Howard Lutnick, the United States Commerce Secretary, told a closed-door congressional hearing on Wednesday that he could not remember why he and his family had lunch on Jeffrey Epstein's private Caribbean island in 2012, a revelation that has intensified the political storm around his association with the deceased sex offender. The appearance before the House Oversight Committee marked the first time a sitting cabinet member has testified in the year-old inquiry into Epstein's crimes and the alleged failures of law enforcement to hold him accountable. Mr Lutnick, a former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, had previously claimed he cut ties with Epstein after the financier's 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor, but Justice Department documents released earlier this year showed the lunch invitation was extended years later, and he admitted to three meetings in total.

From Washington, the testimony exposed a stark partisan rift. Democratic lawmakers, emerging from the hearing, accused Mr Lutnick of lying to the public and called for his resignation. Representative Yassamin Ansari described him as a 'pathological liar', while others noted that he had also invited Epstein to a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton in 2015, a detail that undercuts his narrative of estrangement. The committee's Republican chairman, James Comer, offered a more measured assessment, describing the secretary as 'forthcoming' but warning that any misstatements could constitute a felony. Mr Lutnick said he found it 'unsettling' that Epstein's assistant knew he was in the Virgin Islands at the time of the lunch, an admission that has only deepened scepticism.

Viewed from capitals across the Atlantic, the episode underscores the enduring toxicity of the Epstein affair for the American political elite. The inquiry, which is examining how Epstein built his fortune and whether powerful figures shielded him, has already ensnared figures from both parties. Mr Lutnick's inability to provide a credible explanation for his presence on the island – he told lawmakers the visit was 'inexplicable' – has fuelled suspicions that the network of complicity may extend deeper than previously acknowledged. The hearing also tested how much scrutiny lawmakers are willing to apply to powerful men who kept company with Epstein long after his conviction, a question with ramifications beyond a single cabinet member.

The hearing is unlikely to be the last. With a voluntary interview now completed, the committee may seek further testimony from other administration officials. For Mr Lutnick, the immediate challenge is to contain the damage within a cabinet already buffeted by controversy. Yet for the broader investigation, the question remains whether the political will exists to pursue the truth beyond the familiar cycles of accusation and denial. As observers in London note, the Epstein case has become a mirror held up to the American establishment – and the reflection so far is far from flattering.