Washington, D.C.– Vice President JD Vance recently engaged with claims suggesting links between convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and intelligence agencies, specifically referencing both Israeli and American entities. During an appearance on “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast, Mr. Vance acknowledged a widely circulated perception of Epstein’s ties to Israel’s foreign intelligence service, Mossad, before offering his own perspective on the matter.
The discussion arose when podcast host Joe Rogan, known for promoting various conspiracy theories, stated, “Most people think he was Mossad.” Mr. Vance concurred with the existence of this viewpoint, then elaborated on his own assessment of Epstein’s connections. “Yeah, Mossad or C.I.A., or some other deep state, whether in America or Israel or another country,” Mr. Vance replied, adding, “He clearly had connections to the upper — the highest — levels of American intelligence. He clearly had connections to the highest levels of Israeli intelligence.”
Despite these assertions, Mr. Vance also acknowledged a lack of direct, conclusive evidence. He stated, “I’ve asked, Were there like, were there documents connecting Jeffrey Epstein directly to our intelligence agencies or anybody else’s, and the answer is no.” He then speculated on the potential non-existence of such records in the public domain, remarking, “But if that shit existed, it wouldn’t exist in 2026.”
The Vice President’s comments, made during a nearly three-hour podcast episode covering a wide array of subjects, have drawn significant attention due to the prominence of his office. Such claims, which have previously been advanced by figures like Tucker Carlson, have frequently attracted accusations of antisemitism.
Reactions to Mr. Vance’s statements have been swift and varied. Former Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican and a staunch supporter of Israel, characterized the Vice President’s remarks as a “dog whistle.” Mr. King argued that the comments were directed at a segment of the Republican Party he described as “antisemitic, anti-Israel, conspiratorial and unhinged.” He emphasized the gravity of the Vice President’s position, stating, “Unless you know what you’re talking about, unless you have absolute facts to back it up, before you undermine an ally — before you undermine your own intelligence agencies — you better know what you’re talking about.”
When asked for comment, Mr. Vance’s office provided a statement attributed to an unnamed White House official, which asserted the truthfulness of the Vice President’s remarks and dismissed any suggestion to the contrary as “in bad faith, stupidity, or both.” Aides declined to offer further clarification.
The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office, which also oversees the Mossad intelligence agency, has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding Mr. Vance’s statements. However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has previously refuted claims that Epstein worked for Israel. In February, following disclosures of emails between Epstein and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, Netanyahu posted on social media, “Jeffrey Epstein’s unusual close relationship with Ehud Barak doesn’t suggest Epstein worked for Israel. It proves the opposite.”
Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett also strongly denounced these theories last year after Tucker Carlson promoted them at a conservative conference. At that time, Mr. Bennett stated on social media, “The accusation that Jeffrey Epstein somehow worked for Israel or the Mossad running a blackmail ring is categorically and totally false.” He added, “Epstein never worked for the Mossad. This accusation is a lie being peddled by prominent online personalities such as Tucker Carlson pretending they know things they don’t.”
Concerns about Mr. Vance’s stance on Israel and antisemitism have been expressed by some Republicans who desire a more assertive condemnation of antisemitism and stronger support for Israel. Ben Shapiro, a prominent conservative podcaster who is Jewish and a vocal supporter of Israel, conveyed his concern in a newsletter regarding Mr. Vance’s podcast appearance. On his own program, Mr. Shapiro characterized Mr. Vance’s commentary as “unworthy of the office” of Vice President and stated that it undermined core conservative principles, arguing that “Conservatives, generally, are not in favor of baseless conspiracy theorizing.” The online publication Tablet, which focuses on Jewish news and culture, published a column by journalist Lee Smith titled “JD Vance’s Big Crashout,” accusing the Vice President of “attack[ing] Jews and spread[ing] baseless rumors, for which he admits to having zero evidence, about some kind of dark plot involving Jeffrey Epstein.”
Jeffrey Epstein, known for cultivating relationships with influential individuals globally, maintained a years-long friendship and business association with Ehud Barak, the former center-left Israeli prime minister. Mr. Vance noted this connection during the podcast, telling Mr. Rogan, “Epstein seemed to be connected to the elements of the Israeli deep state that were left of center. I’ve always found that fascinating.” Mr. Barak has stated that he was introduced to Epstein in 2002 by then-Israeli leader Shimon Peres. He attended social engagements at Epstein’s Manhattan residence and received approximately $2.3 million in payments from a foundation linked to Epstein. Epstein also reportedly invested $1 million in a limited partnership established by Mr. Barak in 2015. Mr. Barak has consistently denied witnessing or participating in any sexual abuse and has publicly expressed deep regret for his association with Epstein.
During the podcast, Mr. Vance did not endorse all theories presented by Mr. Rogan. He pushed back, for instance, against an unsubstantiated theory that Epstein’s files were used to blackmail the Trump administration into going to war. The Vice President also presented himself as a “reasonable moderate” in discussions surrounding the U.S.-Israel relationship, expressing confusion over why he has been “accused of being an antisemite by many people” without a “good compelling argument.”
Why This Matters
The Vice President of the United States occupying one of the highest offices in the U.S. government, holds a position that carries immense weight and is expected to uphold a standard of evidence-based discourse. When a figure of this stature engages in or lends credibility to unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, particularly those touching upon intelligence operations and international relations, it has several significant implications:
Firstly, it risks undermining the credibility of the U.S. government and its intelligence agencies. Speculating about “deep state” connections without presenting concrete evidence can sow distrust among the public regarding their own institutions. Similarly, making unverified claims about an allied nation’s intelligence service can strain diplomatic relations. Israel, a key strategic partner of the United States, has repeatedly and emphatically denied any formal ties between Jeffrey Epstein and Mossad. Public statements by a U.S. Vice President suggesting otherwise can create friction and complicate efforts at cooperation, especially during times of geopolitical tension.
Secondly, the embrace of such theories by a high-ranking official can normalize and legitimize conspiracy thinking in the broader public discourse. This can contribute to a climate where misinformation thrives, making it harder for the public to discern fact from fiction. The specific nature of these claims, linking powerful figures to a Jewish intelligence agency, has historically been a trope in antisemitic conspiracy theories. Critics’ accusations of a “dog whistle” highlight concerns that such rhetoric, even if not explicitly antisemitic, can appeal to or inadvertently validate antisemitic sentiments among certain segments of the population. This has particular resonance given past instances where similar claims have been promoted by other prominent conservative voices.
Finally, the platform chosen for these remarks—a popular podcast—underscores the evolving landscape of political communication. While such platforms allow direct engagement with a broad audience, they often lack the journalistic scrutiny and fact-checking mechanisms typically associated with traditional media outlets. This means that unsubstantiated claims can spread rapidly and widely without immediate challenge. The controversy surrounding Vice President Vance’s statements highlights the critical importance of clear, objective communication from public officials and the potential consequences when that standard is perceived to be compromised.