The Jeffrey Epstein files are roiling the United Kingdom, where a senior official resigned over the weekend amid growing calls for Prime Minister Keir Starmer to step down.
In the United States, it’s a much different story.
While the more than 3 million Epstein files are dominating domestic news coverage and overtaking congressional hearings on Capitol Hill, the documents haven’t had the same kind of fallout in the United States as they have internationally. Calls for resignations and accountability have largely stalled in a government led by President Donald Trump. And members of Congress — in both parties — are taking note.
“Look at what’s happening in Britain,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told reporters after reviewing the unredacted Epstein files. “With what’s happened with [Peter] Mandelson, you have the British monarchy having to answer questions. I mean, the King of England is putting out statements. And yet, in our country, we have not had that reckoning.”
Play
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., echoed the sentiment. “We’ve got to have better and more thorough accountability here in the United States,” he said.
“In the United Kingdom and other places in Europe, they’re delivering accountability for powerful, wealthy, politically connected people who had long contacts with Epstein,” Coons added. “We need to be doing a better job.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee who viewed the unredacted files on Monday, said the United Kingdom is “absolutely” taking the Epstein matter more seriously than top officials in the U.S.
And when MS NOW asked Sen. Thom Tillis if there had been enough accountability in the U.S. as a result of the Epstein files, the North Carolina Republican’s answer was simple: “No.”
“I think we got a lot more work to do,” he said.
As lawmakers pore over the newly released Epstein documents, Democrats have zeroed in on Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Despite Lutnick’s name appearing in the files dozens of times, he still has a job in the Trump administration.
Lutnick previously said he severed ties with Epstein in 2005 — before he was arrested and pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution charges. But on Tuesday, the top official admitted to having lunch on Epstein’s island in 2012.
The revelation came minutes into the Commerce Secretary’s testimony during a Senate Appropriations hearing, which was scheduled to discuss funding at the Commerce Department but veered into the secretary’s ties to Epstein.
“I did have lunch with him, as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation, my wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies,” Lutnick said. “I had another couple with — they were there as well with their children, and we had lunch on the island. That is true, for an hour, and we left with all of my children, with my nannies and my wife all together.”
Play
“We were on family vacation. We were not apart. To suggest there was anything untoward about that in 2012,” he added. “I don’t recall why we did it, but we did.”
Despite the bombshell revelation and mounting pressure for Lutnick to resign, the White House is standing by him. Asked if there had been a shift in how the administration views Lutnick’s performance in the wake of his comments, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Lutnick remains “a very important member of President Trump’s team.”
“And the president fully supports the secretary,” Leavitt continued. “I will just point out that there are a lot of wins in the news this week that people in this room have not asked about because you continue to ask questions about the same subject.”
By comparison, in the United Kingdom, Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, announced on Sunday that he was resigning because he advised the prime minister to hire Peter Mandelson to be ambassador to the U.S. (Mandelson was fired from the job in September following new revelations about his relationship with Epstein. And last week, he left the Labour Party and House of Lords.)
That controversy comes after Prince Andrew stepped back from royal duties in 2019, amid uproar over his links to Epstein, and relinquished his title in late 2025.
In the U.S., lawmakers say the lack of consequences stems from the example set at the top. Trump is heavily referenced throughout the Epstein files — mentioned more than 38,000 times in the redacted documents and, according to Raskin, more than 1 million times in the unredacted records.
Asked about the stark difference in how the U.S. and U.K. are handling the Epstein matter, Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., said it all comes back to Trump and his grip on the Republican Party.
Recommended
“You have a Republican Party that’s entirely owned by Donald Trump,” Gallego told MS NOW. “They have no independence. They’re afraid of him. And that’s why there’s actual accountability in the U.K. and other parts of the world — because there’s an actual opposition party that is more loyal to decency than it is to a madman like Donald Trump.”
Lawmakers are also raising concerns about how the Justice Department redacted the files, after victim information was left available to the public and names of co-conspirators and information about Trump were blacked out.
Play
Some Democrats are openly wondering if the initial redactions were done in a way to shield Trump.
“One that I think is notable is an email from Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyers in 2009 recounting a conversation they had with Donald Trump,” Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va., who sits on the Oversight Committee and viewed the unredacted documents on Monday, said on MS NOW.
He said Epstein’s lawyers asked Trump a number of questions, like whether he had ever been on Epstein’s plane. According to Walkinshaw, Trump deflected with answers like, “I’ve been on a lot of planes.”
And Walkinshaw noted that the DOJ had redacted that entire document even though it contains “no information about victims or survivors.”
Asked if he felt that the redactions were meant to protect Trump, Walkinshaw said that was “a clear takeaway.”
But most Republicans have shown no concerns with how the Epstein files have been handled, instead just trying to turn the page on the story that has dominated Washington for months.
When MS NOW asked Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., if he thought there had been enough accountability from the Epstein files, he said, “Yeah, I’m fine.”
Graham also called any suppositions about Lutnick “ridiculous.”
Other Republicans have just resorted to silence.
On Monday, Sen. Cynthia Lummus, R-Wyo., said she saw “what the big deal is — and it was worth investigating.” But when MS NOW asked if there had been adequate accountability over the Epstein files, she shut down.
“What is it with the Epstein thing?” she asked. “You guys are all over that. I will not talk about Epstein anymore.”
Jack Fitzpatrick contributed to this report.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC
