Epstein Secrets

Golinkin, Sandy 220-E 72nd Apt 17C Goess, Pilar OQ 43 1 505 1775 00 43 1 713 3905 00 33 1 47223ta7 oo 16 4453 ?egde:killen 505 946 3643 (w) Gomez, Thomas 220 E. 65th Street 001 EFTA00191493 a Graft Fogsois 721 Madison Ave. NY 020 ,18~ w) (Hm)6157 new bond Street w London 3SJ atr4 b28

4893 Firyal Princess 1 East 66th St NY between West 4th Street and 00 Gr 001 wl I SW t 871 n1 0337?r2i35 2143 01295 262624 Fif Zia giA Fisher, Dan 721 5th n739 NY 001 001 001 h c) tvOlict • EFTA00191490 Park House 7.11 Onlow SO London 1A7 J 017-22 314 (w) 0171-581 118 11) F

oid the interpretation that "engenders constitutional issues if a reasonable alternative interpretation poses no constitutional question." See C a Gomez v. United States, 490 U.S. 858, 864, 109 S. Ct. 2237, 2241, 104 L.Ed.2d 923 (1989). Therefore, Judge Newsom's interpretation should be adopted. Thi

States v. St. Amour, 886 F.3d 1009, 1013 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 139 S. Ct. 205, 202 L.Ed.2d 141 (2018) (quoting ?II United States v. Fisher, 289 F.3d 1329, 1337-38 (11th Cir. 2002)). 16 Our statutory analysis thus should start and end with the language of subsections (a) (5) and (a)(8)

ority's post-charge model avoids those problems, the Court is compelled by the canon of constitutional avoidance to adopt the latter model. See?. Gomez v. United States, 490 U.S. 858, 864, 109 S. Ct. 2237, 2241, 104 L.Ed.2d 923 (1989) ("It is our settled policy to avoid an interpretation of a feder

ain and unambiguous meaning," we "need go no further." United States v. St. Amour, 886 F.3d 1009, 1013 (11th Cir. 2018) (quoting United States v. Fisher, 289 F.3d 1329, 1337-38 (11th Cir. 2002)); see also ? Robinson g Shell Oil Co., 519 U.S. 337, 341, 117 S.Ct. 843, 136 L.Ed.2d 808 (1997) ("The plai