Former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who as a federal prosecutor brokered Jeffrey Epstein’s controversial 2008 plea deal, is again under scrutiny after denying claims that Epstein had ties to U.S. or foreign intelligence agencies. The denials came during a closed-door House Oversight Committee interview on September 19, newly released in full on Friday.
Acosta’s testimony sought to address a long-circulating theory that Epstein’s unusually lenient treatment was due to his supposed status as an “intelligence asset.” The claim — reportedly linked to a comment Acosta allegedly made while serving in the Trump administration — has fueled speculation about whether Epstein’s protection reached into government or intelligence circles.
During questioning by Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM), Acosta denied ever suggesting that Epstein “belonged to intelligence,” a phrase that has become central to the ongoing public debate over Epstein’s political connections.
“I did not know if that was the source of that anonymous White House quote,” Acosta said. “I’ve been asked about that. I didn’t know where it came from. I’ll take your word it came from Mr. [Steve] Bannon, but I don’t know where it came from. I never made that assertion.”
Acosta further testified that he never spoke to Steve Bannon about Epstein, and that no one from the CIA, NSA, State Department, or FBI’s intelligence division ever contacted him during the Epstein investigation. He maintained that he had “no knowledge” of whether Epstein was tied to intelligence agencies — domestic or foreign.
When asked whether anyone had told him Epstein couldn’t be prosecuted because he was “an asset,” Acosta said flatly: “No one approached me and said that.”
The theory that Epstein was protected by intelligence agencies dates back to his 2008 plea deal, which allowed him to avoid serious federal charges despite evidence of trafficking underage girls. Acosta, then the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, approved the agreement — one critics have described as a “sweetheart deal.”
The speculation intensified in 2019, when a report by the Daily Beast claimed that Acosta told Trump transition officials Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and that he had been told to “leave it alone.” Acosta denied making that remark at the time, calling it “categorically false.”
Still, the story has persisted. Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon was later said to have repeated the “intelligence” claim, reportedly attributing it to Acosta — though, as the new transcript shows, Acosta denied ever discussing Epstein with Bannon.
The Trump administration’s handling of Epstein-related questions has often drawn attention — particularly given Epstein’s past ties to Trump himself. Trump and Epstein were known to socialize in Palm Beach in the 1990s, and Trump once famously called Epstein a “terrific guy” who “likes beautiful women… on the younger side.”
However, Trump later claimed to have cut off contact with Epstein, saying he was “not a fan.”
In July 2025, speculation about Epstein’s supposed intelligence connections resurfaced when Attorney General Pam Bondi — serving in the current Trump cabinet — was asked about the allegation during a public meeting. When questioned whether Epstein might have been an intelligence asset, Bondi replied, “I have no knowledge about that. We can get back to you on that.”
Her noncommittal response reignited speculation, leading to renewed scrutiny of Acosta’s earlier comments and fueling public demands for more transparency regarding Epstein’s network and possible protection from prosecution.
Despite Acosta’s denials, his testimony underscores how questions surrounding Epstein’s connections remain unresolved years after the financier’s death in federal custody. The Oversight Committee’s transcript offers no evidence of intelligence involvement — but also no definitive explanation for why Epstein received such favorable treatment in 2008.
Critics argue that Acosta’s responses continue a pattern of ambiguity that has characterized official statements about Epstein across multiple administrations — including Trump’s.
While Acosta insists he had no knowledge of any intelligence ties, the persistence of the theory — and its reappearance in Trump-era discourse — shows how the Epstein case continues to haunt Washington’s political and intelligence circles.
As one Democratic committee staffer noted off-record, “The problem is that every denial seems to raise new questions. The Epstein story has never really been closed.”
Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr
