Newly Released Files Link Jeffrey Epstein to Funding and Strategy for Steve Bannon’s International Campaign

A trove of government records made public by prosecutors and congressional investigators exposes a working relationship in which Jeffrey Epstein provided financial offers, introductions and tactical advice to Steve Bannon as the latter sought to extend a nationalist political program beyond the United States. The correspondence spans planning for European outreach, attempts to arrange meetings with high-level foreign figures, and explicit conversations about seed funding for think tanks, advertising and policy operations; cryptocurrency is named as a possible mechanism. Epstein appears to have acted as an access broker, proposing contacts in multiple capitals and pressing for face-to-face engagement rather than remote coordination. Bannon reciprocated with operational updates from his travels and sought Epstein’s help identifying allies who could affect control of institutions such as the European Parliament. The interaction intensified as both men operated on the political periphery, with Epstein emphasizing discreet support while cautioning that his notoriety posed tactical risks. Their exchanges also touched on media projects and content production, reflecting an effort to marry messaging with funding and diplomatic outreach. The flow of messages halted abruptly when Epstein was apprehended by federal authorities in July 2019, leaving planned meetings and recording sessions incomplete. Subsequent scrutiny from news organizations and investigators has produced at least one high-level resignation in Europe tied to these revelations, underlining real-world political consequences. Beyond reputational damage, the documents illustrate how private wealth and informal networks can accelerate cross-border political campaigns without formal party structures. The material raises governance questions about transparency in political finance, the vulnerability of international institutions to externally arranged influence, and the adequacy of current disclosure and vetting processes. For practitioners and policymakers, the files are a cautionary example of how strategic advising, introductions, and covert funding discussions can operate beneath public oversight. The episode also complicates narratives about the independence of nationalist movements overseas by showing they were, in part, the subject of coordinated resource planning and elite matchmaking. Moving forward, the records are likely to sharpen demands for investigative follow-through and new checks on transnational political financing.