ORDER

PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge.

On November 25, 2019, the Government filed a motion in limine seeking to introduce, inter alia, evidence from Schulte's MCC notebooks. (Gov. Mot. in limine, at 27, Dkt 195.) The Defendant opposes the motion and urges that the Government should be ordered to identify the specific MCC notebook documents it intends to introduce so that the Defendant can rebut some of the Government's arguments. (Def. Opp'n at 15, Dkt. 242.)

As this Court has noted, "writing down his thoughts on classified information is not the crime [Schulte] is charged with, but rather it is the transmission of such information." (See Dkt. 147.) Nor is the Defendant charged for "spread[ing] misinformation intended to portray Schulte as the victim of an attempted framing by the FBI and CIA." (Gov. Mot. in limine, at 27.) The Court continues to believe that the Government may be able to prove transmission without any reference to the contents of Schulte's notebook. The Government has, inter alia, evidence of Schulte's posts on social media, the use of encrypted emails to correspond with reporters, photographs and videos of Schulte using contraband cellphones, and testimony from a cooperating witness. (Id. at 29-35.)

Accordingly, the Government is directed to identify the specific documents and statements it intends to introduce from the MCC notebooks1 including the appropriate citation to discovery bates stamps. Given the significant controversy surrounding the notebook evidence, the Government is further directed to explain why the specific documents should be admitted and what the specific evidence will be offered to prove (e.g., Guilty Conscience), as well as why the other non-notebook evidence is insufficient or incomplete.

SO ORDERED.