The 19 photos released by Democratic lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee were a small part of more than 95,000 they received from the estate of Epstein, who died in a New York jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The photos released Friday were separate from the case files that the Department of Justice is now under compulsion to release, but anticipation is growing as the Trump administration faces a deadline next week to produce the Epstein files that have been the source of conspiracy theories and speculation for years.

The photos were released without captions or context and included a black-and-white image of Trump alongside six women whose faces were blacked out.

Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, did not say whether any of the women in the photos was a victim of abuse, but he added, “Our commitment from day one has been to redact any photo, any information that could lead to any sort of harm to any of the victims.”

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson accused Democrats of “selectively releasing cherry-picked photos with random redactions to try and create a false narrative” and called it part of a “Democrat hoax against President Trump.”

Many of the photos have already circulated in the public. Democrats pledged to continue to release photos in the days and weeks ahead, as they look to pressure Trump over his Republican administration’s earlier refusal to release documents in the Epstein probe. Garcia said that his staff had looked through about a quarter of the images it had received from Epstein’s estate, which included photos that were sent to him or that he had in his possession.

“Donald Trump right now needs to release the files to the American public so that the truth can come out and we can actually get some sense of justice for the survivors,” Garcia added.

Trump, once a close friend of Epstein, has said that he parted ways with him long before he faced the sex trafficking charges. Clinton, too, has minimized his relationship with Epstein, acknowledging that he traveled on Epstein’s private jet but saying through a spokesperson that he had no knowledge of the late financier’s crimes. Clinton also has never been accused of misconduct by Epstein’s known victims. However, Republicans on the House committee are pushing him and Hillary Clinton to testify in their investigation.

A spokesperson for the Republican-controlled committee also said that nothing in the documents the committee has received shows “any wrongdoing” by Trump.

Andrew lost his royal titles and privileges this year amid new revelations of his ties to Epstein, though he has denied wrongdoing.

The photo release also included images of the right-wing political operative Steven Bannon, billionaires Richard Branson and Bill Gates, filmmaker Woody Allen, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and law professor Alan Dershowitz. The men have denied any wrongdoing in their associations with Epstein, who kept many high-profile figures in his circle of friends.

Amid an earlier release of emails between Summers and Epstein, Summers stepped away from his teaching position at Harvard University and faced other fallout to his standing in academic circles.

Allen has faced allegations from his adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow, of molesting her as a child. He has denied the allegations.

Some lawmakers, however, believe that other high-powered figures could be implicated in Epstein’s abuse if the full case files from the Justice Department are released.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who was instrumental in passing a bill to require the public release of the files, said it was a good sign that the Department of Justice has sought to have grand jury material released from several courts.

“The grand jury material is just a small fraction of what the DOJ needs to release, because the FBI and DOJ probably has evidence that they chose not to take to the grand jury because the evidence they’re in possession of would implicate other people, not Epstein or Maxwell,” he said.

On Thursday, the Fed announced 11 out its 12 bank presidents were re-upped, except for the Atlanta Fed chief role as Raphael Bostic had announced previously that he’s stepping down.

The presidents’ five-year terms were due to end in February, and prior reappointments have typically come closer to expiration dates as they historically have been routine affairs. But recent suggestions from the Trump administration that new conditions ought to be placed on the presidents raised concerns it was seeking a wider leadership shakeup.

Earlier this month, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent floated a three-year residency requirement for Fed presidents. Days later, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, who is the frontrunner to become the next Fed chair, endorsed the idea.

While Fed presidents are nominated by governing boards drawn from their respective districts, the Fed’s board of governors approve them. As a result, tipping the balance of power on the Fed board with Trump appointees could conceivably give them the ability to reshape the Fed presidents as well.

Meanwhile, the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee is comprised of the seven members of the Fed board, plus five of the 12 Fed presidents, with four of them rotating on an annual basis. In recent FOMC meetings—including Wednesday’s—Fed presidents have been more resistant to rate cuts while Trump-appointed governors have been more aggressive in calling for cuts.

Deutsche Bank strategist Jim Reid pointed out in a note on Friday the 10-year Treasury yield edged higher after the Fed’s reappointment announcement, as bond investors priced in fewer rate cuts.

“The regional presidents’ current terms expire in February so the advance announcement suggests that the Board was united in wanting to avoid the risk that the reappointment process raises questions over Fed independence,” he added.

Justin Wolfers, a professor of public policy and economics at the University of Michigan, was more blunt about the Fed’s surprise news.

“If I’m reading this properly, they just Trump-proofed the Fed,” he wrote in a post on X.

What’s also notable about the reappointment is the unanimous decision to bring back the Fed presidents suggests the Trump-appointed governors went along with it as well.

That includes Stephen Miran, who is on leave as the White House’s chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers while filling a vacancy on the Fed.

Prior to joining the administration, he had urged an overhaul of the Federal Reserve to give at-will power to the U.S. president to fire Fed board members and Fed bank presidents; hand over control of the Fed’s operating budget to Congress; and shift the Fed’s regulatory responsibility over banks and financial markets to the Treasury. 

The changes would diminish the Fed’s power in favor of the White House so much analysts at JPMorgan warned earlier this year Miran’s appointment “fuels an existential threat as the administration looks likely to take aim at the Federal Reserve Act to permanently alter U.S. monetary and regulatory authority.”

Driscoll, who is currently the chairman of UConn Health after a 25-year career in health care including a previous position as Walgreens Boots Alliance president, said the policy reversal amounts to “a self‑inflicted wound” that will push costs up for both low‑income families and the affluent professionals who thought they were insulated.​

Driscoll cited CBO estimates that if Congress allows the subsidies to lapse, premiums will jump for roughly 24 million marketplace enrollees, and around 2 million people will lose coverage entirely in the near term. 

Enhanced premium tax credits, introduced during the pandemic and extended through 2025, have helped double marketplace enrollment and kept average subsidized premiums under about $900 a year. When they expire, KFF News projects a roughly 114% increase in average premium payments for subsidized enrollees in 2026. Older adults and rural residents would be especially exposed, with KFF also warning that adults ages 50 to 64 could see average premium hikes of 75% or more.​

​​He had a warning for Republicans, calling this looming mass expiration of health insurance subsidies a “self-inflicted wound” for the party. “They were elected on solving affordability,” he pointed out, and now they’re going to accelerate the problem. But Driscoll said no side is blameless. “The tragic thing is, neither side really wants to have a sensible conversation about how do you really care for more people and get them better care earlier.”

In similar countries, roughly 50%-60% of doctors are primary care, but it’s only one in four in the U.S. The problem is that every doctor wants to be a specialist or a surgeon because they’ll roughly double the salary of a pediatrician or internist that way. “Until you change those incentives people are going to keep going towards those higher compensated areas.”

There’s no one fix to this, but there are steps we could take, Driscoll said. He pointed to expanded drug‑price negotiation, immigration reforms to ease shortages of primary‑care doctors and nurses, “site‑neutral” payment so patients aren’t charged more for identical hospital‑based care, and broader use of value‑based and bundled payment models. But we don’t even seem to be capable of engagement, he argued.

“If the two sides could talk,” Driscoll said, “there probably is a way that they could agree on how to to bridge the difference between what Biden and Trump want to do on drug costs. If we could talk, we could probably agree on how to bring back value-based care that would balance the interests of doctors and hospitals and and patients’ outcomes and the government’s obligation.” If only.