Democrats on the House Oversight Committee initially published several emails which they said "raises questions about Trump and Epstein's relationship, Trump's knowledge of Epstein's crimes" and the president's relationship to Epstein's victims.

White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the "selectively leaked emails" were an attempt to "create a fake narrative to smear President Trump". He has consistently denied any involvement or knowledge about Epstein's sex trafficking operation.

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

It prompted Republicans to retaliate by releasing more than 20,000 pages from Epstein's files and accusing Democrats of "cherry-picking" their documents.

Here's what the emails say...

:: Epstein discusses Trump

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

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.. Virginia 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...

The name Virginia, refers to 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.

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] worked at mara lago. . she was the one that accused prince andrew. . trump said 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.

Responding to the release of emails, Mr Wolff posted a video on Instagram: "I have been trying to talk about this story for a very long time now and perhaps we're getting close to the smoking gun.

"These two men... had the closest of relationships for more than a decade."

:: Andrew included in Epstein emails

In several email exchanges, Epstein refers to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and a picture of him with victim Virginia Giuffre.

A photo emerged in 2011 of Andrew, which has become infamous, showing the former prince with his arm around Virginia Giuffre, apparently taken in Ghislaine Maxwell's London home.

The former duke, who was recently stripped of his titles, has previously said he didn't recall meeting Ms Giuffre and claimed an image of the pair could have been doctored.

Although the name of the "girl" is redacted, Epstein appears in his email exchange to be referring to Ms Giuffre, who at the time had spoken to The Mail on Sunday, which had published the photo.

In an email from Epstein to a reporter on 1 July 2011, he said:

The girl has fled the country with an outstanding arrest warrant. The da (sic) after she accused others, said in writing that she has no credibility, she was never 15 years old working for me, her story made it seem like she first worked for trump at that age and was met by ghislaine maxwell.

Total horseshit, the daily mail paid her money, they admitted it, with the statement that it took money to coax out the truth.

Yes she was on my plane, and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew, as many of my employees have.

In a separate email to a publicist on 1 July 2011, Epstein writes:

The girl who accused Prince Andrew can also easily be proven to be a liar.

I think Buckingham Palace would love it. You should task someone to investigate the girl Virginia Roberts, that has caused the Queen's son all this agro (sic).

I promise you she is a fraud. You and I will be able to go to ascot (sic) for the rest of our lives.

:: Mandelson and Epstein talk Trump

According to the documents, Peter Mandelson, who was sacked as the UK ambassador to the US in September, was continuing his connections with Epstein in 2016.

Sir Keir Starmer dismissed him after learning about emails between him and Epstein from 2005 to 2010 - including after Epstein's conviction for soliciting a minor for prostitution.

In an exchange between Epstein and Peter Mandelson on 6 November 2016, Epstein wrote:

63 years old. . you made it

Responding to the message referring to his birthday several days before, Mr Mandelson replied:

Just. I have decided to extend my life by spending more of it in the US.

On the same day, and just before the 2016 US presidential election, Epstein then replies:

in the donald white house

Epstein goes on to refer to Andrew and Mr Mandelson's partner, now husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva:

trump/ and having agreat [sic] deal of fun. In hindsight. you were right about staying away from andrew. I was right in your staying with rinaldo [sic]

According to the documents, Mandelson responds:

Of course, donald in WH. Will he get there? Yes, without Andrew it would not have gone nuclear. Did you advise me to stay with R ? Such a handful but loyal and never embarrassing.

In a separate email from 7 March 2011, Epstein received an interview request from the BBC via his lawyer:

We are keen to explore the possibility of conducting an interview with Mr Epstein, on the subject of the stories which are circulating, however inaccurately, about both him and Prince Andrew, the Duke of York; we'd be keen to hear from Mr Epstein first hand so that the various and at times, speculative reporting which is at large in the UK press can be better
scrutinised?".

The message was forwarded to Mr Mandelson, who replied, bluntly:

No!!

In May this year, Mr Mandelson was asked by Sky News about his relationship with Epstein: "I'm not answering any questions about him. My knowledge of him is something I regret, I wish I'd never met him in the first place."

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

Sky News' 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 emails 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."

Sky News understands Sir Keir spoke briefly to Wes Streeting on Wednesday evening, though did not share details about the briefing campaign.

Politics Hub: Follow latest updates

Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions earlier in the day, he denied authorising the attacks on Mr Streeting, who was accused of planning a leadership challenge after the budget later this month.

Mr Streeting said the allegations are "not true", telling Sky News' Mornings With Ridge And Frost that whoever was behind the briefings had been "watching too much Celebrity Traitors".

He insisted he was loyal to the prime minister, who has been under mounting pressure as he and the Labour Party flounder behind Reform in the polls.

Downing Street went on the attack on Tuesday night to ward off any potential challenge to Sir Keir after the budget, which could see the government announce manifesto-breaking tax rises.

Sir Keir and Rachel Reeves have refused to rule out raising income tax, national insurance, or VAT.

One senior figure told Sky News political editor Beth Rigby while a post-budget challenge is unlikely, it could come if next May's elections - including in London and Wales - go badly for Labour.

Labour face a challenge from Reform on the right and parties like the Greens and Plaid Cymru on the left.

Read more: How No 10 plunged itself into crisis

Also under pressure is the prime minister's chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, after Mr Streeting hit out at a "toxic culture" inside Number 10.

Sir Keir failed to say he had "full confidence" in him at PMQs in response to questions from Kemi Badenoch, but the prime minister's political spokesperson later insisted to journalists that he does retain his backing.

Sky News understands Mr McSweeney was not discussed when Sir Keir and Mr Streeting spoke last night.

Labour chairwoman Anna Turley said the prime minister will investigate the source of the claims against the health secretary, telling ITV: "This is not what he wants to see and he's determined to drive it out."

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 variable pricing system, based on demand, has provoked fan anger since being adopted by FIFA for the 2026 World Cup, which is mainly being staged in the US.

But speaking to Sky News at an event to announce the schedule for the tournament, the Football Association chair Debbie Hewitt said: "We're not a fan of dynamic ticketing pricing and I think UEFA have heard that loud and clear.

"There's been no pushback from UEFA. They're great partners. They understand, and have at their core, too, that we want to make this the most accessible Euros.

"So we're giving a lot of thought to ticket pricing, how we make sure that the accessibility metrics are delivered on."

The final at Wembley will kick off three hours earlier than the last time the men's Euros were held at the stadium in 2021, which was marred by fan unrest as England lost to Italy.

Read more from Sky News:
PM apologises to health secretary
Key takeaways from latest Epstein files

The Sunday 5pm kick-off on 9 July is designed to deliver a better match experience and make the game more accessible to more fans.

"It's easier to get there - we all know what happens to public transport late on a Sunday night," Ms Hewitt said.

"Also we hope that the fans will want to celebrate after the game and so it allows that to happen. And of course, you have safety and security too. So all of those factors come together and it's a common sense decision."

A taste of the schedule

The 24-team tournament is being staged in England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales.

If all host nations qualify directly, their three group stages will be played on home soil - starting with Wales on 9 June at the national stadium in Cardiff.

Dublin's Aviva Stadium and Hampden Park in Glasgow are being used too, with the rest of the matches in England, including at Tottenham and Aston Villa's grounds.

The first Three Lions match would be at Manchester City's stadium, before they end the group stage at Wembley.

England would play a last-16 match at Newcastle if they win the group - or at Everton's new stadium if they finish runners-up.

The quarter-finals, semi-finals, and final would then be back at Wembley for England if they progress.

You can see the full tournament schedule on Sky Sports News.

England's men - like the women - have reached back-to-back Euros finals. But unlike the Lionesses, they haven't lifted the trophy.

England staged the men's Euros in its entirety in 1996 and shared the pandemic-delayed edition in 2021 with countries across Europe, while staging the semi-finals and final.

BMA chair Dr Tom Dolphin told Sky News the dispute remains rooted in years of pay erosion that have left resident doctors far behind other public sector workers.

"When we started the dispute, […] the lowest level of the resident doctors were being paid £14 an hour," he said.

"There were some pay rises over the last couple of years that brought that partly back to the value it should be at, but not all the way.

"The secretary of state (Wes Streeting) himself called it a journey, implying there were further steps to come, but we haven't seen that."

When asked if the row ultimately "comes down to money", he replied: "In the sense that the secretary of state doesn't want to or isn't able to fund the pay increases to match the value that we had in 2008."

Dr Dolphin argued that while "the general worker in the economy as a whole" has seen pay catch up since the 2008 financial crash, "doctors are still way down".

The government points out that its 29% settlement last year was one of the largest in the public sector and was intended to draw a line under two years of walkouts.

But Dr Dolphin said the deal still fell short: "The gap was biggest for doctors and needed the biggest amount of restoration, and that's what we got."

He defended the BMA's use of the Retail Price Index (RPI), a metric rejected by the Office for National Statistics, saying it "better reflects the costs people face".

Should resident doctors get a pay rise? Have your say in the poll at the bottom of this story.

'Who do you think is treating the patients?'

With Chancellor Rachel Reeves preparing her budget amid warnings of deep cuts, Dr Dolphin said the BMA is not demanding an immediate cash injection.

"We're quite happy for that money to be deferred with some kind of multi-year pay deal so that we can end the dispute and avoid having further industrial action about pay for several years to come," he said.

"Money spent in the NHS is returned to the economy. For every pound you spend, you get several pounds back."

When pressed on whether the £1.7bn cost of previous strike action could have been better spent on treatment and technology for NHS cancer patients, he hit back: "Who do you think is treating the cancer patients? It's the doctors."

Read more on Sky News:
Thousands of NHS redundancies
Sentence and fine over patient death

Strikes will cause disruption, union boss admits

Dr Dolphin rejected suggestions that the dispute could destabilise the government, calling the idea "implausible".

He admitted prolonged strikes have tested public patience, but said the government had left doctors with no choice.

"A prolonged industrial dispute makes people annoyed with both sides," he said. "It is vexing to us that we are still in this dispute."

"I don't want patients to suffer," he added. "I accept that the strikes cause disruption… of course that's upsetting for them. I completely get that. And I'm sorry that it's happening."