Epstein Secrets

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) < =); (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject:

Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ) Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

S. Attorney's Office in SDFL. As relevant here, for example, we do not have any materials relating to the purported immunity discussions relating to Lacerda; we have not identified any such materials in the FBI files, and we assume that any discussions or correspondence on that issue likely would have be

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) < =); (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject:

Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ) Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

S. Attorney's Office in SDFL. As relevant here, for example, we do not have any materials relating to the purported immunity discussions relating to Lacerda; we have not identified any such materials in the FBI files, and we assume that any discussions or correspondence on that issue likely would have be

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: ivIcEnany, John (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject: RE:

ven (USANYS) (USANYS) .< ; Cc: (USANYS) <M > C ) Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

S. Attorney's Office in SDFL. As relevant here, for example, we do not have any materials relating to the purported immunity discussions relating to Lacerda; we have not identified any such materials in the FBI files, and we assume that any discussions or correspondence on that issue likely would have be

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Muhry does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) < Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) < (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) <a > ) <-

, Steven (USANYS) I (USANYS) <IMM ); Cc: (USANYS) < Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

S. Attorney's Office in SDFL. As relevant here, for example, we do not have any materials relating to the purported immunity discussions relating to Lacerda; we have not identified any such materials in the FBI EFTA00104393 files, and we assume that any discussions or correspondence on that issue likel

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) ifl; (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: Subject: R

evar, Steven (USANYS) (USANYS) •ca; Cc: (USANYS) > Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) < Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) < (USANYS) ‹ > Cc: I < Subject: RE

M To: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) (USANYS) < MM> Cc: Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? (USANYS) I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhy does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: gc > Subject: RE: Jeffr

To: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) 4 (USANYS) Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin

ike Sarah for instance. Also, it is possible that Touhv does not fall within the scope of SDFla's recusal. I can't see NDGA racing to embrace doing Touhys on this. From: Kochevar, Steven (USANYS) < Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 7:24 PM To: McEnany, John (USANYS) < (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ) Subject

teven (USANYS) < (USANYS) (USANYS) < Cc: >; <->; Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests I take it we fully know that Jane Doe is Maria Lacerda? I had a little pause on handing out the GJ subpoena, but since it's something previously disclosed to her, I can't see much of a problem disclosin