non-existent), the quoted statements attributed to you re "minimizing' what you are alleged to have done and your feelings on NPA would be used against you. I would expect that Edwards would do whatever he could to insert the article into the CVRA case even before the remedy phase to anger J Marra (and attempt thru subpoena to pursue discovery from the reporter eg his notes of interviews with you). The reporter wants to speak with you again, in part to ask about SG, case. I think you should avoid more quotes unless they temper the earlier ones I highlighted. I will just send a list of pgs, lines, inserted thoughts re article:

• Pg 5 first par — reporter speaks about a 'sex slave ring" and speaks in the plural "sex slaves" suggesting more than one accusation

• Pg 8 1st par — reporter should clarify that the young women at your house (and later on your plane) are comely but clearly not underage

• Pg 20- might lead a reader to think you helped clients hide wealth which could lead someone to want to focus on their FBAR or FATCO compliance (it's a leap but I am here to raise red flags)

• Pg 21 — Hoffenberg mentioned — I assume from what everyone including J Sweet says he is nuts but not flattering and totally irrelevant to the story

Pg 25 — quoting you on massages — your adversaries will exploit this to show a lack of remorse, minimizing the conduct

etc -

• Pg 25-26 — don't help him with SG — he's confusing SG and HR — whatever SGs age her website said she was 18

• Pg 26 — he loops back to your "description" which opens reporter up to legal pressure to get his notes, tapes of debriefs with you if there is ever a CVRA remedy hrg or any other future case

• Pg 28 — your quotes re NPA being Kafkaesque can be exploited if there is ever a remedy phase to CVRA to sound like you wouldn't mind its invalidation (no judge would think you didn't get the better of the deal regardless of its uniqueness and unfair conditions)

• Pg 30 — he writes about VR — "new chapter" — sounds like he is quoting you — he can preface it with 'according to court papers..' and not suggest you are narrating the description of the VR allegations

• Pg 31 — he writes that you said this "this is all utterly false" re VR allegations not limiting denial to Clinton, Gore — risks re defamation allegation which you don't need even if it's a hard case for them to make

• Pg 31 — he writes that VR is now suing you for 50M (a little unclear, poor writing, but if its in his notes as coming from you and his notes are ordered to be turned over— yes, 1st Am, but its ultimately a weighing test and then up to the fortitude of the reporter)

• Pg 31-2 — close to end where he says in essence the only thing you regret is not being more circumspect re legal advice — again will send a very bad message to a judge or jury if you are ever before one again (which it is my mission to try to prevent)