Epstein Secrets

by any materials in the record. Accordingly, these assertions of privilege are inadequate. See Bogle. McClure, 332 F.3d 347, 1358 (11th Cir. 2003); Brown' City of Margate, 842 F.Supp. 515, 520 Should the Court allow the Government to assert privilege with regard to any of the materials, the victims w

Reinhart in later representing Epstein-related entities. Because the Government's (inadequate) privilege log does not reveal which entries relate to Reinhart, it is not possible to point the Court to the specific documents that demonstrate this misconduct. These documents, however, are covered by the cri

Answers to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's First Request for Admissions (RFA's), fl 15-17.4 It further admitted that OPR collected information about Reinhart's possibly improper behavior. See Gov't's Answers to RFA's, ¶ 22(a). Yet them is no way to tell which documents (among the more than 13,000 pages o

ct: Date: Attachments: Inline-Images: Gregory Brown undisclosed-recipients:; Greg Brown's Weekend Re

l Monetary Fund had reworked Alesina-Ardagna with better data and reversed their findings, while many economists raised fundamental questions about Reinhart-Rogoff long before we knew about the famous Excel error. Meanwhile, real-world events — stagnation in Ireland, the original poster child for auster

-Prosecution Agreement with highlighted portions Brown file folder with 6/23/08 letter from John Roth (D

ords Redwell with Epstein/.Phone Records Box 23: Redwell with 8/3/2015 Doc Production Jane Doe v. U.S. Relevant Jane Doe v. U.S. Items(Redwell) — Reinhart review (file folder), Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance May 2005, United States of America's Response to Petitioners' Re

etion of the district court." Florida Key Deer v. Brown, 232 F.R.D. 415, 417 (S.D. Fla. 2005) (citing NA

his interests were somehow affected by the victims' pleadings. DE #79. The victims were then forced to file a reply to that motion, explaining that "Reinhart appears to be merely the cat's paw of a possible real party in interest — Jeffrey Epstein." DE #81 at 1. The motion went on to explain that "[s]uch

etion of the district court." Florida Key Deer v. Brown, 232 F.R.D. 415, 417 (S.D. Fla. 2005) (citing NA

his interests were somehow affected by the victims' pleadings. DE #79. The victims were then forced to file a reply to that motion, explaining that "Reinhart appears to be merely the cat's paw of a possible real party in interest — Jeffrey Epstein." DE #81 at 1. The motion went on to explain that Ishich

A4F7EC65/Data/7/7/Messages/77726. emlx Mac Mail Brown Patty 1049589 Source Device Path SourceType

Application Support/AddressBook/Sources/458842CC-A3 4740CB-9B814AF33B39134B/AddressBook-v22.abcddb SourceType Mac AddressBook First Bruce Last Reinhart Phone Number (Mobile) Phone Number (Work) Email (Work) Creation Date 2011-07-22 18:31:15 (UTC) Modification Date 2011-08-16 16:38:57 (UTC) K

Note: 1) for more information, please see Jeffrey Brown and Amy Finkelstein, “The Interaction of Public a

old of 90 percent of GDP. Above 90 percent, median growth rates fall by one percent, and average growth falls considerably more. We note that while Reinhart and Rogoff’s observations are based on ‘gross debt’ data, in the U.S., debt held by the public is closer to the European KP countries’ definition of

are relevant to this motion, of which I have personal knowledge. 3. Annexed hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of an article written by Julie K. Brown and published by the Miami Herald on November 28, 2018, entitled “Cops worked to put serial sex abuser in prison. Prosecutors worked to cut him a bre

. He left the U.S. Attorney’s Office on Jan. 1, 2008, and went to work representing Epstein’s employees on Jan. 2, 2008, court records show. In 2011, Reinhart was named in the Crime Victims’ Rights Act lawsuit, which accused him of violating Justice Department policies by switching sides, implying that he l