, 17 tweets, 4 min read Read on Twitter
Dear @SecretaryAcosta:

I do not believe we have spoken since graduation. I regret encountering you under these circumstances.

I was not able to attend your press conference, but I do have some questions.

/1
/2 You knew, in 2008, that Mr. Epstein had a residence in New York and traveled to other jurisdictions, correct?

And you knew that it was conceivable that there could be an investigation of whether he committed federal crimes in other districts, correct?
/3 And, in fact, Mr. Secretary, Mr. Epstein's attorneys were vigorously demanding a non-prosecution deal that would cover any federal prosecution in any federal district in the United States, correct?
/4 They were elite, experienced lawyers, correct?

And they knew -- as any competent attorney would -- that Mr. Epstein faced exposure in other districts if he conducted the alleged activities in those districts, right?
/5 So you knew, when you approved this non-prosecution agreement, that someday Mr. Epstein's lawyers might be arguing that it barred prosecution in another district, correct?

In light of that, let's look at the agreement, shall we?

blog.bennettandbennett.com/2019/07/jeffre…
/6 Now, you're very familiar with the sorts of agreements that the U.S. Attorney's Office makes with defendants, right?

You'd agree with me that federal prosecutors take great pains to be very specific and explicit, and not ambiguous, in their agreements with defendants?
/7 Do you view this non-prosecution agreement as specific and not ambiguous, Mr. Secretary?
/8 I ask because of some of the terms of the agreement you approved seem to lend themselves to an argument by Mr. Epstein -- perhaps not a strong one, but an argument -- that the agreement is ambiguous about whether it applies outside your district.
/9 For instance, the agreement says that Epstein is seeking to "resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability" without defining that, and speaks generally about the "interests of the United States" without limitation.
/10 Now, the agreement also says that "prosecution in this district" will be deferred, and elsewhere it says that the Southern District of Florida is deferring prosecution, which probably mean that SDNY will prevail on this argument.
/11 But on the other hand, the agreement says that the U.S. Attorney's office and the FBI have investigated "any offenses that may have been committed by Epstein against the United States," without limitation by district.
/12 Moreover, Mr. Secretary, the agreement contains a general promise by the United States -- not limited by district -- not to prosecute Mr. Epstein's co-conspirators.
/13 Mr. Secretary, why doesn't the agreement have standard language specifically stating that it only binds the office offering it?

Why doesn't it have other language limiting what "global" means and specifying that it does not bind other districts?
/14 You would agree, Mr. Secretary, that you were competent and knew what you were doing at the time, correct?

And the defense was competent and knew what it was doing at the time?

In light of that, this level of ambiguity was intentional, correct?
/15 You'd agree with me that you did not take any of the steps required by the U.S. Attorney's Manual to secure the approval of other districts to bind them, correct?

So you did not have the right to offer an agreement that bound other districts to non-prosecution, right?
/16 Mr. Secretary, if you knew that Mr. Epstein's lawyers wanted a nationwide deal, and knew that he might use this agreement as a defense to prosecution elsewhere someday, why does this agreement have the ambiguities I've outlined above?
/17 I will return, sir, with further questions.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to 1000/24thHat
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!