Emails Reveal Epstein Invited to Dem Fundraiser To ‘Get To Know’ Hakeem Jeffries

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, a Republican from Kentucky, accused House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ campaign on Tuesday of “soliciting money from Jeffrey Epstein.”

Citing a 2013 email from a political consulting firm inviting the infamous pedophile to a Democratic Party dinner and to “get to know” Jeffries, the Kentucky Republican is spearheading the oversight panel’s inquiry into Epstein.

“Democrat fundraisers invited Epstein to attend an event, or meet privately with Hakeem Jeffries as part of their 2013 effort to win a majority. So, Hakeem Jeffries’ campaign solicited money from Jeffrey Epstein. That’s what we found in the last document batch,” Comer said on the House floor.

On May 7, 2013, Lisa Rossi, a partner at the New York City-based consulting firm Dynamic SRG, sent Epstein an email with the subject line, “Rising Star.”

Lesley Groff, Epstein’s former executive assistant, also forwarded the email to Epstein.

“Dear Jeffrey,” the message stated. “We are thrilled to announce that we are working with Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, one of the rising stars in the New York Congressional delegation.

“Sometimes referred to as ‘Brooklyn’s Barack’, he is a staunch supporter of President Obama and a progressive voice for the people of New York City.”

The firm’s pitch to Epstein included a video and article touting the Brooklyn Democrat’s work during his first year in Congress.

“Hakeem is committed to electing a Democratic majority in 2014 and is encouraging his friends to participate in the DCCC/DSCC fundraising dinner with President Obama this coming Monday night,” the email continued. “Shoot us an email or give us a call at [the firm’s phone number] if you would like to get involved with the dinner, or would like to get an opportunity to get to know Hakeem better.”

About five years after Epstein entered a guilty plea to charges of soliciting prostitutes and soliciting prostitution from a minor in Florida in 2008, the invitation was sent.

In the 1990s and 2000s, Epstein gave tens of thousands of dollars to a number of Democrats. He passed away in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal child sex trafficking allegations.

Epstein did not appear to have donated to Jeffries, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, or the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee at the time the email was sent, according to Federal Election Commission records.

As part of their extensive Epstein investigation, Republicans in the House Oversight Committee published over 20,000 documents last week, including the email.

This comes as the U.S. Senate formally enacted legislation compelling the Justice Department to provide additional details regarding the case it developed against the late convicted sexual offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The House decisively cleared the bill on Tuesday, and senators had agreed to automatically pass it as soon as it was received.

President Donald Trump has stated that he will sign it, and it is currently on his desk. This is true even though Speaker Mike Johnson pushed for last-minute revisions to the House-passed plan and hinted that he could urge Trump to veto it.

The Justice Department will have 30 days to make the papers publicly available with redactions to safeguard Epstein’s victims, assuming Trump follows through.

On Tuesday, Speaker Mike Johnson discussed House Republicans’ efforts to deliver maximum transparency regarding the Epstein files and ensure justice for victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes.

“The truth is, the biggest proponents of this discharge petition were never actually interested in transparency or ensuring justice or protecting victims of this unspeakable tragedy, the Epstein evils. And how do we know that? Because the Democrats had every one of the Epstein files in their possession for the four long years of the Biden Administration,” Johnson said.

“The Biden Department of Justice had the files the entire time, and not a single one of the people who were so loud and animated right now ever said anything about it for all those four years,” he said.

“For four long years under the previous administration of the Biden-Harris Administration, Democrats insisted there was no border crisis. Remember, they told you that that wasn’t a problem at all. They dismissed inflation as transitory. That’s what they told us. They told the American people not to believe what we could all see with our own eyes, that there was an obvious mental and physical decline on the part of President Biden individually,” Johnson said.

Breaking: Barack Obama Just Confirmed in Washington, D.C. — Details Emerging

In a development that is quickly drawing attention across the country, Barack Obama has just been confirmed in an announcement made in Washington, D.C., according to early reports. The confirmation, which occurred only moments ago, has sparked widespread interest as officials and observers wait for more details about the situation.

Initial information suggests that the announcement was made during a briefing in the nation’s capital, where officials confirmed the update involving the former president. While the full context of the confirmation is still unfolding, the news has already begun circulating rapidly through political circles and media outlets.

Barack Obama, who served as the 44th president of the United States from 2009 to 2017, remains one of the most influential po

litical figures in modern American politics. Any official confirmation involving him tends to generate immediate public and media attention, both domestically and internationally.

Sources close to the situation say additional statements may be released soon, which could clarify the nature of the confirmation and what it could mean moving forward. Analysts are already speculating about possible implications, though officials have urged the public to wait for verified information.

For now, the announcement from Washington, D.C. marks a developing story. More updates are expected as authorities and representatives provide further details in the coming hours.

Stay tuned as this story continues to unfold.

President Donald Trump Signs Major New Executive Order

In a dramatic new court filing, Ghislaine Maxwell has claimed that at least 25 alleged accomplices connected to Jeffrey Epstein quietly reached “secret settlements” related to abuse allegations — yet were never criminally charged.

The filing, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that newly discovered evidence reveals previously undisclosed agreements between plaintiff attorneys and multiple men who, according to Maxwell, could be considered co-conspirators in Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation.

“New evidence reveals that there were 25 men with whom the plaintiff lawyers reached secret settlements — that could equally be considered as co-conspirators,” Maxwell wrote in documents filed without the assistance of her legal team.

Maxwell, 63, is currently serving a 20-year federal sentence following her 2021 conviction on sex trafficking charges. In her latest submission, she maintains that prosecutors failed to disclose crucial information that could have altered the outcome of her trial.

“None of these men have been prosecuted and none has been revealed to me,” Maxwell wrote. “Had I known, I would have called them as witnesses.”

She further contends that the alleged concealment of these settlements — along with what she describes as jury bias — deprived her of a fair trial. According to Maxwell, if jurors had been informed of what she characterizes as “collusion” between government officials and civil attorneys, they may have reached a different verdict.

The filing also claims that four former employees of Epstein were referenced in both a prior non-prosecution agreement and the federal indictment he faced before his death in 2019, yet none of those individuals were ultimately charged.

The possibility that additional accomplices remain unidentified has reignited public scrutiny surrounding the Epstein case. Questions persist about whether the names of those who allegedly reached private settlements will ever be fully disclosed — particularly as federal authorities continue reviewing millions of pages of case-related documents.

To date, only Epstein and Maxwell have faced federal criminal charges directly tied to the sex-trafficking network. Others associated with Epstein have confronted civil lawsuits but have denied wrongdoing.

Among the most high-profile figures accused in civil proceedings was Prince Andrew, who was sued by Virginia Giuffre over allegations of sexual abuse when she was a minor. Prince Andrew has consistently denied the claims and later reached a financial settlement without admitting liability.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice has confirmed that hundreds of attorneys are reviewing an estimated 5.2 million pages of documents connected to the Epstein investigation. Officials say the review process is complex and requires extensive redactions to protect victims’ identities.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated in December that the review is an “all-hands-on-deck” effort, emphasizing that victim protection remains a top priority even as pressure mounts for greater transparency.

It remains unclear whether the 25 men referenced in Maxwell’s filing negotiated any agreements with federal prosecutors or whether their settlements were strictly civil in nature. Legal experts note that civil settlements do not automatically shield individuals from criminal liability — though non-prosecution agreements can.

Maxwell’s filing is widely viewed as part of her broader legal strategy to challenge her conviction. Whether the court will grant further hearings or consider the alleged new evidence remains to be seen.

The renewed claims have once again thrust the Epstein scandal into the national spotlight, raising persistent questions about accountability, transparency, and whether all those involved in the long-running abuse network have truly been brought to justice.

As document reviews continue and appeals move forward, the case remains one of the most controversial and closely watched criminal sagas in recent American history.