Justice Manual

I covered the initial days of this administration when E- Emil Bove was running the department and literally driving out dozens and dozens of career officials.

And I think the people who are in charge right now, uh, since the turnover from Blanche, at least, uh, have come to recognize that that might have been an extreme [laughs] way to go about things, and they could really use some of these career officials, by the way, who might have actually stayed had they been given assurances that, that the rules of the road and, and, and, and the, the basic rules of conduct that are outlined in this, in this, uh, document known as the Justice Manual, which just creates base- a baseline way of behaving as officials, uh, had been followed, but that wasn't done.

Bove, uh, kind of pr- uh, pr- presided over a, a period that, that some former officials, uh, refer to as a reign of terror, citing Art- President Trump's Article Two rights to fire and hire whoever he wanted.

And now they're in a, in a situation where virtually every single unit in that building, particularly the Public Integrity unit, has been, if not greatly, greatly, uh, uh, I mean, obliterated, uh, greatly reduced in strength and experience.

It's just two blank sheets of paper.

Nothing about the substance of the meeting was recorded in the agent's notes, even though the US Attorney's Manual, formerly named the Justice Manual, requires every agent to take substantive notes of contacts with witnesses.

In standard FBI practice, agents typically, they take rough notes by hand during an interview, and later they convert them into an official FD three O two, which is an interview report form for the FBI.

Although it's not required by law, generally speaking, witness interviews should be memorialized by the agent.

Uh, but let's go back to the story here.

"Nothing about the substance of the meeting was recorded in the agent's notes, even though the US Attorney's Manual, formerly named the Justice Manual, requires agents in most cases to take substantive notes of contacts with witnesses.

In standard FBI practice, agents typically take rough notes by hand during an interview and later convert them into an official FD302 interview report form." And you know what? This has always blown my mind.

Like I'm sure they have their own like legal, political, just- justified reasoning for not doing it this way.

That is correct.

And as a federal prosecutor under the Justice Manual, ethics rules, and case law, you had to believe in good faith that the allegations contained in the indictment were true and provable beyond a reasonable doubt in court.

Is that correct?

Yes, we believe we could prove our case in court beyond a reasonable doubt.

That's true.

But they are governed by the Justice Manual as DOJ employees, and they violate it on a near daily basis in the comments they make, the political events they attend, and the way in which they've conducted themselves in front of both grand and petite juries.

Now, look, it should be noted in Chicago right now, you have the prosecutor of the Broadview Six and the actual U.S. attorney accusing each other in writing of lying to the court about the other person.

So.

Even assuming the truth of her factual assertions, Maxwell's take on the legal implications is wrong.

As the Second Circuit recognized, the operative U.S. Attorney's Manual, now called the Justice Manual, stated unequivocally, "...no district or division shall make any agreement, including any agreement not to prosecute, which purports to bind any other district or division without the express written approval of the U.S. attorneys in each affected district and or the assistant attorney general of the criminal division." The EFTA records cited by Maxwell do not in any respect suggest that the U.S.

attorney for SDNY or the Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General in Washington approved, let alone provided express written approval for the NPA.

Third, Maxwell asserts that certain EFTA records suggest that investigative steps were taken in New York as part of the SDFL's 2005-2007 investigation into Epstein.

Even assuming the truth of her factual assertions, Maxwell's take on the legal implications is wrong.

As the Second Circuit recognized, the operative U.S. Attorney's Manual, now called the Justice Manual, stated unequivocally, "...no district or division shall make any agreement, including any agreement not to prosecute, which purports to bind any other district or division without the express written approval of the U.S. attorneys in each affected district and or the assistant attorney general of the criminal division." The EFTA records cited by Maxwell do not in any respect suggest that the U.S.

attorney for SDNY or the Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General in Washington approved, let alone provided express written approval for the NPA.

Third, Maxwell asserts that certain EFTA records suggest that investigative steps were taken in New York as part of the SDFL's 2005-2007 investigation into Epstein.