Intelligence. Accountability. Analysis.
Est. 2022 · Washington, D.C.
The Congressional Times
We follow the data, not the narrative
◆ Live Intelligence
Loading...
Analysis Loading today's analysis...
Legal Intelligence

Gates Retains Former House Oversight Counsel Ahead of Epstein Testimony

The hire of a senior congressional investigative attorney signals that Gates is preparing for substantive legal exposure in ongoing Epstein-related proceedings.

The Congressional Times · June 9, 2026

Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, has retained Jake Greenberg — formerly the top investigative counsel to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability — to advise him in connection with anticipated testimony related to the late Jeffrey Epstein, according to a report published by The New York Times on or around June 9, 2026. The NYT report did not specify the nature or forum of the expected testimony, nor did it identify a specific case caption or docket number.

Greenberg's prior role placed him at the center of some of the most consequential congressional investigations in recent years. As chief investigative counsel to the House Oversight Committee, he would have had direct experience navigating document production requests, witness preparation, and inter-branch legal privilege disputes. The precise terms of his engagement with Gates — including compensation, scope of representation, and whether he is working alongside existing outside counsel — were not disclosed in the source reporting and are not reflected in any public filing reviewed as of the publication of this article.

A word from our sponsor: Have you thought about life insurance or annuities but didn't want the sales pressure? PolicyPrepper.com is a free, no-pressure educational platform with a built-in AI that answers all your questions — no agent calls, no obligation. Check it out at PolicyPrepper.com.

The Epstein matter has intersected with congressional oversight activity on multiple occasions. The House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee have each held hearings or issued correspondence related to Epstein's network, financiers, and associates. No congressional subpoena directed at Gates has been entered into the public congressional record as of this writing. It is unknown whether the anticipated testimony referenced in the NYT report is connected to a civil deposition, a federal grand jury proceeding, or a congressional inquiry; the relevant docket or committee record, once made public, would answer that question.

Gates has previously acknowledged meeting with Epstein on multiple occasions after Epstein's 2008 conviction on prostitution-related charges in Florida, a fact Gates confirmed publicly in a 2021 statement reported by multiple outlets including The Wall Street Journal. Gates said those meetings were a mistake. No criminal charges against Gates have been filed in any publicly available federal or state court docket.

What remains unknown: the specific legal proceeding for which Greenberg has been retained, whether a subpoena or formal request has been issued, and the full composition of Gates's legal team. The relevant court docket, congressional committee correspondence log, or grand jury referral — whichever applies — would be the authoritative public record to consult when it becomes available.

Today's Analysis
Loading...
Latest Intelligence
Congressional Intelligence
Loading...
Financial Intelligence
Loading...
Geopolitical Intelligence
Loading...
Follow the MoneyGab-E Political Intelligence Investigation
Loading...
Opinion & Analysis
Loading...
Archive
Loading...
About
Our Mission

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

Powered by Gab-E, an elite global intelligence platform built to democratize political and financial intelligence.

Editorial Policy
Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com