A recent announcement by Representative Thomas Massie sent shockwaves through Washington when he declared that John Paulson, a billionaire major donor to the Republican Party, appears in Jeffrey Epstein’s personal contact book.
Survivors at a Capitol Hill news conference had privately compiled a list of Epstein’s associates but feared legal backlash if they spoke. Massie and Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene vowed to read names under speech and debate immunity to protect those survivors.
John Paulson’s presence in Epstein’s records matters because he has hosted fundraisers for Donald Trump, backed Speaker Mike Johnson, and contributed millions to GOP campaigns. His donations have fueled super PAC ads in swing districts and bolstered party efforts nationwide.
Paulson’s team denies he had any contact with Epstein beyond an entry in the black book. They insist he never met Epstein or flew on his planes. Massie, however, stresses he is not claiming Paulson committed a crime, only that his name was listed.
The move to block fuller release of the Epstein files became clear when the House adjourned without a vote on a transparency measure. According to Massie, Speaker Johnson ended the session to prevent exposing donor names that could embarrass the party’s financial backers and shake public trust.
Massie argued that hiding the records undermines the survivors’ quest for accountability. He said protecting powerful figures at the expense of victims only deepens calls for reform.
Social media users quickly circulated screenshots of Paulson’s donor history alongside images of the black book entry. One prominent thread highlighted three billionaires tied to GOP super PACs—Miriam Adelson, Paul Singer, and John Paulson—asking followers which name they recognized from Epstein’s contacts.
The post garnered hundreds of thousands of views and reignited calls for the Department of Justice to publish the full files.
Survivor advocates joined the pressure campaign, delivering petitions and testimonies to congressional offices. They argue partial releases allow wealthy figures to remain in the shadows while the public sees only sanitized versions of the scandal.
“We deserve the whole truth,” testified one survivor. “Every name must come out so accountability can follow.” Their demands align with bipartisan bills introduced this year that aim to lift restraints on the unpublished documents.
Legal experts caution that simply reading names aloud may invite defamation suits, even under immunity protections. Paulson’s lawyers warn that false implications damage reputations.
They may pursue civil action if they believe Mrs. Greene or Massie misrepresented the facts. Massie calls this a deterrent tactic by well-funded defenders of the status quo and predicts more lawmakers will join his effort once they grasp the stakes.
Congressional aides say discussions are underway about redrafting the transparency measure to address immunity concerns and limit exposure of private data unrelated to criminal matters. Some Democrats propose an independent review board to vet names before release. Republicans who oppose broad disclosure say survivors’ privacy must remain paramount and that noncriminal entries risk unfair stigma.
Meanwhile, the conservative donor community watches with unease. Private fundraising events have quieted as potential backers weigh the risk of public scrutiny. Fundraising consultants note a slowdown in GOP contributions since the controversy erupted.
“The optics are bad,” one consultant said. “Nobody wants to be the next headline.”
Party strategists worry the feud could distract from legislative priorities and split the donor base ahead of next year’s midterms.
Elsewhere on Capitol Hill, lawmakers debate whether the public interest in full transparency outweighs political fallout. Senator Ro Khanna introduced companion legislation in the Senate that would mandate unredacted file publication within 90 days.
Khanna pointed to Epstein’s victims, saying they have waited years for clarity. “This is about justice, not politics,” he said in a floor speech.
As momentum builds, Massie remains undeterred. He plans to hold additional briefings and invite survivors to testify publicly. His office is collecting nominations for more names to read when Congress reconvenes.
The fight over Epstein’s hidden records now reveals fault lines in how Washington handles power, influence, and accountability. It poses a larger question: can democratic transparency prevail when it threatens those at the very pinnacle of the political machine?
