From: " \(USAFLS\)" < To: " . MUSAFLS \ )" < Cc: " MUSAFLS\)" Subject: RE: Epstein Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:30:00 +0000 Importance: Normal VLISAFLS\)" Both the tone and substance of your email are totally inappropriate and, in combination with other matters in the past, it seriously calls your judgment into question. As you well know, the US Attorney has not even decided whether to go forward with a prosecution in this matter, thus you should have respected his position before engaging in plea negotiations. Despite being told these things, you prepared a pros memo and indictment that included a definitive date for indictment. It has come to my attention that you led the agents to believe that the indictment of this matter was a foregone conclusion and that our decision to put off that date and listen to the defense attorne s' concerns is indicative of the office havin second thoughts about indicting. called me before, not after, the June 26th meeting. It was an informal discussion and not in the nature of an official plea offer but rather a feelino out by both sides as to what it might take to resolve the matter. should also know that my discussion with was made with the US Attorneys full knowledge. Had expressed interest in pursuing this avenue further, I certainly would have raised it with all the interested individuals in this case, including you and the agents. In any event, I fail to see how a discussion that went nowhere has hurt our bargaining position. I am also quite confident that no one on the defense team believes that the federal investigation in this matter has been for show. Nor are your arguments that I have violated the Ashcroft memo, the USAM or any other policy well taken. As Chief of the Criminal Division, I am the person designated by the US Attorney to exercise appropriate discretion in deciding whether certain pleas are appropriate and consistent with the Ashcroft memo and the USAM — not you. As for your stateme