Epstein Project

EFTA00019603.pdf

Type
pdf
Source set
data-set-8

Original source

Extracted text

From: 
To: "-
Subject: Re: wbtw 
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 22:39:59 +0000 
(USANYS)"  
Great. I was just on the phone w/ 
about another case. Told him we could use another person and prefer M. He 
said he'll talk to 
and let us know, so that seems like a good sign. 
From: 
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 6:33 PM 
To: 
(USANYS) <
> 
Subject: RE: wbtw 
Definitely has bandwidth, he has been telling me he is looking for work. 
From: 
(USANYS) 
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 6:29 PM 
To: 
Subject: Re: wbtw 
Sounds good. Any sense of 
bandwidth? If he's not very busy, could use that to pitch him to the chiefs. 
From: 
ann 
Sent: Monday, June 1, 20206:18 PM 
To: 
(USANYS) 
Subject: RE: wbtw 
Hey-
That sounds good to me, thanks. I think it makes sense to discuss our theory of the case, both on the wbtw scheme and 
on the possible PPE scam, just to make sure everyone is on the same page as we continue reviewing. In particular, now 
that 
is openly taking a salary, we should discuss materiality—I don't think those issues are prohibitive at all, but it 
might be helpful to make sure everyone is attuned to those issues as we review. 
In terms of staffing, can we add M? I know he'd want to do it. Apologies that I haven't been working on this case since 
we moved to remote work—I reviewed emails before we left the office, but haven't continued since then. In terms of 
bandwidth, Epstein/Rikers stuff has been taking up my time, although I'm hopeful that will relent a bit over the summer 
(or that someone up the chain will get tired of reading memos?). More immediately, I should be able to dig into email 
review probably starting next weekish. Regardless, don't be shy about passing things off to me if you think of things we 
should be doing that I'm not spotting. 
From: 
(USANYS) <
> 
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 5:01 PM 
To: 
Subject: wbtw 
EFTA00019603


hey - thought it made sense to check in before our call tomorrow. in terms of current status, i think we continue to review 
the email return…

Open in the interactive archive →