Vice President JD Vance said in an interview released July 15, 2026, that Jeffrey Epstein "clearly had connections to the highest levels of American intelligence" and "clearly had connections to the highest levels of Israeli intelligence." Vance made the remarks during a conversation with podcaster Joe Rogan, who prompted the exchange by stating that "most people seem to think Epstein was Mossad" — Mossad being Israel's national intelligence agency, roughly comparable to the CIA in its foreign intelligence role (Al Jazeera).

Vance went further on the Israeli connection, telling Rogan that Epstein "seemed to be connected to the elements of the Israeli deep state that were left of centre" and was not "super connected to the right of centre of Israeli politics." The term "deep state" generally refers to networks of government officials, particularly in intelligence and military circles, believed to operate outside democratic oversight (Al Jazeera).

These comments are the most explicit public statement to date from a sitting vice president asserting a link between Epstein and intelligence services. They also place Vance directly at odds with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who stated in July 2025 that she had not seen evidence of a Jeffrey Epstein link to U.S. or foreign intelligence (AP News). The Director of National Intelligence, or DNI, oversees and coordinates the work of all 18 U.S. intelligence agencies.

Vance did not confine his criticism to the intelligence question. He said the Trump administration "absolutely screwed up the comms of the Epstein files," and that former Attorney General Pam Bondi "overstated what we had and what we didn't have" regarding the files (Al Jazeera).

Bondi, who was fired by President Donald Trump as Attorney General in April 2026, had been a central figure in the administration's Epstein file rollout. Under her leadership, the Justice Department distributed binders titled "The Epstein files: Phase 1" and "Declassified" to conservative commentators. Bondi had also publicly stated that an alleged Epstein client list was "sitting on my desk right now" (Al Jazeera).

Vance's acknowledgment that he is an Epstein "conspiracy theorist," first reported in June 2026, provides a longer arc to the vice president's posture on the Epstein matter (AP News). In August 2025, Vance spokesman William Martin denied reports of a meeting scheduled at the Vice President's residence to discuss Epstein strategy, stating: "There was never a supposed meeting scheduled at the Vice President's residence to discuss Epstein strategy" (Reuters.

The broader context here involves a vice president who is simultaneously breaking with his own administration's former top law enforcement official, contradicting the intelligence community's leadership on a matter of significant public sensitivity, and doing so on one of the largest media platforms available. The choice of venue is itself notable: Rogan's audience dwarfs that of traditional Sunday news programs, and the interview format permits extended, unscripted exposition in a way that press briefings do not.

The tension between Vance's assertions and Gabbard's stated position creates a public split within the executive branch on a question that has generated intense public and political scrutiny. Whether Gabbard or the Office of the Director of National Intelligence responds to the vice president's claims directly will shape how the rift is managed going forward. The fact that Vance's comments come after Bondi's dismissal, rather than during her tenure, also insulates the criticism from immediate operational consequences inside the Justice Department while still carrying the weight of the vice presidency.

Vance's framing of the Israeli connection, distinguishing between left-of-centre and right-of-centre elements of what he calls the "Israeli deep state," adds a layer of specificity unusual for an official at his level. It ventures into terrain that diplomatic and intelligence professionals typically treat with considerable caution, given the sensitivity of bilateral intelligence relationships and the potential for such public statements to be leveraged by foreign actors.