FBI Director Kash Patel found himself at the center of a political firestorm this week as he returned to Capitol Hill to defend the Trump administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Over two days of heated hearings before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, Patel faced a barrage of questions from Democrats demanding transparency about the notorious financier’s criminal case and the role of President Trump’s name in the investigation. The spectacle, which played out in public and was dissected on platforms like The Daily Blast podcast from The New Republic, exposed deep rifts not only between political parties but also within the Trump-aligned conservative movement itself.
Patel’s five-hour appearance before the House Judiciary Committee on September 17, 2025, followed a contentious Senate session the day prior. According to AP, Democrats seized the opportunity to grill the FBI director about the Justice Department’s July 2025 decision not to release additional investigative files from the Epstein case. The heart of the dispute: whether a so-called "client list"—long the subject of fevered speculation—actually exists, and what, if anything, it reveals about the powerful figures once in Epstein’s orbit.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, the committee’s top Democrat, played a clip from a 2023 interview in which Patel claimed the FBI possessed Epstein’s “black book” of client names. Yet, as Raskin pointed out, the Justice Department later declared there was no evidence such a client list existed and announced it would not be releasing further files. “How did you go from being a crusader for accountability and transparency for the Epstein files to being a part of the conspiracy and cover up?” Raskin demanded. The exchange set the tone for a day marked by sharp partisan clashes and pointed accusations.
Perhaps the most dramatic moments came during Rep. Eric Swalwell’s questioning. Swalwell pressed Patel repeatedly about whether he had told Attorney General Pam Bondi that Trump’s name appeared in the Epstein files. Patel, under oath, refused to give a direct answer, instead dodging and deflecting. “Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump’s name is in the Epstein files?” Swalwell asked, to which Patel responded, “Why don’t you try to spell it out if you’re going to mock me? Use the alphabet: A, B, C, D, E, F.” The back-and-forth grew increasingly heated, with Patel eventually snapping, “Why don’t you try serving your constituency by focusing on reducing violent crime in this country?”
On The Daily Blast podcast, host Greg Sargent and historian Nicole Hemmer dissected Patel’s evasions, arguing that his refusal to answer directly only deepened suspicions. Hemmer noted, “If the answer to that question were no, Patel, who was under oath, would have said so.” Instead, Patel’s pivot to crime reduction was seen as a transparent attempt to change the subject. As Hemmer put it, “Kash Patel is becoming this figure who is not very deft, is not very media savvy despite his podcasting background. And I think we saw that on display today.”
The drama didn’t end there. Swalwell continued to press Patel about the frequency of Trump’s name in the files, suggesting it could be a thousand times. Patel, visibly irritated, denied each escalating number—“It’s not. It’s not.” “No.” “No.” “I don’t know the number, but it’s not that.” Yet, as Hemmer pointed out, Patel’s quick denials to specific numbers betrayed a familiarity with the files that undermined his claim not to know the details. “You must have a rough idea how many times it appears in there,” Hemmer observed, “and that’s the sort of trap Swalwell caught him in.”
Beyond the spectacle, the hearings highlighted growing cracks within the Trump-aligned MAGA movement. For years, prominent conservatives demanded full transparency on the Epstein investigation, alleging a cover-up by elites. Now, with Trump’s own appointees controlling the Justice Department and FBI, and with Patel visibly stonewalling, some in MAGA circles are expressing frustration. According to leaks reported by The Daily Blast, both Patel and Attorney General Bondi are facing internal criticism for their handling of the case, with some questioning their competence and loyalty.
Adding fuel to the fire was the release of a sexually suggestive birthday note to Epstein, purportedly bearing Trump’s signature. The note, which surfaced earlier in September 2025 after being handed over by the Epstein estate, was included in a book prepared for Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has denied writing it, and the White House insists the signature is not his. When Rep. Jared Moskowitz pressed Patel on whether the FBI would investigate the note as a potential forgery, Patel at first hesitated but then said, “Sure, I’ll do it.” Observers, including Hemmer, were skeptical that such an investigation would materialize, viewing Patel’s pledge as a maneuver to escape a no-win situation.
Patel repeatedly insisted that the FBI had released all information it was “legally allowed” to share, citing judges’ rulings that denied Justice Department requests to unseal grand jury transcripts related to Epstein and his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell. However, as commentators pointed out, those rulings did not prevent the release of other investigative files. “They certainly could release more of the files if they wanted to,” Sargent argued on his podcast, highlighting the administration’s selective transparency.
The hearings also provided a window into the broader political climate. Republicans, for their part, rallied behind Trump and Patel, focusing attention on grievances such as the long-concluded Russia investigation. Patel described the launch of the Trump-Russia probe as a “massive scandal” and confirmed ongoing FBI inquiries into leaks, document discoveries, and intelligence assessments from that era. “There is more to be done to uncover the depths and origins of the Russia collusion hoax,” Patel said, “and we’re doing it.”
Meanwhile, the administration sought to tout its law enforcement credentials. On September 15, Trump and Tennessee Governor Bill Lee announced the deployment of National Guard troops to Memphis as part of Operation Viper, a crime-fighting initiative that included the FBI and DEA. Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, despite his party’s criticism on other fronts, praised the FBI’s participation, noting that local officials credited the bureau with helping to reduce crime. Memphis police reported that crime had fallen across every major category in the first eight months of 2025, with overall crime at a 25-year low and murders at a six-year low.
Yet, the Epstein controversy refused to fade. As The Daily Blast noted, the issue has become a dividing line within the MAGA movement. Some remain loyal to Trump and accept the administration’s evasions, while others—believing in the need for transparency and accountability—feel betrayed by what they see as a genuine cover-up. “It’s an actual deep state cover-up, and it is an actual example of elite corruption,” Hemmer remarked. “If MAGA is a genuine populist movement, then it should be leading the way on this.”
For now, the battle over the Epstein files continues to simmer, exposing uncomfortable truths about the intersection of power, secrecy, and political loyalty in Washington. As curiosity grows both inside and outside the Beltway, it remains to be seen whether the full story will ever come to light—or if, as some fear, the miasma of scandal will only deepen.
