As Congress prepares for the full release of the long-anticipated Epstein documents, Democrats—who pushed hardest for the disclosures—are finding themselves on the defensive. On Chicago’s Morning Answer, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy told host Dan Proft that the political maneuver is “boomeranging” as years-old connections between prominent Democrats and Jeffrey Epstein continue to surface, while attempts at deflection repeatedly collapse under scrutiny.
The latest misfire came from Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who took to the House floor touting what she claimed were examples of Republicans accepting money from Epstein. The problem: her list was wrong. Donations to figures like Lee Zeldin and Mitt Romney were from Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, a completely different person—and in at least one case, the contributions occurred after Epstein the sex offender had already died. McCarthy noted that such errors underscore “how unserious and sloppy” Democrats have become in trying to dilute the impact of documented ties between Epstein and figures such as Larry Summers, the Clintons, and Virgin Islands delegate Stacey Plaskett.
Plaskett herself is under fire after newly released messages showed she privately exchanged texts with Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing featuring Michael Cohen, soliciting question ideas. Her public explanation—that prosecutors “get information from wherever they can”—was sharply dismissed by McCarthy. “Congress isn’t investigating crime,” he said. “They can choose to hear from credible, decent people. That excuse doesn’t fly.”
Meanwhile, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton, insisting they will face the same expectations as Trumpworld figures who were compelled to testify under threat of prosecution. McCarthy said the political optics are already poor for Democrats, whose evasiveness contrasts with Republicans who have cooperated. But he also cautioned that those expecting explosive new criminal evidence are likely to be disappointed.
According to McCarthy, the Justice Department has already conducted a “deep dive” and publicly stated months ago that no additional charges are expected. He argued that both the Trump-era and Biden-era DOJ would have seized on any viable case involving major political figures, especially Donald Trump—whose interactions with Epstein have been exhaustively scrutinized for years. “If there were something criminal there,” McCarthy said, “it would not have been ignored by prosecutors looking to bring a case.”
The conversation also turned to the separate legal troubles facing former FBI Director James Comey, whose indictment was recently criticized by a federal judge. McCarthy believes the real issue is not procedural missteps but the substance of the charges themselves. “The indictment is incoherent,” he said, adding that it attempts to prosecute Comey for conduct unrelated to the public’s grievances—particularly his handling of the Trump memos and the Russia investigation. Much of that behavior, McCarthy noted, is beyond the statute of limitations.
As the Epstein files head toward full public release, McCarthy expects embarrassment—not new prosecutions. “There’s a lot of reason to be embarrassed about having connections to this guy long after he was an adjudicated pedophile,” he said. “But embarrassment and criminality are two different things.”
For Democrats who pushed the issue thinking it would politically wound Trump, the fallout may look very different. As Proft put it, the attempt to muddy the waters has left the water “muddier in the direction of the Democrats.”
McCarthy agreed. “This isn’t going the way they hoped.”