EFTA00028546.pdf

From: "[Redacted]" <[Redacted]>
To: "[Redacted] (USANYS) 1" <[Redacted]>
Subject: FW: Richardson
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 17:12:34 +0000
Embedded: t_c_with_counsel_for_Bill_Richardson,_re:_JE_case.msg

things are . . . a struggle right now.

From: [Redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 13:09
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] <[Redacted]>
Cc: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Subject: RE: Richardson

Hey I spoke to [Redacted] and [Redacted] about this, but just to keep everyone in the loop, I did talk to Jeff on Sunday and did (what I thought was) a fairly standard witness / subject / target distinction, noting we didn't have sufficient information to put him into the witness or target boxes, and that we didn't currently intend to subpoena him or request to speak with him based on the investigation at this time. So I didn't specifically say he was a subject, but I noted the three categories and said we didn't have enough information for witness or target. I also said that there weren't specific allegations that we need to hear his side of at this time, and I think my intended point was conveyed, which was that we weren't currently asking for anything from him—not that there are no allegations at all, which obviously there are, publicly. I did not say that there is no allegation that the government is actively investigating; I just would never say to an attorney what we are or aren't investigating. In any event, my contemporaneous notes are attached, I typed and sent them less than ten minutes after our conversation, which lasted all of four minutes. I'm really sorry for any difficulties this causes us.

After talking with [Redacted] about it, I also just spoke to Jeff and expressed my view that the statement does not fully accurately reflect our conversation, and that our press office could respond to questions about it or he could clarify, and he said he would get back to me with how he proposed to address the discrepancies.

From: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 12:05
To: [Redacted] <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] <[Redacted]>
Cc: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Subject: FW: Richardson

Has anyone talked to Jeff Brown and is this accurate?

From: Biase, Nicholas (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 12:01 PM
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Cc: Margolin, James (USANYS) [Contractor] <[Redacted]>; Dearden, Dawn (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Subject: Richardson

Richardson has given the following statement to the press, true and accurate?:

Governor Bill Richardson offered his assistance in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation - through his lawyer, Jeff Brown of Dechert LLP - to the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York. In response to this offer, Mr. Brown was informed by the Assistant US Attorney responsible for the case that Governor Richardson is neither a target, subject, nor witness in the case and that there is no allegation against Governor Richardson that the government is actively investigating.

“It’s fair to conclude that the federal prosecutors investigating this matter do not believe the Governor participated in or witnessed the criminal activity Jeffrey Epstein is alleged to have committed,” said Mr. Brown.

Governor Richardson hopes that the investigation continues so that Epstein’s victims can finally have their day in court and see the justice they deserve.

[Redacted]
Public Affairs
United States Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office | Southern District of New York
[Redacted]