Truth verify: Did Democrats take motion over Epstein case transparency?
After the US Home Speaker, Mike Johnson, despatched lawmakers residence early for recess in July, he mentioned in the event that they had been so involved about releasing information associated to the late convicted intercourse offender Jeffrey Epstein, they might have sought them throughout Joe Biden’s presidency.
US Consultant Thomas Massie and Consultant Ro Khanna – together with 30 Democratic and 11 Republican cosponsors – filed laws to attempt to pressure the federal government’s launch of federal Epstein investigation information.
Over the last presidency, “neither of these guys mentioned a phrase about it”, Johnson mentioned of Massie and Khanna on July 24 on CBS.
Trump made a comparable argument that Democrats might have acted earlier than he took workplace in January.
Democrats managed the information for 4 years, Trump mentioned, “So if they’d one thing, they’d’ve launched it earlier than the election.”
Khanna mentioned on July 27 on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the Trump administration’s conflicting statements about its plans to launch the Epstein information prompted the laws.
We determined to discover Johnson’s bigger level about what lawmakers mentioned earlier than this 12 months about releasing Epstein information or investigating the case. We targeted on Democrats; Massie is a conservative maverick who has clashed with Trump.
Democratic lawmakers started to hunt information about Epstein after the Miami Herald’s late 2018 investigation into the case.
Earlier than then, political protection of the Epstein case was usually framed across the financier’s ties to former President Invoice Clinton. His spouse, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, misplaced the presidential election to Trump in 2016, and her function as a Trump rival saved the Epstein subject alive, particularly in conservative media retailers.
Given this framing, Democrats typically weren’t requested to touch upon the subject, declined to remark, or didn’t increase Epstein as a problem.
Beginning in 2019, however earlier than Epstein’s arrest that 12 months on federal intercourse trafficking expenses, some Democratic lawmakers together with Consultant Lois Frankel and Consultant Debbie Wasserman Schultz, each of South Florida, launched a years-long quest to launch Epstein information.
The Democrats referred to as for former US Legal professional Alex Acosta, who served as labour secretary throughout Trump’s first time period, to testify about Epstein’s plea deal. They requested the Justice Division to analyze and launch information. Democrats later pursued different methods, together with asking a Palm Seaside, Florida choose to launch information.
“A full accounting for these heinous crimes is missing,” Wasserman Schultz advised PolitiFact in an August 1 written assertion. “These prospects modified when Republicans momentarily joined the decision for full disclosure.”
In 2019, some Democrats referred to as for a plea deal investigation
Acosta signed off in 2007 on Epstein’s secret plea deal through which he agreed to plead responsible to state prostitution expenses, serve 18 months in county jail and pay financial damages to his victims. In trade, the US lawyer’s workplace agreed to forgo federal prosecution. Epstein entered his responsible plea in 2008.
The Justice Division’s Workplace of Skilled Duty investigated Acosta’s function and, in November 2020, launched a abstract that mentioned he confirmed “poor judgement”.
Spring 2019: Deal with Acosta’s function
Earlier than Epstein’s July 2019 arrest on federal expenses, Frankel and Wasserman Schultz referred to as on the Justice Division to make public Acosta’s function within the plea deal.
Frankel submitted a listing of questions for Acosta, together with whether or not any politicians lobbied prosecutors on Epstein’s behalf.
Senator Tim Kaine and Senator Patty Murray joined the hassle, sending a separate letter to the Justice Division’s Workplace of Skilled Duty asking to make its information public.
Summer season 2019: Deal with how previous investigations had been dealt with
US Consultant Elijah Cummings invited Acosta to testify earlier than the Home oversight committee, which Cummings chaired. Just a few days later, on July 12, Acosta introduced he had resigned as labour secretary, after Democratic leaders and presidential candidates referred to as for him to take action.
On the day Acosta resigned, Khanna mentioned Acosta ought to testify earlier than the Home oversight committee, and later that month Senator Chuck Schumer was among the many Democrats who referred to as on the Justice Division to make public the outcomes of its assessment of Acosta’s dealing with of the Epstein case.
Additionally in July, the congressional Democratic Girls’s Caucus requested that the Home Oversight and Reform Committee open an investigation into how the Palm Seaside, Florida Sheriff’s Workplace dealt with the Epstein investigation.
Days after Epstein’s August 2019 loss of life in a Manhattan jail cell, Khanna posted his help for an investigation into the loss of life, writing: “There are too many unanswered questions, and much too many who deserve closure, to go away this case unexamined.” Khanna connected to his publish a hyperlink to a Day by day Beast article that mentioned bipartisan lawmakers despatched a letter to the FBI demanding solutions about Epstein’s suicide.
Democrats continued their push for a plea deal investigation, writing a number of letters, together with one to Trump’s then-Legal professional Normal Invoice Barr and one other to the Home judiciary and oversight committees.
Democrats, together with some Republicans, proposed laws to forestall prosecutors from putting secret plea offers, and Democrats additionally sought information in regards to the Epstein case from the Florida Division of Regulation Enforcement.
2020 to 2024: Deal with information
Democrats tried different techniques to acquire information, corresponding to requesting them from a Palm Seaside choose – a technique spearheaded by the Palm Seaside Submit that may take years to succeed.
Some information emerged from civil lawsuits and the federal prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted for her function in a scheme with Epstein to sexually exploit and abuse a number of minor women.
When Maxwell was charged in 2020, Democrats continued to push for transparency.
Frankel advised PolitiFact in an August 1 interview that the Home oversight committee wished to carry a listening to at which they’d hear from Epstein victims, their legal professionals and prosecutors. They wished to subpoena the prosecutors to ask them underneath oath “why they gave this man a slap on the wrist, who pressured them?” Frankel mentioned.
Nevertheless, “We had been advised by the Justice Division to chop it off” as a result of it might compromise the Maxwell investigation, Frankel advised PolitiFact.
After Biden took workplace in 2021, Democrats appeared to dial again their public requires Epstein information’ launch.
“Pushes for oversight and file releases had been at instances tempered by a have to respect each the victims’ pursuit of justice in courts and their fears of reprisals,” Wasserman Schultz advised PolitiFact. “As disclosures had been denied or delayed, we did what lawmakers do and legislated to guard future victims.”
In February 2024, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed a invoice to permit the discharge of Epstein 2006 grand jury testimony after an identical effort failed in earlier state legislative classes. Frankel praised the laws.
A Palm Seaside choose launched information in July 2024, which confirmed prosecutors had heard testimony about how Epstein sexually assaulted two teenage women earlier than they gave Epstein a plea deal. Frankel once more repeated her push for an evidence.
In September 2024, Wasserman Schultz together with Consultant Burgess Owens, launched a invoice, comparable to earlier proposals, to require prosecutors to tell victims of such plea offers. The invoice didn’t obtain a vote.
*Caryn Baird and Louis Jacobson contributed to this report*
