Wexner-Epstein Investigation: Expect Criminal Referrals, Further Depositions, and Prolonged Legal Battle

6 predicted events · 7 source articles analyzed · Model: claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929

The Path Forward: What's Next in the Congressional Probe of Les Wexner's Epstein Ties

The House Oversight Committee's February 19, 2026 deposition of billionaire Les Wexner has opened a new chapter in the long-running Jeffrey Epstein saga, but the questioning has generated more skepticism than closure. As lawmakers prepare to release the full transcript and video of the six-hour session, multiple signals suggest this investigation is far from over—and may be entering its most consequential phase. ### Current Situation: A Testimony That Convinced No One Wexner's core defense remained consistent throughout his deposition: he was "naive, foolish, and gullible" to trust Epstein, who he claims stole "vast sums" from him while serving as his financial adviser from the mid-1980s through the early 2000s (Articles 2, 4, 5). The 88-year-old retail mogul, founder of Victoria's Secret parent company L Brands, denied any knowledge of Epstein's crimes and insisted he "has nothing to hide." Democratic lawmakers emerged from the closed-door session expressing deep skepticism. Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) told CNN it was "very hard to believe" Wexner's testimony (Article 3), while Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) emphasized that "there would be no Epstein island, there'd be no Epstein plane, there would be no money to traffic women and girls" without Wexner's support (Articles 5, 6). Crucially, lawmakers noted that Wexner "downplayed the closeness of the relationship" and "repeatedly saying he could not recall key events" (Article 5). The most dramatic moment came when Wexner's own attorney was caught on microphone threatening to "f—ing kill you if you answer another question with more than five words" after more than four hours of testimony (Article 1). This extraordinary outburst suggests growing tension and concern within Wexner's legal team about his responses. ### Key Signals Pointing to Escalation Several developments indicate this investigation will intensify rather than conclude: **1. Documentary Evidence Contradicts Testimony**: The January 30, 2026 Justice Department document release contains communications and financial records with Wexner's name appearing "both redacted and unredacted" (Article 2). Democratic lawmakers clearly believe these documents tell a different story than Wexner's testimony suggests. **2. FBI Co-Conspirator Designation**: A 2019 FBI document described Wexner as a "potential co-conspirator" of Epstein's, though no charges were filed (Article 6). This designation, combined with unconvincing testimony, creates a foundation for renewed scrutiny. **3. International Connections**: Article 2 reveals that former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak "received Wexner Foundation funds" and "years later, he partnered with Epstein." This international dimension suggests the investigation's scope may expand beyond Wexner personally. **4. Partisan Divide**: Notably, no Republican lawmakers attended the deposition, though staff members were present (Article 6). This partisan split could become significant as the investigation progresses into an election year. ### Predictions: Three Likely Outcomes **Criminal Referrals Are Coming** The combination of Democratic skepticism, documentary evidence, and Wexner's repeated memory lapses creates a near-certain path toward criminal referrals to the Department of Justice. Rep. Garcia's statement about understanding "how Epstein amassed the wealth that enabled his crimes" (Article 5) signals that Democrats view Wexner's financial support as potentially criminal facilitation, not mere victimization. Expect the committee to formally refer the matter for perjury investigation and potential obstruction charges within 30-60 days of the transcript's release. **Additional Witnesses Will Be Subpoenaed** The investigation won't stop with Wexner. Article 2's mention of Ehud Barak and the Wexner Foundation suggests a broader network of individuals who may have facilitated or benefited from Epstein's operations. Financial advisers, accountants, attorneys, and foundation officials who worked with both men will likely receive subpoenas as Democrats attempt to document the full extent of the financial relationship. The "vast sums" Wexner claims were stolen will require detailed accounting—and testimony from those who managed the money. **Civil Litigation Will Accelerate** Wexner's deposition testimony, once fully public, will provide ammunition for civil plaintiffs seeking damages from Epstein's estate and associated parties. His admissions of a close, decades-long financial relationship—combined with Democratic lawmakers' assertions that he "provided financial support" even after Epstein's 2008 conviction (Article 6)—will strengthen claims that he bears civil liability for enabling trafficking operations. **Political Weaponization** The partisan divide evident in the deposition attendance suggests Republicans may use the investigation to attack Democratic priorities or defend wealthy donors. Conversely, Democrats may leverage the investigation to highlight elite impunity and push for stronger trafficking laws. As 2026 midterm elections approach, expect both parties to use the Epstein connection for political advantage. ### The Long Game Wexner's legal team clearly understands the stakes—hence the attorney's extraordinary threat caught on microphone. At 88, facing potential criminal referrals and mounting civil liability, Wexner's strategy of feigned forgetfulness and victimhood appears unlikely to succeed. The documentary record is too extensive, the financial connections too clear, and the political pressure too intense. The coming months will likely see a steady drumbeat of revelations as the full deposition becomes public, additional witnesses are questioned, and investigative journalists dig deeper into the Wexner Foundation's international connections. This story is far from over—it's only beginning its next, potentially most consequential chapter.