Federal prosecutors expanded their investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged sex trafficking network to examine whether the disgraced financier was engaged in money laundering, according to a new review of his personal email account.

Bloomberg reviewed documents and emails from Epstein’s personal Yahoo account that show lead prosecutor Marie Villafaña, then assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, requested grand jury subpoenas in 2007 for "every financial transaction" he had engaged in for the previous four years. Sources say prosecutors also subpoenaed major banks for records about his accounts and financial activity.

"Epstein grew furious when he learned that prosecutors had broadened their investigation’s scope, the emails show," Bloomberg reported. "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 raises new questions about congressional testimony last month from Alex Acosta, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida who ultimately signed off on Epstein's plea deal.

"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," Bloomberg reported. "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," the report added.

The documents and emails reviewed by Bloomberg do not reveal what investigators learned about Epstein's alleged money laundering or other important details, but a former law enforcement official told reporters the investigation lasted 18 months and found at least tens of millions of dollars in questionable financial transactions.

“These new details only raise additional questions about Acosta’s truthfulness,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), whose staff has investigated Epstein's financial network. “The best-case scenario according to his story is that it was by incompetence rather than by choice that he allowed Epstein to go on trafficking women and girls for another decade.”

Wyden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in July that the panel had reviewed records held by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, that showed major banks had facilitated more than $1.5 billion in payments that Epstein used to traffic women or “engage in dubious transactions indicative of money laundering.”

"Money laundering charges surely would have been a centerpiece of any serious prosecution aimed at bringing [Epstein] down for good," Wyden told Bloomberg, adding that the decision to drop that aspect of the case as part of the plea agreement was a “staggering miscarriage of justice.”

An attorney for Acosta told Bloomberg that the existence of a financial probe into Epstein's dealings would not be “inconsistent” with what Acosta, President Donald Trump's former treasury secretary, told the committee.

"Back in 2006, the Southern District employed over two hundred attorneys and, at any given moment, conducted countless investigations," said attorney Jeffrey Neiman. "Although Mr. Acosta approved the terms of the Epstein matter, he did not direct that investigation — or any investigation, for that matter. 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.”