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 did the flight logs and Secret Service records say about Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein in 2002-2003?
Executive summary
Flight logs unsealed in litigation and released to congressional investigators show former President Bill Clinton was listed as a passenger on Jeffrey Epstein’s planes multiple times in 2002–2003 — commonly reported as 17–26 individual flight legs across six multi-stop trips — and at least one manifest entry shows Clinton traveling with Secret Service agents on a 2002 flight [1] [2] [3]. Available sources emphasize that the logs do not prove why trips occurred, do not by themselves establish criminal conduct by Clinton, and show no flight-log evidence that Clinton traveled to Epstein’s private Virgin Islands island [4] [5].
1. What the flight logs say: multiple trips, many stops
Unsealed flight manifests and pilot logs record Clinton’s name on numerous Epstein plane entries between Feb. 2002 and Nov. 2003; reporting counts vary because some describe “legs” (individual flights) while others summarize “trips” that included multiple stops — FactCheck and related reporting counted 26 flight legs across six trips, while other outlets and summaries report at least 17 legs in that timeframe [5] [1] [2]. News coverage and summaries note specific routings reported in the logs: transatlantic and trans-Pacific segments in March and May 2002 and other legs to places such as China, Japan, Morocco, the Azores, Russia and parts of Africa in 2002–2003 [6] [4].
2. Secret Service presence: what manifests show and don’t show
Some released records and committee materials indicate that Secret Service agents were listed with Clinton on certain Epstein flights; at least one 2002 flight manifest explicitly shows Clinton accompanied by Secret Service [3]. Reporting also notes that many Clinton entries do list agents, while a small number of entries are illegible or omit agents — those omissions are cited by media as ambiguous rather than definitive proof of an unaccompanied former president [4] [7].
3. What the logs do not prove — and what Clinton’s office has said
The flight logs do not record reasons for travel or on-board activities; they are passenger lists and routing records, not affidavits or activity logs. Outlets emphasize that the logs “don’t indicate why any of the trips were taken” and that being listed on a manifest is not an allegation of wrongdoing [4] [3]. Clinton’s representatives previously acknowledged he took a small number of trips on Epstein’s plane in 2002–03 tied to Clinton Foundation work and other events, and they have denied he visited Epstein’s island or otherwise participated in the crimes Epstein was charged with [1] [5].
4. Disputed claims and competing counts: 17, 26, or other tallies
Different publications report different totals because of how they count: some count each segment (leg) separately and arrive at about 26 legs across six trips; others focus on distinct trips and report four to six trips or cite “at least 17” legs depending on which logs and redactions they used [2] [1] [5]. The BBC and other outlets note congressional investigators have cited figures up to 26 flights and have subpoenaed the Clintons as part of a broader probe that references those flight records [7].
5. Island visits and third-party claims: what’s corroborated
Multiple fact-checking and reporting outlets say the flight logs contain no record that Clinton flew to Little St. James (Epstein’s U.S. Virgin Islands island), and some people close to Epstein later told investigators Clinton was never there; at least one accuser’s claim of meeting Clinton on the island has not been corroborated by available flight manifests, and Clinton’s spokespeople have denied such visits [5] [8] [9]. Media note discrepancies between some accuser statements and the manifest record; those discrepancies have fueled disputes but are not, by themselves, final proof one way or the other in every allegation [8] [9].
6. Broader context and investigative posture
House investigators and media releases have placed the flight logs into a larger document set — emails, calendars and witness interviews — and congressional committees have used those materials to subpoena witnesses including Bill and Hillary Clinton [7] [10]. Reporting repeatedly stresses that being on flight manifests is a fact distinct from allegations of criminal conduct; the logs provided context to investigations but do not constitute judicial findings against Clinton [3] [5].
Limitations and open questions
Available sources do not settle who organized or paid for each flight, the full passenger list for every segment, or the activity that occurred off-aircraft; the logs list passengers and routes but “don’t indicate why any of the trips were taken” [4]. Some entries are illegible or redacted, and competing tallies reflect different counting methods [5] [1]. Where sources directly contradict one another on counts, that disagreement stems from methodology rather than new evidence about specific incidents [2] [1].