Congress

Congress’ Epstein probe raises a thorny question: Who counts as a victim?

Published

5 months ago

May 11, 2026

Nearly a year after the launch of the House Oversight Committee’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation, lawmakers are now wading into a thorny debate over whether certain women in Epstein’s orbit should be considered co-conspirators or victims.

The Republican-led panel, eager to haul in witnesses who can shed new light on the convicted sex offender’s crimes, appears to have taken a side in recently asking Sarah Kellen — a top assistant to the late, disgraced financier — to sit for a transcribed interview on May 21.

Kellen was one of four women named as possible co-conspirators in the now-controversial 2007 agreement with Florida federal prosecutors that granted all of them immunity, while also allowing Epstein to spend minimal time in a county jail rather than face federal sex-trafficking charges.

“There is a list of four alleged victims that took plea deals that I think are co-conspirators and got let off the hook,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), a member of the Oversight Committee, said recently. “And I’d like to bring them in.”

“If you’re an adult female and you’re recruiting underage girls, you’re not a victim. You’re a prostitute, a child predator, and a sex trafficker,” said Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), another committee member, in an interview. “Certainly the adult women that were recruiting underage girls should go to jail.”

But few of Epstein’s former associates have proven as fraught a subject for federal prosecutors as Kellen. In the immediate aftermath of Epstein’s suicide while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges in 2019, federal officials grappled with the question of whether to prosecute Kellen, according to two people familiar with the matter as well as documents released in the Epstein files.

The files show that Manhattan prosecutors discussed a possible witness tampering charge for Kellen and that they submitted a prosecution memo concerning her to then-U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman. But Kellen argued that she was a victim, according to the files and people familiar with the deliberations, who like others were granted anonymity to share private conversations. Prosecutors opted not to bring a case against her.

A lawyer for Kellen did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said in an interview that several GOP women on his committee were eager to have Kellen testify and he has deferred to them in deciding which women should be invited to give statements in the Epstein probe. But while some members of Congress support the decision to bring in Kellen, others are also signaling they, too, recognize the complicated dynamics of questioning a woman who claims to have been sexually abused.

“For folks who are not trauma-informed, and folks who don’t understand this world, I think it can be an easy ‘yes, we should charge this woman,’” said Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.), who sits on the panel and previously worked in the San Francisco District Attorney’s office. “It’s a conversation that should be taken seriously.”

Simon added that she has been providing committee staff with “resources [on] how we look at how we treat and support survivors while they’re coming here, how to look at women who historically have been in these situations.”

At the same time, the committee is under increasing pressure to surface new information after the Justice Department’s haphazard release of the Epstein files — and as law enforcement in the United Kingdom has seized opportunities to arrest Epstein associates in contrast to the U.S.’ continued finger-wagging.

In the interview last month, Comer blamed the committee’s lack of progress, in part, on disagreements about who is and isn’t an Epstein victim.

“That is honestly one of the reasons why there’s been issues getting documents — [DOJ] released documents, and some of the victims say, ‘oh my gosh, you didn’t redact the names’ … Well, they were victimizers too,” Comer said. “Like they recruited other girls to come in. But they, I do believe, were victimized. This is a tough issue.”

Kellen had been accused in numerous civil lawsuits of scheduling young girls to give Epstein massages, with one lawsuit dubbing her “the lieutenant.” In Palm Beach, where police investigated Epstein, girls told detectives that Kellen would prepare rooms for the massages, laying out tables and lotions intended for their use.

But when prosecutors were mulling charges, Kellen’s attorneys argued that their client was abused, writing that “given the fact that we see her basically as a cog in Epstein’s wheel, acting entirely at his direction and doing what she did at a time that she herself was a very vulnerable victim, a [non-prosecution agreement] would be the appropriate disposition.”

In an interview with The Sun published around the period in 2020 in which her lawyers were attempting to fend off potential charges, Kellen also described herself as a “victim,” saying that she was “raped and abused weekly.”

During the sentencing in 2022 of Epstein’s only convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan described Kellen as “a knowing participant in the criminal conspiracy.”

Lauren Hersh, a former sex-trafficking prosecutor in Brooklyn who is now the CEO of World Without Exploitation — a coalition combating human trafficking and sexual exploitation — said situations like Kellen’s are “really common.” The Oversight panel, she suggested, would be better served by focusing on those who could not conceivably be considered a victim of Epstein instead of trickier cases like Kellen’s.

“There are a lot of people where it’s absolutely clear-cut they should be brought in,” Hersh said of Epstein’s associates. “So let’s start there.”

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), one of the GOP’s most vocal proponents of Congress using all available tools to bring Epstein’s co-conspirators to account, had a similar perspective.

Asked how one could determine whether someone like Kellen is a victim or a perpetrator, Massie said, “I don’t think you’re gonna figure that out in the forum that the Oversight Committee has. I think you need to have an investigation with discovery and presentation, adversarial presentation of facts in a courtroom to decide that — matters of guilt or innocence.”

Some members of the Oversight Committee who worked as, or with, prosecutors prior to serving in Congress also cautioned it was important to tread carefully.

“I’ve prosecuted cases where someone has been a victim and has also been charged with a crime, and that’s something that in the due course of justice — a court or jury can determine. Those types of factors can be considered,” said Rep. Wesley Bell (D-Mo.), a former St. Louis County prosecuting attorney.

But, he added, “given the circumstances at this point in time, anyone connected with the investigation should be called in.”

Other lawmakers defended the panel’s decision to call in Kellen. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), a member of the Oversight Committee, said that since the committee’s ultimate goal was to support future trials of co-conspirators and build an evidentiary basis, it made sense to interview Kellen.

“Folks like Sarah Kellen were complicit in crimes,” Stansbury said. “Were they also victimized by Jeffrey Epstein? It’s very likely that was his pattern of abuse. But does that absolve them from culpability in this case? I think it depends on the specifics and the individual, and that’s why DOJ’s investigation and investigation and prosecution of these individuals is really important.”

Congress

Scalise heads to Florida to boost several GOP candidates

Published

2 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise is heading to Florida to boost a raft of Republicans as the House GOP campaign arm launches new spending across the ruby-red state.

Republicans are working to ensure they prevail in a series of tight Florida races after they redrew several districts in their favor. Several GOP incumbents have warned the party needs to do more to help put out fires across these areas. Scalise is just the latest Republican leader who is looking to shore up candidates in once-thought-to-be-safe red territory.

Scalise will hold a GOTV rally Thursday with Republican Dan Green who is challenging Democratic Rep. Darren Soto in central Florida’s 9th District, according to an invite obtained by Blue Light News. Soto should be toast from the GOP redistricting effort, but he’s still hauling in significant fundraising and Democrats say their internal polling shows a tight race.

Over on the Gulf Coast, the National Republican Congressional Committee is also launching its first coordinated ad spending for Rep. Anna Paulina Luna on Wednesday. House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, GOP governor nominee Rep. Byron Donalds and Sen. Ashley Moody, who is also up for reelection, are appearing at a Saturday rally with Luna.

President Donald Trump won Luna’s district by 13 points and Democrats have tried and failed to target her before. But Republicans are warning the headwinds are stronger this year and forcing a tighter than expected race.

Republicans are also working to shore up key seats in South Florida. Scalise will be with GOP Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar in the Miami area Friday, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter, granted anonymity to share not yet public details. Salazar has raised alarm about Republican erosion with Hispanic voters in his district and other states over the Trump administration’s mass deportations.

Scalise will boost Ryan Elijah, the Republican who beat scandal-ridden Rep. Cory Mills in the primary in Florida’s 7th District, according to another person with direct knowledge of the matter, granted anonymity to speak candidly. The party feels better about the seat in recent weeks, especially more than they would have if Mills had won the GOP nomination.

The House Majority Leader will also hold events with Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Brian Mast and Rep. Gus Bilirakis, according to the person.

Congress

Capitol agenda: The unknowns of a Sherrod Brown return

Published

8 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democrats may be rooting for Sherrod Brown’s comeback, but they are not exactly prepared for what’d happen next.

If Brown wins on Election Day, Democrats likely face an uncomfortable choice: break longstanding party rules to restore his seniority on powerful committees like Banking, Agriculture and Finance or potentially make him start over at the bottom.

Complicating the issue: Brown will immediately need to prepare for a grueling re-election fight in 2028 and his campaign could greatly benefit from two years with a high-profile gavel. That’s because this midterm is Ohio’s special election where voters are selecting a senator to serve out the remainder of Vice President JD Vance‘s term.

Brown’s post, therefore, may not only deeply impact Democrats’ policy agenda but could also play a key role in the party’s success in winning the battleground seat in 2028.

Some members are already suggesting the party should try to find a middle ground.

“Some accommodation that recognizes he would not be a rank freshman would make sense. But that’s distinct from handing him back a leadership role at Banking,” said Sen. Chris Coons.

The Ohio Democrat served as the top Democrat on the Banking panel for a decade. He was also a longtime member of Finance as well as Agriculture, where he would also be the most senior member if his previous service counted.

To give Brown a gavel on Agriculture or Banking could set up clashes with the Democrats now expected to lead their party on the panels: Sens. Michael Bennet and Elizabeth Warren, respectively.

It would also break Senate Democrats’ caucus rules, and precedent is not on Brown’s side when it comes to making exceptions.

Still, aides and lobbyists around the panels expect Democrats will be eager to give Brown some sort of perch.

Those close to him have been encouraging him to seek the Agriculture gavel. It’d allow him to deliver valuable policy wins for Ohio’s rural areas, influence the farm bill if it gets punted to next year and help guide the direction of cryptocurrency regulation.

Another possibility that avoids an intraparty clash: hand Brown a seat on Appropriations, which could potentially give him a subcommittee gavel and federal funding clout.

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has avoided any firm commitments on Brown’s seniority, saying last month when asked: “Let’s win back the Senate first.”

What else we’re watching:

— OMAR RAID RAISES QUESTIONS FOR GOP: House Republicans — including Majority Whip Tom Emmer — have publicly cheered on the Trump administration’s investigation of GOP boogeyman Rep. Ilhan Omar. But the raid raises thorny questions for GOP leaders about how aggressively Congress wants to defend itself — regardless of party — from encroaching federal prosecutors. Lawmakers’ work communications are protected from prosecutors’ scrutiny, with few exceptions, under the Constitution’s “speech or debate” clause. That draws into question whether the emails, texts, and materials on Omar’s phone, which was seized in the raid, could legally be reviewed by Trump officials. So far, Speaker Mike Johnson has yet to weigh in on how the House’s legal team may defend Omar.

— TRUMP’S TRICKY FARM MONEY PROMISE: Trump’s move Monday to turn out GOP voters by promising to send farmers $8 billion in taxpayer money is already facing a reality check. The internal USDA taxpayer-funded account Trump is tapping doesn’t actually have enough money in it right now to make the payments, meaning Congress will have to approve new funds or the administration will have to take it from another program, according to three Trump officials granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Plus, farmers wouldn’t receive the payments until late November or early December at the earliest — well past Election Day, according to three people close to the plans.

Jasper Goodman, Grace Yarrow, Kyle Cheney and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

Congress

This member is so frustrated with Congress he wants voters to sidestep it

Published

8 hours ago

October 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

At the end of one of the least productive Congresses in modern history, freshman Rep. Johnny Olszewski is so sick of the gridlock on Capitol Hill that he wants voters to bypass it entirely.

“It’s been a long two years,” the Maryland Democrat said in a Tuesday interview.

“One of the things that’s made it difficult as a new member is to see not only the dysfunction, but also the missed opportunities,” he added. “There are so many issues out there that Americans support that this Congress and frankly prior Congresses have failed to act on.”

Fed up with the lack of progress on popular policies like banning congressional stock trading, equipping police with body cameras or protecting in vitro fertilization, Olszewski is introducing a constitutional amendment Thursday, first shared with POLITICO, that would create a mechanism for voters to make federal law directly.

The measure would give voters 18 months to gather signatures from at least 5% of people who participated in the most recent presidential election in 25 states. Then any qualifying direct-democracy measure would be put on ballots for the next national election and need a 60% national majority to pass.

Votes to declare war or direct federal spending would not be eligible under the proposal.

“If we were acting, there’d be no need for this to come into play,” Olszewski said. “It would create a really important backstop for the American people to say, ‘You know what … irrespective of which party is in power, Congress is failing to meet not just our everyday needs but act on issues that we overwhelmingly support and want to see acted upon.’”

The amendment — which itself would require support from two-thirds of the House and Senate as well as three-quarters of states — is an incredible longshot and would create serious implementation headaches, but Olszewski — a former civics teacher — hopes his proposal will spark a discussion about congressional reform.

“I understand that any constitutional amendment is going to be difficult,” Olszewski said. “But I’m hopeful that at least for the lame duck session, this is an opportunity to create a conversation around the fact that we have been so gridlocked that we have failed to address the needs of the American people.”