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.
What have Israeli government officials publicly said about Jeffrey Epstein investigations?
Executive summary
Israeli government figures have publicly pushed back against claims that Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset, with former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett calling such allegations “categorically and totally false” [1]. At the same time, reporting and leaked documents cited by multiple outlets portray Epstein as deeply connected to senior Israeli officials (notably Ehud Barak) and to people with alleged intelligence ties, producing vigorous public debate and denials [2] [3] [4].
1. Netanyahu amplifies coverage — but not an endorsement of Mossad claims
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shared an article on X that discussed Epstein’s contacts with Israeli figures, apparently because it referenced newly revealed text messages in which Epstein said he consulted with former prime minister Ehud Barak; The Times of Israel frames the post as Netanyahu circulating the piece without an explicit endorsement of espionage claims [4].
2. Direct denials from former prime minister Naftali Bennett
Naftali Bennett publicly and forcefully denied that Epstein worked for Israel or Mossad, calling such accusations “categorically and totally false” in response to media amplification of the theory; Bennett framed the discourse as a wave of “slander and lies” against Israel and his people [1].
3. Reporting vs. official silence: media investigations alleging Israeli ties
Investigations by outlets and reporters — notably Drop Site News and coverage summarized by Democracy Now! and other sites — allege Epstein acted as a broker for Israeli intelligence interests, citing hacked emails and reporting that a senior Israeli operative (Yoni Koren) stayed in Epstein’s New York apartment and helped arrange high-level contacts [2] [3]. These reports present a portrait of Epstein as an intermediary for security deals, including projects involving Ehud Barak [2] [3].
4. Alternative narratives: critics say mainstream media ignored the thread
Commentators at media-critique outlets (Fair.org, Common Dreams) argue mainstream U.S. outlets undercovered Epstein’s purported Israeli links despite public documents and Drop Site reporting; they present the material as “ignored” evidence of extensive work with Israeli intelligence [5] [6]. These sources also cite documents and hacked emails as the basis for renewed scrutiny [6].
5. Political actors invoking the question to press for files
U.S. politicians and commentators — including Marjorie Taylor Greene and others cited in regional outlets — have used the Epstein-Israel angle to demand more transparency and release of files, asking explicitly whether Epstein “was working for Israel”; some coverage treats these questions as politically motivated and notes the risk of conspiratorial framing [7] [8].
6. The most-cited factual threads in reporting: Barak, Koren, and leaked correspondence
The recurrent factual claims across investigative pieces are: (a) a pattern of private meetings and correspondence between Epstein and Ehud Barak; (b) reporting that Yoni Koren, an aide with alleged ties to Israeli military intelligence, was hosted in Epstein’s Manhattan residence for extended periods; and (c) Epstein brokering security and cyber-related projects linked to Israeli firms — all items reported by Drop Site and summarized in multiple outlets [2] [3] [6].
7. What Israeli officials have not said, per available reporting
Available sources do not mention any public Israeli government admission that Epstein formally worked as an agent for Mossad or that Israeli intelligence directed his crimes (not found in current reporting). Where denials exist, they assert no operational relationship [1]. Available sources also do not show an Israeli government investigation publicly concluding Epstein was an Israeli operative (not found in current reporting).
8. How to reconcile competing claims — evidence vs. denials
The situation in reporting is binary: investigative journalists present leaked emails and anecdotal links suggesting Epstein facilitated connections for Israeli officials [2] [3], while prominent Israeli figures publicly deny he worked for Israel [1]. Readers should note the differing types of evidence: investigative series lean on hacked correspondence and on-the-record sourcing, while denials are categorical statements from Israeli political leaders; neither side, in the sources provided, offers a court finding or declassified intelligence proof that definitively resolves the question [2] [1] [6].
9. Hidden agendas and political uses of the story
Coverage shows the Epstein-Israel narrative has been politicized: domestic Israeli politics (Netanyahu sharing articles), U.S. partisan actors pressing for file releases, and media-critique outlets arguing selective coverage all suggest stakeholders may be advancing political aims while interpreting the same documents differently [4] [8] [5].
10. Bottom line for readers
Public Israeli statements in the sources amount chiefly to forceful denials from leaders like Naftali Bennett and selective amplification by Netanyahu, while investigative reporting from Drop Site and others presents documentary claims tying Epstein to Israeli officials and individuals with intelligence links — a factual dispute that, according to the available sources, remains unresolved in public, judicial, or declassified intelligence records [1] [2] [3].