Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently attended a closed-door oversight meeting regarding his connections with the late financier Jeffrey Epstein. This session focused on reconciling his previous public statements, as well as his deposition testimony, with the details now emerging from millions of pages of Justice Department files. Per Newsweek, despite proof of past misstatements, reactions from Republican lawmakers were relatively mild.
During the interview, Lutnick answered nearly 400 questions from members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The session only concluded when committee members had nothing further to ask. A Commerce Department spokesperson stated that Lutnick explained that three specific encounters with Epstein do not constitute a relationship. The committee adjourned without identifying evidence to contradict this assessment.
House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky) emphasized that Lutnick appeared voluntarily and took the opportunity to correct his prior statements regarding the island visit. “The only thing that I’d seen that Lutnick did wrong was [he] wasn’t 100 percent truthful on the brief visit to the island with his family. He corrected that in his opening statement. If we find that there were any misstatements by Lutnick, it’s a felony to lie to Congress and he’ll be held accountable.”
If there wasn’t anything to hide, why did he lie to begin with?
The core of the discussion involved Lutnick’s evolving account of his interactions with Epstein. Lutnick previously claimed he avoided Epstein after a 2005 encounter, but he eventually acknowledged during his testimony that he had also visited Epstein’s private island in 2012.
A person familiar with the issue noted that Lutnick explained he was invited to lunch on the island. However, he felt unsettled that Epstein’s assistant knew he was in the Virgin Islands at the time.
Per NBC, the disconnect between Lutnick’s earlier claims and the documented evidence has caused frustration among some lawmakers. Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California was particularly vocal about his dissatisfaction. “If Donald Trump had seen the video transcript, he would have fired Howard Lutnick. It was really embarrassing,” Khanna said.
He went on to describe the secretary’s responses as evasive, specifically pointing to how Lutnick handled questions about his previous claims that he had cut off all contact with Epstein after 2005. “It was just contortions and lies and no acknowledgment that he mislead the American public,” Khanna added, noting that Lutnick seemed to struggle with defining his past interactions.
Epstein and Lutnick were neighbors in an elite Manhattan enclave for over a decade. Beyond the 2005 coffee meeting and the 2012 island lunch, Lutnick reportedly mentioned a third interaction involving a discussion about scaffolding in Epstein’s foyer.
Despite these meetings, Lutnick maintained that he never witnessed anything inappropriate. However, the Epstein files paint a picture of sporadic contact that extended well beyond 2005, including emails from 2009 and as late as 2018.
Other Democrats on the committee echoed the sentiment that the testimony was insufficient. Representative Suhas Subramanyam, a Democrat from Virginia, told reporters, “We asked him over and over again, ‘Why did you go to the island?’ He says he doesn’t remember, that it’s ‘inexplicable,’ and he simply didn’t know how to answer the question.”
DNC Rapid Response Director Kendall Witmer released a statement, saying, “Howard Lutnick has already lied about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein — and it seems like there’s more he’s still not being honest about.” The statement further criticized the administration, suggesting that the recent testimony does not provide the transparency that some feel is owed to the public.
Lutnick, who previously served as the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, has consistently denied any wrongdoing or criminal conduct related to Epstein. His supporters argue that the focus on these brief meetings is an attempt to distract from his current work at the Commerce Department. Nevertheless, the scrutiny of his testimony remains intense.
Published: May 8, 2026 10:09 am