Democrats on the House Oversight Committee who put out the messages claim the correspondence "raises questions about Trump and Epstein's relationship, Trump's knowledge of Epstein's crimes" and the president's relationship to Epstein's victims.

But White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, says the "selectively leaked emails" are an attempt to "create a fake narrative to smear President Trump".

The messages are dated between 2011 and 2019 and some are between Jeffrey Epstein and his sex trafficking co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and others between Epstein and author Michael Wolff.

The US president has consistently denied any involvement or knowledge about Epstein's sex trafficking operation.

Trump latest: 20,000 pages published in response to 'leak'

Here's what the emails say...

In the first exchange of emails, between Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, dated 2 April 2011, Epstein wrote:

i want you to realize that that dog that hasn't barked is trump.. [REDACTED NAME] spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75% there

Maxwell responded:

I have been thinking about that...

In the second exchange of emails, between Epstein and Michael Wolff, a journalist who has written several books about the Trump administration, dated 31 January 2019, Epstein wrote:

[REDACTED NAME] mara lago. [REDACTED] . trump said he asked me to resign, never a member ever. . of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop

The third email exchange, between Epstein and Wolff, dated between 15 and 16 December 2015 shows that Wolff wrote:

I hear CNN planning to ask Trump tonight about his relationship with you--either on air or in scrum afterwards.

Epstein replied:

if we were able to craft an answer for him, what do you think it should be?

Wolff responded:

I think you should let him hang himself. If he says he hasn't been on the plane or the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt. Of course, it is possible that, when asked, he'll say Jeffrey is a great guy and has gotten a raw deal and is a victim of political correctness, which is to be outlawed in a Trump regime.

Explainer: Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein's 'friendship'

Whose name has been redacted?

The White House and Republicans on the committee have said that the redacted name in one of the emails was Virginia Giuffre, a prominent Epstein survivor who died in April and had never accused Mr Trump of wrongdoing.

Ms Giuffre made allegations of three sexual encounters with Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who was stripped of his prince title, in her autobiography which was released last month - allegations Andrew has denied.

Read more from Sky News:
Key claims by Virginia Giuffre in memoir
Ghislaine Maxwell appeals to Trump
US Congress summons Andrew

Sky News's US news partner NBC News has reached out to lawyers for Michael Wolff, Maxwell and the family of Virginia Giuffre for comment.

The top Democrat on the House committee, Robert Garcia of California, said in a statement that the released emails "raise glaring questions about what else the White House is hiding and the nature of the relationship between Epstein and the President".

The Oversight Committee Democrats say the email strike "a blow against the White House's Epstein cover-up".

But White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt said in a statement: "The Democrats selectively leaked emails to the liberal media to create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.

"The 'unnamed victim' referenced in these emails is the late Virginia Giuffre, who repeatedly said President Trump was not involved in any wrongdoing whatsoever and 'couldn't have been friendlier' to her in their limited interactions."

But these sorts of antics emanating from Downing Street, a couple of weeks out from a critical budget, feels far less entertaining and only serves to further hurt a struggling prime minister.

It wasn't the intention. Allies of Keir Starmer have been alive to growing talk of a possible post-budget challenge, which has building amid growing concerns from MPs about the upcoming manifesto-breaking budget, the continued dire polling, and a Downing Street forever on the back foot.

There was a decision, as I understand it, from the PM's team, in light of questions being asked about a possible challenge, to put it out there that he would stay and fight a leadership challenge should it come.

Politics latest: Starmer denies authorising attack on Streeting

I was briefed about this on Tuesday by allies that wanted to make the case to the parliamentary party about the perils of trying to oust a sitting prime minister 18 months into the parliamentary term.

My contacts made it very clear to me that the PM would fight any challenge, in turn triggering a three-month leadership battle that would spook the markets, create more chaos and further damage the Labour brand.

They also stressed the PM has no intention of giving way just 18 months in. The intention was to try to see off any plot and scare the parliamentary party into line at the prospect of a full-on meltdown should the challenge come.

But the decision by some of the PM's allies to anonymously also drop the name of prime traitor suspect - Wes Streeting - into briefings has badly backfired and plunged No 10 into crisis.

'Frustration' after PM's allies went 'too far'

As for the clean-up job, Mr Streeting - already carded for the morning round ahead of a speech on the NHS on Wednesday - has come out to declare his loyalty (tick), but also take aim at the No 10 briefers, and called on the PM to take them to task.

On the part of No 10, I was told by sources on Wednesday morning that there wasn't an attempt to brief against the health secretary - there is a view that some of Sir Keir's allies might have gone too far, rather to make it clear the PM was prepared to fight a challenge if it came.

I am told by one No 10 source there is "frustration" over how his played out and it had "got out of control".

"Wes is doing a good job, is an asset and doing a big speech today making the broader case of not cutting spending ahead of the budget," said a source.

But putting the genie back in the bottle is no easy feat. MPs are furious at the briefings and exasperated that No 10 have made a mountain out of a molehill, with some suggesting that there wasn't an active plot post-budget, and they have created a crisis when there wasn't one.

"They've done this before," observed on senior party figure. "They pick a fight of their own making and imply everything is a calamity ahead of a big possible negative, be it the budget or the Batley and Spen by-election [in an effort to get MPs to rally around the PM].

"It's worked in the past; I think they have misplayed it this time. They have started a fire they cannot put out."

The prime minister has been left badly burnt in all of this. He was forced at PMQs to defend his health secretary and his chief of staff as Kemi Badenoch goaded him over No 10's "toxic culture", and called for him to sack Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff.

The PM told his party that he "never authorised" briefings against his cabinet and that it was "completely unacceptable". But when his team were later asked about what the PM was going to do about it, they didn't appear to have an answer.

If he takes no action, it will only feed into the sense among many in his party that Sir Keir doesn't have a grip of his operation and is not leading from the front. That's difficult when his health secretary, having professed his loyalty, has called on the PM to deal with those briefing against him. It's a mess.

Budget measures to calm febrile party

And this mess comes at a time that is already so difficult for this government. Number 10 and No 11 knows exactly how difficult the coming weeks are going to be.

The chancellor has been out pitch rolling her budget, trying to explain the reasons behind potential manifesto-breaking pledges and arguing that the alternatives - cutting spending and a return to austerity or breaking fiscal rules, and the knock on effect in the markets - are far worse.

The prime minister is also going to be out making the case as Downing Street and the Treasury work out how they can possibly try to sell a manifesto-breaking budget to voters already completely disillusioned with this Labour administration.

I'm told that the current working plan is to do a combination of tax rises and action on the two-child benefit cap in order for the prime minister to be able to argue that in breaking his manifesto pledges, he is trying his hardest to protect the poorest in society and those working people he has spoken of being endlessly in his mind's eye when he takes decisions in No 10.

The final decisions are yet to be taken, but the current thinking is to lift the basic rate of income tax - perhaps by 2p - and then simultaneously cut national insurance contributions for those on the basic rate of income tax (those who earn up to £50,000 a year). That way, the chancellor can raise several billion in tax from those with the 'broadest shoulders' - higher-rate taxpayers and pensioners or landlords.

At the same time, the chancellor intends to move on the two-child benefit cap - although it's unclear if that will be a full or partial lifting of that cap - in order to argue that Labour is trying to still protect those on lower incomes from tax hikes.

Those two measures will be designed to try to calm a febrile party and prevent panic after the budget. As one informed MP put it to me, the combination of tax rises for wealthier workers and more support for parents with more than two children are arguments that many MPs could get behind.

More bad news at moment of peril

This is also why No 10 getting ahead of a possible post-budget coup has surprised me a little, given that pretty much all the conversations about a possible challenge to the PM have been linked to the ballot box test next May.

One party figure told me on Wednesday it would be "insane and catastrophic" to for the party to try and bring down a Labour PM over a Labour budget, given, for a start, how the markets would react, and thinks the No 10 briefing is a reflection of how "paranoid and out of touch" the Starmer operation is with the parliamentary party.

But it is also true that there is a settled view among some very senior figures in the party that Sir Keir lacks the charisma, leadership and communication skills to take on Nigel Farage, while broken manifesto promises will kill his hopes of standing for a second term. As one figure put it to me: "Breaking those promises will destroy him. The public won't give him a hearing again. We need a clean skin."

The whispered plots around Westminster are now front page news - not something the Sir Keir would have wanted as he prepares to front up what is shaping up to be his biggest test as prime minister yet, should he break the most sacred of his manifesto pledges on not raising VAT, income tax and national insurance on working people.

There is no doubt the budget will be a moment of peril - and those who wanted to be faithful to the PM this week have somehow only managed to make his situation even worse.

The British Geological Survey (BGS) upgraded its forecast to the maximum and said the ongoing storm had already interfered with communications and satellite navigation.

It said the storm could feed off another one, becoming a "cannibal storm" - one of the biggest in 20 years - and reaching Britain this afternoon.

Blue Origin - the space tech company founded by Amazon boss Jeff Bezos - was due to launch its rocket, New Glenn, today.

The mission was set to take two Mars-bound NASA spacecraft, called ESCAPADE, into the cosmos.

Announcing the postponement on Twitter, Blue Origin said: "New Glenn is ready to launch.

"However, due to highly elevated solar activity and its potential effects on the ESCAPADE spacecraft, NASA is postponing launch until space weather conditions improve.

"We are currently assessing opportunities to establish our next launch window based on forecasted space weather and range availability."

The effects of the solar storm aren't just limited to the Cape Canaveral launch site in Florida.

It's also expected to bring a dazzling display of Northern Lights to Britain later.

The storm led to impressive sightings of the aurora borealis in some parts of the UK overnight and the same could happen later - assuming clear, dark skies.

But solar storms carry serious implications for energy infrastructure and navigation, and are therefore listed as a primary hazard on the UK's National Risk Register.

They're caused by an explosion of particles, energy, magnetic fields, and material blasted into space by the sun - and can disturb the Earth's magnetic field, according to NASA.

The latest event has already created the biggest geoelectric field at ground level since BGS records began.

Gemma Richardson, geomagnetic hazard specialist with the BGS, said: "Space weather can have a real impact on the lives of people across the planet.

"BGS records real-time data of geomagnetic conditions, underpinning the national forecast service.

"Our data suggests that this event could be one of the biggest storms we've seen in 20 years".

People in Scotland, northern England and Northern Ireland have the best chance of seeing Northern lights, according to the BGS.

Cloud is forecast in other areas but the Met Office said it might break enough to provide a glimpse over southeast England.

Get the Sky News forecast for your area

The colours of the aurora are produced by charged particles from the sun hitting atoms and molecules in Earth's upper atmosphere.

Solar storms can reach Earth from the sun in as little as 17 hours, but can sometimes take much longer.

Read more from Sky News:
Three men arrested after body found in field
Government to use military driving examiners to cut test backlog

The latest one could hit the highest level of G5, according to the BGS, a rating that warns of possible power blackouts, GPS problems lasting days, and problems orientating spacecraft.

NASA says solar storms don't cause direct harm to humans as the planet's magnetic field and atmosphere protect us from the worst of the effects.

Warning: Readers may find the content below distressing

The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO) has issued a report into how "horrific" physical and sexual violence was allowed to continue against 17 to 21-year-olds at the Medomsley Detention Centre in Consett.

It named officer Neville Husband who was thought to have groomed and attacked hundreds of trainees in Medomsley's kitchens. He was described by the ombudsman "as possibly the most prolific sex offender in British history".

The abuse at Medomsley continued "unchallenged" for the entire 26 years of its operation, from 1961 to 1987, according to the report from ombudsman Adrian Usher. There was, he said, "extreme violence and acts of a sadistic nature".

The centre held inmates who were all first-time offenders and who had been convicted of crimes ranging from shoplifting and non-payment of fines to robbery.

Several members of staff were convicted after investigations by Durham Constabulary in 2001 and 2023 found widespread abuse of more than 2,000 detainees at Medomsley.

But the ombudsman investigated what authorities knew about the abuse, whether there were opportunities to have intervened at the time and what was done about any opportunities.

Husband 'used power with devastating effect'

Husband was finally convicted of sexual assault and was jailed in 2003 and again in 2005. He died in 2010.

Mr Usher said: "The illegitimate power imbalance that existed between Husband and the trainees and other staff further flourished within a culture of collusion and silence from other employees.

"Husband used this power with devastating effect."

Trainees 'physically abused'

Trainees were physically abused from the moment they arrived, when they bathed, were strip searched, during physical education, while working and even during medical examinations, the PPO found.

Victims were targeted for being perceived as gay or weak. Inmates who failed to address staff as "sir" would be punched.

Witnesses said baths were either scalding hot or freezing cold. A number of them said if they were ill, painkillers could be taped to their forehead and they would be told to run around until the pill had dissolved.

Medomsley leaders at every level 'failed'

Mr Usher said: "Leaders at every level at Medomsley, including the warden, failed in their duty to protect the best interests of those under their charge. Either staff in leadership roles were aware of the abuse, in which case they were complicit, or they lacked dedication and professional curiosity to such an extent as to not be professionally competent."

"The knowledge of abuse by the Prison Service, the police, the Home Office and other organisations of authority was ignored and dismissed. The authorities failed in their duty to keep detainees safe," Mr Usher added.

The report highlights a complaint, written in 1965, of an officer striking an inmate with "a distinct blow". The handwritten response below dismisses it as "playfulness".

Staff 'took law into own hands'

A letter sent to all detention centre wardens in 1967 refers to the "increasing number of complaints of assault" and warns of staff "taking the law into their own hands" with discipline going "beyond the legitimate".

The police officers who delivered 17-year-old Eric Sampson to Medomsley in December 1977 told him he was going to "get the hell kicked out" of him there, he said.

Victim - 'I could have been killed'

"The violence I had done to me was terrible. I could have been killed in there," said Mr Sampson. "Every day and night was hell on earth for the full nine weeks.

"With all the abuse, and obviously the sexual abuse, it totally ruined my life. It should never have happened in the first place, or it should have been stopped."

The inquiry spoke to 79 victims and witnesses.

Over 2,000 former inmates came forward to give their testimony to Operation Seabrook, a police investigation that led to five retired officers being convicted of abuse in 2019.

Lawyer David Greenwood, who represents victims of the abuse at Medomsley, said he has been contacted by men who were held at 20 other detention centres around the country, alleging similar violence.

"I think it was a systematic thing. These prison officers were cogs in a big machine which was designed, culturally or by training, to treat boys really badly," he said.

Mr Greenwood is calling for a wider inquiry into abuse at all of the detention centres.

What have the police said?

The ombudsman's report found police officers from both Durham and Cleveland police were "aware that physical and sexual abuse was taking place at Medomsley from as early as 1965 due to complaints of abuse made at police stations".

It said officers who ignored, dismissed or took no action "failed in their duty to report and investigate crime".

In response to the report, Durham Constabulary has publicly apologised for "the force's historic failure to investigate decades of horrifying abuse".

Chief Constable Rachel Bacon said: "This report makes for extremely difficult reading. It exposes shameful failings by police at that time: both to recognise that the physical violence meted out by staff at Medomsley amounted to abuse or to adequately investigate allegations by those victims who did have the bravery to come forward and report what happened to them.

"I am satisfied that policing standards at Durham Constabulary are worlds apart from those which sadly appear to have existed at that time."

Cleveland Police said in a statement: "All victims of any form of abuse or exploitation should always be listened to and action taken to prevent any further forms of abuse, and we acknowledge this was not the case many decades ago.

"We know cases like this have a lasting impact upon victims and Cleveland Police has, and continues to, improve its service and support to all those affected by abuse, especially those in cases of children and young people."

The ombudsman's report pointed out that the victims have never received a public apology and the complaints process for children in custody remains the same today as it was at the time of the abuse.

Mr Usher said: "I leave it to all of the bodies in this investigation to examine their organisational consciences and determine if there is any action taken today, despite such an extended passage of time, that would diminish, even fractionally, the trauma that is still being felt by victims to this day."

The government has since issued an apology and announced a new safeguarding panel to improve protections for children in custody.

Minister for youth justice Jake Richards said: "To the men who suffered such horrific abuse at Medomsley, I want to say again - I am truly sorry. The failings set out in today's report by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman are truly harrowing, and we must ensure nothing like this ever happens again.

"This government is establishing a Youth Custody Safeguarding Panel to review how we protect children in custody today. It will ensure their voices are heard, that complaints are taken seriously, and that every child is kept safe from harm."

In a statement, the Office of the Victims' Commissioner said: "We are deeply saddened to share that Baroness Helen Newlove, the Victims' Commissioner for England and Wales, has passed away following a short illness. Our thoughts are with her family at this difficult time.

"Helen was a committed and passionate advocate for victims, drawing on her own experience of the criminal justice system. She was determined that all victims should be treated with compassion, decency and respect - and she consistently led by example."

Baroness Newlove had called for the death penalty to be brought back after her husband was killed and had campaigned on behalf of victims of crime since.

She first served as the Victims' Commissioner for England and Wales for six years from March 2013 to May 2019 before being re-appointed in October 2023. She was due to serve until the end of the year.

Mr Newlove, a salesman with a plastics company, left his home to remonstrate with the group of drunk teenagers who had damaged his wife's car.

He was kicked "like a football" in front of his terrified wife and three daughters. He suffered massive head injuries and died two days later in hospital.

Three teenagers were found guilty in January 2008 of the murder, which was the trial heard was committed after a seven-hour drinking binge.

In the wake of the shocking crime, Baroness Newlove became a national voice for victims - campaigning for authorities to take action against persistent anti-social behaviour and youth violence following her husband's killing.

Read more from Sky News:
Government to use military driving examiners to cut driving test backlog
NASA cancels space launch as 'cannibal storm' heads to Britain

In 2010, Lady Newlove was made a life peer for her work on youth crime.

As Victims' Commissioner, she laid the groundwork for victims' rights to be enshrined in law, and last month published the biggest survey of victims ever carried out by the independent body.

Justice Secretary David Lammy paid tribute, saying he was "deeply saddened" to learn of Lady Newlove's death.

The deputy prime minister said: "As both Victims' Commissioner, and deputy speaker in the House of Lords, Helen brought unparalleled experience and dedication to her roles.

"She championed the rights of victims and witnesses and held agencies to account.

"Her leadership shaped the Victims' Code, strengthened victims' voices in the criminal justice system, and ensured that the Victims and Prisoners Act progressed with victims' interests at its heart."

He added: "Helen was an extraordinary public servant whose life's work and her legacy are defined by courage, compassion, and an unwavering commitment to justice.

"My thoughts remain with her family and her loved ones at this incredibly difficult time."

Former prime minister David Cameron posted on X: "Desperately sad to hear that Helen Newlove has died. Helen was so wonderful, warm, brave and plain speaking. She suffered the tragedy of watching her beloved husband, Garry, being murdered by thugs - and then turned that experience into a second life of service.

"Service to her community, to the country and to parliament - but, most of all, service to victims of crime to make sure they got a proper hearing and a better deal.

"It was a privilege to meet her and an honour to help her into a position where she could dedicate herself to the service of others.

"My thoughts and heartfelt condolences are with Helen's husband, Paul, and her daughters, Zoe, Danielle and Amy. Helen leaves a legacy that they - and we all - can be proud of."

Several other peers paid tribute in the House of Lords.