Epstein Attack Ads Flood Midterm Races as Both Parties Trade Accusations Over Ties and Votes

Survivors of Epstein's abuse, including the family of Virginia Giuffre, are being drawn into partisan advertising, with Giuffre having died by suicide last year.
A survivor's family is now part of a campaign message
Giuffre's relatives appear in a Colorado ad targeting Republican Jeff Crank over the Epstein files vote.
Mark

Why are the Epstein files such a big part of the ad war this year?

Mimi

Because the charge is simple and emotional: you protected a pedophile. More than $35m has gone into these ads, according to CNN, and Democrats alone spent over $40m in six Senate races, per the Post.

Luke

Those are two separate analyses with different scopes, so I wouldn't add them together. They're each one outlet's count.

Mark

What's the Republican defense?

Mimi

That nearly every House Republican voted for the Epstein Files Transparency Act in the end. All but one did. The ads cite the earlier fight over the discharge petition instead.

Luke

Worth noting that by the final vote Trump had agreed to sign it. So both things are true: early resistance, then near-unanimous support.

Mark

Are the ads accurate, then?

Mimi

It varies. The Patronis ad paraphrases a radio comment that said "energy and time suck," not "waste of time." Hinson voted for the final bill but didn't sign the petition.

Luke

And Crank's campaign says he wanted redaction assurances for victims. The reporting records that claim; it doesn't verify his motive.

Mark

What about Giuffre's family being in an ad?

Mimi

It's the human cost. A survivor who died last year is now part of a campaign message, and Crank's campaign calls that preying on a grieving family.

Luke

That's the campaign's characterization. What's confirmed is that his staff met the family and he didn't.

  • More than $35 million in Epstein-related ads have flooded the closest races, with Democrats outspending Republicans by a wide margin in six Senate contests.
  • Survivors' faces and words are being pulled into partisan spots, including a family tied to Virginia Giuffre, who died by suicide last year.
  • Ads accusing Republicans of protecting a pedophile skip the fact that nearly every House Republican ultimately voted to release the files.
  • Republicans are answering with accusations about Democratic donors and associates with Epstein ties, sharpening a fight neither side can easily leave.
  • Campaigns in Iowa, Georgia, Florida, Colorado and New Mexico are scrambling to defend disputed claims while voters decide whether any of it matters.

Four days before a national vote, the Epstein files have become a weapon in the closing stretch of the American midterms. Across the country, campaign advertising has turned the long-buried case of a convicted sex offender into a test of who is willing to stand with his victims, and whose loyalties are bent by money and by Donald Trump. Both parties are reaching for the same wound: the fear that powerful men were shielded, and the suspicion that the other side is no cleaner. What the advertising leaves out, and how voters weigh it, will show how much a scandal rooted in the past can still move the choices of the present.

In Colorado, a television ad aimed at Republican Jeff Crank features relatives of Virginia Giuffre, a woman who survived abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and died by suicide last year. They claim Crank covered up Epstein's crimes to protect Donald Trump. It is one of many Epstein-themed spots now running as the country prepares to vote.

The spending is enormous. CNN found more than $35 million in Epstein-related advertising, and the Washington Post found Democrats alone spent over $40 million across six key Senate races. Their ads accuse Republicans of protecting pedophiles by opposing the release of the Epstein files, with wording chosen to provoke outrage.

The votes at the heart of the attacks date to last year, when Democrats and a few Republicans used a discharge petition to force a floor vote. Trump opposed it, angering some of his own supporters, until he reversed course and backed the legislation. Nearly every House Republican then voted for the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Most of the ads omit that final vote.

Republicans have seized on the omission. Iowa Senate candidate Ashley Hinson insists she voted for release and says she had to explain to her sons that her mother does not protect pedophiles. Some specific claims are disputed too: Florida's Jimmy Patronis never called the investigation a waste of time, though he did call it a massive time suck.

Republicans are also counterattacking, pointing to Democratic donors with Epstein ties, including tech billionaire Reid Hoffman, and to Deb Haaland's 2014 flight on a charter booked by an Epstein company, which she says she did not know about. Whether any of this changes the outcome in the closest races remains to be seen.

In Colorado, a television ad aimed at Republican Jeff Crank features the family of Virginia Giuffre, a woman who survived abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and died by suicide last year. In it, her relatives claim Crank "covered up Epstein's crimes to protect Donald Trump." It is one of a wave of Epstein-themed spots now running in midterm races as the country prepares to vote.

The scale is large. A CNN analysis found that candidates and outside groups have spent more than $35m on Epstein-related ads. A separate Washington Post analysis found that Democrats alone spent more than $40m on such ads across six key Senate races. The Democratic spots, from candidates and from groups supporting them, accuse Republicans of protecting pedophiles because they voted against legislation to release the Epstein files. The wording, accusing candidates of "protecting" a notorious pedophile accused of running a sex-trafficking ring involving minors, appears designed to provoke an emotional response.

The targets are spread across the map. In Iowa, Senate candidate Ashley Hinson was accused of refusing to vote for release in order to "protect her donors." In Georgia, an ad against Republican Senate candidate Mike Collins says he voted against releasing the files even after he knew Epstein's operation exploited 14-year-old girls. In Florida, Republican Jimmy Patronis was attacked by his Democratic opponent, who claimed he called investigating Epstein "a waste of his time."

The votes at the center of the ads trace back to last year, when Democrats and a few House Republicans used a discharge petition, a procedure that bypasses the usual legislative steps, to try to force a floor vote on the files. Trump, who knew Epstein in the 1990s and early 2000s, opposed the petition, reversing a campaign promise to increase government transparency. Most House Republicans aligned with him, which angered some high-profile Trump voters. Under pressure from allies, Trump eventually backed the legislation and gave Republicans the go-ahead. All but one House Republican then voted for the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

That last fact is what many of the ads leave out. They point to Republicans' opposition to the early effort to force the bill to the floor, not to the final vote, when Trump had already agreed to sign it. Republicans have seized on the omission. "Of course I voted to release the Epstein files," Hinson says in a direct-to-camera ad, accusing her opponent, Josh Turek, of lying. She did vote for the final act, though she never signed the discharge petition. In another ad she says: "This week I had to explain to my boys, 'No, Mom does not protect pedophiles.'"

Some of the specific claims are contested. Patronis never called the investigation a "waste of time." He told a local radio station he had "no problem getting everything all released," but called the matter a "massive energy and time suck at the end of the day." His campaign spokesperson, Melissa Stone, pointed to his work with Trump on disaster funding after Hurricane Isaias and said his opponent, Gay Valimont, was still talking about a dead pedophile in a web video instead of helping the district recover.

Crank's campaign called the ad "intentionally vague" in a statement to the Washington Post. It said his position was that he would vote against release until he was confident victim information was properly redacted. It also called it "unfortunate" that his opponent, Jessica Killin, was "preying on a grieving family with the help of the Washington Democrats." The New York Times reported that Crank's staff invited and met with Giuffre's family, though Crank did not meet them in person. His campaign says it offered to meet with Epstein victims before the vote.

Republicans and allied groups are also turning the issue around, accusing Democrats of taking money from donors with Epstein ties. In a Georgia Senate debate, Collins accused Jon Ossoff of accepting donations from tech billionaire Reid Hoffman, who has said he knew Epstein only through fundraising relationships and regrets it. "This call is coming from inside the house," Collins said, "and the Epstein class is on stage right now and it's you."

In New Mexico's governor's race, an outside group accused Democrat Deb Haaland of riding on Epstein's private jet and taking "tens of thousands of dollars from Epstein businesses." Haaland did not fly on Epstein's jet, but she did take a flight booked in 2014 by one of his companies. She has said she did not know the chartered flight was tied to an Epstein-owned company. How voters respond in the closest races will show whether the issue moves any results.

Of course I voted to release the Epstein files.
— Ashley Hinson, Iowa Senate candidate
The call is coming from inside the house and the Epstein class is on stage right now and it's you.
— Mike Collins, to Jon Ossoff in a Georgia Senate debate
Möchten Sie die ganze Geschichte? Das Original lesen bei The Guardian ↗
Kontakt FAQ