Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to Face House Questions on Epstein Ties in May
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick will sit for voluntary questioning before the House Oversight Committee on May 6 about his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Despite Lutnick's claims he cut ties with Epstein in 2005, Justice Department files show he visited Epstein's private island in 2012 -- four years after Epstein's guilty plea for sex crimes involving a minor.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick will appear before the House Oversight Committee on May 6 to answer questions about his connections to Jeffrey Epstein, according to a source familiar with the schedule. The voluntary interview comes after Committee Chair James Comer announced in early March that Lutnick had "proactively agreed" to testify, though no date had been set until now.
The questioning centers on glaring contradictions between Lutnick's public statements and documentary evidence released by the Justice Department. Lutnick, who was Epstein's next-door neighbor in New York City, told the New York Post last year that he decided in 2005 that Epstein was "disgusting" after the financier made an inappropriate remark while hosting Lutnick and his wife at his townhouse.
"So I was never in the room with him socially, for business or even philanthropy. That guy was there, I wasn't going 'cause he is gross," Lutnick claimed.
But Justice Department files tell a different story. The records show Lutnick and his family visited Epstein's private island in 2012 -- a full seven years after Lutnick says he cut ties, and four years after Epstein pleaded guilty to procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and felony solicitation of prostitution. The files also indicate Lutnick appeared to invite Epstein to a small Hillary Clinton fundraiser in 2015.
At a Senate hearing earlier this year, Lutnick said he couldn't recall why he took the trip to Epstein's island but insisted there was nothing "untoward" about it. That explanation raises obvious questions: Why would someone who found Epstein "disgusting" in 2005 vacation at his private island seven years later, after Epstein had been convicted of sex crimes involving a minor?
The timeline matters. Epstein's 2008 guilty plea was national news. His sweetheart deal with federal prosecutors -- which allowed him to serve just 13 months in a county jail with work release privileges -- sparked widespread outrage. Anyone paying attention knew exactly who Jeffrey Epstein was by 2012.
Lutnick told Axios last month he looks forward to appearing before the committee. "I have done nothing wrong and I want to set the record straight," he said. Authorities have not accused Lutnick of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
But the discrepancies between Lutnick's public statements and the documentary record demand explanation. If Lutnick truly severed ties with Epstein in 2005, why do Justice Department files show continued contact years later? What was the nature of that 2012 island visit? And why did Lutnick apparently consider Epstein an appropriate guest for a political fundraiser in 2015?
These questions matter because they go to the credibility of a sitting Cabinet secretary. They also matter because the Epstein case represents one of the most significant failures of accountability in modern American history -- a connected financier who trafficked underage girls, cultivated relationships with the powerful, and faced minimal consequences until his 2019 arrest and subsequent death in federal custody.
The House Oversight Committee's investigation into Epstein's network of enablers and associates is one of the few ongoing efforts to establish a full accounting of who knew what, when. Lutnick's testimony will be a test of whether that investigation can extract truthful answers from powerful figures with obvious incentives to minimize their connections to a convicted sex offender.
Lutnick's voluntary appearance is scheduled for May 6. Whether his testimony will clarify or further muddy the timeline of his relationship with Epstein remains to be seen. But the documentary evidence has already established that his previous public statements don't tell the whole story.
The Commerce Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.
Sign in to leave a comment.