Where Congress Stands on the Epstein Files

Research ▼

📄ReportsInvestigation reports & briefings 👥EntitiesEntity directory 📖WikiKnowledge base · 247 sourced pages 🤖 Ask AIAI research assistant 🔎 Evidence MapFBI serial resolution 📷 Reverse Image SearchCLIP + face across 614K images 💻 Run Your OwnDownload & search locally 🔍 SearchFull-text document search

Visualize ▼

🌌AtlasSemantic map · 1.29M docs ✈Flights15,328 flights · 1991–2019 🕸NetworkFused graph · 18K people · 4 layers 🌎Global Heatmap145 countries mentioned 📈Coverage MapWhat's here ▦Grid160K photos · zoomable mosaic

Data ▼

📚Full Text Corpus1.43M docs, 2.9M pages 🗃All Databases14 searchable databases 📷Images92K analyzed photographs 🔍Scanned TextOCR text from scanned pages 🎬Audio & VideoTranscribed media

Voices ▼

🎤DepositionsTranscribed audio & video 💬Hear from the SurvivorsSurvivors in their own words ⚖Cases53 federal & state cases 📖Cover to Cover-Up24-hour public reading ✉Wolff–Epstein Emails2,009 messages · 2009–2019

News ▼

📰 NewsCoverage & reporting 🕵 SleuthsletterWeekly digest of sleuth activity 📡 Epstein Fallout Trackerepstein.observer · community ⚖ Justice MonitorArrests, charges, lawsuits, firings 🗳 Where Congress StandsEFTA votes + sourced statements

Source ▼

🏛 DOJ ProductionOfficial EFTA disclosures 📜 EFTA Law TextPublic Law 119-38 📁 Source Data (GitHub)Open source databases

🌐 Community ResourcesCurated external projects ✉ ContactGeneral · privacy · DMCA · press

❤️ Donate 🎧 Podcast

The signal is in who talksOne bubble per person · size = number of statements · obeys the filters below?

X Y Color

Drag a box on the plot to select · shift-drag to add.

Read this first. A blank means nothing surfaced in our search, not confirmed silence: members and FEC-qualified candidates got a deep multi-source search, lower-tier candidates a lighter screen. Positions come from a person reading every statement in the record. Open a card for what the record shows, or read the full narrative catalogue ↗.

No one matches those filters.

Methodology & sources

The Epstein Files Transparency Act, across everyone on the ballot: how every current member of Congress voted, where every 2026 federal candidate stands, and a sourced record of what they've publicly said. Votes are primary-source; statements are a compiled research map, not an exhaustive record.

The vote

Bill: Epstein Files Transparency Act, H.R. 4405, 119th Congress.
House: Roll Call 289, "motion to suspend the rules and pass," passed 427–1 (Nov 18, 2025). Each member's vote is read directly from the U.S. House Clerk's official record — clerk.house.gov/evs/2025/roll289.xml.
Senate: passed by unanimous consent — no recorded roll call, so senators have no individual vote.
Not eligible: the six non-voting delegates (DC, PR, VI, GU, AS, MP) can't vote on final passage; five current House members won special elections after the vote ("not seated").
Roster from the open unitedstates/congress-legislators dataset, joined by Bioguide ID; candidates from the FEC 2026 candidate master file (cn26).

The statements — and what counts as one

A statement is a person personally saying or doing something about the Epstein files / the Act — a press release, floor remark, interview, tweet, or being directly quoted. A bare mention of their name does not count. There is no viewpoint filter: statements pushing for release, opposing it, or deflecting are all included equally.

Source of the sweep: automated search across the open web (DuckDuckGo) and news (Google News RSS) — no paid API. Each sitting member and FEC-qualified candidate got four targeted queries: general, Act-specific, their posts on X (site:x.com), and their official .gov press page. Lower-tier candidates got a single query.
Filtering: language models read each result and keep only items clearly attributable to that person, discarding generic "Epstein files" database/search pages, vote-tally roundups, bare profile pages, and — a frequent trap — same-named different people (a candidate "James King" is not Stephen King; "Charles Summers" is not Larry Summers). Results are then spot-checked by hand.
Every statement links to its source; each is tagged news / press release / X / interview / floor.

Positions and the record (added Sept 3, 2026)

Each person also carries a position: a plain-English read of their whole record, written by a person who read every statement (not a keyword classifier), published as the narrative catalogue. Members: Led the push (forced the issue: sponsored, subpoenaed, letters that produced action), Took action (at least one concrete act beyond the vote), Marked the vote only, Worked against release (voted No, or kept it off the floor before the vote was forced), Voted to block release (senators: Yea on the Sept. 10 motion to table), Deflected (blamed the other side or played it down), Redirected to the Clintons, Said nothing. Challengers: Campaign plank, Attacks opponent over it, Called for release, Mentioned it.

Senate · Sept. 10, 2025: the only recorded Senate vote on releasing the files. Republicans moved to table Schumer's amendment directing the Attorney General to release the documents; the motion passed 51–49, every Republican voting Yea except Hawley and Paul (senate.gov Vote #512). "Blocked release" = voted for the motion; "opposed blocking" = voted against it. The November passage by unanimous consent required no vote at all.
House · discharge petition: the vote happened only because petition #9 on H.Res. 581 (Massie, filed Sept. 2, 2025) reached 218 signatures on Nov. 12: 214 Democrats and four Republicans (Massie, Mace, Boebert, Greene), read from the Clerk's signature list.
Distinct actions counts what a person actually did once duplicate rows (the same act reported by several outlets) are collapsed.
Corrections: on Sept 3, 2026 the statements table was corrected (291 duplicate rows and 27 unrelated rows removed, 78 dates fixed, one member added); counts on this page reflect the corrected data.

Limits — read before citing

Not exhaustive. A blank means "nothing surfaced in our search," not proof the person said nothing.
X is partial. X blocks deep indexing, so a statement made only in a tweet is often invisible to any search.
Summaries are drawn from source headlines — confirm the primary source and pull the exact quote before quoting anyone.
Candidate depth varies: deep for FEC-qualified candidates, single-pass for the rest.

Last updated Sep 3, 2026 (positions, Senate Sept. 10 vote, discharge petition, corrected statements) · refreshed periodically. Corrections and additions welcome.

Method & sourcing · full methodology & reproducibility ↗

Votes are primary-source: the U.S. House Clerk's Roll Call 289 on H.R. 4405 (passed 427–1). The Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent, so senators have no individual recorded vote on final passage; delegates cannot vote on final passage; five current members won special elections after the vote.

The record before the vote is also primary-source. Senate: Vote #512 on Sept. 10, 2025, the 51–49 motion to table the Schumer amendment that would have forced release (every Republican but Hawley and Paul voted to block it). House: discharge petition #9 on H.Res. 581, which reached 218 signatures with 214 Democrats plus Massie, Mace, Boebert and Greene.

Statements were compiled by automated and targeted search across news, official press releases, interviews, the Congressional Record, and indexed posts on X; each links to its source. The set was corrected on Sept. 3, 2026 during the catalogue work: 291 duplicate rows and 27 unrelated items were removed and 78 dates fixed (2,891 to 2,574 rows). Summaries are short paraphrases, so confirm the primary source and pull the exact quote before citing any single line. No statements listed means none were found, not that none exist.

Positions and the pre-vote records were added Sept. 3, 2026 from What Congress Said About the Epstein Files, a narrative catalogue in which a person read every statement in the record and every quote is linked to its source. The entry shown in each card is that catalogue's entry for the person.

This record is not exhaustive. A member or candidate may have made additional statements not captured here, particularly on social media or in local outlets, and a blank should be read as "none surfaced in our search," not proof of silence. Corrections and additions are welcome.