House investigators are weighing whether to drag one of the world’s most powerful billionaires into sworn testimony as newly released Epstein records reignite questions elites have dodged for years.
Mace pressures Comer as Gates enters the witness conversation
Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, asked House Oversight Chairman James Comer to compel Bill Gates to testify under oath after the Justice Department released a new tranche of Epstein-related records. Mace’s request centers on claims found in a 2013 email attributed to Jeffrey Epstein, which describes alleged conduct involving Gates. The accusations remain unproven in the available reporting, and Gates has denied wrongdoing.
Special thanks to Chairman Comer on taking up my call to subpoena Bill Gates for his Epstein ties.
We are one step closer to finding out why these elitist freaks felt the need to hang out with a convicted pedophile. pic.twitter.com/r9VgbGCVXi
— Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) February 5, 2026
Comer has not publicly confirmed a subpoena, but multiple outlets reported the committee is weighing who should be called next as investigators sift through an enormous volume of material. That “who’s next” question matters because subpoenas force answers on the record—something many Americans believe has been missing in past “too-big-to-touch” scandals. The committee’s challenge is practical as well as political: it must triage leads without turning oversight into theater.
What the new Epstein material does—and does not—prove
The most cited document in the current push is a July 2013 email in which Epstein allegedly wrote to himself about resigning from “BG3” and the Gates Foundation, while also describing salacious claims. Reporting also notes a direct conflict between Epstein’s self-described relationship timeline and Gates’ account: Gates has acknowledged meeting Epstein around 2011 and attending multiple dinners, while denying visits to Epstein’s island or any misconduct. The Gates Foundation has said Epstein never worked there.
Those details create a narrow but important distinction: congressional interest appears driven less by a settled evidentiary record and more by the public significance of the names involved and the fresh visibility created by the DOJ release. Americans who watched years of institutional failures around Epstein are likely to demand clarity, but the current public record still rests heavily on contested statements, ambiguous documents, and competing narratives that have not been tested under oath.
Bipartisan signals emerge, but process questions remain
As the story developed, reporting described bipartisan openness to further witnesses. Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia was cited as discussing next steps with Comer, while Republican Rep. Byron Donalds emphasized the need for an organized process given the sheer scale of the document dump. That convergence does not guarantee a subpoena, but it suggests a shared recognition that credible oversight cannot selectively stop at politically convenient targets if lawmakers want public trust.
At the same time, the committee is operating in a politically charged environment where public confidence has been damaged by years of perceived double standards for the well-connected. For conservative voters frustrated with “two systems of justice,” the key issue is not pre-judging Gates’ guilt, but whether Congress will apply the same pressure—sworn testimony, timelines, and document demands—to billionaires and power brokers that it routinely applies to ordinary citizens.
How upcoming testimonies could shape the investigation’s next phase
The Oversight Committee’s schedule already includes high-profile depositions involving Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Ghislaine Maxwell is expected to testify as well. Those appearances matter because they may clarify who communicated with Epstein, what was known, and how institutions responded. If the committee treats witness selection consistently, Gates’ potential testimony could be framed as part of a broader fact-finding effort rather than a single headline-driven confrontation.
James Comer Hints at Who Might Be Next on the Epstein Investigation Witness List: Bill Gateshttps://t.co/hxoS22Lg78
— RedState Updates (@RedStateUpdates) February 5, 2026
Gates, for his part, has publicly rejected the allegations and characterized Epstein as a liar, saying Epstein was frustrated that a relationship did not work out. Until sworn testimony or corroborated documents emerge, the responsible conclusion is limited: lawmakers are weighing whether the public interest and investigative needs justify compelling Gates to answer questions under oath. The committee’s decision will signal whether this probe expands beyond familiar names—or stalls under pressure.
Sources:
House Oversight mulls Bill Gates subpoena
Nancy Mace asks Comer to subpoena Bill Gates over Epstein ties
Lawmakers escalate Epstein probe with possible Bill Gates subpoena
Rep. Mace demands Bill Gates testify under oath on ties to Epstein