Journalist and author Michael Wolff is facing intense scrutiny after the House Oversight Committee released emails on Wednesday, November 12, 2025, revealing his communications with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The correspondence, part of over 20,000 pages obtained from Epstein’s estate, shows Wolff advising Epstein on public relations strategy regarding then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.
The emails date back to December 15, 2015, when Wolff warned Epstein that CNN planned to question Trump about his relationship with the financier during a televised debate. When Epstein asked what answer Trump should give, Wolff responded with strategic advice that raised immediate ethical concerns among journalism experts.
“I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff wrote back to Epstein. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt.”
The revelation has sparked debate about the boundaries between journalism and advocacy. According to reports, Edward Wasserman, a professor at UC Berkeley, criticized Wolff’s approach. Journalism ethics experts have noted that while journalists build relationships with sources to obtain information, certain boundaries must be maintained when serving the public interest.
Wolff has built a career covering Trump’s presidency, authoring four books about the administration. His first book, “Fire and Fury,” became a bestseller in 2018. The author has defended his methods, acknowledging that his comments to Epstein were “embarrassing” in hindsight but maintaining he was cultivating a valuable source.
“That’s what a journalist, a writer in that situation, does if you want to stay — if you want to be invited back the next day and the next day and the next day,” Wolff said. “As my mother would say, you get more with a little honey.”
“Perhaps we’re getting close to the smoking gun” on the extent of the president’s relationship with the convicted sex offender, Michael Wolff said.
According to Wolff, Epstein and Trump maintained an exceptionally close bond for over ten years, during which they shared nearly everything—from private jets and women to business and financial insights.
It’s striking, Wolff noted, that while Epstein’s ties to numerous public figures have severely damaged their reputations, the individual he was most closely connected to has faced no consequences. That person is Donald Trump.
According to sources, Wolff said he recorded 100 hours with Epstein. The journalist has characterized his relationship with the financier as part of his reporting process to better understand Trump’s inner circle and connections. He has distinguished himself from traditional newsroom journalists, describing his work as that of a writer who operates outside prescribed institutional rules.
The released emails are not isolated to Wolff. Another journalist, Landon Thomas Jr., a former New York Times finance reporter, also appeared in the correspondence with Epstein. Thomas left the newspaper over what the Times described as a clear violation of its ethics policies.
The House Oversight Committee’s release of these documents comes as Congress prepares for a vote on the full release of government files related to Epstein. The vote is expected next week, adding pressure to an already contentious political environment surrounding the case.
Journalism ethics experts have voiced concerns about the implications of Wolff’s conduct. They argue that while cultivating relationships with sources is standard practice in investigative journalism, actively advising subjects on media strategy crosses a fundamental line. The public has a right to assume journalists act independently rather than as participants in the events they cover.
Wolff has attempted to contextualize his actions by explaining that his goal was to encourage Epstein to speak publicly about his relationship with Trump. However, the language in the emails suggests a more collaborative approach than traditional source development. The correspondence indicates Wolff was positioning himself as an adviser rather than maintaining the professional distance typically expected in journalism.
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions in modern journalism about access and ethics. Wolff has achieved extraordinary access to powerful figures throughout his career, including Trump administration officials. His methods, while yielding bestselling books and insider accounts, have consistently drawn criticism for blurring lines between reporter and participant.
As the scandal continues to unfold, questions remain about what other revelations may emerge from the 20,000 documents obtained by the committee. The upcoming congressional vote on releasing additional government files could provide further context about relationships between Epstein, Trump, and various media figures who covered them.
