Epstein Secrets

es admitted into evidence in the trial of four of President Nixon's former advisors. The media intended to copy th

EFTA00074907 Case 20-2413, Document 10-1, 07/30/2020, 2896538, Page6 of 38 United States v. Graham, 257 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2001) United States v. McVeigh, 119 F.3d 806 (10th Cir. 1997) 12 28 Wash. Metro. Area Transit Comm'n v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841 (D.C. Cir. 1977) 13 Statutes All W

ates Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Nixon 734 might be vitiated by a broad rule. To ensure

o. 101-647, § 502(b) (1996). 2 Id. § 502(b)(1). 3 Id. § 502(b)(3). 24 Id. § 502(b)(5). 25 Id. § 502(b)(4). 26 Id. § 502(a). 27 United States v. McVeigh, 157 F.3d 809, 814-815 (10th Cir. 1998). See generally Cassell, Barbarians at the Gates, supra note 6, at 515-22 (discussing this case in greater det

. P. 17(c)(Q). °4 See generally United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 689 (1974). 95 See id. at 699. D

the Victims' Rights Amendment, 1999 Utah L. Rev. 479, 515-22 (discussing the Oklahoma City bombing case in greater detail). 47 See United States v. McVeigh, No. 96-CR-68, 1996 WL 366268, at 2 (D. Colo. June 26, 1996). 48 Td. at 2-3 (discussing application of Fed. R. Evid. 615). 49 Motion of Marsha and