Congress

‘This is just the beginning’: 1 year in, there’s no end in sight for Congress’ Epstein probe

Published

2 hours ago

July 9, 2026

The House Oversight Committee’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation will hit the one-year mark later this month, and the saga isn’t ending anytime soon.

No matter which party ends up in control in the next Congress, the Oversight panel will remain under pressure to continue to investigate the late convicted sex offender and the web of power players who may have been complicit in his crimes.

Democrats are making clear that they view the committee’s work under Republican leadership as incomplete and that the Epstein case will be central to their oversight of President Donald Trump’s administration if they win the majority in the midterms.

“This is just the beginning,” Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, an Oversight Democrat, said in an interview. “I believe this is the administration’s Watergate. I think that it’s clear that they are complicit in covering crimes and shielding the president from accountability and evading the law, and so I’d like to see all of them in front of the committee under oath.”

Republicans, meanwhile, say that the public’s appetite for answers in the Epstein case won’t be satiated no matter what new details the panel unearths.

“People are never satisfied with the congressional investigation throughout history,” said Oversight Chair James Comer of Kentucky, who, due to GOP term limits, will no longer be the panel’s top Republican in the next Congress.

While he had hoped to wrap up interviews by the August recess, Comer added, “It’s probably going to be hard because it seems like … after every deposition we get another name or two that we need to talk to.”

That means the congressional Epstein probe could continue for the foreseeable future, not only out of hopes of finding a smoking gun but also because the political incentives to keep investigating — for Democrats as well as Republicans — are impossible to resist.

The panel has interviewed more than a dozen people, and none so far have shared any new information culminating in criminal charges. But the panel has made history by making a host of powerful people answer for their willful association with a convicted sex offender — among them Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, the billionaire investor Leon Black and tech mogul and philanthropist Bill Gates. Black and Gates both admitted to knowing about Epstein’s criminal history, at least in part, while continuing to associate with him.

There have been some other revelations, too. Sarah Kellen, a former Epstein assistant, gave lawmakers the names of two men potentially implicated in Epstein’s misdeeds: Hair stylist Frédéric Fekkai and former Miami Beach mayor Philip Levine, who both have denied wrongdoing.

Black, in the middle of his transcribed interview, was slapped with subpoenas that will force him to reappear and hand over nondisclosure agreements that could be tied to Epstein.

And ousted former Attorney General Pam Bondi underscored the extent to which her then-deputy, Todd Blanche, led the Justice Department’s haphazard release of the Epstein files after Congress forced the department’s hand last fall. Blanche — now the acting attorney general vying to lead the DOJ permanently — is expected to be heavily questioned about the matter at his Senate confirmation hearing next week, and House Oversight could separately call him in to speak with the panel in the coming weeks.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, who is poised to become Oversight chair next year if Democrats sweep the fall elections, noted the ongoing investigation has also set a new precedent: The panel’s decision earlier this year to compel the sworn testimony of former President Bill Clinton, he said, could pave the way for subpoenaing other commanders-in-chief.

That includes Trump, who has drawn scrutiny for his own relationship with Epstein. Democrats have argued the administration has concealed the extent of that relationship, but Trump has maintained that he and Epstein had a falling-out long before Epstein’s death by suicide behind bars in 2019. The president has not been charged with wrongdoing.

There are, however, clear limits to what Congress can do to bring people to account. Already, committee Republicans have recommended that the Justice Department investigate allegations against Fekkai and Levine.

In a statement, a DOJ official confirmed the department had received the recommendation from the committee, and the FBI was looking into it.

“The allegations Kellen made in her interview to Oversight included names of purported perpetrators that she apparently did not raise in her FBI interviews during the course of the investigations into Epstein and Maxwell,” the official said. “The FBI is in the process of confirming that. If, during the course of their review, FBI encounters of evidence of a federal crime, they will investigate that matter.”

Comer hinted that the House Oversight Committee would pursue criminal referrals to the DOJ, too: “We believe there are people that deserve to be prosecuted, and we’re going to do everything in our ability to see that happen. I promised the survivors that.”

Garcia said some witnesses who came to testify voluntarily and were not sworn in under oath would, in a Democratic majority, be called back again to give formal depositions, such as Bondi. Committee Democrats have also expressed an interest in subpoenaing testimony from FBI Director Kash Patel as they explore not just Epstein’s network of associates but the federal government’s uneven handling of the matter.

The Epstein probe will not be over, Garcia pledged, “until they release all the files and until … ideally, criminal convictions out of the DOJ.”

But any referrals would be merely advisory — only the Trump administration can decide who to target with federal charges. It’s also highly unlikely that a sitting president could be compelled to participate in the committee’s Epstein probe through a subpoena.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) suggested that the House effort was only serving to provide cover for the Justice Department to avoid accountability.

“Frankly, bringing all these people in is still part of the charade and the diversion from what should happen, which is, the DOJ should bring charges against people for whom there’s credible evidence,” Massie, who lost his reelection primary to a Trump-backed challenger, said in an interview. “Everything that happens in Oversight is just a part of trying to shellac over the whole thing.”

Massie teamed up last year with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to force a vote on legislation requiring the Justice Department to make public all the Epstein materials in its possession. The Trump White House sought to block the measure, and with Republicans not wanting to disobey their president or alienate their base clamoring for transparency, Speaker Mike Johnson sent the House home rather than keep members in town to writhe amid the uproar.

But before lawmakers departed, Democrats forced a surprise bipartisan vote during an Oversight subcommittee hearing compelling the Justice Department to turn over the Epstein files to Congress. That vote launched the Epstein probe at a time when the DOJ was still refusing to cooperate fully on its own — a shift that took place in November, when Trump finally relented and allowed Congress to pass Massie and Khanna’s Epstein Files Transparency Act with near-unanimous support.

Since that time, the rollout of the files has been full of mistakes, including botched disclosures of victim information and excessive redactions. Lawmakers of both parties argue the DOJ has not fully complied with the law.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), another Oversight Committee member, said he didn’t know how the Epstein investigation would end but wasn’t optimistic there would be a satisfying conclusion.

“This town moves — I mean, glaciers run past us,” Burchett said. “We’ve been studying the Kennedy assassination, and we’re still getting information on it. … I don’t have a lot of faith in the system. I don’t care who’s in charge. I think that the sewer is too deep.”

Congress

How we got here …

Published

8 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

We break down how Graham Platner’s momentous campaign crumbled in the days after POLITICO’s report of a new sexual assault allegation against him.

Congress

Collins’ allies think Platner’s exit makes her reelection bid tougher

Published

8 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republicans may be publicly using Graham Platner’s exit from Maine’s Senate race to ratchet up their attacks on Democrats, but behind the scenes, his withdrawal is hardly being viewed as good news for Sen. Susan Collins’ reelection campaign.

According to a person familiar with the campaign’s thinking, granted anonymity to discuss it, Collins’ team had long viewed Platner as a uniquely vulnerable opponent whose personal controversies could help offset one of the biggest challenges she faces in 2026: running as a blue-state Republican in the Trump era.

“She can certainly win, but they didn’t want to change candidates,” the person familiar with the campaign’s thinking said. “The stuff we already knew about Platner was going to propel Collins to overcome the Trump anchor. Now it’s going to be a Democrat with a cleaner record, presumably.”

Collins’ campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, and it has not weighed in publicly since Platner announced the suspension of his campaign.

From the Collins campaign’s perspective, Platner offered an unusually favorable contrast.

They believed his baggage would have given Collins an opportunity to shift voters’ attention away from national politics and toward questions about his character.

Instead, Maine Democrats now have the opportunity to nominate a candidate with a cleaner profile, raising the prospect of a more conventional general election in which Collins will have to confront the same challenges facing other Republican incumbents.

A flash poll conducted by Platner’s own campaign and obtained by POLITICO Wednesday bore this out: Platner trailed Collins in the poll, while three likely Democratic candidates who lost their gubernatorial primary last month led or were statistically tied with her.

The Collins campaign remains confident the senator can win another term, according to the person familiar with its thinking. But Platner’s withdrawal removes what allies viewed as one of Collins’ clearest advantages.

Congress

Cheyenne Hunt: Democrats drew a ‘red line’ with Platner

Published

8 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Cheyenne Hunt, a progressive Democratic lawyer whose nonprofit aims to fight misogyny, said she is relieved Graham Platner dropped out of the Maine Senate race.

“Today, I’m proud of my party for drawing a red line and putting our values above political outcomes,” Hunt said in a statement posted on X on Wednesday. “Now the hard work begins to put forth a candidate who can defeat Susan Collins and ensure we send a champion for women to the Senate this November.”

Hunt, the executive director of Reckoning Action, had connected Blue Light News with Jenny Racicot, who dated Platner and alleged that he forced her to have sex with him, which he has denied. Earlier this year, Hunt also was key to bringing forward sexual misconduct allegations against former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), prompting him to suspend his campaign for California governor. Swalwell denies the allegations.

Hunt endorsed Platner as leader of the group Gen Z for Change last fall but withdrew her support in June after three of Platner’s ex-girlfriends described what they called “reckless” and “unsettling” behavior from Platner to The New York Times.

In an interview with Blue Light News after Platner suspended his campaign, Hunt said she was “deeply disappointed in those around him that are continuing in this incredibly tumultuous and difficult moment for the party in the country to stand by his hubris and suggest that he has any kind of leverage in choosing who his successor is.”