US Panel Probes Epstein Sex Trafficking Case, Pressure Mounts On Trump Administration
The Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee acted just before House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., sent lawmakers home early for a monthlong break from Washington. The committee's moves are evidence of the mounting pressure for disclosure in a case that Trump has unsuccessfully urged his supporters to move past. But they were also just the start of what can be a drawn out process.
Here's what could happen next in the House inquiry as lawmakers seek answers in a case that has sparked rampant speculation since Epstein's death in 2019 and more recently caused many in the Trump administration to renege on promises for a complete accounting.
Democrats, joined by three Republicans, were able to successfully initiate the subpoena from a subcommittee just as the House was leaving Washington for its August recess. But it was just the start of negotiations over the subpoena.
The subcommittee agreed to redact the names and personal information of any victims, but besides that, their demand for information is quite broad, encompassing "un-redacted Epstein files."
As the parameters of the subpoena are drafted, Democrats are demanding that it be fulfilled within 30 days from when it is served to Attorney General Pam Bondi. They have also proposed a list of document demands, including the prosecutorial decisions surrounding Epstein, documents related to his death, and communication from any president or executive official regarding the matter.
Ultimately, Republicans who control the committee will have more power over the scope of the subpoena, but the fact that it was approved with a strong bipartisan vote gives it some heft.
The committee chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., said he told the speaker that "Republicans on the Oversight Committee were going to move to be more aggressive in trying to get transparency with the Epstein files. So, we did that, and I think that's what the American people want."
Comer has said that he is hoping that staff from the committee can interview Maxwell under oath on Aug. 11 at or near the federal prison in Florida where she is serving a lengthy sentence for child sex trafficking.
In a congressional deposition, the subject typically has an attorney present to help them answer - or not answer - questions while maintaining their civil rights. Subjects also have the ability to decline to answer questions if it could be used against them in a criminal case, though in this instance that might not matter because Maxwell has already been convicted of many of the things she will likely be asked about.
Maxwell has the ability to negotiate some of the terms of the deposition, and she already conducted 1 1/2 days of interviews with Justice Department officials this past week.
Democrats, however, warn that Maxwell is not to be trusted.
"We should understand that this is a very complex witness and someone that has caused great harm and not a good person to a lot of people," Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the oversight committee, told reporters this week.
Committee Republicans also initiated a motion to subpoena a host of other people, including former President Bill Clinton, former Sen. Hillary Clinton as well as the former attorneys general dating back to Alberto Gonzales, who served under George W. Bush.
It's not clear how this sweeping list of proposed subpoenas will actually play out, but Comer has said, "We're going to move quickly on that."
Trump is no stranger to fighting against congressional investigations and subpoenas. And as with most subpoenas, the Justice Department can negotiate the terms of how it fulfills the subpoena. It can also make legal arguments against handing over certain information.
Joshua A. Levy, who teaches on congressional investigations at Georgetown Law School and is a partner at Levy Firestone Muse, said that the results of the subpoena "depend on whether the administration wants to work through the traditional accommodation process with the House and reach a resolution or if one or both sides becomes entrenched in its position."
If Congress is not satisfied with Bondi's response - or if she were to refuse to hand over any information - there are several ways lawmakers can try to enforce the subpoena. However, that would require a vote to hold Bondi in contempt of Congress.
It's practically unheard of for one political party to vote to hold one of its own members in contempt of Congress, but the Epstein saga has also cut across political lines and driven a wedge in the GOP.
Ultimately, the bipartisan vote to subpoena the files showed how political pressure is mounting on the Trump administration to disclose the files. Politics, policy and the law are all bound up together in this case, and many in Congress want to see a full accounting of the sex trafficking investigation.
"We can't allow individuals, especially those at the highest level of our government, to protect child sex traffickers," said Rep. Summer Lee, D-Pa., a committee member.
The Trump administration is already facing the potential for even more political tension. When Congress comes back to Washington in September, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers is working to advance to a full House vote a bill that aims to force the public release of the Epstein files.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Trump welcomes reports India may halt Russian oil imports, calls it a 'good step'
U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday (August 1, 2025) expressed cautious optimism over reports that India may be ending its purchases of Russian oil, calling it a 'good step' while addressing reporters before departing the White House. 'I understand India no longer is going to be buying oil from Russia. That's what I heard. I don't know if that's right or not, but that's a good step,' Mr. Trump said during an impromptu press gaggle on the South Lawn. His remarks come amid growing American scrutiny of India's continued energy and defence ties with Russia, especially in the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine and broader U.S. efforts to isolate the Kremlin economically. While there has been no official confirmation from New Delhi regarding such a move, Mr. Trump's comments mark the first public acknowledgement from the U.S. administration of a potential policy shift by India. Mr. Trump has maintained a firm stance against countries maintaining close commercial ties with Moscow. His administration has already imposed a 25% tariff on Indian imports, citing both trade imbalances and India's longstanding energy relationship with Russia. In his remarks, Mr. Trump did not elaborate on whether the reported change in India's oil policy would impact those tariffs or future negotiations. 'We'll see what happens,' he said. The issue of India's energy imports from Russia has been a point of contention between Washington and New Delhi, with previous administrations urging India to reduce its reliance on Russian crude in the wake of the Ukraine conflict. India has so far defended its purchases as essential for energy security and economic stability. Mr. Trump's tone on Friday, however, suggested an openness to engage with India if the reported shift holds. 'That's a good step,' he repeated, signalling potential diplomatic movement should the reports prove accurate. Officials in New Delhi have historically avoided commenting on energy policy decisions until after implementation. Mr. Trump's brief but pointed remarks come as part of a broader foreign policy strategy to pressure both adversaries and allies into realigning their global partnerships in accordance with US strategic interests. Russia remains under sweeping U.S. sanctions, and energy exports have been a critical lifeline for the Kremlin amid ongoing war-related expenditures. (This article is published in an arrangement with 5WH.)
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
With new 40% tariff on transshipments, Trump takes aim at US dependence on China's factories
Ever since President Trump began raising tariffs on goods from China during his first term, Chinese companies have raced to set up warehouses and factories in Southeast Asia, Mexico and elsewhere to bypass US tariffs with indirect shipments to the American market via other countries. But on Thursday, Trump took aim at all indirect American imports, which he blames for part of the $1.2 trillion US trade deficit. Trump imposed 40% tariffs on so-called transshipments, which will take effect in a week. And a senior administration official who briefed reporters said work was under way that could broaden considerably the definition of indirect shipments. The new rules cover indirect shipments from anywhere, not just China. But China, with its massive factory infrastructure and expansive manufacturing ambition, has been the main country to develop a global network for such shipments. Trade experts were quick to predict that China would be the most affected - and the most executive order Thursday created a new category of imports: goods that are transshipped through other countries instead of coming straight from the country of origin. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like They Were So Beautiful Before; Now Look At Them; Number 10 Will Shock You Reportingly Undo The 40% tariffs on these goods will be on top of whatever tariffs would have applied if the goods had come directly from the country where they were originally made. The legal definition of transshipment is narrow: a good that did not undergo a "substantial transformation" in the country through which it was indirectly shipped. Countries in Southeast Asia have long denied that they allow a lot of transshipment. They contend that their soaring imports of Chinese components are being assembled into new and different products that can appropriately be labelled made in their countries, and not labelled "made in China. " Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . Discover stories of India's leading eco-innovators at Ecopreneur Honours 2025
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Docus that hint at Hillary role in plan to tie Trump to Russia false?
The Trump-era special counsel who scoured the Russia investigation for wrongdoing gathered evidence that undermines a theory pushed by some Republicans that Hillary Clinton 's campaign conspired to frame Donald Trump for colluding with Moscow in the 2016 election, information declassified on Thursday shows. The information, a 29-page annex to the special counsel's 2023 report, reveals that a foundational document for that theory was most likely stitched together by Russian spies. The document is a purported email from July 27, 2016, that said Hillary had approved a campaign proposal to tie Trump to Russia to distract from the scandal over her use of a private email server. The release of the annex adds new details to the public's understanding of a complex trove of 2016 Russian intelligence reports analysing purported emails that Russian hackers stole from Americans. It also shows how the special counsel, John Durham, went to great lengths to try to prove that several of the emails were real, only to ultimately conclude otherwise. The release of the annex was no exception. John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, said in a statement that the materials proved that suspicions of Russian collusion stemmed from "a coordinated plan to prevent and destroy Donald Trump's presidency." Kash Patel, the FBI director, declared on social media that the annex revealed "evidence that the Clinton campaign plotted to frame President Trump and fabricate the Russia collusion hoax." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Salt Spring: Unsold Furniture Liquidation 2024 (Prices May Surprise You) Unsold Furniture | Search Ads Learn More Undo In reality, the annex shows the opposite, indicating that a key piece of supposed evidence for the claim that Hillary approved a plan to tie Trump to Russia is not credible: Durham concluded that the email from July 27, 2016, and a related one dated two days earlier were probably manufactured. Before the 2020 election, Ratcliffe, as director of national intelligence in Trump's first term, had declassified and released the crux of the July 27 email, even though he acknowledged doubts about its credibility. Officials did "not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication," he said. Among some Trump supporters, the message became known as the "Clinton Plan intelligence," as Durham put it in his final report. In his report, Durham used the US govt's knowledge of the supposed plan, via the Russian memos, to criticise FBI officials involved in the Russia investigation for not being more sceptical when they later received a copy of the Steele dossier and used it to obtain a wiretap order. Durham's report also mentioned that Clinton and others in the campaign dismissed the allegation as ridiculous. But Durham banished to the annex concrete details he had found that bolstered her campaign's rebuttal, burying until now the conclusion that the email he called the "Clinton Plan intelligence" was Russian disinformation. Durham was never able to prove any Clinton campaign conspiracy to frame Trump by spreading information that it knew to be false, but he used court filings to insinuate such suspicions. He brought charges of false statements against two people involved in efforts to scrutinize possible ties between Trump and Russia, which ended in acquittals.
