Did Donald Trump ever provide sworn testimony to law enforcement or in civil affidavits about Jeffrey Epstein and when?

1. What the supplied reporting actually documents: file releases and political fights

The materials you provided center on Congress passing and President Trump signing a bipartisan bill in mid-November 2025 ordering the Justice Department to release its Epstein-related files, and on Democrats’ release of Epstein emails that reference Trump — not on any sworn testimony by Trump to police or in civil affidavits ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Coverage highlighted the political stakes of those disclosures, House maneuvers that forced votes, and administration statements about transparency and selective leaks ^{[4] [1]}.

2. Emails and documents that mention Trump — not the same as sworn testimony

Reuters and other outlets published newly released emails from Epstein’s estate that reference Trump and allege Epstein described Trump as knowing about certain victims; those items are part of document disclosures, not testimony by Trump himself ^[3]. Multiple news outlets quoted and summarized those emails as evidence prompting renewed political scrutiny, but none of the provided pieces state Trump gave sworn statements to investigators on the record about Epstein ^{[3] [4]}.

3. The legal action covered: congressional compulsion and the 30‑day clock

Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act and President Trump signed it, creating a 30‑day timetable for the DOJ to publish unclassified records while carving out materials tied to active investigations; press accounts emphasize that Trump signed and framed the move as a transparency effort while critics warned of loopholes for redactions ^{[2] [5] [1]}. Reporting also notes Trump’s public posture — criticizing Democrats and promising files release — rather than reporting him providing sworn testimony ^{[6] [2]}.

4. What the sources do not say — limits of available reporting

Available sources do not mention Trump giving sworn testimony to local or federal law enforcement about Epstein, nor do they report him filing a civil affidavit specifically addressing Epstein’s conduct or victims (not found in current reporting) ^{[1] [3] [2]}. If you have a particular year, investigator, or lawsuit in mind, those specifics are not present in the supplied sources and would need to be checked against other reporting or primary documents.

5. Alternative explanations and competing narratives in the coverage

News coverage in this set frames the episode two ways: congressional Democrats and survivors pushed for disclosure to reveal the full record and hold powerful people accountable ^[1], while the White House and some Republicans portrayed the disclosures as politically motivated and warned of selective leaks or “hoaxes” used to smear Trump ^{[3] [4]}. The reporting also shows Trump used the episode to criticize opponents while ultimately signing the bill — a move interpreted variously as tactical capitulation, transparency, or political theater ^{[2] [7]}.

6. How to verify whether sworn testimony or affidavits exist

To establish definitively whether Trump ever gave sworn testimony about Epstein — and when — consult primary public records referenced by the Epstein Files release (once DOJ files are posted under the new law), court dockets in civil litigation involving Epstein and related litigants, or prior investigative reporting that cites subpoenas, affidavits, or interview transcripts. The present packet does not contain those primary records; it documents only the push to release files and the emails made public by Democrats ^{[1] [3] [2]}.

Sources cited in this summary: Reuters on the email disclosures ^[3]; AP and CNN on the bill passage and signing ^{[1] [6]}; CNBC and other outlets on the 30‑day release requirement and political context ^{[2] [4]}.