Rep. Ro Khanna names figures in Epstein files, raising questions over accuracy and immunity

(RightwingJournal.com) – A Democratic lawmaker’s dramatic floor speech naming six men linked to Jeffrey Epstein files has backfired spectacularly after investigation revealed at least four individuals have zero connection to the deceased sex offender, raising serious questions about congressional overreach and the dangers of public accusations without due diligence.

Story Snapshot

Rep. Ro Khanna named six men during a House floor speech claiming they appeared in redacted Epstein files
At least four of the named individuals have no documented ties to Jeffrey Epstein whatsoever
The reckless disclosure demonstrates how political theater can destroy reputations without factual basis
Bipartisan push for transparency devolved into potentially defamatory accusations protected by congressional immunity

Congressional Immunity Shields Reckless Accusations

Rep. Ro Khanna used the Speech or Debate Clause on February 10, 2026, to publicly name Leslie Wexner, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonic Leonov, and Nicola Caputo as individuals whose names appeared in redacted Jeffrey Epstein DOJ files. Protected by constitutional immunity from legal consequences for statements made on the House floor, Khanna framed these disclosures as exposing “wealthy, powerful men” shielded by improper government redactions. This constitutional protection, designed to enable fearless legislative debate, instead became a weapon for making potentially career-destroying allegations without accountability or verification.

Four Names Confirmed as Having No Epstein Connection

Subsequent investigation revealed a catastrophic failure in Khanna’s allegations. At least four of the six named individuals—reportedly including some combination of Nuara, Mikeladze, Leonov, and Caputo—have no documented connection to Jeffrey Epstein according to follow-up reporting. These men’s names were broadcast nationally and internationally, permanently associating them with one of history’s most notorious sex traffickers, despite having no involvement whatsoever. This represents a fundamental breakdown in the responsibility that should accompany the extraordinary power of congressional speech protections. The reputational damage inflicted on innocent individuals cannot be undone, regardless of subsequent corrections.

Transparency Law Becomes Political Weapon

The Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed in November 2025, mandated DOJ release all Epstein-related documents within 30 days, limiting redactions solely to victim identities. The law explicitly prohibited redactions based on “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity” of powerful associates—a reasonable standard designed to prevent elite protection. However, Khanna and Rep. Thomas Massie’s bipartisan effort to enforce this transparency devolved into a rushed, politically motivated spectacle. Rather than careful review and verification, the lawmakers appeared more interested in generating headlines accusing the Trump administration’s DOJ of cover-up, with Khanna declaring “imagine how many” more names might be hidden in 3 million files.

DOJ Redactions Appear Justified After All

Attorney General Pam Bondi testified before the House Judiciary Committee on February 11, defending DOJ’s redaction process while acknowledging imperfections in handling millions of pages. Bondi pledged to unredact any improperly protected names but emphasized the complexity of reviewing 6 million documents while protecting victim privacy and ongoing investigations. The revelation that Khanna named innocent individuals vindicated concerns about premature disclosure. While legitimate questions remain about the 70-80 percent redaction rate Khanna cited, his catastrophic errors demonstrate that some redactions protected people who merely shared common names or appeared in unrelated contexts within sprawling investigative files. The rush to accusation over careful verification exemplifies everything wrong with modern political grandstanding.

Elite Accountability Versus Individual Rights

Leslie Wexner, the former Victoria’s Secret owner, was previously identified as cooperating with investigators as a non-target informant after Epstein defrauded him. Wexner’s representative emphasized his cooperation and non-target status, yet Massie claimed FBI documents labeled him a co-conspirator—a disputed characterization. Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, DP World CEO, was allegedly linked via email references, though specifics remain unclear. The fundamental tension between exposing powerful predators and protecting innocent individuals requires far more rigor than Khanna demonstrated. True accountability for elite wrongdoing demands evidence and verification, not blanket accusations that catch innocent bystanders in the political crossfire while lawmakers hide behind constitutional immunity.