US lawmakers demand Andrew testifies as they vote on Epstein files
Massie said the United States should show the urgency and consequences seen in Britain.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYCredibility rates Daily Mail, which republished this story. The other scores rate the article itself.
The Daily Mail is an established, bylined publication, but its tabloid style and sensational framing warrant a lower institutional score than a newspaper of record. The article identifies its reporters and attributes key statements, but the text provides limited documentation and context.
- Source type — An established international tabloid; its institutional record is below that of major newspapers of record.
- Editorial standards — The report attributes several claims and quotes, but uses sensational phrasing.
- Author attribution — Two reporters are named.
- Transparency — The article identifies speakers and actions but offers little documentary sourcing.
The report gives the vote tally, quotes lawmakers on both sides, and describes the bill’s next steps. It offers limited independent documentation and context, and some claims about Trump and the files are presented briefly.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The article includes the sole opposing vote’s rationale and describes concerns about redactions, alongside arguments for disclosure. Its limited context and dramatic characterization of the political dispute keep it from being fully balanced.
- Counterarguments presented — Higgins’s concern about harm to innocent people and Johnson’s proposed redactions are included.
- Source diversity — The article quotes lawmakers with different positions, but relies mainly on political figures.
- Loaded language — Several dramatic descriptions shape the account of Trump and the dispute.
- Omitted context — The article gives limited detail on the bill’s provisions and the likely scope of any release.
The article uses some loaded language and gives prominent attention to criticism of Trump’s stance, while reporting the lawmakers’ calls for accountability in approving terms. The report includes an opposing lawmaker’s stated reason for his vote, but the overall framing tilts slightly left.
- Language tone — Phrases such as “political nightmare” and “writing was on the wall” add a critical tone toward Trump.
- Framing — The report emphasizes calls for accountability and consequences in the United States.
- Source selection — It quotes Massie and Khanna at length and includes Higgins’s stated objection to the bill.
Republished
Republished from Daily Mail. The relationship between the two publishers has not been determined.
455 stories · 54–55 · updated Oct 13, 2026
This is Daily Mail's own score, and this article is credited to Daily Mail. The host score in the Source Check is Daily Mail's.
The House passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, 427 to 1, prompting Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna to call for accountability and for Prince Andrew to testify. The bill now goes to the Senate, where its timing and possible changes remain unsettled.
The House passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by a vote of 427 to 1. Massie called for consequences in the United States like those taken in Britain, while Khanna said Prince Andrew should testify before the House oversight committee. Rep. Clay Higgins cast the sole opposing vote, saying the bill as written could harm innocent people.
The legislation now heads to the Senate. Majority Leader John Thune said the Senate could pass it as soon as that day, while Speaker Mike Johnson asked the Senate to amend it to allow redactions intended to protect victims, sources and methods. The article also reports that President Donald Trump changed his position on releasing the files and had recently requested an investigation into Epstein’s relationships with prominent Democrats.
Community verdict
29 VOTESCounts every outlet’s report of this story. See all 26
Votes cast on this page
Votes cast on this page: ▲ 0 · ◆ 0 · ▼ 0
People in this story
SWIPE →Kentucky representative calling for accountability related to the Epstein files
California representative calling for Prince Andrew to testify
Khanna's version of this story ↗President whose position on releasing the files changed and who requested an investigation
Trump's version of this story ↗Louisiana representative and sole opposing voter on the bill
Attorney general who complied with Trump’s request for an investigation
Speaker of the House who voted for the bill and sought Senate amendments
Senate majority leader considering when to bring the bill to a vote
Part of a bigger story
21 OUTLETS- ARTICLES
- 26
- OUTLETS
- 21
- AVG CRED
- 67
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…






