Thread by @JasonLeopold

🚨 EXPLOSIVE NEW investigation: We uncovered previously undisclosed details about an 18-month money laundering investigation into Jeffrey Epstein that took place alongside the 2007 federal sex crimes probe, according to emails & docs @business obtained from Epstein's personal Yahoo account & source familiar

🎁 bloomberg.com/features/2025-…

The lead prosecutor requested that a grand jury issue subpoenas for “every financial transaction conducted by Epstein and his six businesses” dating to 2003, the emails show. Prosecutors also subpoenaed major banks for records about Epstein’s accounts and financial activity, according to two people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified to discuss a sensitive investigation.

Marie Villafaña, who was an assistant US attorney for the Southern District of Florida at the time, even contacted Epstein’s longtime wealth-management client, Les Wexner, the billionaire businessman behind the brands Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works, about the investigation, according to the documents and emails.

Epstein grew furious when he learned that prosecutors had broadened their investigation’s scope, the emails show. His high-powered team of lawyers, including Gerald Lefcourt, Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, former Bush administration official Jay Lefkowitz and former Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, argued that Villafaña was pursuing baseless claims to pressure their client into a plea deal. They launched an aggressive campaign to discredit her attempts to follow the money and pressured her higher-ups to remove her and others from the case—or scuttle the case entirely.

The money laundering probe adds a new layer to the narrative about how the government conducted its investigation into the notorious sex abuser. It also raises questions about what evidence prosecutors may have gathered as they followed Epstein’s money, long before the public began demanding a full accounting of his case.

The revelation that the investigation had a financial aspect also puts a spotlight on Alex Acosta, the former US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, who signed off on Epstein’s plea deal.

Last month, Acosta told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that he didn’t recall any discussion of “potential financial crimes” as part of his office’s Epstein investigation. Yet the emails and documents from Epstein’s Yahoo account show that prosecutors in his office discussed the financial-crimes component of the investigation with Acosta and copied him on correspondence about it. Records obtained as part of the money laundering probe were stored at the US Attorney’s Office in a folder titled, “Money Laundering,” which contains “attorney research and handwritten notes,” according to a partial list of the government’s evidence that was filed in a related court proceeding.

in February 2007, the money-laundering probe was opened, according to the former law enforcement official. At around the same time, prosecutors focused on a pattern of transactions in which Epstein directed some of his employees to withdraw large amounts of cash to disburse to women around the world he was suspected of having victimized—the basis for a potential charge of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business, according to the former law enforcement official.

The evidence Villafaña collected was serious enough that she wrote in an 82-page prosecution memo that Epstein should be charged with money-laundering and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, according to the former law enforcement official.

On Aug. 16, 2007, Villafaña requested that a grand jury issue subpoenas for Epstein’s financial records dating back to 2003. On the same day, Villafaña also sent a letter informing Epstein’s defense attorneys that she would continue investigating his finances as long as the NPA remained unsigned. That letter was detailed in a 22-page document prepared by Epstein and his lawyers that was titled “In re: Grand Jury Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein.” (Track changes in a draft of the document show Epstein made numerous edits under the initials “JEE.”)

Epstein was incensed. He and his attorneys took steps to back out of the NPA he’d signed. On Oct. 15, 2007, Epstein sent himself an email and attached a word document he wrote titled, “Did you know that.”

And he took note of one particular move Villafaña made: “She calls Les Wexner to inform him of the investigation.”

The former law enforcement official said Villafaña contacted Wexner in an effort to get him to cooperate and provide information about Epstein, his business, his travels and his enterprise.

Shortly after that conversation, Wexner took steps to end Epstein’s role as his wealth manager, the emails show. The first signs of a break-up appeared in the emails in October 2007. That’s when Epstein’s lawyer, Darren Indyke, sent him a message discussing the transfer of interests in Wexner’s Aspen ranch from one of Epstein’s entities to another controlled by Abigail Wexner, Wexner’s wife.

As Epstein reflected on his case, his emails about it became more frantic. On Nov. 16, 2007, he sent one to Jimmy Cayne, the former chief executive of Bear Stearns, and his friend the psychiatrist Henry Jarecki to run an “initial pitch” past them that he planned to send to his attorneys. Under the subject line, “this is how crazy,” it contained a litany of grievances toward the prosecutors.

Four days before he reported to prison, Epstein received an email from Wexner, whose wife had updated him about Epstein’s situation.

A spokesperson for Wexner declined to comment. A person close to Wexner said his email “expressed his strong disappointment that Epstein had breached his fiduciary duties and broken the family’s trust.”

Last month, Acosta told the House Oversight Committee he had no recollection of the financial crimes investigation that prosecutors in his office led for more than a year.

During the interview with lawmakers, Representative Melanie Stansbury, a New Mexico Democrat, peppered Acosta with questions about whether his office probed any “financial crimes” as part of their Epstein case.

“I don't recall a financial aspect,” Acosta said, according to a transcript of his interview the committee released this month. “We were focused on the inappropriate acts that took place in Palm Beach.”

An attorney for Acosta, Jeffrey Neiman, told Bloomberg that the existence of a financial probe would not be “inconsistent” with Acosta’s statements to the committee. “Back in 2006, the Southern District employed over two hundred attorneys and, at any given moment, conducted countless investigations. Although Mr. Acosta approved the terms of the Epstein matter, he did not direct that investigation—or any investigation, for that matter,” he said. “If evidence of financial wrongdoing existed, no agreement prevented the Department of Justice from pursuing it in the many years following Epstein’s sex-crimes prosecution.”

Reporting this story with @jeffykao @maxabelson @harrynwilson @avabmorrison & @suryamattu was a massive effort

There are TONS more details in our report about prosecutors' efforts to follow Epstein's money, which have been shrouded in secrecy for two decades

bloomberg.com/features/2025-…

@jeffykao @maxabelson @harrynwilson @avabmorrison @suryamattu And @dmehro!