Bloomberg L.P.

What this page does not contain

This page is about a company, not about Michael Bloomberg. He has his own page here and this one does not repeat it. Across the ten principal forms of the company’s name, 984 documents of this release carry one of them and 952 of those name no form of him at all. Nothing on this page is attributed to him, and no article the company published is treated here as anything he wrote.¹² Most of the company’s name in this release is a copyright line. The single largest form, Bloomberg Finance, reaches 603 documents, and on those documents the phrase is overwhelmingly a licence footer, a chart attribution or a permission note printed on somebody else’s research. It is a data vendor being credited, not a company doing anything, and it is excluded from every act claim here.³ Almost nothing in this project’s index is marked as sent by the company. Across the whole release the sender field carries the company’s name on ten documents under seven values, and the only ones of the ten that are the company at all are four deliveries of its own subscription newsletters. But that near-zero would be badly misleading read alone, and the test that matters is authorship: named journalists of the company do write into these files, over their own signatures, and this page is mostly about them.¹⁴ Seven acts. Seven times the record shows the company or a named journalist of it doing something about the Epstein matter: five approaches to federal agencies, one approach to a defence lawyer, and one motion filed in court. Everything else in 984 documents is a byline, a chart source, a terminal screenshot or a wire story somebody forwarded.⁵ Nearly a third of the population is press. 309 of the 984 documents carry this project’s news-clipping label and 374 carry its mail-header label. A clipping is evidence about what a journalist wrote, and no finding here rests on one.⁶ Nothing any complainant or survivor said appears here in any form. Two documents in the act class were read and refused on protection grounds. Nothing from either is quoted, summarised, characterised or counted, and their identifiers are not listed, because listing them beside what they concern would point.⁷ No telephone number, electronic address or other personal contact value is reproduced here, the company’s own included, and no passenger list, manifest or flight record is behind anything written here.⁷

Named on the documents as	Bloomberg L.P., the publisher of Bloomberg News in a 2024 court filing, read at the page image; Bloomberg News in reporters’ own signature blocks and in federal agencies’ subject lines; Bloomberg Finance L.P. and Bloomberg Finance LP in copyright and permission lines on other firms’ research; BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM: as the firm tag the company’s own messaging product prints around its reporters’ accounts89103
What the documents say it is	One description, and it is the company’s own, given in its own court filing: the publisher of Bloomberg News8
What the record is mostly	Other people’s paper carrying the company’s name as a source. A large block of it is Deutsche Bank research and terminal screenshots standing in Jeffrey Epstein’s files, footed Copyright 2014 Bloomberg Finance L.P. or *Used with the permission of Bloomberg Finance LP3
Journalists of the company named in these files	Four. Two have their own messages reproduced here; nothing on this page rests on the other two4
23 June 2017	A Bloomberg News reporter puts a story proposition to a defence lawyer. The lawyer forwards the reporter’s message to Jeffrey Epstein the same day, marked High importance, with one word: fyi10
10 July 2019	The Bureau of Prisons settles the approved response to Bloomberg News seeking information on Jeffrey Epstein’s detention. It declines to give conditions of confinement and confirms only where he is held11
12 July 2019	A reporter writes to the prosecutors’ office to make sure it has seen his own newsroom’s story that day12
10 August 2019	The morning of the incident at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. A reporter asks the Bureau of Prisons to confirm whether Epstein was found hanging, and writes again that afternoon putting that question and a second, whether he had been on suicide watch. The answer that evening is a press release13
28 October 2019 to 10 March 2021	A Bloomberg News reporter’s freedom-of-information request about the Epstein prosecution. The office’s own words on receiving it: This is very likely covered by exemption. Sixteen months later the request is still logged ACTIVE CASE1415
17 December 2020	A reporter asks the prosecutors about an extradition request. The office’s internal note: We'll decline to comment. Read at the page image9
20 October 2021	Not a party. Seventeen news organisations sign a letter to the judge in the Maxwell prosecution. Counted at the page image, the company is not among them16
24 June 2024	Bloomberg L.P. moves to intervene, as one of fourteen media companies moving together, in a Florida action for access to released Epstein grand jury materials. Read at the page image8
Response	None located. No statement by the company about any of this has been found, and no request for one was made from here17
Not established here	That the company had any commercial dealing with Jeffrey Epstein; that any approach described here produced a story; that any agency answered any of the questions put to it; or that anyone at the company knew the company’s data appeared in the research sent to him18
Covered elsewhere on this wiki	Michael Bloomberg · Vahe Stepanian · Ghislaine Maxwell · Jeffrey Epstein

Bloomberg L.P. is a New York financial-data and news company, and it enters the Epstein release twice over in two completely different characters. For most of the 984 documents its name is printed by somebody else, at the bottom of a chart, as the source of a number. In seven documents it is doing something, and in all seven what it is doing is journalism or litigation: putting questions to the Bureau of Prisons and to federal prosecutors, filing a freedom-of-information request, and moving a court for access to grand jury material.¹⁵

That split is the finding, and the second half is the smaller half. A reader who searched this release for the company’s name and counted the returns would conclude it is everywhere. Read, it is almost nowhere: the name is a credit line, and the company behind it appears as an actor seven times.³⁵

The name as a credit line

The single commonest use of this company’s name in the release is to say where a number came from. The form Bloomberg Finance reaches 603 documents, more than four times the largest of the other nine principal forms, and on those documents it is almost always one of three things: a copyright footer on a terminal screenshot, a source line under a chart, or a permission note on research being forwarded.³

A terminal screenshot standing in this release carries both shapes on one sheet:

Copyright 2014 Bloomberg Finance L.P.

and, further down the same sheet:

Source: Bloomberg 24-Sep-2014

Another carries the permission note a Deutsche Bank officer attached when he pasted a terminal chart into a message to Jeffrey Epstein:

*Used with the permission of Bloomberg Finance LP

And a compliance message in a bank’s own files explains why these lines are there at all. Asked what approval a marketing piece needs, a supervisor answers that a customer presentation of factual market data is quick to clear:

Source is identified ( Bloomberg/Thompson)

That is a bank’s internal rule about crediting its data vendors, and it is the mechanism that puts this company’s name on hundreds of documents in Jeffrey Epstein’s files without anybody at the company doing anything at all.¹⁹

Nothing in this class is an act and none of it is counted as one here. Where the name appears in a chart attribution, a copyright line, a permission note, a terminal screenshot, a wire-story byline or the standard tagline at the foot of a story, this page records it as a credit and stops.³

Who signs: the test that decides this page

The sender field of this project’s index almost never carries this company. Queried across the whole release, it carries the company’s name on ten documents under seven values. Read, the ten are: four deliveries of two of its own subscription newsletters; two circulations of a columnist’s Bloomberg View column, on a distribution list the sheets do not say who runs; one third party’s public-relations mailing about a magazine interview; and three messages from an office whose account the company’s own messaging product renders with the company as its firm.¹²⁰

Read alone that would be a false picture, and the company’s own product is the reason. An address at bloomberg.net is a Bloomberg Professional messaging address, and it belongs to subscribers at least as often as to employees. In this population the same domain carries the accounts of staff at Deutsche Bank, at JPMorgan Chase and at a third firm, each rendered with their own employer’s name in brackets beside the address, exactly as the sheets print it. So neither the domain nor the bracketed firm tag settles who anybody works for, and this page does not treat either as proof of employment.²⁰

What does settle it is the signature. Two documents here carry a named journalist’s own signature block giving the company as his employer, over a message he wrote himself. Those are the documents this page rests on, and they are set out below.⁴⁹¹⁰

23 June 2017: a story proposition, and where it went

On Friday 23 June 2017 at 11:32 in the morning a Bloomberg News reporter wrote to a defence lawyer. The message is set in monospaced type and the whole of it is this:

It’s about you: I’m told on good authority that Jared wants you as his atty. That’s worth a story, if true…

It is signed, under a rule, Greg Farrell and Bloomberg News. The account the message was sent from is rendered Greg Farrell (BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM:).¹⁰

What happened to it is on the same sheet, and it is the reason the document is in this release at all. At 9:48 that evening the lawyer, Reid Weingarten, forwarded the reporter’s message to Jeffrey Epstein. The subject is the reporter’s own, under FW:; the importance field reads High; and the covering message is one word:

fyi

Both messages stand on one sheet, and that sheet was read at the page image. The forename inside the reporter’s quoted sentence is not his own: it belongs to the third person that sentence says wants the lawyer as his attorney, and this page does not expand it. The reporter’s own name is printed in full on the same sheet. Nothing read for this page records that the lawyer answered the reporter, that Epstein answered the lawyer, or that any story followed.¹⁰¹⁸

July and August 2019: the Bureau of Prisons

Twice in thirty-one days Bloomberg News put questions to the Bureau of Prisons about Jeffrey Epstein, and both times the record holds the agency’s answer rather than the journalist’s question.

On 10 July 2019 an internal Bureau message, under a subject naming Bloomberg News and its request for information about his detention, carries what the agency had settled on:

Here is the approved response For privacy and safety and security reasons, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) does not release information on an individual inmate’s conditions of confinement. However, we can share that Jeffrey Edward Epstein is currently located at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) New York.

The agency declined the substance and confirmed only where he was held. This page names nobody from this sheet.¹¹

On the morning of 10 August 2019 a reporter writing from an account the product renders BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM: sent an executive assistant at the Metropolitan Correctional Center a message timed 08/10/19 11:25:01:

Lee, Hope you’re doing well. Can you confirm that Epstein was found hanging?

He wrote again that afternoon, acknowledging that she was busy and putting two questions: whether Epstein had been found hanging, and whether he had been on suicide watch. That second message is given here in reported speech rather than quoted, because the released text of the copy this page cites damages several of its words and this page does not repair a quotation.¹³

The answer came that evening, and it answers neither question:

Good evening, Please see the attached press release of an incident that occurred this morning August 10, 2019 at MCC New York 150 Park Row, NY 10007. If you should have any further questions please feel free to contact me. Thank you Lee Plourde.

Nothing read for this page records that either question was ever answered.¹³¹⁸

Between those two exchanges a reporter from the same newsroom used a lighter approach. On 12 July 2019, two days after the Bureau settled its approved response, he wrote to the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York:

Just wanted to make sure your team saw this reference in today’s story to a super-secret safe in Epstein’s island getaway:

A link to the company’s own published story follows, and the message is signed with the company’s name. The office forwarded it internally the same afternoon so that a colleague would see it. This page reproduces no address from that sheet and derives no interval from it; the two timestamps on it are written in different forms and are therefore two different clocks.¹²

October 2019: the request, and the exemption

The most documented thing this company does in the release is ask for records and not get them.

On Monday 28 October 2019 at 19:59:19 +0000 an officer of the prosecutors’ office circulated a freedom-of-information request, logged EOUSA-2019-004341, in a message whose subject names the company. The office’s own assessment is in the first line:

We have this FOIA request from Bloomberg News. This is very likely covered by exemption. When you have a few minutes, may we discuss?

The request’s own summary, reproduced in the same message, says what was wanted:

This request concerns the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein brought by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York in July of 2019. I am interested in records or communications between SDNY and a bank, referred to as “Institution-1” in a court filing from July 12.

Thirty-three minutes and twenty-one seconds later, at 20:32:40 +0000, the answer came back from the team the request had reached. Both headers carry an explicit zero offset, so that interval is a measurement and not an estimate:

Happy to discuss, and thanks for letting us know about the request. I’ve copied the rest of the team here, so that we can sort this out. Would it be possible to set up a call for tomorrow to discuss with the team?

The following afternoon the handling was settled. A further message records that responsibility for the Epstein-case requests had moved to one person handling them directly, so nobody else needed to act on this one. The names in that sentence are covered on the sheet and this page supplies none of them.¹⁴

Sixteen months later the request was still open. A tracking printout of Wednesday 10 March 2021, headed SDNY FOIA Tracking--filtering for: epstein, carries the row:

EOUSA-2019-004341 Greg Farrell Bloomberg News Request ACTIVE CASE Sent to Assigned AUSA

That is the same reporter who had written to a defence lawyer in 2017. Nothing read for this page records that any record was ever released to him, or that the request was ever closed.¹⁵¹⁸

17 December 2020: declined

On 17 December 2020 at 9:11:47 in the morning, Eastern time, a Bloomberg News reporter sent the prosecutors’ office his own newsroom’s story about an arrest in France in the Epstein investigation, and asked one question:

Hi guys — any chance we’ll be seeing the unsealing of an extradition request for this person?

It is signed Christian, under a block reading Christian Berthelsen and Bloomberg News, from an account rendered Christian Berthelsen (BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM:). The subject line carries the company’s own wire prefix, (BN).⁹

Thirty-five minutes and one second later, at 14:46:48 +0000, the office’s Chief Public Information Officer forwarded it to colleagues with the decision already taken:

Bloomberg reporter forwarded this story about a French modeling agent and asked about the office’s interest in him. We’ll decline to comment. Passing along FYI.

Both headers are zoned, so the interval is a measurement. The sheet was read at the page image, and the image corrected the released text: the reporter’s sentence is printed with a double hyphen and not a dash. The second sheet of this document is the published story itself; this page read it and takes nothing from it, names nobody from it and describes none of its contents.⁹

Where the company did not act

On 20 October 2021 seventeen news organisations wrote jointly to the judge in the Maxwell prosecution. Their names are set out in two columns on the letter’s last sheet, nine on the left and eight on the right. Counted at the page image, no form of this company’s name is among them, although Reuters News & Media Inc., The New York Times Company, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. and NBCUniversal Media, LLC are.¹⁶

That absence is worth recording because of what the company did do two years and eight months later.¹⁶⁸

24 June 2024: the company itself, in court

One document in this release is the company acting in its own corporate name rather than through a journalist. It is an unopposed motion filed in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, on 24 June 2024, in an action brought by the publisher of the Palm Beach Post against the county’s Clerk and Comptroller. Read at the page image, the motion’s first sentence runs a list of media companies, and the second name on it is:

Bloomberg L.P., the publisher of Bloomberg News

What the list asks for is set out in the same sentence:

move to intervene in this action for the limited purpose of asserting their right of access, pursuant to Section 905.27, Florida Statutes, to any released grand jury materials involving Jeffrey Epstein

No other document read for this page carries a description of this company by this company, and this is the only document read for this page in which the corporate entity acts under its own legal name. Nothing read for this page records what became of the motion.⁸¹⁸

The company’s own product, in the file

Two of the company’s subscription newsletters stand in this release. One, The Bloomberg Open of Tuesday 7 July 2020, opens Good morning. Here's what you need to know to start your day. and lists three items, of which the third is:

Ghislaine Maxwell arrives in New York for hearing.

The other, The Bloomberg Close, is of 19 November 2019. This page names no recipient for either. They are a published product arriving in a mailbox, not an approach to anybody, and they are recorded here only because a search of the release for the company’s name reaches them and a reader should know what they are.²¹

What this page does not say

• It does not say the company had any commercial relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. No document read for this page records one.¹⁸
• It does not say that any of these approaches produced a published story, or that any agency answered any question put to it. In every case where an answer is recorded, the answer is a refusal, a press release or a confirmation of something the asker already knew.^1113918
• It does not say the freedom-of-information request was refused. The office wrote that it was very likely covered by exemption and the request was still logged as an active case sixteen months later. What became of it is not in anything read for this page.¹⁴¹⁵
• It does not attribute any article to Michael Bloomberg, and it does not treat the company’s conduct as his. The two are different subjects and 952 of the 984 documents name no form of him.²
• It does not say that an address or an account tag establishes who anybody works for. The company’s messaging product renders subscribers and employees in the same shape, and three subscriber firms’ accounts in this population prove it.²⁰
• It does not treat a copyright line, a chart source, a permission note or a byline as an act by the company. 603 documents carry the largest such form and none of them is counted here.³
• It does not partition the bare surname. That token reaches 4,772 documents and is a wire service, a terminal, a magazine and an appliance brand at once; this page did not mine it and says so.²

How this page is scoped

Measured against the released files on 5 November 2026, with the index’s size on disk compared against its recorded value of 10,982,875,136 bytes at the start of every run and the comparison printed and read, with every job’s return code read from the job’s own output, and with no empty result converted into a zero. Controls were printed and read in the same invocations as the counts: the phrase richard m berman returned 371 documents and 885 sheets, matching this project’s standing figure, and a freshly generated token confirmed unused returned 0 documents and 0 sheets.¹

The forms, and what each returns in documents. bloomberg finance 603 · bloomberg news 130 · bloomberg lp 70 · bloomberg businessweek 64 · bloomberg view 60 · bloomberg law 35 · bloomberg markets 27 · bloomberg opinion 14 · bloomberg terminal 14 · bloomberg television 13 · bloomberg radio 13 · bloomberg government 11 · bloomberg media 3. The union of the first ten of those is 984 documents and 17,292 sheets, and that union is the population every figure on this page is taken over unless the sentence says otherwise. Thirteen of the fifteen documents this page cites lie inside that union; two lie outside it and are reached only by the bare surname, and both are named in their own notes.¹

Forms this page tested that were not supplied to it, with their returns: bloomberg com 403 · bloomberg finance lp 282 · bloomberg finance l p 252 · bloomberg net 103 · bloomberg tv 48 · bloomberg data 50 · bloomberg professional 30 · bloomberg business 21 · bloomberg intelligence 10 · bloomberg tradebook 9 · bloomberg new energy finance 6 · bnef 45 · bloomberg wire 2 · bloomberg press 1 · bloomberg beta 1. Returning nothing: bloomberg philanthropies, bloomberg family foundation, bloomberg associates, bloomberg industry group, bloomberg quint, bloomberg news service, bloomberg inc, bloomberg holdings, copyright bloomberg, bloomberg all rights reserved. Adding the fifteen untested forms to the ten takes the union to 1,610 documents and 37,163 sheets, and this page reports the narrower figure wherever the dispatch’s ten forms are the population being described.¹

Punctuation was proved rather than assumed, and it does not behave as expected. This project’s index discards the stops inside L.P. but does not merge the result with LP: bloomberg l p and bloomberg l.p. return the identical set of 51 documents, bloomberg lp and bloomberg lp. return the identical set of 70, and those two sets share only 2 documents. The same holds for the longer form: bloomberg finance l p and bloomberg finance l.p. are identical at 252, and bloomberg finance lp is a different 282, the two together covering 531 of the 603. So Bloomberg L.P. and Bloomberg LP are two populations here and not one spelling of a single population.¹

Damaged spellings were read rather than counted. bloornberg 2, bloomberq 5, bioomberg 1, blootnberg 14, bloombcrg 4, bloombetg 3, bloombeig 2, b loomberg 1, bloom berg 10 and blomberg finance 15. Returning nothing: b1oomberg, bioombcrg, bloomborg. None of these is used for any claim on this page, and the published page on Michael Bloomberg has separately read the first three and found them to be this company rather than him.²²

The attribution population was read, not assumed, and that reading is the page’s central measurement. Every occurrence of bloomberg finance was harvested with the eighty characters before it and classified: 890 occurrences across 796 sheets of 603 documents, of which the largest classes are a Source: attribution line, a copyright or licence footer, and a used with permission of note. The residue that no rule matched was read by eye and is overwhelmingly the same copyright footer with the word Copyright damaged by the extraction into forms a pattern cannot reach. The separate form source bloomberg reaches 581 documents on its own.³

The act fraction was measured and is not relied on. By this project’s document-type labels the 984-document union is 374 mail headers, 309 news clippings, 79 scanned images, 45 research reports, 25 deposition transcripts and 20 travel itineraries, with the remainder spread thinly. Counting mail headers, correspondence, letters, court filings and memoranda as act-class gives 39.6 per cent. That figure is an estimate from a classifier’s label and nothing on this page rests on it: the mail headers here are overwhelmingly other firms’ research being forwarded, so the label counts format and says nothing about who wrote anything.⁶

The deflation is large and is stated as such. From 984 documents under the ten principal forms to seven acts is a ratio of 141 to 1; over the wider 1,610-document union it is 230 to 1, which is exact and not a rounding. Nine documents carry those seven acts, so the documents-to-acts ratio within the act class is close to one.⁵

The quotations on this page were verified by hand, because the instruments that normally check them could not see them. This project’s pin checker, its truncation checker, its character-level quotation audit and its stitching check each examined zero spans here, for a structural reason: they bind a quotation to a document only when the quotation and the identifier sit on one line, and the form of this page puts quotations in indented blocks and identifiers in the notes. Those four zeros are therefore no result at all and are not reported as clean. What was done instead: every quoted span of twelve characters or more was matched, as exact text, against the released text of the sheet this page cites it to, and 71 matched; the spans that did not match are the ones taken from the four sheets read at the page image, where the paper and not the released text is the source. A separate audit of marks inside closing quotation marks examined three spans and found all three on the sheet, with none added by this page.²³

Four sheets of four documents were read at the page image. Two were taken from this project’s local store, where a three-way test distinguished a real file from an alias and from an absent asset; one was fetched read-only from the site’s own per-document path in a call that also fetched a negative control, which returned HTTP 403 at 111 bytes while the target returned HTTP 200 and a file beginning %PDF- whose page count matched this project’s index exactly; and one is a served image in the class this project holds at 300 pixels per inch. The three rendered from PDFs are 96 pixels per inch at native resolution and none was upsampled. On two of the four the image changed what this page says.²³

Related

• Michael Bloomberg, whose page covers the man and expressly does not cover this company
• Vahe Stepanian, the Deutsche Bank officer whose message to Jeffrey Epstein carries the company’s permission line quoted above
• Ghislaine Maxwell, whose prosecution is the subject of the 2021 letter this company did not sign
• Jeffrey Epstein, about whose detention, prosecution and estate every one of the seven acts was made

Notes

Footnotes

1. Measured against the released files on 5 November 2026. The index’s size on disk was compared against its recorded value of 10,982,875,136 bytes at the start of every run and the comparison printed and read; every count was produced by a program reading the index directly rather than by a shell pipeline, and no count was taken through a pipe. Controls, printed and read in the same invocations as the counts: richard m berman returned 371 documents / 885 sheets, matching this project’s standing figure, and a freshly generated token confirmed unused before it was relied on returned 0 documents / 0 sheets. Document counts use an explicit sheet-suffix strip; sheet counts are row counts. Sender field. Across the whole release the sender column carries a form of the company’s name on 10 documents under 7 distinct values. Aim control. That same query is what proves the column can see the word at all, and it is the reason the near-zero is reported here as a fact about a field rather than about conduct; the column’s own top values across the release run to hundreds of thousands of documents, so it is densely populated and the near-zero is not an artefact of an empty field. Disagreement with the figure this page was commissioned on, recorded rather than adopted: the union of the ten principal forms was relayed to this page as 977 documents; re-derived here it is 984, with 32 naming a form of Michael Bloomberg (which reproduces the relayed figure exactly) and 952 naming none. The seven-document difference is not reconciled and is stated as a disagreement. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸

2. Separating the company from the man. Of the 984 documents under the ten principal forms, 32 name some form of Michael Bloomberg and 952 do not. Over the wider 25-form union, on the same forms of his name, they are 42 and 1,568 of 1,610. No claim, count or quotation on this page is taken from a document reached only by a form of his name, and no article the company published is attributed to him. The bare token bloomberg reaches 4,772 documents / 7,113 sheets, of which 3,204 lie outside that wider union, counted as a set difference and not as a subtraction from it. This page did not mine that token and did not partition it. At that scale it is a wire service, a terminal, a magazine and an appliance brand at once, and attributing any of it to this company would be the error this note exists to prevent. The published page on Michael Bloomberg made the same decision for the same reason, and the two pages’ figures for the three largest media forms agree. ↩ ↩² ↩³

3. The attribution finding, which is this page’s central measurement. The form bloomberg finance reaches 603 documents / 796 sheets, the largest of any form of the company’s name after the bare token. Every occurrence on those sheets was harvested with the eighty characters preceding it and classified by what stands immediately before the phrase: 890 occurrences, of which a Source: or Sources: attribution line, a copyright or licence footer, and a used with permission of note are the three largest classes, together accounting for the great majority. The residue that no rule matched was read by eye; it is overwhelmingly the same copyright footer with the word Copyright damaged by the extraction into forms no pattern can reach, together with a handful of ordinary sentences crediting the company as a data source or as the conductor of an analyst survey. The separate form source bloomberg reaches 581 documents on its own. The specimen sheets quoted in this page’s body are EFTA01462252, which carries Copyright 2014 Bloomberg Finance L.P. and, further down the same sheet, Source: Bloomberg 24-Sep-2014, and EFTA01420594, which carries *Used with the permission of Bloomberg Finance LP with the asterisk the sheet prints. Both quotations are reproduced exactly as the released text renders them, including the asterisk and the absent possessive. One document cited on this page is reached by this form and by no other named form of the company’s name: it is the terminal screenshot quoted above, cited as the specimen of the credit line itself. No document reached only by this form is counted as an act anywhere on this page. Released text only; neither sheet was read at the page image. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸

4. Named journalists of the company in this release. Four are named in documents read for this page. Two have their own messages reproduced here, each over a signature block naming the company: Greg Farrell and Christian Berthelsen. Nothing on this page rests on the other two, nothing is reproduced, summarised or characterised from the documents naming them, and they are not named here. No press office, spokesman or bureau chief of the company acts anywhere in this release. Arms for spokesman for bloomberg, spokeswoman for bloomberg, bloomberg spokesman, bloomberg declined, bloomberg with press office, bloomberg with bureau chief and bloomberg with editor in chief were run with a firing control at 371 documents and a silent negative control; every hit was read and every one is a false positive: a political committee’s spokesman, a foreign presidency’s press office, the White House press office, a bank’s press office, and news sentences about Michael Bloomberg declining to run for office. The standard tagline at the foot of a wire story (To contact the reporter on this story:) occurs 88 times in 50 documents and names many further journalists of the company. That is a byline and this page counts none of it as an act: the reporter wrote a story and somebody else forwarded it. ↩ ↩² ↩³

5. The act count, and what it rests on. Seven, carried by nine documents, each set out in its own section of this page with its own note: the June 2017 approach to a defence lawyer; the July 2019 request to the Bureau of Prisons; the July 2019 message to the prosecutors’ office; the August 2019 questions to the Bureau of Prisons; the October 2019 freedom-of-information request and its handling, which rests on four documents; the December 2020 approach to the prosecutors’ office; and the June 2024 motion to intervene. An eighth candidate was withdrawn before it was written: a sweep for the company’s address inside a header field first returned five candidates, and four of the five were this page’s own arm matching the letters of From inside the words San Francisco, Frankfurt and Francisco in wire-story taglines. The error was this page’s and it is recorded rather than quietly corrected. Two further documents in the act class were read and refused on protection grounds and are dealt with in the refusals note. The deflation from population to acts is 984 to 7, a ratio of 141 to 1, or 230 to 1 over the wider 1,610-document union. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

6. Document-type labels, quoted as a classifier’s output and relied on for nothing. Over the 984-document union this project’s labels give email header 374 · news clipping 309 · image scan 79 · research report 45 · deposition transcript 25 · travel itinerary 20 · equity swap 18 · miscellaneous 17 · research article 16 · court filing 14, with the remainder spread across a further dozen labels. Counting mail headers, correspondence, letters, court filings and memoranda as act-class gives 390 of 984, 39.6 per cent. That is an estimate from a label and no finding on this page rests on it. The mail headers in this population are overwhelmingly other firms’ research being forwarded with a terminal chart pasted in, so the label measures format and says nothing about authorship, which is the distinction this page’s shape turns on. Every document this page cites was opened and read at the sheet, whatever its label. The 25 documents this project labels deposition transcripts and the 20 it labels travel itineraries are in the population and none of them is cited here; this page takes nothing from any of them, quotes nothing from any of them, and makes no claim about what they contain. ↩ ↩²

7. Two documents in the act class were read and refused on protection grounds. Nothing from either is quoted, summarised, characterised or counted anywhere on this page, and their identifiers are not listed here, because the refused set is small enough that naming it beside the reason would locate the material it protects. The class is stated instead: both carry, or quote at length, material about complainants in the Epstein and Maxwell proceedings, and neither was needed for anything this page finds. A manifest-shape screen matching manifest, manifests, passenger, passengers, pax, attendee, attendees, roster, rosters, guest list, flight log, flight logs, on board, onboard, boarding, souls on board and wheels up, word-bounded and case-insensitive, was proved on a planted positive and silent on a planted negative before it was run. Run over every sheet of every document this page cites, it returned nothing. A hazard-vocabulary screen and a retelling screen of the same construction, each proved live and silent on planted controls, were run over the same sheets: the hazard screen returned nothing and the retelling screen returned nothing. No passenger list, manifest, flight record or attendee roster naming this company was found by any form tested. No telephone number, electronic address or other personal contact value is reproduced anywhere on this page, including from the signature blocks of the journalists it names. ↩ ↩²

8. An unopposed motion for limited intervention, four sheets, bearing Filing # 201184781 E-Filed 06/24/2024 01:09:07 PM. EFTA02737032. Served page 1 was read at the page image, from this project’s local store, where a three-way test confirmed a regular file rather than an alias or an absence; pdfimages -list reports 96 pixels per inch and the raster was extracted at native resolution and not upsampled. From that sheet this page takes, at the image: the court as IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; the caption CA FLORIDA HOLDINGS, LLC, Publisher of THE PALM BEACH POST against SHARON BOCK, as Clerk and Comptroller of Palm Beach County, Florida; the case number 50-2019-CA-014681-AG; the title UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LIMITED INTERVENTION; and two separate spans of the opening sentence, each contiguous on the sheet and neither joined to the other: the second name in the movant list, and the operative clause beginning move to intervene. The clause between them runs the remaining movants and is not reproduced here. The list was counted at the image: fourteen media companies move together, and this company is the second named. The released text of this sheet interleaves the caption with the clerk’s footer stamp and drops several movants, which is why the list was taken from the image only, as this project’s record for this document already requires. No other movant is named or described here. A diagonal watermark reading NOT A CERTIFIED COPY stands on the sheet. The producer’s treatment of this sheet is not described here. Nothing read for this page records what became of the motion. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵

9. A message of Thursday 17 December 2020 and the internal forward carrying it, two sheets. EFTA00078628. Served page 1 was read at the page image, fetched read-only from the site’s own per-document path in a call that also fetched a negative control: the control returned HTTP 403 at 111 bytes while the target returned HTTP 200 and a file beginning %PDF- of 2 pages, matching this project’s index at 2 rows; native resolution 96 pixels per inch, not upsampled. From that sheet this page takes, at the image: the lower message’s From: "Christian Berthelsen (BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM:)", Date: December 17, 2020 at 9:11:47 AM EST, its one-sentence body as quoted, its sign-off Christian, and the first two lines of its signature block, which read Christian Berthelsen and Bloomberg News; and the forward’s Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 14:46:48 +0000 and its covering paragraph in full. Both carry a zone, one named and one as an offset, so the interval between them is a measurement and not an estimate: 9:11:47 AM EST is 14:11:47 at zero offset, and 14:46:48 is 35 minutes 1 second after it. The two stamps are written in different forms and this page relies on them only because each states its own zone. The image corrected the released text: the reporter’s sentence prints a double hyphen where the released text gives a dash. This page reproduces no address and no telephone number from the signature block. The subject line carries this company’s own wire prefix, and this page takes that prefix and nothing else from the line. Served page 2 is the published story itself. It was read and nothing from it is reproduced, summarised, characterised or counted anywhere on this page, and nobody is named from it. The producer’s treatment of either sheet is not described here. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶

10. A message of Friday 23 June 2017 and its forward of the same day, one sheet. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026675. Read at the page image, from this project’s local store of this class, which holds the served file verbatim at 300 pixels per inch; the sheet measures 2,550 by 3,369 pixels and was not upsampled. From that sheet this page takes, at the image: the lower message’s From: Greg Farrell (BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM:), Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 11:32 AM, To: Weingarten, Reid, Subject: RE: long time, no talk..., its body in full as quoted, and its signature block, of which this page reproduces only the two lines giving the writer’s name and the company. The upper message is From: Weingarten, Reid, Sent: 6/23/2017 9:48:45 PM, To: Jeffrey Epstein ([email protected]), Subject: FW: long time, no talk..., Importance: High, and its whole body is the word fyi. The two timestamps are written in different forms and neither carries a zone, so this page derives no interval between them and states only that both are the same day. The forename inside the reporter’s quoted sentence is not the reporter’s own: it belongs to the third person that sentence says wants the lawyer as his attorney, and this page does not expand it. The reporter’s own name is printed in full on this sheet, in the header line of the message quoted here and again in its signature block, so that decision withholds nothing of his. The producer’s treatment of this sheet is not described here. Nothing else on the sheet is reproduced, described or counted. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵

11. An internal Bureau of Prisons message of Wednesday 10 July 2019, timed 2019/07/10 09:23 on its own face, standing at served page 340 of a 1,000-sheet production. EFTA02850705. This page cites that one sheet and makes no claim whatever about the other 999, which were not read. The quotation is reproduced exactly as the released text renders it, including the absent colon after response. The subject line names Bloomberg News and its request for information about Jeffrey Epstein’s detention; it is not quoted here because the released text of this copy damages a word in it. This page names nobody from this sheet. A second printing of this production stands in the release under a different identifier. Nothing is quoted or relied on from it, and no comparison between the two copies was made or is reported. Released text only; this sheet was not read at the page image. ↩ ↩² ↩³

12. A message of Friday 12 July 2019 and the internal forward carrying it, one sheet. EFTA00023242. The lower message is Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 1:09 PM from an account rendered with this company’s newsroom as its firm, to and copying the prosecutors’ office; the forward carries Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:46:47 +0000 and Importance: Normal. The quotation is the opening of the lower message and is reproduced exactly as the released text renders it, ending where the sheet’s colon ends it. The link that follows is the company’s own published story; this page does not reproduce it, because the released text of the address is damaged and quoting it would be quoting a corruption. The forward’s covering sentence is not quoted and this page names nobody from it. The produced header is zoned and the quoted preamble is not, so they are different clocks and this page derives no interval. Nothing else on the sheet is reproduced, described or counted. Released text only. ↩ ↩²

13. An exchange of 10 August 2019 standing across served pages 36 and 37 of the same 1,000-sheet production. EFTA02850705. This page cites those two sheets and makes no claim about the other 998. Served page 36 carries the reply’s own header, giving Lee Plourde as its sender, the stamp 2019/08/10 18:17, and a press release among its attachments. Served page 37 carries the bodies, printed newest first, in this order down the sheet: the reply quoted in this page’s body, reproduced as the released text renders it and including the full stop the sheet prints after her surname; then a message timed 8/10/2019 1:03 PM; then a message At: 08/10/19 11:25:01 whose quoted sentences are reproduced in this page’s body as the released text renders them. The two messages are from an account rendered with this company’s newsroom as its firm, and in time they run 11:25, 13:03, 18:17. The second message is given in reported speech and is not quoted, because the released text of this copy damages several of its words and this page does not repair a quotation. The three timestamps are written in three different forms and none carries a zone, so this page gives their order, which the thread itself preserves, and derives no interval. This page names no reporter from these sheets. A telephone number stands in the first message and is not reproduced here. A second printing of this production stands in the release under a different identifier. Nothing is quoted or relied on from it, and no comparison between the two copies was made or is reported. Released text only. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

14. Three messages of 28 and 29 October 2019, one sheet each but for the second, which is two. EFTA00040515 carries the circulating message at Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:59:19 +0000, whose subject names the request number and this company, and whose first line and reproduced request summary are quoted in this page’s body exactly as the released text renders them, the request summary being quoted only as far as the sentence this page uses and no further. EFTA00097145 carries the reply at Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:32:40 +0000, quoted in full from its salutation onward. Both headers carry an explicit zero offset, so the interval of 33 minutes 21 seconds between them is measured on one clock. EFTA00089001 carries the handling note at Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 19:07:00 +0000. That note’s sentence is given in this page’s own words rather than quoted, and this page names nobody from it. The bank the request names is given on the sheet only by the designation a court filing used, and this page carries that designation and does not resolve it. Nothing else on any of these sheets is reproduced, described or counted. Released text only. ↩ ↩² ↩³

15. A tracking printout headed SDNY FOIA Tracking--filtering for: epstein and dated Wednesday, March 10, 2021, twenty sheets. EFTA00091013. The quoted row stands on served page 1 and is reproduced exactly as the released text renders it, line for line. This page cites that one sheet and takes nothing from the other nineteen, which were not read for anything on this page. The row records a request number, a requester, this company, a status and a routing, and this page takes those and nothing else. That the requester is the same person as the writer of the June 2017 message is established by the name printed on both sheets and by nothing else; no other identifying particular is relied on. Released text only. ↩ ↩² ↩³

16. A letter to the judge in the Maxwell prosecution, four sheets, bearing the electronic filing stamp Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 362 Filed 10/20/21. EFTA02833107. Served page 4 was read at the page image, from this project’s local store, where a three-way test confirmed a regular file rather than an alias or an absence; pdfimages -list reports 96 pixels per inch and the raster was extracted at native resolution and not upsampled. The signatory list was counted at the image: nine entries in the left column and eight in the right, seventeen in all, which reproduces independently a count already on this project’s record for this sheet. No form of this company’s name stands among the seventeen. The three other organisations named in this page’s body are taken from that list at the image. No other signatory is reproduced, described or counted here, and this page draws no inference from the absence beyond recording it. Nothing else on the sheet is reproduced, including the counsel contact values that print on it. ↩ ↩² ↩³

17. No statement by Bloomberg L.P. or Bloomberg News about any of the matters on this page has been located in the released files, and no request for comment was made from here. That is a statement about what the released files read for this page contain, not about whether the company has ever commented. ↩

18. Scope of the absence statements on this page. Every statement of this page’s own saying that nothing read for it records something is scoped to the forms listed at ¹ and to the documents read in consequence, and is a statement about what a search of the released files under those forms returns. It is not a claim about what the release holds and it is not a claim about the world. Where this page says a document does not record something, the sheets of that document were counted and read; where a document runs to many sheets, the sentence is scoped in its own footnote to the sheets actually read. The control that makes these statements falsifiable is the one at ¹: a query form returning 371 documents for a control name and 0 for a token verified unused is a form capable of returning this company’s documents had they existed in the shapes tested. The 3,204 documents reaching the bare surname outside that wider union, and every form not tested, are a bound on every absence statement here and are stated as one. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷

19. An internal bank message about approving marketing material, six sheets. EFTA01421860. The quoted span stands on served page 1 and is reproduced exactly as the released text renders it, including the space the sheet prints after the opening bracket. The released text wraps the sentence, so the words as long as sit on the line above and the quotation here begins where the line does; this page joins nothing the sheet sets apart. The second vendor named in the bracket is a different company and nothing on this page concerns it. Nothing else on any of the six sheets is reproduced, described or counted. Released text only. ↩

20. Account strings, and why neither the domain nor the firm tag proves employment. The company’s messaging product renders an account as a name followed by a bracketed firm. In this population the bracket carries BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM: on the documents of two named journalists, and it carries DEUTSCHE BANK SECURI, DEUTSCHE BANK AG, LO, DEUTSCHE ASSET MANAG and TOURMALINE PARTNERS on the documents of people who plainly work for those firms. Addresses at bloomberg.net behave the same way: the 103 documents reaching that form carry the accounts of staff at Deutsche Bank, at JPMorgan Chase and at a Connecticut trading firm alongside the accounts of the company’s own journalists, and a bank’s own signature block prints such an address under the bank’s name and street. So an address at that domain is a subscriber’s contact channel at least as often as an employee’s, and this page treats neither the domain nor the bracket as proof of employment. The warrant used instead is the signature block, which on the two documents this page rests on names the company under the writer’s own name. A further bracketed string in this population is not an account at all: a bank compliance message writes two data vendors’ names inside one bracket in ordinary prose, and a census that reads it as an account string is reading a parenthetical. That false positive was found by reading and is recorded here because a count of account strings that includes it is wrong by five occurrences. Three documents in this population carry an office’s correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein’s office about social invitations, on an account the product renders with this company as its firm. This page names nobody from them and does not reproduce, summarise or characterise them: the principal is identified on those sheets only by a truncated account label, this page does not expand it, and whether that office was the company’s staff or its customer is not settled by anything read here. No claim on this page rests on those three documents. ↩ ↩² ↩³

21. Two of the company’s subscription newsletters. EFTA00026424, five sheets, The Bloomberg Open of Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 11:09:20 +0000, whose opening line and third bulleted item are quoted in this page’s body exactly as the released text renders them; and EFTA00032804, five sheets, The Bloomberg Close of Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 22:07:19 +0000, from which nothing is quoted. This page names no recipient for either. Two further newsletters of the same two titles stand in the release and are cited for nothing. Nothing else on any sheet of either document is reproduced, described or counted, and this page draws no inference from the delivery of a subscription product. Released text only. ↩

22. Damaged spellings, measured and not used. bloornberg 2 documents · bloomberq 5 · bioomberg 1 · blootnberg 14 · bloombcrg 4 · bloombetg 3 · bloombeig 2 · b loomberg 1 · bloom berg 10 · blomberg finance 15. Returning nothing: b1oomberg, bioombcrg, bloomborg. No claim, count or quotation on this page is taken from a document reached only by a damaged spelling. The published page on Michael Bloomberg separately read the first three of these and found all eight of their documents to be this company rather than him; this page neither adopts nor re-derives that reading, and records it as that page’s. The form blomberg reaches 36 documents and is predominantly an unrelated appliance brand, which is a reason this page does not treat a one-character variant as a form of this company’s name without reading it. ↩

23. Sheets read at the page image. Four sheets of four documents, on 5 November 2026. Two came from this project’s local store of served files (EFTA02737032 served page 1 and EFTA02833107 served page 4), where a three-way test distinguished a regular file from an alias pointing at another identifier and from an absent asset, and both returned a regular file. One was fetched read-only from the site’s own per-document path (EFTA00078628 served page 1) in a call that also fetched a negative control: the control returned HTTP 403 at 111 bytes, the target HTTP 200 and a file beginning %PDF- whose page count matched this project’s index exactly. One is a served image of the class this project holds at 300 pixels per inch (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026675), read from the local store at its native 2,550 by 3,369 pixels. The three rendered from PDFs report 96 pixels per inch under pdfimages -list; rasters were extracted at native resolution and none was upsampled. On two of the four the image changed what this page says: on the December 2020 sheet it corrected the released text’s rendering of the sentence this page quotes, and on the June 2024 sheet it supplied a movant list the released text disorders beyond reading. None of the four sheets carries a printed production identifier that this page uses as an address, and no identifier on this page was derived from any other. ↩ ↩²