Democrats spend $53 million on Epstein ads as midterms near

Democratic candidates are betting heavily on the Jeffrey Epstein controversy to win the November 3 midterms, spending $53 million on television advertisements that mention the late financier. That figure is nearly 18 times higher than the $3 million Republicans have spent on similar messaging, according to AdImpact data cited by the Washington Post. The disparity marks a sharp increase from the 2024 presidential cycle, when CNN reported that Epstein appeared in only three campaign ads, all involving Florida candidates.

If Democrats secure control of one or both chambers of Congress, investigating Epstein’s case is slated to be a top priority. Rep. Robert Garcia of California, who serves on the House Oversight Committee, confirmed this stance in a recent interview with Bloomberg News. Two legislative proposals are already on the table to guide that work. One is a follow-up bill to the Epstein Files Transparency Act, co-sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna and Rep. Thomas Massie. This bill would allow state attorneys general and survivors to sue the Justice Department for unredacted files currently withheld under claims of privilege. The second is the Epstein Wall Street Records Act, introduced by Garcia and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, which requires regulators to disclose supervisory records and investigate Epstein-connected banks for potential violations in banking, securities, or illicit financing.

Critics argue the focus may be misplaced. Ankush Khardori, a former federal prosecutor, wrote in a Boston Globe op-ed that the release of Epstein documents was a historic mistake. He noted that the presumption of innocence has been undermined by an ethos of guilt by association. Khardori pointed to the suicide of Edward Juul Rod-Larsen in April, whose family faced scrutiny over their contact with Epstein. He suggested Democrats should instead focus on potential corruption within the Trump administration or assign a respected prosecutor to oversee a dedicated commission.

The evidentiary challenges are substantial. Epstein is dead, and Ghislaine Maxwell is serving a prison sentence, which Khardori suggests affects her credibility. Three of the women who claimed abuse by Epstein have died, as have several men who spent time with him. Rep. James Comer, the Kentucky Republican leading the Oversight Committee, made two criminal referrals to the Justice Department earlier this year based on testimony from Sarah Kellen, a former Epstein assistant. Kellen accused two men of sexual assault but stated that Epstein and Maxwell did not facilitate the abuse. The Justice Department is not required to act on congressional referrals, so the status of those probes remains unclear.

Legal hurdles persist for old allegations. Cases involving powerful men like Peter Nygard, Frank Stronach, and Harvey Weinstein have seen charges dropped or retrials occur. If a case reaches trial, Kellen may face questions about previous accusations that she helped facilitate abuse as an adult. Democrats have also accused at least three major financial institutions of failing to follow anti-money laundering laws regarding Epstein’s accounts.

Previous committee hearings have faced criticism for their structure. Transcripts show sessions were often repetitive, with legislators asking questions already posed by colleagues. Witnesses were frequently asked about a painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress or queried about connections to Mossad. Nearly every witness was read a list of names, including Woody Allen and Noam Chomsky, to identify interactions. Hillary Clinton later described the panel’s approach as a fishing expedition. Trump has described Epstein as an acquaintance, though he was no longer in contact when Epstein was indicted in Florida in 2006. House Democrats have recommended a special counsel to investigate allegations against Trump, including a claim that a 1993 incident involved rape, though he has not been formally accused of a crime related to his Epstein friendship.