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 statements has Bill Clinton's office or spokespeople issued about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein since 2019?
Executive summary
Bill Clinton’s office has repeatedly issued a consistent defense since 2019: Clinton says he “knows nothing” about Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes, that his contacts with Epstein were limited to several foundation-related flights in 2002–2003, and that he has not spoken to Epstein in roughly two decades [1] [2] [3]. His spokesperson Angel Ureña has reiterated in later reporting that “nothing has changed” from the 2019 statement and, in 2025 reporting, defended Clinton as having “did nothing and knew nothing” in response to renewed scrutiny [2] [4].
1. What the 2019 statement said — a tight, limited account
In July 2019, as Epstein’s arrest focused attention on his network, Clinton’s office released a statement confirming Clinton took a small number of trips on Epstein’s plane in 2002–2003 for Clinton Foundation work, that staff and supporters accompanied him, and that Clinton “knows nothing about the terrible crimes” Epstein committed; the statement also denied Clinton ever visited Epstein’s private island, New Mexico ranch, or Palm Beach residence and said Clinton had not spoken to Epstein since about 2002–2003 [1] [5] [2].
2. Spokesperson Angel Ureña: repeating and reinforcing the core lines
When documents referencing Clinton were unsealed or republished after 2019, Clinton’s spokesperson Angel Ureña repeatedly pointed reporters back to the 2019 statement, emphasizing that Clinton had not been accused of wrongdoing and that “nothing has changed” from that earlier account [2] [3]. Ureña also told outlets that Clinton’s trips on Epstein’s plane were humanitarian trips connected to the Clinton Foundation and accompanied by staff and supporters [2] [5].
3. Reaction when unsealed files and new reporting surfaced (2019–2024)
Following releases of lawsuits’ documents and later unsealed files, media outlets asked Clinton’s office to respond to names and allegations in those materials; the office’s replies consistently reiterated the 2019 language — “knows nothing” and had no contact with Epstein for nearly 20 years — while pointing out that being named in court papers is not an allegation of criminal conduct [3] [5] [2].
4. Pushback and alternative framings in public debate
Political opponents and others have framed Clinton’s past association with Epstein differently: some have used flight logs and mentions in documents to suggest a closer relationship, while Clinton’s team has insisted the contacts were limited, documented, and primarily for foundation travel [1] [5]. Reporting has noted the difference between counting individual flight segments and counting “four trips,” a discrepancy his spokesman characterized as being misread in some public commentary [1].
5. Responses to new waves of document releases and political probes (2024–2025)
When further documents or emails drew renewed attention in 2024–2025, Clinton’s office again referred to the 2019 statement. In November 2025 coverage of a DOJ probe requested by President Trump, Angel Ureña publicly stated that newly cited emails “prove Bill Clinton did nothing and knew nothing,” framing fresh scrutiny as politically motivated noise [2] [4] [6].
6. What Clinton’s office does not say — limits in the public record
Available sources do not mention Clinton’s office admitting any previously unreported contacts with Epstein, nor do the cited statements concede any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s criminal conduct beyond the limited travel described [1] [2]. They also do not provide internal Foundation records or third‑party confirmations beyond flight acknowledgements cited by Clinton’s team [2] [5].
7. How independent reporting characterizes the dispute
News outlets (BBC, NBC, People, Newsweek) document both the content of Clinton’s statements and the factual points driving scrutiny — flight logs, mentions in emails or depositions, and lists of names in court filings — while noting reporters’ and critics’ divergent interpretations about what those materials imply [3] [7] [5] [2]. The reporting makes clear: being named in documents is not itself an allegation of criminality, a point Clinton’s spokespeople emphasize [3] [2].
8. Why this matters now — politics, probes, and narratives
Recent calls for DOJ review and congressional interest have turned Epstein-related documents into political cudgels; supporters of probes argue for transparency about powerful figures’ ties, while Clinton’s camp says renewed scrutiny recycles already answered questions and misreads files — an argument his spokesperson made when saying “nothing has changed” since 2019 [6] [2] [4]. Readers should note the explicit partisan context in which some new investigations and demands for files have been advanced [8] [6].
If you want, I can extract the exact 2019 statement language and compile a timeline of each public Clinton response cited in the files above, with the specific source and date for each quote [1] [3] [2] [5] [4].