Donald Trump’s Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, came under intense scrutiny on Capitol Hill this week after appearing as a witness in a Senate hearing where lawmakers pressed him repeatedly over his documented connections to Jeffrey Epstein.

The hearing quickly turned confrontational as senators challenged Lutnick’s long-standing public claim that he severed all ties with Epstein after a single disturbing encounter in 2005—an account now sharply contradicted by records contained in the recently released Epstein files.

Lutnick’s Public Story vs. the Epstein Files

For years, Lutnick has maintained that his only interaction with Epstein occurred shortly after purchasing a New York townhouse from him in 2005. According to Lutnick, Epstein invited him and his wife on a brief tour of his home, where Lutnick says he encountered a massage table that immediately raised alarm. He has repeatedly claimed that the experience disgusted him so deeply that he never interacted with Epstein again.

However, the Epstein files paint a very different picture.

According to records cited during the Senate hearing, there were at least eight documented interactions between Lutnick and Epstein after 2005, including meetings, email exchanges, and travel coordination. Most notably, the files reference a December 2012 trip to Epstein’s private island, where Lutnick reportedly traveled with his family and another family, bringing children and nannies along.

The 2012 Island Visit Raises Alarms

Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen directly confronted Lutnick over the apparent contradiction between his past statements and the documented island visit. Under questioning, Lutnick acknowledged stopping on Epstein’s island for lunch while traveling by boat during a family vacation.

He insisted that the visit lasted roughly an hour, that his wife, children, nannies, and another family were present at all times, and that nothing inappropriate occurred. Lutnick stated he did not recall the reason for the stop and emphasized that his family was never separated.

Despite these assurances, senators expressed concern that the visit occurred years after Epstein had already pleaded guilty to sex crimes, making the decision to bring children to the island especially troubling.

Emails, Meetings, and Business Overlap

Beyond the island visit, senators highlighted additional records suggesting ongoing coordination between Lutnick and Epstein. These include:

• Emails planning meetings and visits

• References to shared investments and business dealings

• A 2013 exchange involving intellectual property and gambling-related topics

• Mentions of Epstein being described as a “close friend” in fundraising correspondence tied to Lutnick

Lutnick attempted to minimize these interactions, claiming he met Epstein only “three times over 14 years” and suggesting that emails and references in the files overstated the nature of their relationship. He argued that millions of documents were reviewed and that only a handful mentioned his name.

Lawmakers were unconvinced.

Nanny References and Further Red Flags

One particularly disturbing line of questioning involved references in the Epstein files to nanny exchanges. Senator Van Hollen asked whether the nanny who accompanied Lutnick’s family on the island trip was the same nanny Epstein had expressed interest in meeting.

Lutnick said he had no knowledge of such matters and denied any awareness of inappropriate behavior during the visit. He also denied that Ghislaine Maxwell was present on the island at the time.

Still, senators stressed that Epstein was a convicted sex offender and questioned why Lutnick would continue any form of contact after claiming to have recognized Epstein as dangerous years earlier.

Conflicting Statements Fuel Credibility Crisis

The hearing also resurfaced Lutnick’s previous interview with the New York Post, where he vividly described Epstein as “gross” and claimed he avoided him entirely after 2005. Senators contrasted those remarks with the documented timeline, arguing that Lutnick had misled the public and Congress.

In a closing exchange, lawmakers urged Lutnick to fully disclose all interactions to put the matter to rest, emphasizing that public trust was at stake—especially given Trump’s campaign promise to release the Epstein files.

Lutnick responded by forcefully denying any wrongdoing, insisting that he had nothing to hide and that he reviewed the Epstein files without fear.

Calls for Resignation Intensify

Outside the hearing room, reporters pressed Lutnick on whether he would resign amid mounting criticism. He declined to comment, saying only that he looked forward to testifying before Congress.

However, the political fallout is growing. Several Democrats have openly called for Lutnick’s resignation, arguing that the inconsistencies in his testimony and the seriousness of the Epstein association make his position untenable.

A Broader Political Problem for Trump

The controversy places additional pressure on the Trump administration, particularly as questions continue to swirl about how Epstein-related revelations are being handled by federal agencies now under Republican control.

With timelines, emails, and testimony continuing to clash, the Lutnick case is rapidly becoming a test of transparency, accountability, and credibility—not just for one Cabinet official, but for the administration as a whole.

Whether Lutnick survives the mounting scrutiny may depend on whether further disclosures emerge—and whether Congress is satisfied with answers it has so far found deeply lacking.