BREAKING: House Oversight Dems React To Howard Lutnick's Epstein Testimony: 'He Should Resign'

Added: 2026-05-12

[00:00:08]Well, now we know why that interview was not videotaped. Uh, if Donald Trump had seen the video transcript, he would have fired Howard Lutnik. Uh, it was really embarrassing. He was asked very straightforward questions about whether he regretted misleading the American people. I mean, he said that he would never see uh Epstein again uh in 2005.

[00:00:38]And everyone knows that he took his wife and kids to see Epstein in 2012. And yet it was just contortions and lies and no acknowledgement that he misled the American public. And if you saw the exchanges that my colleagues had with him, you would see uh he made a uh force of the English language. I mean uh he was trying to define I as if uh saying that what he really meant is that he would not see Epstein alone but be totally fine with having his wife and kids uh kids see Epste. It made no sense. And then uh he's raised even more serious concerns about the investigation. He originally had said that uh Epstein engaged in blackmail and uh recorded videotapes. Now he's saying, well, he was wrong. He was just speculating uh and Epstein actually didn't engage in blackmailing. This raises the question of what the cover up is. Did someone tell him to say that? Uh I've not heard that uh he is that Epstein never engaged in blackmail. Why is Howard Lutnik changing his testimony, changing his story? He's lost all credibility. Uh and really it's a shame that the American people uh don't get to see uh what he did there. Total lack of truth and lack of honesty.

[00:02:01]>> Yeah, I I agree. Howard Lutnik should resign. That was absolutely mindboggling what we just heard in the room. He was evasive, nervous, he was dishonest. uh he would not admit to lying, which he clearly did in the podcast. He said he was never in the room uh with Jeffrey Epstein ever again after the first time he met him. Yet, he then admitted that he was in the room with Jeffrey Epstein.

[00:02:25]I had to ask him whether he and I were in the same room just now because I couldn't understand his meaning of we were in the same room together. And so, and then he said that Jeffrey Epstein was a sick man that he would never want to be in the room with him again. Yet he was in the room with him again when he visited his island where Jeffrey Epstein raped women, underage women, and he brought his kids and his friends with him to that island when he met with Jeffrey Epstein. He said he never met with Jeffrey Epstein again socially. Yet he admits that that was a social visit to his island. And so he was clearly being dishonest. Uh he was clearly being evasive. And finally, he doesn't remember why he went to Jeffrey Epstein's island, which is also mindboggling. He somehow remembers going to the island after pictures surfaced of him being at the island, but he doesn't remember why he went to the island. And we had the emails. That's why we found out he was at the island. Uh, this is absolutely absurd and he should resign.

[00:03:24]>> Good afternoon, uh, Congresswoman Ansari from Arizona's third district. After what we have seen so far in this transcribed interview, I feel very comfortable saying that Howard Letic is a pathological liar. who is enabling the most egregious cover up in American history. We have now gone through the timeline of events with him in in detail in excruciating detail from when they met in 2005. This is Howard Lutnik and his wife meeting Jeffrey Epstein.

[00:03:56]He described it himself in great detail on a podcast last year where he said that they went to his home, they took a tour, and allegedly were so uncomfortable after seeing the massage tables in Jeffrey Epstein's home that Howard Letic went on on this podcast to tell the American people that he himself and and my colleagues referenced the the definitions he tried to uh change of of what he meant there, but he said that he would never socially or professionally be involved or be in a room with Jeffree Jeffrey Epstein again. Then in 2012, he took his family and his staff to Jeffrey Epstein's island. I focus my questions today on how he could have done that if him and his wife were truly so uncomfortable, especially when in 2008, we know that Jeffrey Epstein was accused and the sweetheart deal took place for soliciting a minor. Howard Letic tried to tell us in that room that he essentially didn't know any of that. I asked him, "How did I, as a child at the time, see this all over the media about Jeffrey Epstein and you, an adult, who was this person's neighbor who had engaged with him before? How could you possibly not have known?" I mean, the level of the lies that are taking place inside that room without video is unbelievable. and part of this egregious cover up. I recommend that every single American when this interview is released read the document in full. You will see Howard Lutnik use phrases like um uh how it's inexplicable and unsettling that he went to the island. That's how he defines it himself. It's inexplicable how this happened. He also tries to define all of their interactions as quote unquote meaningless and inconsequential. I think he's used those terms about 20 times so far and continues to use them. So, I will just end by saying that there are real victims here. There are potentially over a thousand women who were abused and raped when they were children. And even at the bare minimum, Howard Lutnik was aware of these things. He knew it. just demonstrates the culture of enabling these crimes and allowing rich and powerful people like Jeffrey Epstein and all of the other disgusting rich and powerful men who committed these crimes to continue because people like Howard Leutnik knew these things were happening because they were all over the news and continued to engage and legitimize somebody like Jeffrey Epstein.

[00:06:31]Earlier today, Chairman Comr said that he hadn't seen any evidence of wrongdoing by Secretary Lutnik. And that's actually the problem with the Trump administration, this Republican majority in Congress, because lying to the American people is wrongdoing. And Howard Lutnik lied to the American people. I hope today that we would have heard some remorse, some contrition from Secretary Lutnik for flatout lying to the American people. Instead, what we've heard thus far is hours of testimony where he's attempting to redefine the meaning of the word I.

[00:07:07]He claims that when he said, "I would never be in a room again with Jeffrey Epstein," he meant only him and Jeffrey Epstein.

[00:07:17]Epstein was so gross to him, so disgusting that he wasn't willing to be in a room with them, but he was perfectly okay with his wife and family being in a room with Epstein.

[00:07:31]He's lying. And today's transcribed interview is part of the ongoing cover up because the American people deserve to see the video of what's taking place in there. They deserve to see the sweat on the secretary's brow as he struggles to answer basic questions about his lies to the American people. So, we're going to continue to listen and ask tough questions, but unfortunately, it appears that Secretary Lutnik is not going to take any responsibility for lying to the American people today.

[00:08:02]>> Can you explain for just a moment when you talked about the trip and I'm happy to ask this to Can you explain for a moment when they took the trip on the boat and you're saying that he's we were okay doing that, but he didn't want to be in the same room with him.

[00:08:16]Characterized what his remarks were, his response. He said, "Wait a minute. Isn't this inconsistent with his travel? If you're uncomfortable with being with this person, we asked him over and over again, why did you go to the island?" He says he doesn't remember. That was inexplicable.

[00:08:33]And and he simply didn't know how to answer the question at that point.

[00:08:38]>> Follow the island. Did he say that he saw anything? from his time there that camp in retrospect raises alarm about Epstein's activities on the island and he mentioned in his 2005 visit Epstein's apartment that he saw massage tables that made him uncomfortable. Did he see anything on his in his time on the island any specifics about what he saw there?

[00:08:59]>> Th those questions were specifically asked by the majority during the first hour and he said no to all of it. And also, it's important to note he >> he could remember nothing about the visit to the island. Couldn't remember why he was there. Couldn't remember anything he saw. Apparently, he could remember in great detail the 2005 visit to the townhouse and the massage tables that were there. Now, 2005 is 7 years before 2012. So his memory was sharp with respect to 2005 but dull with respect to 2012 in the visit to the island.

[00:09:35]>> And this is why uh this is such a cover up. I mean uh he refused to say there was any blackmailing even though he thought that happened in in the past. He refused to say that there was any video recording even though he said in the past that people Epste was video recording these young girls. He refused to say anything abnormal about Epstein's island. So, someone obviously got to him from the administration. In fact, he said he talked to people in the administration and that's why he's changed his tune. And the question is not just uh why he's lying. The question is why he's covering up why he's no longer willing to share what he knows about Epstein's aborant behavior.

[00:10:15]>> Secretary talk to President Trump ahead of this interview at the Trump administration. He said he did not talk to President Trump.

[00:10:22]>> Why do you think Secretary agreed to appear voluntarily? Did he address that at all? It is significant that he's the only cabinet secretary that has appeared to us.

[00:10:31]>> Well, he didn't want to be subpoenaed. I mean, he knew that we have the Republican votes uh to subpoena him just like we did do with Pam Bondi. And it's the first time that a cabinet member has been subpoenaed. What I expected, honestly, I expected him to say, "Well, you know, I regret what I said on the podcast. Uh, I should have uh had been transparent about this incident with the family. Uh, nothing happened that was terrible, but you know what? I should have had better judgment. And uh, here are the things I know about Epstein. He was a disgusting person. Let me try to help in the investigation. He did none of that.

[00:11:07]>> Can I ask two questions to follow up on what you just said, Congressman? You mentioned that he spoke to members of the administration and then he changed his tune. Did he say who exactly he spoke to and when he spoke to them?

[00:11:17]>> You want to take that? You asked that question. Yeah.

[00:11:20]He he could not recall who he spoke to in the administration. It's also important to note he was asked by a number of us if he spoke to President Trump about today's testimony and he refused to answer that question. He did say he didn't speak to President Trump or Donald Trump when he was not president, but he would not answer the question as to whether he spoke to President Trump about today's testimony.

[00:11:42]>> And then secondly, um the secretary had told you guys that he found the invitation to the island to be unsettling. how his assistant knew that he was in the US Virgin Islands. Did he talk about why he accepted an unsettling invitation?

[00:11:56]>> This is what I was asking during my line of questioning. Why did you go when you were so clear on this podcast and you've described in great detail that you and your wife were so alarmed by this person and did not want to ever be in a room with him. to the point of the statement that he had made. I mean, they were very clear statements that I would never in a social professional setting be in a room with this person. And then we later got him to admit that visiting someone's island and having lunch with them is in fact considered a social situation. And so, no, he would not. And I find that extremely unbelievable. I mean, I think of all of the depositions that we have done so far, I find Howard Lutnik to be the least credible with the way that he just refuses to acknowledge how misleading his statements uh were. I mean, that quite frankly, he lied in in the podcast, but he refuses to acknowledge that he still is trying to stand by the fact that that he was truthful in those statements.

[00:12:55]>> Behind you, behind you, did the secretary I haven't gotten a question yet. Sorry. Did uh the secretary indicate whether or not he had had any business dealings with Jeffrey Epstein and more specifically whether they invested in the same company?

[00:13:09]>> Yeah, the the the Republicans asked that in the first hour. Uh he did admit that a subsidiary of his company was invested in a company Jeffrey Epstein was was invested in as well and they did have an email exchange about that. And then as Democrats, are you all planning to do anything to compel the secretary's testimony on camera going further since you don't seem satisfied that this was >> that may be coming, but well stay tuned.

[00:13:34]>> Meanwhile, as sorry, I haven't um you said that you believe that he's covering up. Do you have any indication or when you're questioning did you were you able to zero in or perhaps you've seen in the documents who you believe he's covering up for and how extensive that cover up is?

[00:13:53]>> I think he's covering up for the administration and let me give the exact exchange that uh and Representative Wench elaborate on it because he really drilled down on it. Uh first uh Secretary Lnik said on the podcast that there was blackmail going on, right?

[00:14:09]Then he says to my inquiry, "Well, no, no, no. I was just speculating. And I said, "Well, what was your basis for speculating?" Well, I didn't have any basis. I take it back. You know, it seems like this is the administration's motus up, right? Just speculate with no basis. But here he's saying, "Okay, I take it back." So then I said, "Well, why did you take it back?" "Well, I talked to administration officials."

[00:14:28]Then Representative Walsh asked him, "Well, who did you talk to?" And he says, "Well, no, no, no. I just learned about this in public. I didn't talk to the administration officials." Well, Massie and I have been doing this and all of us have been doing this for months. I've never seen a single public statement that there was no uh blackmail. So the question is why is he changing his tune? Who is getting to him in the administration to basically have him say nothing was wrong? Let's move on. That's what that's what he was saying.

[00:14:57]>> That's right. No, I think you nailed it.

[00:14:59]Repres the Justice Department last July said that there was no blackmail in its memo. So why do you keep saying that there was no blackmail sent by the administration?

[00:15:07]>> We have not. We we have not uh that is not what the survivors believe. That is not what uh the testimony has been of other individuals and we we there has not been investigation of people like Les Wexner or people like Leon Black and uh many other people. That's why we're calling for uh investigations and he and he certainly did not reference that memorandum.

[00:15:31]>> Democrats win the midterms. What changes with regard if this investigation is continuing, what do you see changes with regard to this investigation and how you get more answers should the Democrats win?

[00:15:43]>> Well, for starters, these uh interviews are going to be on video and we're going to make sure that the American people get to see what we got to saw as legislators today. We're going to be completely transparent and honest when it comes to this investigation. So, to be clear, you're going to try to have him come in again uh and try to maybe do this under a subpoena, which would >> I didn't say I said I said generally that we're going to make sure that these types of interviews are on video and that the American people get to see them >> just in the future.

[00:16:12]>> I'm not ruling out him again. I'm just saying generally.

[00:16:14]>> Can we get your reaction on something else on the other investigation dealing with the DC and the investigation with the police department? Uh, nine officers have now been put on leave for an investigation. Just want to get your thoughts on that investigation and where we're at on it.

[00:16:30]>> That's a great question for another day.

[00:16:32]I think that was the last question.

[00:16:33]>> I just wanted to see what Thank you.

[00:16:35]Thank you.