Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

What do Epstein's flight logs reveal about Bill Clinton's travel to Little St. James?

Checked on November 18, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Epstein’s publicly released flight logs show Bill Clinton flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s planes multiple times between 2001 and 2003, with some reporting at least 17 distinct flights in 2002–2003 and other counts reaching 26 trips when multi-stop itineraries are included [1] [2]. However, the same records and related reporting show no entry placing Clinton on a flight to the U.S. Virgin Islands or to Little St. James, and Epstein himself wrote in emails claiming Clinton “was NEVER EVER there” [2] [3].

1. What the flight logs actually record: many Clinton trips, not an island visit

Publicly released flight logs documented Bill Clinton as a passenger on Epstein planes dozens of times in the early 2000s; journalists have counted at least 17 flights in 2002–03 and 26 flights across several trips between Feb. 2002 and Nov. 2003, often described as tied to Clinton Foundation work or speaking tours [1] [2]. Crucially, fact-checking and archival reporting note that none of the released logs list Clinton on a flight destined for the U.S. Virgin Islands or Little St. James, meaning the logs do not corroborate claims he visited Epstein’s private island [2] [4].

2. Competing assertions: victims’ statements, aides, and denials

Court filings and public allegations include statements that claim Clinton was seen on Epstein’s island in some accounts, while Clinton and his representatives have repeatedly denied he ever visited Little St. James and have pointed to Secret Service and travel records in support of that denial [5] [6]. Some former associates (for example, a Vanity Fair-cited former Clinton aide) have at times said he visited, creating conflicting accounts in the public record [6]. Available sources do not provide corroborating Secret Service logs placing Clinton on the island; a FOIA search reportedly produced no such evidence [4].

3. What Epstein’s own documents and emails say

Among documents recently disclosed to Congress were emails in which Jeffrey Epstein wrote that Clinton “was NEVER EVER there,” statements Epstein used to challenge other allegations [3]. News organizations covering the same tranche of documents noted Epstein’s emails denying Clinton visited the island, though those emails come from a subject who had motivation to deflect or shape narratives about his associates [7] [3].

4. How media counts and political claims diverge

Some outlets and commentators have amplified higher counts or direct-visit assertions—e.g., claims that Clinton visited Little St. James “28 times”—but reporting that traced the underlying flight logs has found no records of trips to the Virgin Islands and has cautioned that Clinton’s many flights on Epstein planes were to destinations in Europe, Asia and Africa [8] [9] [1]. Political actors have also used the logs selectively; for example, calls for renewed DOJ inquiries have followed new disclosures even as the Justice Department previously said it found no predicate evidence to open investigations of uncharged third parties [10] [11].

5. What the logs don’t prove — and what we don’t know from available reporting

Flight logs only show a name, a date and listed routes; they do not by themselves explain purpose, context, or where every traveler disembarked during multi-stop trips [1]. Available sources do not mention internal Secret Service paperwork or other contemporaneous travel manifests that would definitively show Clinton physically setting foot on Little St. James beyond the absence of Virgin Islands-bound entries in the logs [4] [2]. Where sources disagree—victims’ allegations versus Clinton’s denials—no single document in the provided reporting definitively resolves the dispute.

6. What to watch next and why context matters

Congressional releases of additional Epstein files and emails have continued to produce new snippets and competing narratives; reporters emphasize that names in Epstein’s address books or logs do not equal criminal complicity and that many entries are “in passing” [12] [11]. Careful readers should distinguish between: (a) documented flights with Clinton as a passenger (supported in the logs) and (b) documented visits to Little St. James (not supported by the logs cited here) [1] [2]. Given the political stakes, sources have incentives—political actors to press investigations, Epstein’s estate and allies to minimize links—so disclosure of contemporaneous Secret Service records or corroborating on-the-ground island manifests would materially change the evidentiary picture if they appear [10] [3].

Summary judgement: the released flight logs demonstrate Clinton rode Epstein aircraft many times [1] [2], but the same sources and fact-checking reporting find no flight-log evidence that Clinton flew to Little St. James, and Epstein’s emails expressly deny Clinton visited the island [2] [3]. Available sources do not mention definitive Secret Service or island-entry records proving a Clinton visit to Little St. James [4].

Want to dive deeper?
Do Jeffrey Epstein's flight logs list Bill Clinton as a passenger to Little St. James and under what names?
What do flight manifests and passenger records independently corroborate about Clinton's trips on Epstein-linked planes?
Have airport security, crew testimony, or flight records placed Clinton on flights that landed at or near Little St. James?
What explanations or denials have Clinton's representatives given regarding reported flights on Epstein's aircraft?
How have prosecutors, journalists, and document releases interpreted flight-log entries implicating high-profile passengers?