Thomas Massie Names 14 People on House Floor as Epstein Files Fight Intensifies

WASHINGTON — Rep. Thomas Massie renewed his campaign for greater transparency surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation on August 31, reading 14 names into the Congressional Record and calling for further investigation.

Massie said the individuals he named should be investigated and potentially prosecuted, while simultaneously beginning a new effort to force lawmakers to consider additional legislation requiring disclosure of Epstein-related records.

 

 

 

5

The Kentucky Republican has spent much of the past year pressing the Justice Department to release additional documents connected to Epstein, who died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial.

Massie’s latest House-floor remarks came approximately one year after President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, legislation Massie helped advance with Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna.

The original transparency law passed the House by a 427-1 vote in November 2025, later passed the Senate unanimously, and was signed by Trump shortly afterward.

 

 

 

4

Massie now argues that the Justice Department has not fully complied with the disclosure requirements, leading him and several bipartisan lawmakers to pursue a second transparency measure.

In July, Massie, Khanna and other lawmakers introduced H.R. 9694, known as the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, which would create additional avenues for challenging withheld records.

The proposed legislation would give standing to state attorneys general, Epstein survivors and members of Congress to challenge the Justice Department in court over alleged failures to comply with disclosure requirements.

Massie began collecting signatures for a discharge petition intended to force the House to consider the legislation, saying the effort would require 218 signatures before lawmakers could compel a floor vote.

 

 

 

6

During his August 31 speech, Massie read 14 names and described those individuals as Epstein “coconspirators” who should face investigation and prosecution, according to multiple reports.

The names included Jes Staley, Leon Black, Les Wexner, David Copperfield, Lapo Elkann, Tom Pritzker, Glenn Dubin, Frédéric Fekkai, Edoardo Teodorani and others.

The list also included Jean-Luc Brunel, Daniel Siad, Ramsey Elkholy, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, and Lesley Groff, according to reports describing Massie’s House-floor remarks.

Being named by a member of Congress does not itself establish criminal liability, and several people mentioned by Massie have not been charged with crimes connected to Epstein.

 

 

 

5

That distinction is particularly important because Epstein-related records contain different categories of material, including investigative documents, witness statements, communications, photographs and references to people who interacted with him.

A person's appearance in a document, contact list, photograph or investigative record does not, by itself, demonstrate participation in Epstein's criminal conduct or establish that the person committed an offense.

Massie has argued that additional information should be examined by investigators and prosecutors rather than simply remaining hidden through extensive redactions.

His campaign follows a January congressional review in which Massie and Khanna said they examined unredacted records at the Justice Department and raised concerns about the extent of redactions.

 

 

 

In February, Khanna told the House that he and Massie had identified six previously redacted names during their review and questioned why those identities had not initially been disclosed.

The two lawmakers have repeatedly said that Congress needs access to sufficient information to evaluate whether the Justice Department has complied with the transparency law.

The current dispute therefore involves two related issues: the release of Epstein-related government records and whether additional individuals should face criminal investigation based on evidence contained within those records.

The viral graphic adds another question, asking whether Americans would support Massie's actions “even if that might mean the imprisonment of the president.”

That wording is hypothetical, not a report that President Trump has been charged, convicted or ordered imprisoned because of Massie's House-floor speech.

 

 

 

6

Trump is not among the 14 individuals identified in reports describing Massie's August 31 House-floor remarks, and the available reporting does not establish a criminal proceeding against Trump resulting from Massie's disclosure campaign.

Massie's effort instead centers on obtaining additional records and seeking investigations of people whom he says deserve scrutiny, leaving any potential criminal consequences to prosecutors and courts.

The political significance of the episode comes from Massie's continued willingness to pursue the issue alongside Democratic lawmakers, despite broader disagreements between the two parties over many other issues.

His legislation has also placed pressure on the Justice Department to explain how records have been reviewed, redacted and released under the existing transparency law.