Speaker Mike Johnson found himself in the hot seat Tuesday when Fox News congressional correspondent Chad Pergram pressed him over two explosive issues at once: his refusal to swear in a newly elected Democrat and the simmering controversy over the unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files. The exchange quickly turned heated, with Johnson accusing Democrats of hypocrisy while defending delays that critics say look increasingly political.
Pergram, one of Capitol Hill’s longest-serving reporters, opened the confrontation with a direct question about Arizona Congresswoman-elect Adelita Grijalva, who won her special election last month but has yet to take the oath of office. “You said last week that you would swear in Adelita Grijalva whenever she wants. She’s written a letter to your office. You’ve not sworn her in. I understand about pro forma sessions. Doesn’t your resistance to not swear her in add fuel to the fire that this is about the Epstein files?” Pergram asked.
Johnson bristled at the suggestion, insisting the two issues were unrelated. “No. Let’s talk about Grijalva and Epstein. Okay, once more for everybody. Everybody in Congress, I think, is for maximum transparency of the Epstein files. That is underway right now,” he said, before pivoting to a familiar target. “All of the files were in the possession of the Biden-Harris Department of Justice for four years. Every single thing that we’re talking about right now was in their sole possession.”
He continued his rebuttal by accusing Democrats of feigning outrage. “They could have released it. They could’ve done anything. Ro Khanna, all the Democrats who are jumping up and down making noise about this, didn’t say a peep about it for four years. I don’t know why, but this is another partisan-manufactured thing.”
Still, Johnson insisted he was committed to transparency while balancing privacy concerns for victims. “Is it a serious problem? Yes. I have sat with the victims, some of the ladies who bravely have come forward and talked about the horrors that they sustained because of traffickers on Epstein Island and all the things he was involved in,” he said. “Everybody involved in that should have the full weight of justice descend upon their head, and we’re all for that. We want every single person who had anything to do with that to be exposed.”
Johnson added that the redaction process was critical before releasing any new records. “There are as many as a thousand victims estimated, that’s what the victims say,” he explained. “Many of them were underage at the time. They have not all chosen to come forward, like some of these other brave women have, for obvious reasons, and we have to make sure that when the files are released, their names are redacted so they don’t suffer further harm.”
But critics on both sides of the aisle see Johnson’s delay as more about control than caution. Grijalva’s supporters argue that the speaker is intentionally dragging his feet to avoid another Democratic vote amid ongoing spending negotiations. Meanwhile, conspiracy theories have flourished online, suggesting a link between the Epstein documents and Johnson’s stonewalling, claims that the speaker dismisses as “partisan nonsense.”
The confrontation shows the tension gripping Congress as it juggles scandal, stalled investigations, and political showdowns. Pergram’s line of questioning exposed a growing perception that transparency in Washington often comes with a catch. For Johnson, the balancing act between protecting victims and appeasing a restless public is becoming increasingly precarious.
