Ashley Hinson voted for Epstein files’ release. What’s behind Democrats’ messaging to the contrary?

A Democrat-backed ad in Iowa’s U.S. Senate race said Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson took money from people named in the Jeffrey Epstein files and then voted to withhold the files from public view.

“Her top donors appear in the Epstein files over 700 times,” the ad from WinSenate super PAC said, referring to thousands of documents related to criminal investigations into Epstein, the convicted sex offender. Epstein died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

“In Congress, Hinson voted against releasing the files,” the ad continued. “When given another chance, she skipped the votes. Instead, she was raising money from a billionaire who’s in the Epstein files over 20 times.”

In a separate ad from WinSenate, a woman tells viewers that Hinson “took nearly $90,000 from people in the Epstein files and voted to keep those files secret.”

As a super PAC, the pro-Democrat WinSenate may raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, including from corporations and unions, to campaign independently for candidates for federal office. Hinson faces Democrat state Rep. Josh Turek in the race to replace Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, who is not seeking re-election. 

Federal Election Commission data show that Hinson received donations from people who were mentioned in the Epstein files. They’re among hundreds named in the files — but that alone doesn’t mean they were involved in wrongdoing or had close ties with Epstein, who interacted with many influential people regardless of political affiliation.

WinSenate’s ads mislead about Hinson’s votes on the Epstein files’ release.

Hinson opposed procedural efforts, but voted in favor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act

On July 14, 2025, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced an amendment requiring the attorney general to release the Epstein files within 30 days. The House Rules Committee voted against attaching that amendment to a cryptocurrency bill to be voted on the House floor.

The next day, Democrats pushed to defeat a motion to “order the previous question,” a procedural maneuver that would end debate and force a vote on the legislation at hand, which on that day included a defense appropriations bill and the cryptocurrency bill. If the “previous question” motion failed, it would have allowed further consideration of Khanna’s amendment on the Epstein files’ release. But the procedural vote passed 211-210 along party lines, with Hinson and other Republicans in the majority. The ad cited this vote as evidence for its claim.

Hinson called Epstein a “disgusting human being and an absolute pedophile” around that time, but said she disagreed with a separate effort to force a vote on the Epstein files’ release.

We found that Hinson also voted with the majority for other “previous question” motions in July 2025 and September 2025 that stopped a stand-alone bill on the Epstein files from being brought to the House floor. And she didn’t sign a discharge petition led by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., that eventually obtained enough signatures to force a floor vote on the Epstein files’ release.

But the ad did not mention that Hinson later voted in favor of the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act introduced by Massie and Khanna. Facing increased pressure to release the files, President Donald Trump directed lawmakers to pass the measure requiring the Justice Department to publish online all its files on Epstein. It passed the House, 427-1, in November 2025. 

The ad also cited an Aug. 27 article from the liberal American Journal News. The article said Hinson missed votes for Epstein-related motions in September 2025, including motions to restrict funds in favor of enabling the release of the Epstein files. Her campaign didn’t tell us why she didn’t vote.

Asked about WinSenate’s ad, Hinson spokesperson Billy Fuerst pointed to Hinson’s vote on the Transparency Act and described the July vote that the group cited as a “procedural motion to advance several bills, including a defense appropriations bill.”

Donations from people mentioned in the Epstein files does not equate to wrongdoing

This midterm election season, both parties have turned to the Epstein files to lob campaign attacks at one another. 

WinSenate’s ad did not specify which of Hinson’s donors it was referring to, but news reports and FEC data show that Hinson received donations from current Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Blackwater CEO Stephen Schwarzman and Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, all of whose names appear in the Epstein documents. They are not accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein’s crimes.

The Daily Beast reported that Hinson and her affiliated PACs accepted nearly $90,000 over three campaigns from donors whose names appear in the files. PolitiFact was unable to confirm the figure.

And not just Republican donors appear in the Epstein files. Hinson’s opponent Turek, for example, received a donation from venture capitalist and chairman of Kleiner Perkins John Doerr, who was also mentioned in the files. Doerr is not accused of wrongdoing, and the files don’t reflect that he directly corresponded with Epstein. 

Our ruling

A WinSenate ad said Hinson voted against releasing the Epstein files.

Hinson opposed a procedural maneuver allowing a vote on the Justice Department’s release of the Epstein files. She opposed two other similar procedural efforts related to the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but later voted for the bill in November 2025. The measure passed.

We rate the claim Mostly False.