What We Know About Epstein Ad Attacks in the 2026 Midterms

Democratic candidates and allied groups are running ads in the final stretch of the 2026 midterms accusing Republican opponents of "protecting" Jeffrey Epstein by voting against legislation to release files tied to the convicted sex offender, according to reporting by The Guardian. Some Republicans and their campaigns are pushing back, and a smaller number of Democrats are facing comparable attacks of their own.

What are the Epstein-related ads claiming?

The ads center on votes against legislation to release Epstein-related files, framing those votes as an attempt to shield a man described in the ads as a pedophile who ran a sex-trafficking operation, the Guardian reported. The spots are designed to provoke an emotional reaction by linking a candidate's record directly to Epstein's crimes rather than debating the underlying legislation on its merits.

Which Republican candidates are being targeted?

Several Senate and House races feature the attacks by name, according to the Guardian's review of the ads. In Colorado, spots targeting Republican Jeff Crank cite his vote against releasing the Epstein files; one ad features family members of Virginia Giuffre, who survived abuse by Epstein and died by suicide last year, saying Crank "covered up Epstein's crimes to protect Donald Trump." In Georgia, an ad against Senate candidate Mike Collins states that he "voted against releasing the Epstein files even after he knew Epstein's sex-trafficking operation exploited 14-year-old girls for sex." In Florida, Republican Jimmy Patronis has been attacked by his Democratic opponent over a remark that investigating Epstein would be "a waste of his time," per the Guardian.

How have Republicans responded?

Iowa Senate candidate Ashley Hinson, accused in ads of voting to "protect her donors" by opposing release of the files, answered directly in her own campaign spot.

"This week I had to explain to my boys, 'No, Mom does not protect pedophiles,'" Hinson said, according to the Guardian.

Crank's campaign took a different tack, with a spokesperson telling the Washington Post, as cited by the Guardian, that the attack ad against him was "intentionally vague" because it did not accurately characterize his actual vote or position on the underlying bill.

Are Democrats facing similar accusations?

Yes. The Guardian's report notes that "select Democrats, too, are being accused of having ties" to Epstein as the midterms approach, though the piece does not detail which Democratic candidates face those claims or the specific language used against them. The dynamic suggests the Epstein files have become a line of attack both parties are willing to use against each other, rather than one confined to a single side of the ballot.

How much is being spent on these ads?

Outside analyses cited by the Guardian — one from CNN and another from the Washington Post — found that candidates and outside groups have put substantial sums into Epstein-related advertising this cycle, with the Washington Post's review focused on Democratic spending across six key Senate races. The Guardian's report did not provide independently verified, itemized spending figures beyond citing those two analyses, and HTT News has not been able to confirm specific dollar totals against primary campaign-finance filings as of publication.

Why are the Epstein files central to this cycle?

The files have become a flashpoint because they involve an unresolved congressional fight over disclosure, giving campaigns a concrete legislative vote to point to rather than a vaguer policy dispute. A Guardian opinion piece referenced in the same report, by Katie Phang, described the Epstein files as "a sledgehammer for the US midterms," capturing why both parties see the issue as a potent closing argument with voters. Because the underlying vote is a matter of public record, campaigns on both sides can cite it directly in ads, even as they disagree sharply over what that vote actually represented.

For readers trying to verify any single ad's claim, the most reliable step is to check how a candidate actually voted on the specific bill the ad references, since campaigns on both sides — as the Crank campaign's response shows — are already disputing whether the attacks accurately reflect those votes.

mindfulAI Keyboard — An iPhone keyboard that rewrites a draft in a tone you pick. Four free AI actions a day.