The Royals with Roya and Kate - US congressman presses the King to meet Epstein survivors

Episode Date: April 8, 2026

Will the King’s upcoming US state visit be overshadowed by the Epstein scandal? US Congressman Ro Khanna, who co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act, tells Roya Nikkhah and Kate Mansey why he believes King Charles should use his address to Congress to acknowledge the scandal and meet survivors. Plus, The Times chief US reporter Josie Ensor explains why the Epstein story risks following the Royal Family’s diplomatic work in America.Do you think the King should meet Epstein survivors? And can the King help repair the 'special relationship' with President Trump? Get in touch: [e-mail]: GettyProducer: Robert WallaceExecutive Producer: Priyanka Deladia Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hello and welcome to the Royals, the podcast where we tell you what happens behind palace walls and why it matters. I'm Kate Manse and I'm Roya Nicar. In just a few weeks, America will be getting the full royal treatment as the King and Queen travel to the US on a state visit for a high-stakes diplomatic moment for the special relationship. It'll be a test of the royal family's soft power at a crucial time for Britain's relationship with America. another story is threatening to travel with the king across the Atlantic. Well, Congressman Roe Kana, a leading voice on Capitol Hill and author of the Epstein-Files Transparency Act, has written to the king, urging him to meet survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and Galane Maxwell during the visit. Well, the palace has been swift to rule out any suggestion that the king will meet Epstein survivors,

but the countdown to the visit is now on. So can the monarchy keep the focus on diplomacy or does the Epstein story threaten to overshadow the trip? Later in this episode, we'll also be talking to Josie Ensir, the Times' chief US correspondent, who has spent years covering the Epstein story. But first, we're delighted to be joined by the man who wrote that letter to the king. Congressman Rokane. Congressman, welcome to the royals. Thank you. Congressman Buckingham Palace has made it clear through sources we've both been speaking to over here

that the King is not really willing or able, as they say, to meet survivors of Jeffrey Epstein during this state visit. What was your reaction to that? Well, it's disappointing. Willing and able are two different things. He's certainly able to meet them. We made it very clear that none of the specific facts regarding his brother, would be discussed. We've made it clear that uncomfortable questions would not be asked, such as when did the royal family know about allegations concerning his brother, such as how many

times did Epstein actually visit the royal court, such as why did the king not speak out earlier regarding his brother, why did it take two American members of Congress to force the king's hand in saying that there should be prosecution? Those are the questions. the media will ask when he comes to the United States. And I don't want those to be the dominant headlines. And if he had just met with the survivors and said that he may be a king, but that doesn't make him any better than the survivors, that he understands that he is born of the same flesh and has equal dignity as the survivors, he would have done himself a favor. But look, there's a real question about what role the British monarchy is going to play in the 21st century.

I mean, you know, it's a vestige of colonialism. It's a vestige of a world of power, which is in contradiction to the equal rights and values that most of my generation believe in. And, you know, the king has done things like on climate change and other areas where people may be thinking, okay, you could play a force for good. But his refusal, if he really does refuse to meet the abstin survivors, it would be a big mistake. And I don't think he understands how thin the line is of the support. for the royals in the United States. Have you had a reaction from the Palace directly? Obviously, we've been speaking to Buckingham Palace here.

You've seen the media reports about, you know, him feeling that he can't prejudice a police investigation which is ongoing in the UK. Have you received any direct response from the Palace or the King's lawyers at all? We have not. I reached out to the British ambassador. We have not heard back yet.

But that's just not true. I mean, there's no one who thinks that the King, meaning with the survivors in a context where his brother's case is not going to come up, prejudice is anything. All it would do is recognize the trauma they faced, the inhumanity they face, and this Epstein class who allegedly abused and raped and trafficked young girls with no consequence. So, Congressman, you've effectively saying that the argument that the palace are putting forward, that the king and queen, of course, who's a profound campaigner for victims of sexual abuse. Are you saying that you think that the reason they're giving that that would potentially

prejudice the ongoing legal investigation here into Andrew Matt Matt and Windsor who denies all rending? Are you saying that's a bit of a fudge? No, I'm saying it's ridiculous. I'm saying they would be laughed out of parliament and they'd be laughed out of an election campaign in America. I think the king, I've seen some of the clips. It's like they'd never been asked questions by the press. It would be embarrassing. They wouldn't get 2% of the vote if they had to actually campaign. Here's the problem. They're not above the law. They're not any better. than you or me. And look, the media is going to make this the focus of a lot of his trip. And look, I know the president is enamored with the monarchy. The president's 80 years old.

Like, think about people my age, 50 and younger. You think we're enamored by that? Absolutely not. So I had respect for the king in terms of his climate advocacy and other advocacy, but he would make a total blunder for the entire British monarchy if he does not acknowledge the Epstein survivors. I believe he should meet with them. At the very least, he should be mentioning them in his remarks. So you're saying, Congressman, there's more at stake here that it's actually the future of the monarchy at stake. This isn't just about one Epstein scandal.

You're saying that the whole, you know, the reputation of the institution of monarchy is at issue, essentially, if Charles doesn't meet the survivors. I do believe that. I don't, look, obviously, it's for the British people to decide their own government. And if they want a constitutional monarchy, that's their right and prerogative. I don't judge that. But I'm talking about the king's role. and the monarchies' role in the world.

Right now, when you think of the British monarchy, front and center in many Americans' minds, at least over the last six months, is Epstein. It's his brother and what he did and why his titles were stripped. And I believe the king could turn this around and say the modern British monarchy is going to be a force for good in the world,

for actually lifting up the underprivilege, not protecting the Epstein class and look at what Britain's doing. Congressman, to that very point, you gave an interview to Katie Balls, who's in Washington for us, the Sunday Times at the weekend. And you did make the point that Britain and the UK has taken the issue of accountability over the Epstein issue much more seriously. You did just mention as well the fact that, you know, you don't want to see the King protect the whole institution. He has, we have seen our unprecedented scenes here.

He has de-titled. He's removed all his brother's titles. Of course, being in the Epstein files is not an indication of wrongdoing. We have had Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, although he denies wrongdoing, an absolute focal point of the whole Jeffrey Epstein saga and scandal. And there has been relatively little, if any, accountability by public figures in America. What do you make of that? I believe Britain has done better. I mean, I'm a straight shooter.

I believe that the British people have done better in seeking accountability. They are opening up an investigation against a former prince. In our country, we've had no one from the Trump administration face accountability. consequences. So it's the irony that two American member as a Congress got the Fowles release and it's other nations like Britain that are actually taking it seriously. So I give the British people full credit. But that is nothing to do with the monarchy. But what about the king? Because the king has acted. He has acted. He has absolutely stripped his brother of all his titles. He's made sure he's never going to be seen in public again on official maneuvers. The king has acted.

It shouldn't just be down to the king, should it, to take all accountability on this. Why is there no accountability stateside on this? Well, look, I don't think the king's actions are sufficient, though I appreciate that he stripped his brother of titles. I believe the king needs to be answering questions, ultimately about what he knew, what the royal family learned, how to make sure this never happens again, and what the reparations will be for survivors. But I believe the king should meet with the survivors, given the stakes of what happened with his brother. That said, if you're asking me, should other people in the United States be taking accountability?

Absolutely. If you're asking me, has Britain done a better job on accountability than the United States? Absolutely. I'm not going to defend our inability to hold the elite accountable here in the United States. So we have fallen short. And Congressman, you've led the way on releasing the Epstein files and what we know so far. I mean, that last data dump was huge. We had three million documents unveiled.

Now, can you tell us a bit more about whether, there'll be any more to come. We know that there are other files that weren't released. What else is there to come? Is there anything else lurking in the files that might worry the king, for example, or any other people in power? Well, actually, Britain has requested the remaining three million files. That's the irony. It's Britain's a government that is siding with the compliance of an American law that Thomas Vassie and I drafted. So I don't want to be sensational. I have no idea whether there's anything in the remaining documents that would embarrass the the British rural family. I just have no clue, and I don't want to create any conspiracy or

speculation without facts. What I do know is that there are other survivors who have named rich and powerful men who abuse them, and that there are more details about the men who abuse them and why in those files, and those need to come out. I also would just say about the king is, you know, I've said that he should meet the survivors, and I really believe that is the most important thing. But short of that, when he does speak to the Congress, where I'll be, on our 250th independence anniversary, he should at least acknowledge the Epstein scandal. He should acknowledge the trauma that these young girls face. He should make it clear that the British monarchy condemns that and will take actions to prevent that, and that they support the release of the files.

At the very least, it seems to me that even if he doesn't meet the survivors, which is my hope and the survivors hope, he would make a clear acknowledgement of that in his speech. So you're hoping that he's going to address that in public in some way, even if, you know, as he says, he's not able to meet those survivors? I do. And, you know, I personally have nothing bad respect for him. And before this, all I knew was his advocacy on climate change. And I thought that was actually very, very thoughtful. So I would hope that the British market can play a constructive role.

I don't have any sense of ill will towards the monarchy. It's just that I'll tell you if there was someone in my family who had allegations of abusing a survivor, I would be meeting with those survivors, and that's where my perspective comes from. Well, fascinating to hear your insights. It's certainly not going to be a straightforward visit, plenty of opportunity for controversy,

but we'll see how it plays out. In the meantime, Congressman Roe Kana, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. Coming up, will the Epstein story overshadow the monarchy's work in America? We'll be back with US reporter Josie Ensoor after the break. Well, let's widen that lens now, because is there a risk that the Epstein story could completely overshadow the monarchy's work while they're in the US? That's a good question, Roya, and there's no better person to help us answer that than the US chief reporter Josie Enso, who joins us down the line.

Welcome to the Royals, Josie. Josie, we've just been hearing from Congressman Roe Kana. What did you make of his intervention over the last few weeks, particularly with that letter to the king? Is it a political stunt or do you think it's a serious attempt by him to force action and actually make something happen during this state visit that we're not expecting? I think it's a bit of both. I mean, Kana is a pretty savvy and canny actor over here.

I mean, he has massively raised his profile. He's an otherwise little-known representative from California, who's on the oversight committee, which doesn't usually make the headlines. So every single time he talks about Epstein, all of the channels have him on from, you know, CNN to MSNBC. He gave an interesting interview to Sunday Times over the weekend in which he kind of talked about his sort of personal reason, almost, to challenge the monarchy, which was that his grandfather was actually jailed by the British monarchy, and he spent four years in jail in the 90s 30s as part of Gandhi's independence movement. So I think he has a kind of very strong-willed attitude when it comes particularly to Epstein, but also, So there might be a kind of a personal animus as well.

You have worked on the Epstein story for years. You know a lot of the survivors. You've done some amazing coverage on some of their stories. You've spoken to Virginia New Jifrey's family. In terms of this meeting that he is calling for between the king and some of the survivors, what do you make of that? How important would that be?

How meaningful would that be for the survivors if it was to happen? Which, of course, we're told by the palace it probably won't. I think they're grateful for any amount of pressure that's put on this. Any attention is on this is gratefully received. I mean, you have to understand in the context that the US is doing so little in comparison to Britain. And so a lot of people are looking overseas almost just in a desperate search for some sort of accountability. And perhaps they see an easier way to do this so far has kind of been to make the monarchy and the British royal family responsible. And so far, to some extent this has worked. I mean, the idea of former Prince Andrew being detitled was

unthinkable. But I think they understand the kind of realpolitik here. They're not expecting any kind of grand gesture, but just the fact that this is being talked about, I think, and even being discussed is certainly symbolic to them. But it's interesting, isn't it? Andrew has denied any wrongdoing in association with his friendship with Geoffrey Epstein. But you know, you talk about they're having a moment of publicity. But shouldn't the Americans be doing more to have that kind of accountability over there? Because a lot of it does feel like it's been batted across this side of the Atlantic, particularly bringing, like you say, bringing the monarchy, bringing the king into the story.

What is being done there to kind of shed more light on Epstein and help the survivors over there? Yeah, I mean, in the moment a lot of it is being left to the media. You know, Pan Bondi, who's now been reassigned as Attorney General, was kind of leading this push to keep the files secret. This was an issue that Trump was campaigning on in the last election. And so people were kind of holding him to that campaign promise. And you know, you had the Attorney General standing up and saying, there's no co-conspirators, there's nothing here.

We're closing the case. And it was sort of almost like a Streisand effect where they're kind of like, don't talk about this thing and that all that anyone's ever been able to talk about. You know, so many people that I speak to, including survivors, are convinced. They're convinced that the Iran war has only been launched as a kind of major distraction away from the Epstein files. You know, the reason that this kind of accountability is difficult in the US is that a number of members of the current cabinet and Trump allies. And, you know, Trump himself has mentioned many, many times in the files.

And there's been kind of back and forth about what has been rejected, what hasn't. So I think if you kind of have this reluctancy right at the very top of there to be accountability, then it kind of, you know, trickles down right to the bottom. And so there really has only been a kind of a small critical number of congressmen really trying to do anything. And, you know, when you're talking about how seriously the idea of Charles meeting the victims or speaking before Congress, the answer of whether it's been taken seriously is absolutely not. I mean, you look at Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, who quite literally laughed when he was asked this question by Fox News report the other day. He said, the King of England has nothing to do with Epstein. That is a joke and it's offensive for him to suggest that. They're rallying around to kind of try and protect the royal family from a sort of scrutiny that they're having to face. And what's interesting is because of this complete lack accountability in the US, you're seeing this real kind of civil and civilian-led movement. So people who are named in these files, they can't leave the house without being harassed.

I mean, we're really seeing a kind of a groundswell of public support for more to be done and people taking it into their own hands almost. So given that it's such a huge issue over there in the States, does that mean there's going to be a massive Epstein-shaped shadow over the King's visit when he comes later this month? You sort of have to view it in the context of the moment in the US. So what has emerged, particularly in the kind of the wake of the Epstein files, is this like horrified block of voters.

They're kind of anti-Iran, anti-Eptstein, anti-elite, pro-working class, potentially anti-monarchy. And you have the head of the British state kind of walking into this moment that's inevitably very, very charged. And so a lot of that fits into what people have been reading in the Epstein files. that there was this kind of cabal, a very wealthy and influential people working to kind of suppress the victims and suppress those who, you know, aren't in their circle. I think in many respects King Charles, whether he likes it or not, kind of represents that to a lot of Americans. So obviously it's being viewed one way abroad at home.

You know, Trevor Ndowa, the kind of late show host was joking about Britain's obsession with Megan and Harry and how, you know, everyone should be talking about King Charles and everyone should be talking about Prince Andrew. but actually they're not talking about Megan and Harry and they see that as a major distraction. But yeah, I think it's important to kind of understand the moment we're in America and what he is stepping into. Well, given that you've got kind of US talk show hosts sort of taking the Mickey, if you like, out of the Royal Family, could this be quite a dangerous move then for Charles and Camilla?

Could there be at risk of being embarrassed during the trip, do you think, from what you're seeing over there? I think the administration and those around him will try their very best not to let that happen. I mean, it's in no one's interest really in the establishment here for that to happen. The president was a huge supporter and fan of the late queens. And I think some of that affection has been transferred to Charles. And I think that there will be a great appetite for him not to be embarrassed.

I mean, as Mike Johnson said in the quote earlier, like, we do not want to create an international incident here. So I think there's going to be great effort on this side of the pond to make sure that that doesn't happen. You know, whether there are things out of their control, like, protests or demonstrations, to a large extent, they can't control that. But I think there's definitely a desire to kind of protect them in a bubble from the kind of anger that there's bubbling in America. I think what we're definitely not going to see, are we, is we're not, I mean, talking about that control, Josie, we're not going to see a repeat of MBS in the Oval Office being asked a lot of questions by the US press corps about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. We're not going

to see that. If we were just to put Epstein to one side, and obviously that's not. going to happen on this visit, but separate of the Epstein issue, how important is this visit in terms of how badly damaged the relationship between the US and UK has been recently? Because we have had effectively a war of words, mostly coming from Donald Trump about Kirstama, Kirstama's actions during this conflict with Iran. He hasn't towed Donald Trump's line. We've had Donald Trump calling him not Winston Churchill, comparing him to Neville Chamberlain. How badly damaged is that, quote, unquote, special relationship at the moment? And how important is this visit towards repairing it, do you think?

I think what's interesting is that Trump always reserves this really special criticism for the British so-called special relationship. I mean, you know, he likes to talk about Macron and France and Western Europe, but he really does kind of reserve this special criticism for us. I think also part of it is kind of the pomp and pageantry of it. So, you know, he knows that every time he goes to the UK, he's going to get this kind of kingly reception. And you just look at what he's doing in the East Wing in the White House.

I mean, he's trying to change the East Wing entirely into this, you know, giant state ballroom. I mean, he's pretty much modelling it on the things that he's seen in the UK and Balmoral. And he has a great desire for that. So to kind of get then rejected by that is quite hurtful to him. I mean, he's kind of come to view Britain as this fair weather friend. And he suggested that Britain was no longer the Royce of allies. In terms of, like, Starmas standing in the American press, what's been interesting as I was kind of reading a New York Times article,

And one of the Times commentators suggested that they always described it as a love actually moment. And this is the kind of reference to that 2003 film that everyone has seen in which Hugh Grant is playing this British Prime Minister who's standing up to this bullying American president. And so I think there is an acknowledgement that a lot of what is going on at the moment is self-protectionism from the UK. And, you know, Trump both has a very long memory and a very short memory. and I think I can completely see how this trip at this time will kind of rewrite the narrative. I mean, you know, Charles is the head of the armed forces. And so, you know, it's not just purely a symbolic visit. And at a time when he feels like, you know, the military and the armed forces of the United Kingdom

and not behind him to have that visit now is clearly important timing. I mean, what is slightly awkward for Charles here is that his visit comes just, I think, days after this two-week ceasefire elapses. So, I mean, I can imagine that the president even has in his mind what he needs to do to ensure that, you know, there is an absolute chaos happening, you know, just the weekend before Charles's visit. And so I wouldn't, you know, underestimate how much this is on his mind is that they're kind of setting deadlines and deciding what to do. The question now, I suppose, is, you know, if you throw Epstein into the mix amid, you know, war in the Middle East, if you're getting your bingo card out, Josie for the US visit and seeing what you think Trump's going to say and what's on them, what do you think Epstein and the story and the scandal of Epstein would overshadowed this visit? I think the pomp and the ceremony of these visits usually has a way of stealing that limelight

and that's deliberately designed. This trip is all about marking 250 years of America, which in many, many ways is defined by its relationship to Britain. So, you know, these relationships between nations are much more important than whoever happens to be the head of state in that kind of blip in time, that blip in history. You know, will Epstein form part of the coverage? Certainly it will. I mean, this is the kind of the topic de jour. But, you know, lots of other things are going on in the world at the moment.

And I think this trip really kind of marks this moment in history for what it is. And so I think Charles will pull it off. I mean, I think the nature of how Trump hosts the royal family in this country means the kind of the spectacle of it all would largely kind of distract from anything else. And, Roya, on this side of the pond, what's your prediction? Do you think Epstein will be a big part of this visit? Or we'll be talking about the Middle East? Look, I don't, I'm not, just like his mother, the king is an arch diplomat.

He's continued to craft diplomacy in his own special way. And I think, as Josie says, he'll pull it off. But there's no escaping the fact that with the UK media and the American media and all the noise in Congress who've pushed to have these Epstein files released, that the Epstein issue will be a very controversial big and dark shadow over this visit. I'm not sure I would totally overshadow every moment of it, but it'll be a constant presence there.

And I think no matter how much the palace try and keep the king and queen out of that melee, no matter how controlled the whole visit is by, you know, the American authorities and it will be, no matter how much Donald Trump doesn't want his guests to be embarrassed, you cannot get away from the fact that the king's brother has been arrested, and he denies all wrongdoing, but that's going to be looming very large over this visit, and I think there will be questions that will come from Congress and the survivors too. What about you? What do you think? How it's going to play out? Yeah, I think it's really interesting because there's so much that the palace can't control.

You know, they've been on there on several recies. They've been measuring things with tape measures, I've been told. You know, they want everything to be kind of scrutinized. Every part of this visit has been scrutinized. It's been scheduled. But there's just so many elements that are beyond their control, such as protests about Epstein. You know, there's a lot of anger we've been hearing from Josie about the survivors.

You know, they want answers, they want accountability, both on this side of the Atlantic and on that side of the Atlantic. And I think we're going to hear those voices, you know, whether the Palace and Donald Trump like it or not, that is going to form part of the theme that we're going to see when we go out there. I'm sure it will. Josie, thank you so much for joining us on the Royals. It's great to hear from you and we'll see you out there. Well, that's all for this week. If you liked it, please subscribe so you don't miss any future episodes. And with just weeks to go until the state visit, we'll be travelling to Washington and bringing you lots of special coverage on it from America.

So will Epstein overshadow the state visit? Will the king be able to repair the relationship with the US? And how might the palace handle the age-old Prince Harry Christen? Well, you can email us to your questions and thoughts at the Royals at the times.com.com. But until then, thank you so much for joining us, and we look forward to seeing you again soon.