Epstein Secrets

y points: First, there was no telephonic communication that met the requirements of § 2422(b). For example, as many other witnesses have stated, Ms. Beale testified in no unclear terms that there was never any discussion over the phone about her coming over to Mr. Epstein's home to engage in sexual ac

tatutes your Office had brought forth and to the application of those laws to the facts as presented, it is abundantly clear from Drew's letter that Main Justice is not directing this prosecution. In fact, CEOS plainly acknowledged that a federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein would involve a "novel application"

8-80736-CV MARRA 002196 EFTA00227310 communication that met the requirements of § 2422(b). For example, as many other witnesses have stated, Ms. Beale testified in no unclear terms that there was never any discussion over the phone about her coming over to Mr. Epstein's home to engage in sexual ac

athetic" to our various federalism concerns, but stated that because you serve within the "unitary Executive," you believed your hands were tied by Main Justice. You were also extremely gracious in stating that you did not want the United States to be "unfair". Although CEOS limited its assessment to the fe

was no telephonic 1027 EFTA00227156 communication that met the requirements of § 2422(b). For example, as many other witnesses have stated, Ms. Beale testified in no unclear terms that there was never any discussion over the phone about her coming over to Mr. Epstein's home to engage in sexual ac

athetic" to our various federalism concerns, but stated that because you serve within the "unitary Executive," you believed your hands were tied by Main Justice. You were also extremely gracious in stating that you did not want the United States to be "unfair". Although CEOS limited its assessment to the fe