🔮 WHEN FILES?

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Ro Khanna Predicts "Enormous Pressure" if Trump Misses Dec. 19 Epstein Deadline

Ro Khanna represents California’s 17th district, and co-authored the Epstein Transparency Act with Thomas Massie, which passed unanimously in the Senate and 427-1 in the House.

With the DOJ dragging its feet ahead of the December 19 deadline to release the files, Khanna reveals his plan to pressure the Trump administration into coughing up the information.

This interview has been edited for length. All answers are his own and not trading or financial advice.

---

You and Thomas Massie were instrumental in getting the Epstein Transparency Act passed. Do you have faith they’re going to comply with the December 19th deadline?

There are two decisions that give me great confidence on this. Because of my bill, a judge in Florida ordered that the grand jury testimony be released. He reversed a previous judge’s ruling, citing the Congress. And then today, a judge in New York ordered the same thing. So now you have the federal courts basically saying that the grand jury testimony has to be released. The Justice Department can’t hide behind that.

And given that the courts, including Trump-appointed judges, are giving such deference to the Epstein files, that makes me believe that Pam Bondi and the Justice Department are going to comply, because otherwise they’d be losing in federal court. I am quite confident that we will get these files, and we’re going to fight until we do.

The rules on this polymarket are pretty extensive on what counts as new information. What happens if they release some small amount of info that doesn’t meet a reasonable standard?

Massie and I have it already lined up for the survivors to be here again from around the country, with their lawyers who’ve seen these files, if there are any games played. The country will hear from the survivors again, and that will put an enormous amount of pressure. Of course, we could go to court and continue to fight for transparency, but my view is that what ultimately will matter is public opinion.

Do you have a sense of who will be named?

I have a sense. Obviously from my conversations with the survivors and my conversations with the survivors’ lawyers. But I don’t want to engage in public speculation because I’m the author of the bill. I just want the files to come out so the American people will know for themselves. But what I can do is have enough people who’ve seen these files to say, hey, this isn’t a full release, we need more information.

Were you surprised by the resignation of Marjorie Taylor Greene?

I was very surprised. And, in candor, I was a bit disappointed, because I had developed a working relationship with her. We were working on cost of living legislation together, health care legislation together. And she was very honorable in my interactions on the Epstein files. So I would never have guessed that I’d have a moment of regret seeing her leave, but that’s the truth.

Do you think more Republicans will follow?

Anytime you have a sense that people may lose the House, you have a lot of people leave, because it’s much better to be in the majority than the minority. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a number of other announcements over the next few months.

Have you seen our forecast for Democrats taking the House? I was going to ask you to guess before I tell you.

My guess would be 75%.

Wow, it’s at 76% today. What would push it into the 80s or 90s?

How annoying President Trump continues to be. How many journalists he’s going to call “piggy.” Some people laugh, but the American people don’t like it. Many people voted for him in spite of all that because they thought prices were too high. But deep down, they’re annoyed by that. He’s reminding them of all the stuff they didn’t like about his first term. So does he continue that, or does he have a moment like he had with Zohran, where he was charming and a different version of himself? Second is the economy. Prices haven’t come down. Job creation has slowed down in places.

What about the Senate?

I think the Senate is remarkably in play. If you had asked me at the beginning of the year, I would have said we had almost no chance. Now I think we’ve got a real chance. I’d put the odds at one out of three.

Following the shutdown, you called for Senator Schumer to step down as Minority Leader. Do you still stand by that?

I believe that Senator Schumer mishandled the shutdown, and he doesn’t represent the future. We should have been able to get some extension of the Affordable Care Act, and we should have been voting at the same time for paying our troops, for paying air traffic controllers. So I think we need new leadership in the Senate. I stand by that. Schumer has had a distinguished career, but he’s just not the future of the party.

Odds of extending the ACA premium tax credits, a major Democratic demand of the shutdown negotiations, were at 85% in late November and have tanked to around 19%. Is that a fair reflection of where things stand now?

Unfortunately, I think it’s become very challenging to get the Affordable Care Act tax credits extended. The compromise of one year or two years, which I am open to supporting, is something that the Republican leadership isn’t for. At this point, you have a case where people may have huge premium increases, not be able to afford their health care. It really is a disaster for the American people.

What would have to fall into place for it to pass by year end?

We would need to coalesce around a bipartisan agreement. Sam Liccardo has one he’s pushing that would get a one year extension, negotiate on eligibility, no one over $250,000. Trump, it seems to me, is open to it, but I don’t think he can get his own congressional leadership there. This is the best shot, in my view, to get something done before we head into an election year in 2026.

Would you support another shutdown at this point?

I don’t think we need to shut down government. I think what we need to do is get to an agreement to extend the tax credits. We didn’t need to shut down the government the first time. And we certainly didn’t need to shut down Congress, which was done because they didn’t want to vote on the Epstein files.

You’ve been active on Pete Hegseth accountability over the Venezuela strikes. What are you looking for?

He needs to come before the Armed Services Committee. He needs to explain what happened to the American people. That should happen before Congress leaves for the holidays. And he needs to release the second tape. They’ve said they would release it, but now are hesitating. And he should stop blaming the admiral for his decision. That’s total cowardice. You don’t blame a decorated military officer for your judgment.

Do you think Hegseth should go?

It’s not just one incident. It’s Signalgate, and he didn’t have classified information properly protected. Then it’s yelling at the generals, calling them fat, when they’re the ones risking their lives. Then it’s his inability to give a clear standard for why we’re striking boats in Venezuela. And then it’s his refusal to take responsibility. He’s lost the credibility, not just with the American people, but with his own officer corps, his own military. He’s on thin ice. What I can tell you is that Hegseth is losing a lot of Republican support on the Hill.

The Trump cabinet has been pretty stable compared to the first term. Are you surprised?

No. Trump, first time, he tried to appoint people who would be independent-minded and willing to question him. People like Mattis, Tillerson. The second term, he’s surrounded himself with acolytes. His lesson from the first term was, I don’t want anyone who’s going to have a different opinion than mine. I want yes people. And if you have yes people around you in an orbit, they’re more likely to stay.

Does Trump have authority to conduct these alleged drug boat strikes? Or a wider attack on Venezuela?

No on both. Certainly not on the wider war. That would absolutely require a War Powers resolution. But also on these boat strikes. He’s not giving us any indication of what the standard is. If it’s just that they’re bringing cocaine in, can that cocaine not be interdicted? Is there no more narrowly tailored solution? He’s engaged in a policy without justification.

Do you think Trump is looking to expand the conflict?

Too many people around him want regime change or want to take Maduro out, and there’s reporting of CIA activity there. My sense is that it is definitely on the table, and it would be a big mistake.

You’ve endorsed progressive challengers for 2026. Who should we be watching?

I’ve endorsed Graham Platner in Maine and Kat Abughazaleh in Chicago. I think a disproportionate amount of them will win. You’re going to see both incumbents lose and a lot of conventional candidates lose to challengers.

We have Graham Platner in the mid-60s right now.

Wow. I’m obviously on the progressive wing. I want us to go in a progressive populist direction.

As a Member of Congress, how do you look at prediction markets?

I certainly look at them around election time to see how people are looking at the odds on an outcome. But I must say in candor, I find the idea of betting on every single occurrence in human life a bit undermining of our humanity. It can encourage a fatalism.

How so?

If Mamdani had taken the prediction market seriously, he may not have run. He was at 1%. But political outcomes can be shaped by agency, by action. I’ve never had a case where these markets were so correct months before an outcome happened. Usually they just reflect the conventional wisdom of a moment. With Mamdani, it was like the day before the markets totally reversed.

I thought it was silly when someone told me there were bets on whether the Epstein files would get released. People are talking about that while I’m standing with the survivors at a press conference, and they’re sharing stories about the trauma they’re facing.

But for a casual observer who doesn’t have time to go into everything, it’s just another data point. You’ve captured the zeitgeist of our era. I almost think it matters as much what your listing is on Polymarket as what your poll numbers are. You’ve become part of the conversation.

---

Disclaimer

Nothing in The Oracle is financial, investment, legal or any other type of professional advice. All odds are time sensitive. Anything provided is for informational purposes only and is not meant to be an endorsement of any activity or market. Terms of Service on polymarket.com prohibit US persons and certain other jurisdictions from using Polymarket to trade, although data and information is viewable globally.