OAN Staff Brooke Mallory
6:27 PM – Tuesday, November 18, 2025
In a fiery exchange on the House floor, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer called out Democrats for their direct and indirect involvement with pedophile sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein — specifically noting how House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ fundraising team solicited him for donations and a private meeting in 2013 — five years after being convicted of procuring a minor for prostitution.
The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is the main investigative committee of the United States House of Representatives.
Comer (R-Ky.) has accused Democrats of selectively leaking, editing, and misrepresenting Epstein-related documents to create a false narrative smearing President Donald Trump. This culminated in Comer’s floor speech and public statements on Tuesday during House consideration of the bill, which passed the House and Senate by an overwhelming margin on Tuesday.
The explosive Tuesday claims came during debate over the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act. The legislation requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to publicly release all investigative files related to Epstein’s child sex-trafficking operation.
Comer’s statement – released by the Oversight Committee’s official government website:
“As Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I have always believed that sunshine is the best disinfectant. For years, the American people have demanded transparency about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s horrific crimes, and about the federal government’s failure to protect the victims. The House Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough review of the federal government’s investigation into Epstein. Our work goes far beyond the legislation before us today. We are committed to accountability, transparency, and justice for the American people and for the survivors of these appalling crimes. To date, the Oversight Committee has released more than 65,000 pages of documents, issued 13 subpoenas, and conducted interviews with two key witnesses. The Trump Administration has provided us with Department of Justice materials and access to suspicious activity reports. Unfortunately, throughout this investigation, Democrats have chosen to manufacture yet another anti-Trump hoax instead of pursuing justice. They have mischaracterized witness testimony and selectively released documents, complete with targeted redactions, in an effort to smear President Trump. For example, former U.S. Attorney General William Barr, who oversaw the 2019 Epstein investigation, stated clearly that the prosecution team found no evidence that President Trump committed wrongdoing. Despite this simple and straightforward fact, Ranking Member Robert Garcia publicly claimed that “Barr could not clear Trump of wrongdoing.”
When the Oversight Committee interviewed former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta, Democrats whipped themselves into a frenzy trying to manufacture a “gotcha” moment. They failed. Mr. Acosta dismantled the Democrats’ narrative. His testimony confirmed there was no contact between President Trump and Mr. Acosta and no connection between President Trump and Epstein in the case. Next, Democrats resorted to selective leaks and doctored documents to mislead the American people. Oversight Committee Republicans have posted 65,000 pages of documents we have received to date. Democrats, by contrast, have released fewer than a dozen. In their latest selective leak, Democrats released just three of the 23,000 pages of documents from the Epstein Estate and made redactions to two of those emails that changed both the content and the meaning. When CNN called them out for the deceptive redactions, Representatives Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) tried to blame Republicans for their own edits. After Democrats released only three emails, Republicans released over 23,000 pages. And what did Democrats say in response? They claimed that full transparency was meant to “disorient” and “distract” from their manufactured narrative. These are the same Democrats who chant “release the files” every day—until the files contradict the story they want to tell. That is the definition of hypocrisy. In contrast, full transparency exposed how Epstein appears to be TDS Patient Zero. The emails reveal that a “journalist” coached Epstein to blackmail then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. The files also show that a House Democrat colluded with Epstein during a 2019 Oversight hearing to target a discredited witness with a vendetta against President Trump.
And, unsurprisingly, Democrats have been silent about their colleague’s coordination with Epstein. Another email shows Democrat fundraisers invited Epstein to attend an event, or meet privately with Hakeem Jeffries, in 2013 as part of their effort to build a Democrat House majority. The files also underscore why former President Bill Clinton must appear for his deposition. The Oversight Committee subpoenaed him for testimony in August, yet Democrats have done nothing to help secure his appearance. The Democrats’ latest anti-Trump hoax has collapsed—just like Russiagate, the Steele Dossier, and the politically motivated prosecutions before it. Time and again, Democrats will promote any hoax rather than have a serious conversation with President Trump about how to improve the lives of the American people. I support full transparency and will vote for this legislation today. However, I want to be clear: Congress should not conduct investigations through legislation. That sets a dangerous precedent for the powers of the House. The House Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough review to ensure transparency and accountability, and we will continue to follow the facts wherever they lead for the American people and for the survivors of Epstein’s crimes. Democrats must end their latest hoax and turn their attention to truly bring transparency and accountability for survivors.”
At the time, Comer was holding up one newly released document from the committee’s ongoing review of more than 20,000 pages of Epstein estate records.
The Hakeem Jeffries email mentioned was sent by Dynamic SRG, a Democrat fundraising firm representing then-freshman congressman Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the now-House minority leader, to Epstein in 2013. It promoted a “high-dollar dinner” and offered Epstein the chance to “get to know Hakeem better,” describing the now-55-year-old lawmaker as “Brooklyn’s Barack [Obama].”
Prior to the vote, Jeffries appeared to voice support for the bill, declaring: “It’s a complete and total surrender, because as Democrats we made clear from the very beginning, the survivors and the American people deserve full and complete transparency as it relates to the lives that were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein.”
When Jeffries’ fundraising firm reached out to Epstein, the pedo financier had already pleaded guilty in Florida in 2008 to procuring a minor for prostitution, serving just 13 months with extensive work-release privileges in a controversial plea deal. By 2013, he was a registered sex offender facing multiple civil lawsuits from a number of victims alleging abuse of underage girls.
However, it is worth noting that there is no public evidence or records showing that Epstein ended up donating to Jeffries or even attending the specified event.
In comparison to his vast wealth, Epstein was a relatively “modest” political donor, contributing around $139,000 to Democrat candidates and committees over the years — including donations to figures such as Bill Clinton — as well as $25,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
As highlighted by Comer and other Republicans, recently unsealed documents from Epstein’s estate have shed further light on his financial ties to Democrat Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D-V.I.), who has represented the U.S. Virgin Islands’ at-large congressional district as a non-voting House member since 2015. Federal Election Commission records indicate that Epstein personally donated approximately $18,000 directly to Plaskett’s campaigns across multiple cycles from 2014 to 2018. These contributions were supplemented by donations from Epstein’s key associates, including his longtime attorney Darren Indyke and accountant Richard Kahn, pushing the total Epstein-linked support for her campaigns to more than $30,000.
Separately, a 2023 deposition of Plaskett in the U.S. Virgin Islands’ settled lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase, Epstein’s former bank, revealed that she and her campaign accepted over $34,000 in contributions from Epstein and four of his associates between 2014 and the 2020 election cycle. In that testimony, Plaskett also acknowledged personally soliciting a $30,000 donation from Epstein in 2018 for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).
The late Epstein’s small private island “Little St. James” was part of Plaskett’s district, and he used the land for his ongoing sex trafficking operation(s).
As general counsel to the Virgin Islands Economic Development Authority (EDA), Plaskett worked for the agency that granted Epstein’s companies approximately $220 million in tax breaks between 1999 and 2012. This period overlapped with Epstein’s post-2008 conviction efforts to maintain influence in the territory. Court filings from a 2023 lawsuit by Epstein victims against Virgin Islands officials, including Plaskett, had alleged that she and others benefited from or enabled his activities — though the case was dismissed in March this year.
The newly unsealed documents also revealed that Epstein had fed questions to Plaskett in real time during a 2019 congressional hearing — coaching her on lines of inquiry aimed at damaging President Donald Trump’s reputation. The messages, first obtained by The Washington Post, capture Epstein exchanging texts with Plaskett throughout the February 27, 2019 House Oversight Committee hearing — where Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen was testifying.
According to the documents, Epstein appeared to be watching the hearing live as Cohen referenced longtime Trump executive assistant Rhona Graff, prompting Epstein to send Plaskett real-time commentary and suggested follow-ups.
Comer countered that the committee’s staggered releases were designed to ensure proper redaction of victim information, further accusing Democrats of selectively leaking documents to target political opponents while ignoring their own party’s ties to Epstein.
The confrontation represents the latest escalation in a months-long battle over Epstein’s extensive political and social contacts, which have implicated figures across the ideological spectrum.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act cleared the House with broad bipartisan support, signaling rare agreement on the need for full public disclosure of one of the most notorious criminal cases in recent American history.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news alerts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
What do YOU think? Click here to jump to the comments!
Sponsored Content Below