The “beef” you seek is in the links at the end of the article.
Why not sprinkle a little in this article? Your average reader is not willing to go back and do your research for you.
The article is a hagiography.
They’re nominating her for the Left’s Martyr of the Year award, figuring to get kudos for finding her.
From the links, I’d estimate a few hour’s reading to get the background details.
I looked at the links, and they confirmed my suspicions. Buzzfeed is highly invested in the Edwards leaks.
I read the links - they say NOTHING except that money-laundering exists and there are tens of thousands of suspicious activity reports generated. Indeed, just as with most police work, very few can be fully investigated. Otherwise, what is the point of this crap article?
Edwards imagined herself a hero, leaked to them, and they are running a series of sensationalist "stories" about money-laundering, hoping to generate tumult. This is highly subjective journalism, typical of the Hollywood-style "narrative journalism" that is the bane of US media today
Please read this below article. It describes exactly the situation Buzzfeed has given us.