Tag: Epstein Files

Bill Clinton Denies Knowledge of Epstein Crimes in House Deposition: ‘I Did Nothing Wrong’
Former President Bill Clinton, long dogged by scandals involving his personal conduct and questionable associations, faced a grueling six-hour deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Friday, where he repeatedly denied any awareness of Jeffrey Epstein’s heinous sex trafficking operations.
In a performance that Republicans praised as cooperative but critics dismissed as evasive, Clinton insisted he “saw nothing that gave me pause” during his multiple interactions with the disgraced financier, whose crimes against underage girls have shocked the nation and exposed a web of elite enablers.
“I did nothing wrong,” Clinton declared, a refrain that echoes his past defenses amid allegations of misconduct, but one that rings hollow to many given the mounting evidence of his proximity to Epstein’s predatory world.
The closed-door session, held in Chappaqua, New York, near the Clintons’ residence to avoid a public spectacle in Washington, marked a historic low for a former commander-in-chief: the first time a ex-president has been compelled to testify under subpoena before Congress.
This came after months of negotiations and threats of contempt charges, underscoring the gravity of the committee’s probe into Epstein’s network—a sordid empire built on exploitation, manipulation, and connections to powerful figures, including those in influential financial circles that Epstein navigated with ease. Republicans, led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), hailed Clinton’s appearance as a step toward transparency, while Democrats accused the GOP of partisan gamesmanship aimed at shielding President Donald Trump from similar scrutiny.
Clinton’s testimony followed that of his wife, Hillary Clinton, who appeared the day before and claimed she never met Epstein—a stark contrast to her husband’s documented ties. In his opening statement, released publicly, Clinton portrayed his relationship with Epstein as a “brief acquaintance” that ended well before the financier’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
“I had no idea of the crimes Epstein was committing,” he said. “I know what I saw, and more importantly, what I didn’t see. I know what I did, and more importantly, what I didn’t do.” Yet, skeptics point to flight logs showing Clinton aboard Epstein’s infamous “Lolita Express” private jet at least 26 times between 2001 and 2003, often without Secret Service detail, raising questions about what exactly transpired on those trips to destinations including Epstein’s private island, Little St. James.
Lawmakers grilled Clinton on a trove of recently unsealed documents from the Department of Justice, including photographs depicting him in compromising settings with redacted women—images that have fueled speculation about his involvement.

Jeffrey Epstein (left) and Bill Clinton (center) in a photo released by the justice department on Friday. (Department Of Justice/Zuma Press Wire/Shutterstock)
One particularly infamous photo showed Clinton in a jacuzzi with an unidentified woman, her face obscured. Sources familiar with the deposition told outlets that Clinton denied knowing her or engaging in any sexual activity, a response he repeated for each image presented. “No matter how many photos you show me,” he stated, “it won’t change the fact that I saw nothing wrong and did nothing wrong.”
But these denials do little to dispel the cloud of suspicion, especially given Epstein’s modus operandi of using his wealth and connections—often within elite, predominantly Jewish social networks—to lure and abuse vulnerable girls, all while hobnobbing with global leaders like Clinton.
The committee also probed Epstein’s donations to the Clinton Foundation, a charitable entity that has faced its own controversies over foreign influence and opaque finances. Epstein contributed tens of thousands of dollars, and records show him visiting the White House multiple times during Clinton’s presidency.
Clinton maintained that these interactions were innocuous, focused on philanthropy, but critics argue they exemplify how Epstein ingratiated himself with power brokers to mask his criminal enterprise. “We are only here because he hid it from everyone so well for so long,” Clinton said in his prepared remarks, shifting blame squarely onto Epstein—a convenient narrative that ignores the red flags many believe should have alerted someone of Clinton’s stature.
Republicans on the panel, including Comer, described Clinton as “charming” and “very cooperative,” noting he answered every question without invoking the Fifth Amendment. “He’s a charming individual, obviously,” Comer remarked, adding that the testimony “exonerated President Trump” by recounting a early-2000s golf tournament conversation where Trump allegedly told Clinton he severed ties with Epstein over a land deal dispute. This anecdote, volunteered by Clinton, aligns with Trump’s longstanding claim that he distanced himself from Epstein before the 2008 charges.
Trump himself weighed in from the White House, expressing reluctance about the deposition: “I like Bill Clinton, and I don’t like seeing him deposed.” Yet, Democrats seized on the moment to demand Trump testify, pointing to his own extensive socializing with Epstein in the 1990s and 2000s, as well as mentions in Epstein-related files.

From left, Trump and his girlfriend (and future wife), former model Melania Knauss, Epstein and Maxwell pose together at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida on February 12, 2000 [File: Davidoff Studios/Getty Images]
The broader investigation stems from Epstein’s 2019 death in custody—ruled a suicide but mired in conspiracy theories—and the subsequent conviction of his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, for sex trafficking. Epstein’s crimes, which involved grooming and abusing dozens of underage girls, often at his lavish properties, have implicated a roster of high-profile names, from British royalty to Wall Street titans.
The House probe, launched amid calls for accountability, has drawn bipartisan support but devolved into partisan sniping. Democrats accuse Republicans of selective outrage, noting the Justice Department’s reluctance under Trump to release records on allegations against him, including a claim of sexual abuse of a minor—which the department is reviewing.
Clinton’s spokesperson has reiterated that he cut ties with Epstein before the 2006 charges and was unaware of the crimes, denying any visits to Little St. James. However, a 2025 FBI document lists Clinton among figures with unverified sexual assault allegations tied to Epstein’s orbit, though no charges have been filed. This deposition, while not accusing Clinton of wrongdoing, revives painful memories of his own impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky affair and allegations of sexual misconduct from women like Juanita Broaddrick and Paula Jones—patterns that, for detractors, make his Epstein denials less credible.
As transcripts from both Clintons’ testimonies are expected to be released soon—possibly as early as this weekend—the political fallout intensifies. Republicans frame the sessions as vindication for Trump, with Comer slamming Democrats for “weaponizing” the probe.
Democrats, like top panel member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), counter that the precedent now demands Trump’s appearance, along with others like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who admitted visiting Epstein’s island.
February 27, 2026
Japan Backs Tech Venture Led by Former Epstein Associate Joichi Ito
After a disgraced exit from the top ranks of U.S. tech and media circles, an entrepreneur who had deep ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein secured a second act in Japan with the help of powerful allies in the Japanese government.
Joichi Ito, the entrepreneur, resigned in 2019 from a prominent position at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology after revelations about his efforts to conceal millions of dollars he raised through connections to Epstein. He also quit a position at Harvard University and board seats at the MacArthur Foundation and The New York Times.
Six years later, in Japan, Ito is helping lead a government initiative championed by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi and her inner circle. The project, a strategic priority for the government, has more than $400 million in public funding and seeks to team up with top U.S. and Japanese universities to create a startup hub in Tokyo.
Within the next few months, the Japanese government will decide whether to authorize the project, known as the Global Startup Campus Initiative, as a legal entity, the final step required for it to move ahead.
But Ito’s involvement caused universities including MIT, Harvard, Carnegie Mellon and Keio University in Japan to distance themselves from the initiative after being approached as potential partners, according to interviews with government and university officials, as well as internal documents and emails reviewed by the Times. The project has fallen behind its own timeline targets.

And that was before the latest tranche of Epstein files released by the Justice Department shed new light on the depth of Ito’s ties to Epstein. These latest revelations are likely to further deter some potential partner organizations, said six government and university officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss their groups’ internal views.
Ito was a prolific correspondent with Epstein. A Times analysis shows that Ito and Epstein exchanged more than 4,000 emails through the years. The emails show that Ito was a frequent visitor to Epstein’s private Caribbean island, and the two were so close that Ito even joked about naming his daughter “Jeffrina.”

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi and her inner circle are backing a tech initiative led by Joichi Ito. (Haiyun Jiang / The New York Times)
Ito did not respond to requests for comment. The university he heads in Japan declined to make him available for an interview. In previous statements made to local media, Ito has said he deeply regrets soliciting donations from Epstein. “I was never involved in, never heard him talk about, and never saw any evidence of the horrific acts that he was accused of,” Ito said in a statement in 2019.
A spokesperson for Japan’s Cabinet secretariat, which promotes the Global Startup Campus Initiative, said she recognized there were concerns about Ito. But the secretariat office decided to bring Ito on as an executive adviser, she said, “as we haven’t confirmed any wrongdoing by him and we believe he is highly knowledgeable.”
Ito, 59, was born in Kyoto and raised in suburban Detroit. After dropping out of Tufts University and the University of Chicago, he returned to Japan in the 1990s to start a string of early internet service providers.
A master networker, Ito maintained U.S. connections as a venture capitalist with early stakes in companies like Twitter. In 2011, he was tapped for a prestigious position leading MIT’s Media Lab, a sort of academic Skunk Works where designers and engineers build futuristic prototypes.
It was through these circles that Ito began associating with Epstein, who became a significant, concealed MIT donor. Starting in 2013 — roughly five years after Epstein was convicted in Florida of soliciting prostitution from a minor — Ito met frequently with Epstein, and the financier contributed funding on multiple occasions for Ito’s ventures.
After a 2019 article in The New Yorker described the measures that Ito took to conceal Epstein-directed donations made to his lab, Ito resigned from MIT. At the time, he said he had “screwed up” by accepting the money but that he had done so after a review by the university and consultation with his advisers.
Ito returned to Japan, taking a position at a little-known private university on the outskirts of Tokyo in 2021.

Fumio Kishida addresses the U.S. Congress in 2024, when he was prime minister. Kishida personally pitched the Global Startup Campus Initiative idea to then-U.S. President Joe Biden. (BLOOMBERG)
The next year, in 2022, Fumio Kishida, then the prime minister, introduced the Global Startup Campus Initiative. The plan was to build a research hub focused on technologies, including artificial intelligence and robotics. It was to be anchored by a partnership with MIT and sought to recruit researchers from U.S. universities to collaborate with Japanese entrepreneurs.
Kishida personally pitched the idea to then-President Joe Biden during a 2023 meeting in Hiroshima. A campus in central Tokyo was supposed to be completed by around 2028.
At its outset, Ito was not involved with the government group leading the project. But in early 2024, people involved in the initiative received a memo naming Ito as one of three leaders who would dictate the group’s strategies, along with two high-ranking Japanese government officials.
According to documents reviewed by the Times, the memo was sent by Akira Amari, a long-standing and influential figure within Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party, which has dominated Japanese politics for decades. At least four government and university officials said they were surprised at the time by the appointment of Ito, given his ties to Epstein.
Amari is close with the current prime minister, Takaichi, who has been known to call him “aniki,” or “big brother.” Takaichi has endorsed the initiative as one of her administration’s growth strategies. The prime minister and Amari’s offices did not respond to requests for comment.
In Japan, Ito’s role in the Global Startup Campus Initiative has gone mostly unnoticed. In 2025, a lawmaker, Satoshi Honjo, raised questions about the appointment during parliamentary sessions. He asked whether it was problematic for a person with ties to Epstein to, in effect, lead the initiative.
A high-ranking Takaichi administration official, Kiyoto Tsuji, then a Cabinet office vice minister, responded by saying Ito “has provided us with a variety of useful information and advice toward realizing the initiative.” And, he added, “he is merely acting as a part-time adviser.”
But documents suggest Ito plays a much bigger part. Government officials have told potential partner universities that he plays a “pivotal role” in the initiative, according to internal documents and correspondence. The documents show a framework for the project that is based solely on “ideas from Professor Joichi Ito.”
More than three years after the group’s launch, it publicly lists a few universities — the University of Tokyo, Imperial College London and the National University of Singapore — as “pilot activity” partner organizations. Others have expressed hesitation in associating with a group tied to Ito.
MIT, Harvard and Keio have each conveyed to Japanese officials that they would be reluctant to work with the initiative if Ito was involved, according to emails viewed by the Times and four individuals with direct knowledge of the interactions. At the start, MIT was supposed to be a cornerstone partner.
Last year, Martial Hebert, a dean at Carnegie Mellon’s School of Computer Science, wrote in an email to Japanese officials obtained by the Times, “We will not be part of any project that involves Joi.” A spokesperson for Carnegie Mellon confirmed that the school is not working with the Global Startup Campus Initiative but declined to comment on its reasoning.
In 2024, Richard K. Lester, then MIT’s vice provost for international activities, told Japan’s minister in charge of economic revitalization that many of the school’s faculty would “find it difficult to cooperate with the Global Startup Campus if Mr. Joichi Ito was to occupy a significant position,” according to internal minutes from the meeting.
Imperial College London, the University of Tokyo, MIT, Harvard, and Keio did not respond to requests for comment. The National University of Singapore said in a statement that it is working with the Global Startup Campus Initiative “under the purview of Japan’s Cabinet Office” and that it had no relationship with Ito.
Before Ito was appointed in early 2024, the Global Startup Campus Initiative was behind schedule.
Two people familiar with its operations said it further lost pace after Ito joined. The spokesperson for the Cabinet secretariat said Ito helped introduce new strategies for the project that have enabled the group to “progress rapidly.” The spokesperson said she could not comment on the progress of conversations with individual universities.

Although the Global Startup Campus Initiative has already been allocated a budget of more than $400 million, it will need to be approved by parliament as a so-called operating corporation. The group had originally aimed to receive this approval last year. The decision on whether the initiative will be approved is now expected by July.
Some notable names publicly listed as the project’s “pilot activity” partner organizations include the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the philanthropy run by Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, and his wife, Priscilla Chan; and Hakuhodo, a major Japanese advertising company.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative said it does not provide funding to the Global Startup Campus Initiative. Hakuhodo did not respond to a request for comment.
The latest Epstein files provide more detail about Ito’s money transfers with Epstein. In a May 2014 email exchange, Ito wrote to Epstein, “The slush fund, if it’s at MIT is easy. Should I send you the instructions?” Later that month, Ito confirmed receipt of the capital, writing, “I just got notice that $500K came into my slush fund account. Thanks!”
Honjo, the politician who questioned Ito’s appointment in parliament, said in an interview that it was “an established fact” that Ito had not properly disclosed Epstein-directed financial contributions to his MIT lab. “He can’t be called the right person for the job,” Honjo said.
The spokesperson for the Cabinet secretariat said the Global Startup Campus Initiative is moving into its next phase starting in the fiscal year that begins April 1. With regard to Ito, “we don’t believe there is a problem currently, but we will choose the appropriate people for the next fiscal year’s goals,” she said.
The recently released emails, as well as flight logs, detail at least five instances in 2013 and 2014 in which Ito planned to or did visit Epstein’s private island. In 2017, two years before he resigned from MIT, Ito wrote to Epstein saying he hoped his estate was OK after the devastation of Hurricane Irma. In a separate exchange, Epstein jokingly asked if “little Jeffrina,” Ito’s baby, had been born yet.
In Japan, the Epstein files have been treated mostly as a “domestic American issue,” said Chizuko Ueno, chief director of Women’s Action Network, a Japanese advocacy group. The Japanese establishment tends to ignore or bury contentious matters involving high-powered officials if there is no criminal conviction, she said.
Ueno is also a professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo, one of the institutions publicly associated with the initiative. Ueno said that Japan and the university had become less tolerant of individuals with histories of possible misconduct and that she believed the school and government officials would increasingly find they “can no longer ignore it; they have to do something.”
February 27, 2026
Hyatt’s Thomas Pritzker Retires After Being Named in Newly Released Epstein Documents
Billionaire hotel magnate Thomas J. Pritzker announced his immediate retirement as executive chairman of Hyatt Hotels Corporation on Monday, citing his “terrible judgment” in maintaining ties with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. The 75-year-old heir to the Pritzker family fortune, long a fixture in elite circles and Democratic fundraising, expressed “deep regret” over communications that persisted well after Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
Pritzker’s exit, effective immediately, underscores the growing reckoning for powerful figures entangled in Epstein’s web of perversion, a network that preyed on vulnerable young women while shielding predators behind wealth and influence.
The revelations stem from millions of pages of U.S. Justice Department documents unsealed last month, exposing Epstein’s insidious reach into business, politics, and high society. Emails and records show Pritzker exchanging “friendly” messages with Epstein years after the financier’s Florida conviction, including attempts to broker investments in Dubai involving DP World chairman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem.
Pritzker, who will not seek reelection to Hyatt’s board at the 2026 stockholder meeting, lamented in a statement: “I exercised terrible judgment in maintaining contact with them, and there is no excuse for failing to distance myself sooner. I condemn the actions and the harm caused by Epstein and Maxwell and feel deep sorrow for the pain they inflicted on their victims.”
This isn’t mere oversight; it’s a damning indictment of the elite’s complicity in enabling perverts like Epstein, whose operations often intersected with political lobbying and philanthropy—networks that Pritzker, even a prominent supporter of Jewish causes, navigated effortlessly.

Pritzker’s fall is part of a cascade of resignations rippling through Epstein’s tainted orbit. Goldman Sachs chief legal counsel Kathryn Ruemmler stepped down last week, citing distractions from her Epstein links. Norwegian police raided properties of former Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland amid a corruption probe tied to the sex offender. DP World’s bin Sulayem was ousted over his decade-long friendship with Epstein, including emails linking him to Jes Staley, then at JPMorgan Chase.
Economist Larry Summers resigned from OpenAI’s board in late 2025, while former UK ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson faces a U.S. congressional grilling from Representatives Robert Garcia and Suhas Subramanyam over his “extensive social and business ties” to Epstein.
Mandelson’s scandal has ignited a firestorm in Britain, toppling UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chief of staff and cabinet secretary, and prompting calls for Starmer’s own resignation. Appointed ambassador in February 2025 despite red flags, Mandelson was sacked in September after deeper Epstein connections surfaced. Opposition leaders decry Starmer’s “appalling judgment,” amplifying anti-establishment fury against elites who hobnobbed with perverts while preaching moral superiority.
Hyatt’s board swiftly named CEO Mark Hoplamazian as Pritzker’s successor, praising the outgoing chairman’s “instrumental” role in strategy. Yet, the market reacted coolly: Hyatt shares (H) dipped 1.8% to $142.50 in after-hours trading Monday, erasing $1.2 billion in market cap amid investor unease over reputational fallout.
Analysts at Barclays downgraded the stock to Neutral, citing “elevated risks from ongoing Epstein scrutiny,” while the broader hospitality sector—Marriott (MAR) and Hilton (HLT)—slid 0.9% in sympathy. Pritzker, pivoting to his science foundation, leaves a $50 billion family empire shadowed by questions of ethical blindness.
This wave of accountability exposes the rot at the heart of Epstein’s client list—predominantly wealthy, often Jewish elites. As more documents drop, the purge of these perverts and their enablers can’t come soon enough—justice demands no less for the exploited girls whose lives were shattered.
February 16, 2026
Ghislaine Maxwell Refuses to Answer Lawmakers’ Questions During Closed-Door Testimony
Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted enabler in Jeffrey Epstein’s web of exploitation, stonewalled the House Oversight Committee on Monday, invoking her Fifth Amendment rights and refusing to utter a word beyond prepared deflections. Appearing via videoconference from her Texas prison camp in a khaki jumpsuit, Maxwell’s deposition lasted under an hour, leaving lawmakers fuming and the public no closer to unraveling the full scope of Epstein’s elite circle—a network heavy with rich-rooted influencers whose shadows still loom over American power structures.
Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) called it “very disappointing,” lamenting missed chances to probe Epstein’s crimes and “potential co-conspirators.” Democrats like Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) accused her of “protecting” unnamed figures, but their outrage rings hollow amid their party’s own ties to the scandal-plagued Clintons.

Maxwell’s attorney, David Oscar Markus, teased a bombshell: full testimony if President Donald Trump grants clemency. “Only she can provide the complete account,” Markus said, hinting it could clear Trump and Bill Clinton—both denying involvement—while noting “some may not like what they hear.”

Rep. Andy Biggs (R, Ariz.) and House Oversight Committee chair Rep. James Comer (R, Ky.) speak to members of the media after a closed-door virtual deposition with Ghislaine Maxwell on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 9, 2026. (Nathan Howard—Bloomberg/Getty Images)
This dangle feeds into the “nation under blackmail” theory: Epstein’s operation, with its high-society lures, may have ensnared leaders in compromising positions, holding America hostage to hidden leverage. Trump, who once wished Maxwell “well” and hasn’t ruled out a pardon, draws mixed views—pro for pushing file releases, anti for flirting with leniency that could whitewash the mess.
Republicans like Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) blasted the idea: “No clemency and no mercy for child predators.” Democrats, meanwhile, cry foul over Maxwell’s prison transfer after a DOJ interview clearing Trump, ignoring Clinton’s deeper Epstein links.
The session followed the Justice Department’s unredacted file release to lawmakers, mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) accused a “cover-up,” but heavy redactions persist, fueling suspicions of elite protection. Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 amid sex trafficking charges, pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting a minor. Maxwell, convicted in 2021, appeals her 20-year sentence.
Upcoming Clintons’ testimonies on Feb. 26-27 could expose more, but expect partisan theater—Republicans dodging internal rifts, Democrats shielding their icons. In a nation possibly blackmailed by such scandals, Maxwell’s silence speaks volumes.
February 11, 2026
Prince William and Princess Catherine ‘Deeply Concerned’ as Epstein Files Shake U.K. Establishment
Thousands of miles from Washington, shock waves from the Justice Department’s release of the latest Jeffrey Epstein files continue to rock British society at its highest echelons, engulfing Prime Minister Keir Starmer in a fresh political crisis and casting a lengthening shadow over the royal family. In their first public remarks since the latest revelations, Prince William and Princess Catherine of Wales said they were “deeply concerned.”
The most recent releases appear to offer further evidence of long-running links between the convicted sex offender and two high-profile men in British public life: London’s former ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson, who was dismissed in September over his links to Epstein, and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the younger brother of King Charles III who was stripped of his titles.
The swirl of repercussions faced by both men — who have largely been forced from public life as a result of the revelations — stands in sharp contrast to the relatively muted fallout so far faced by Epstein’s high-profile associates in the United States.

For Starmer, questions over his judgment in selecting Mandelson for that ambassadorship were threatening on Monday to boil over into a full-fledged political crisis. Over the weekend, Starmer’s top aide, Morgan McSweeney, announced his resignation from government, citing his role in advising Starmer to send Mandelson to Washington. By Monday morning, Tim Allan, the prime minister’s communications director was also gone, citing the need for a reset.
It was not immediately clear whether the resignations would be enough to stem the growing political blowback, with a high-profile figure from Starmer’s party — the leader of Scottish Labour, Anas Sarwar — on Monday afternoon calling on him to step aside.
Among other previously unseen documents, the latest tranche included an undated photograph of a man who appears to be Mandelson in a T-shirt and underwear alongside an unidentified woman. It also appeared to include correspondence between Epstein and Mandelson from when the latter was in public office.
Mandelson has been a controversial fixture of British political life since the 1980s, when he helped mastermind the Labour Party’s centrist reinvention and paved the way for its return from the political wilderness to power in 1997. He went on to serve in high-profile positions under two Labour prime ministers. He has not been accused of any sexual wrongdoing.
Last week, Mandelson resigned his Labour membership, after the Financial Times reported that the latest documents showed Epstein made payments totaling about $75,000 to accounts linked to Mandelson when he was a lawmaker in the early 2000s. In a public letter to Labour officials, Mandelson acknowledged the “furor” surrounding Epstein and said he needed to investigate the latest allegations for himself.
“I want to take this opportunity to repeat my apology to the women and girls whose voices should have been heard long before now,” Mandelson added.
The revelations have prompted police to open an investigation into potential misconduct in public office. Last week, Starmer apologized directly to Epstein’s victims and said Mandelson had repeatedly portrayed Epstein “as someone he barely knew.”

Then-British Ambassador to the United States Peter Mandelson is seen in London last year. (Jaimi Joy/Reuters)
The political fallout came as the British royal family also grappled with its links to Epstein.
A spokesperson for Kensington Palace told reporters Monday: “I can confirm the prince and princess have been deeply concerned by the continuing revelations. Their thoughts remain focused on the victims.”
Among the previously unseen documents, photographs and email messages to be released last month was an image of a man who appeared to be Mountbatten-Windsor kneeling on all fours and positioned over a female individual. The tranche also contained an email from an account labeled “The Duke” and signed “A” to Epstein, suggesting dinner “and lots of privacy” at Buckingham Palace in 2010, a month after Epstein’s house arrest ended.
Mountbatten-Windsor has long denied any wrongdoing, and the latest releases contain no allegations of criminal behavior by him.
In October, Buckingham Palace stripped Mountbatten-Windsor of his royal titles after excerpts were made public from a memoir by Virginia Giuffre, the American who said she was forced to have sexual encounters with him as a teenager.
Last week, a Buckingham Palace official confirmed that Mountbatten-Windsor had relocated out of Royal Lodge, his 30-room longtime residence in Windsor, about three months after the palace announced he would be leaving the property.
February 9, 2026
Kash Patel on Defensive as FBI Director Faces Intensifying Pressure
WASHINGTON – FBI Director Kash Patel is bracing for a grilling from both sides of the aisle as he prepares to testify before Congress on Tuesday, September 16, 2025, amid swirling controversies over his handling of the investigation into the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and a wave of internal firings that have plunged the bureau into turmoil.
Patel, a staunch ally of President Donald Trump confirmed in February 2025 in a razor-thin, party-line Senate vote, returns to the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time since his January confirmation hearing. There, he pledged to Democrats that he would steer clear of retribution against perceived political enemies within the FBI. Now, with the bureau reeling from high-profile missteps and lawsuits alleging a “campaign of retribution,” Patel faces skeptical lawmakers eager to probe whether he’s lived up to those assurances.
The hearing, which will also include an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee later in the week, comes just days after the FBI’s response to Kirk’s killing on a Utah college campus last week drew sharp bipartisan criticism. Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed by 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, who authorities say had increasingly embraced a “leftist ideology” and become more politically radicalized in recent years. Robinson turned himself in late Saturday night, September 13, after acquaintances tipped off law enforcement, but not before Patel’s public handling of the case ignited a firestorm.
Patel drew immediate backlash for a social media post hours after the shooting, announcing that “the subject” was in custody—a claim he walked back less than two hours later, stating the individual had been released following an interview. The swift reversal fueled accusations of incompetence, with conservative commentator Chris Rufo questioning Patel’s “operational expertise” in a Friday morning post on X (formerly Twitter). “He performed terribly in the last few days, and it’s not clear whether he has the operational expertise to investigate, infiltrate, and disrupt the violent movements—of whatever ideology—that threaten the peace in the United States,” Rufo wrote.
Steve Bannon, another prominent Trump supporter, piled on, noting that those close to Robinson had turned him in, calling the arrest “not great law enforcement work.” Even President Trump, while defending Patel in a Saturday interview with Fox News Channel’s Maria Bartiromo, acknowledged the scrutiny: “Kash and the FBI have done a great job,” Trump said, but the praise rang hollow amid the GOP infighting.
FBI Director Kash Patel testifies in front of the Senate Judiciary Commitee in Washington, D.C., on Sept.16, 2025. © Josh Morgan, USA TODAY
Undeterred, Patel pushed back aggressively on Monday morning during an appearance on Fox & Friends. Defending his transparency pledge—a cornerstone of his vow to dismantle the “deep state” bureaucracy he inherited—Patel dismissed the criticism as partisan noise. “I was being transparent with working with the public on our findings as I had them,” he said. “I stated in that message that we had a subject and that we were going to interview him, and we did, and he was released. Could I have worded it a little better in the heat of the moment, sure, but do I regret putting it out? Absolutely not.”
He added: “I challenge anyone out there to find a director that has been more transparent.” Patel also highlighted his decision to release photographs of Robinson while he was at large, crediting it with facilitating the eventual arrest. The FBI rarely comments publicly on ongoing probes, making Patel’s approach a deliberate departure from precedent.
The Kirk investigation isn’t the only flashpoint. Democrats, led by Senate Judiciary Committee members like Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), have teed up questions about broader politicization of the bureau. Schiff posted a video on X last week previewing his line of inquiry, compiling past Patel statements critical of the “deep state.” Patel fired back swiftly: “Let’s find out who law enforcement backs… and who supports defunding the police—answer coming tomorrow, but we already know.”
On the left, concerns center on a recent FBI review of Jeffrey Epstein’s files, which culminated in a memo deeming further releases unnecessary despite earlier promises. House Judiciary ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) fired off a letter to Patel last week demanding details: “Obvious questions abound: why were so many agents tasked with reviewing documents that were never released? What specific instructions were they given during the review? What information did these agents uncover that led DOJ and FBI to reverse their promise to release the files, and how are these decisions related to the President?”
Raskin specifically asked when Patel became aware of references to Trump in the files and for a breakdown of resources devoted to the review. The Epstein matter has faded somewhat amid the Kirk fallout, but it’s expected to resurface as evidence of alleged favoritism.
Compounding the pressure is a federal lawsuit filed last week by three top FBI officials ousted in August, including former acting director Brian Driscoll. The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accuses Patel of orchestrating the firings as part of a White House-directed purge targeting those seen as disloyal. Driscoll, who clashed with Trump administration officials early in the president’s second term, and two other high-ranking agents allege the removals were illegal and retaliatory.
The suit details a conversation between Patel and Emil Bove, then a senior Justice Department official, in which Patel reportedly admitted the firings were non-negotiable to safeguard his position. “Patel explained that he had to fire the people his superiors told him to fire, because his ability to keep his own job depended on the removal of the agents who worked on cases involving the President,” the complaint states. It further claims Patel referenced the FBI’s past investigations into Trump, saying, “the FBI tried to put the President in jail and he hasn’t forgotten it.” Driscoll believed “superiors” meant the Justice Department and White House, a claim Patel did not refute in the recounted exchange.
White House aide Stephen Miller is named in the suit, with allegations that he demanded “summary firings” via Bove. The firings have decimated FBI leadership: Since Trump’s January 2025 inauguration, the administration has axed all top career officials overseeing key branches, multiple special agents in charge of field offices, and counterterrorism expert Mehtab Syed, who was set to lead the Salt Lake Field Office in February. Current and former officials say the upheaval has sapped morale and hampered operations at a time of rising political violence.
Democrats argue these moves echo Patel’s confirmation hearing promises gone awry, while Republicans on the committee—holding the majority—plan to rally around him. They expect to laud his emphasis on combating violent crime and illegal immigration, and press for updates on the Kirk probe, including Robinson’s motives tied to leftist extremism.
Patel’s tenure, now eight months old, has been marked by vows to root out institutional bias. A vocal critic of the multiple probes into Trump during his first term, Patel has redirected resources toward reexamining the 2016 Russia investigation into potential Trump campaign coordination. Agents and prosecutors are reportedly seeking interviews on those long-dormant threads, which Patel frames as correcting past weaponization of the FBI and DOJ.
As the hearing looms, Patel shows no signs of backing down. His combative style—evident in his X clapback at Schiff and on-air defenses—suggests Tuesday’s testimony will be as much a battle as an oversight session. For a director who campaigned on transparency and reform, the spotlight could either solidify his reformist image or expose fractures in his leadership of America’s premier law enforcement agency.
September 15, 2025
DOJ to Begin Sharing Epstein Investigation Records with House Oversight Committee on Friday, Chairman Comer Announces
A billboard in New York’s Times Square calls for the release of the Epstein Files on Wednesday. © Adam Gray/Getty Images
The Department of Justice (DOJ) will start turning over documents related to its investigation of the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee this Friday, according to Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.). The announcement comes as the committee faces a self-imposed deadline of Tuesday, August 19, for full compliance with a subpoena issued earlier this month, highlighting growing bipartisan frustration over the pace of transparency in one of the most controversial cases in recent U.S. history.
Comer revealed the development in a statement on Monday, noting that DOJ officials had informed the committee of their intent to begin the process despite needing additional time to review and redact sensitive materials. “There are many records in DOJ’s custody, and it will take the Department time to produce all the records and ensure the identification of victims and any child sexual abuse material are redacted,” Comer said. He added, “I appreciate the Trump Administration’s commitment to transparency and efforts to provide the American people with information about this matter.”
The subpoena, approved on a bipartisan basis last month, demands all documents and communications from the case files of Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, including records related to human trafficking, exploitation of minors, sexual abuse, and Epstein’s controversial 2007 plea deal in Florida. That deal, orchestrated by then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, has long been criticized for its leniency, with Acosta reportedly claiming Epstein “belonged to intelligence” in a 2019 testimony. The committee’s request also extends to files that could shed light on Epstein’s death in 2019, officially ruled a suicide, which has fueled widespread conspiracy theories among the public and lawmakers alike.
Political Flashpoint and Bipartisan Pressure
The Epstein case has emerged as a significant flashpoint within the Republican Party, particularly among the MAGA base, which has expressed outrage since the DOJ concluded last month that Epstein had no “client list” and that his death was indeed a suicide. Despite President Trump’s efforts to downplay the issue and sideline related votes, congressional momentum has persisted. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has repeatedly emphasized the need for transparency, stating there is “no fear” within his conference about the revelations.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer speaks on Capitol Hill, March 08, 2023 in Washington, DC. © Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images, FILE
Democrats on the committee have voiced strong dissatisfaction with the DOJ’s timeline, arguing it falls short of full compliance. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the panel, insisted after a closed-door deposition with former Attorney General William Barr on Monday that the committee requires “the full, complete, and unredacted Epstein files, as well as any ‘client list.’” He warned that failure to deliver by the deadline would signal a continuation of what he called the “Trump Epstein Coverup.” The subpoena originated from a motion by Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), calling for the files to be delivered concurrently to both majority and minority members.
Notably, several Republicans joined Democrats in approving the subpoena, including Reps. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), Scott Perry (R-Pa.), and Brian Jack (R-Ga.), underscoring the rare cross-aisle consensus on this matter. Beyond the document request, the committee has issued subpoenas for testimony from high-profile figures linked to Epstein or the investigations, including former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, and former Attorneys General such as Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, and Robert Mueller. Barr’s deposition on Monday marked the first in this series, with others expected to follow into the fall.
Separately, Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) are spearheading an effort to force a full House vote on declassifying the Epstein files when Congress reconvenes in September, potentially bypassing leadership delays.
Background on the Epstein Saga
Jeffrey Epstein, a wealthy financier with connections to powerful figures across politics, business, and entertainment, was arrested in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving minors. He died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell the following month, sparking debates over prison oversight and possible foul play. His associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking and is serving a 20-year sentence.
The case has lingered in the public eye due to Epstein’s infamous “little black book” and flight logs from his private jet, dubbed the “Lolita Express,” which allegedly transported underage girls and high-profile passengers. Thousands of pages of court documents were unsealed in early 2024 related to a defamation lawsuit by Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, revealing names like Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton, though no new criminal charges stemmed from them. Earlier this year, in February 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi released initial batches of Epstein files, including flight logs and victim statements, describing the contents as “pretty sick.”
Conspiracy theories have proliferated, particularly among conservative circles, alleging a cover-up involving intelligence agencies or political elites. The DOJ’s July 2025 memo dismissing further disclosures as unnecessary intensified calls for accountability, leading to the current subpoena.
Reactions and Broader Implications
The announcement has elicited mixed responses. On social media platform X, users expressed skepticism about the completeness of the release, with one poster stating, “Unless it’s all of em, save your breath. We don’t want any watered down shit.” Another highlighted the bipartisan nature, noting, “The Epstein case continues to generate attention in Washington.”
Critics from both parties argue that redactions could obscure key details, while supporters of the Trump administration praise the move as a step toward openness. As the files begin to flow, the committee’s investigation represents a direct challenge to GOP leadership’s attempts to move past the issue, potentially reshaping public discourse on accountability and elite influence.
A DOJ spokesperson did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The process is expected to unfold over weeks, with the full impact on ongoing political debates yet to be seen.
August 18, 2025
Hunter Biden Faces $1 Billion Demand from Melania Trump Over Epstein Controversy
First Lady Melania Trump is threatening legal action against Hunter Biden, son of former President Joe Biden, demanding a public apology and retraction for comments linking her to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In a letter dated August 6, 2025, Melania Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, warned that failure to comply could lead to a $1 billion defamation lawsuit, citing “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” caused by Biden’s remarks.
The controversy stems from a July interview Hunter Biden gave to YouTube personality Andrew Callaghan, in which he claimed that Epstein introduced Melania Trump to her husband, President Donald Trump. Biden attributed the allegation to author Michael Wolff, asserting that Wolff obtained the information directly from Epstein. The comments, described as “false, disparaging, defamatory,” and “extremely salacious” in Brito’s letter, prompted a swift response from Melania Trump’s legal team, invoking Florida’s pre-suit defamation statute.
Brito’s letter specifically challenged Biden’s statements that “Epstein introduced Melania to [Donald] Trump” and that “Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania, that’s how Melania and the President met, according to Michael Wolff.” The first lady’s legal team argues that these claims are baseless and damaging to her reputation. President Trump, in an August 13 interview on Fox Radio, supported his wife’s pursuit of legal action, stating, “Jeffrey Epstein has nothing to do with Melania. … I told her to go ahead and do it; she was very upset about it.” He clarified that he met Melania through another individual, not Epstein, and dismissed the allegations as an attempt to “demean.”
In a follow-up YouTube video posted on August 14, Callaghan presented Hunter Biden with the letter from Melania Trump’s attorney, offering him an opportunity to retract his statements. Biden refused, declaring, “That’s not going to happen.” He defended his remarks by citing Wolff’s reporting and claimed that New York Times reporters Edward Carney and Maggie Haberman had made similar assertions. Calling the defamation threat a “distraction,” Biden stood firm on his comments.
First lady Melania Trump visits Number 10 Downing Street during the second day of President Donald Trump’s state visit on June 4, 2019, in London. © Karwai Tang/WireImage
The allegations have drawn significant attention due to Epstein’s notoriety. The financier, who died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, was a polarizing figure whose associations have fueled widespread speculation. Epstein’s associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.
The dispute echoes a recent retraction by The Daily Beast, which apologized for publishing a similar claim about Epstein introducing Melania to Donald Trump after legal pressure from the first lady’s team. Posts on X from August 2025, including one by user @ShadowofEzra, noted Hunter Biden’s refusal to apologize, quoting him as saying, “F*ck that” and “It’s not gonna happen,” underscoring the escalating tension.
Melania Trump’s potential lawsuit adds to a series of legal battles involving high-profile figures and Epstein-related claims. If pursued, the case could test the boundaries of defamation law, particularly given Biden’s reliance on third-party reporting and the public’s intense interest in Epstein’s connections. For now, the first lady’s legal team is pressing for a retraction, while Biden’s defiance suggests the matter may head to court.
August 15, 2025
Trump directs Bondi to pursue release of grand jury testimony related to Jeffrey Epstein
President Donald Trump on Thursday directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to try and unseal grand testimony records related to Jeffrey Epstein. (Yuri Gripas/UP)
Washington — President Trump late Thursday ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of grand jury testimony related to Jeffrey Epstein as his administration faces pressure to disclose more details on the late sex offender.
“Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,” Mr. Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. “This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!”
Bondi wrote in a post on X minutes later, “we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.”
A judge will need to make the final decision on whether material can be released, which could take some time and is unlikely to be immediate.
It’s unclear what material the Trump administration will ask to be released. It’s not clear how much of the Epstein-related material in the government’s possession is grand jury testimony.
Epstein was investigated by federal authorities in Florida in the 2000s, which ended in a non-prosecution agreement and a guilty plea on state prostitution charges, and he was later charged with child sex trafficking in Manhattan in 2019. The government also secured a conviction against Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell. It investigated the circumstances of Epstein’s death in federal custody, which was deemed a suicide.
The order from Mr. Trump comes after the Justice Department and FBI released a memo stating that Epstein did not have an incriminating “client list,” did not try to blackmail any prominent figures, and died by suicide. The memo drew backlash from across the political spectrum, including from some fervent Trump backers, in part because Bondi and other administration figures had promised to release information on Epstein.
The government is generally required to keep grand jury materials secret, and it’s common for not all material that is shown to a grand jury — which meets before a person is criminally indicted — to emerge during a criminal case.
A request of this kind by the government is unusual, says Mitchell Epner, a partner at the New York law firm Kudman Trachten Aloe Posner, and a former federal prosecutor.
“I’ve been in and around federal criminal cases for over 30 years. I’ve never heard of this before,” he told CBS News.
While the scope of the government’s request is still unknown, Epner says it could encompass an “enormous quantity of data.” Mr. Trump said the government would seek the release of grand jury testimony, which Epner noted may include exhibits that witnesses testified about before a grand jury.
“I would not bet against there being anything, from the most interesting thing in the world to the least interesting thing in the world, in that material,” said Epner, who told CBS News he believes calls for more information to be disclosed in the Epstein case are warranted.
Epner joked: “If we were to find out the location of the corpse of Jimmy Hoffa, I would not be surprised.”
Material likely will not be released immediately, according to Epner, who said, “weeks would be moving very quickly, months is likely.” Under court rules, grand jury material is typically only released under certain circumstances, often when it’s needed for some other investigation. The government’s grounds for release in this case aren’t clear.
In this case, both associates and alleged victims of Epstein’s may oppose some disclosures.
“I would not be surprised if a number of people came forward under pseudonyms to object to the release of grand jury material related to them,” Epner said. “I also would not be surprised if some of the victims…came forward and said, ‘Yes, we do want things to be revealed.’”
Trump administration faces Epstein fallout
Last week’s memo on Epstein reignited years of questions — and conspiracy theories — on the disgraced financier, including speculation about the circumstances of Epstein’s death in custody, and about whether the federal government was concealing information to shield some of Epstein’s famous friends.
Bondi had pledged to release files related to Epstein, and suggested in a Fox News interview in February a “client list” was “sitting on my desk right now to review.” (She later said she meant generally that material on Epstein was sitting on her desk.)
In late February, the Justice Department distributed binders to over a dozen right-wing social media influencers labeled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1,” though the influencers later said many of the materials were already in the public domain.
Some Republicans and vocal Trump supporters were dissatisfied with last week’s memo, in some cases calling for more disclosures or the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into the Epstein case — which White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president does not support.
Mr. Trump, for his part, has scolded some Republicans for buying into what he called the “the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax,” calling them “stupid people” and “weaklings” who are “do[ing] the Democrats work.”
Shortly before pushing for the release of grand jury testimony, the president on Thursday denied a Wall Street Journal report on what the newspaper described as a “bawdy” birthday letter to Epstein — featuring a drawing of a nude woman — that the paper claimed was signed by Mr. Trump in the early 2000s. Mr. Trump and Epstein had crossed paths for years, though Mr. Trump says they had a “falling out.”
Mr. Trump called the letter a “FAKE” and threatened to sue the Journal, as well as its parent company News Corp and leader Rupert Murdoch.
“These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don’t draw pictures,” he said.
NY Budgets has not independently verified or seen the letter. Dow Jones — the News Corp division that includes the Journal — declined to comment on Mr. Trump’s threats.
July 18, 2025