Congress
How an Adam Schiff indictment could shake the Senate
President Donald Trump’s retribution campaign against his political adversaries could soon hit the Senate — and lawmakers are already bracing for impact.
After securing the indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, Trump has his sights set on Sen. Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who as a member of the House managed the president’s first impeachment trial.
If Schiff ends up indicted on allegations of mortgage fraud — a charge he has vehemently denied — or for any other claim, it would mark an unprecedented escalation for Trump to target an outspoken political adversary who is also a federal elected official.
As Schiff solicits dollars for a legal defense fund and builds an expansive political operation prepared to do damage control around any potential charges, Schiff’s Democratic colleagues in Congress are increasingly anxious about their own vulnerability. They are also frustrated with the unwillingness of Republican senators to speak out on Schiff’s behalf.
“I’ve spoken to a number of Republicans, and they are certainly disquieted, if not dismayed, by the increasing weaponization of the Department of Justice,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “Because it tears down the norms and rule of law that protects them and all Americans, as well as Adam Schiff and Democrats who may be targeted by Trump.”
It has been just a few months since news broke that Schiff was being investigated for mortgage fraud relating to the financing of his Maryland residence — and weeks since Trump in a social media post called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after Schiff, Comey and James. Recent reports have suggested the case against Schiff has stalled as prosecutors are said to be struggling to find sufficient evidence to bring up charges.
“[Trump has] been more than willing to go after his political opponents — to go after universities, to go after law firms, to go after media organizations,” Schiff said last week. “It’s all part of the same effort to silence and intimidate critics and, I think, needs to be recognized for what it is.”
The investigation remains ongoing, however. And FBI Director Kash Patel, another longtime Schiff foe, continues to brandish accusations that Schiff, as chair of the House Intelligence Committee, sought to leak potentially damaging information about Trump.
A report from the DOJ Office of Inspector General, in which names have been redacted, found that the witness levying the leaking charges against Schiff had “little support for their contentions.” Schiff, through a spokesperson, has denied the claims.
Lawmakers of both parties are now closely watching to see what will become of Schiff. Interviews with senators revealed concerns that their institution is at risk of becoming further polarized if the DOJ goes ahead with charges.
“You can’t go around threatening people everyday and have a collaborative environment,” said Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).
Democrats are on edge, worrying a Schiff indictment would open the floodgates to more targeting of Democratic elected officials. Many Republicans are either visibly uncomfortable with the dynamics or unwilling to weigh in on a matter that could put them crosswise with the president.
Because Trump took the step of publicly calling on his attorney general to go after Schiff — a break with historical precedent in which the White House has kept its distance from the Justice Department — an indictment would play out differently on Capitol Hill than past episodes where lawmakers have found themselves under legal scrutiny.
The most recent senatorial indictment — of Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), accused of bribery in 2023 — presented an awkward situation for many of his longtime colleagues in both parties. Most Democrats repeated the “innocent until proven guilty” mantra while praising him for stepping aside from his leadership post atop the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as the case worked through the system.
Menendez was convicted at trial and is now serving an 11-year prison sentence. In recent months, he has sought to endear himself to Trump, who has pardon-granting power.
But Schiff’s indictment would challenge those old norms in almost every way. Democrats are expected to rush to his defense and blast the Trump administration for carrying out a personal vendetta. Many Republicans will have to decide how strongly to push back, if they do at all.
Senate Democrats concede they are nervous about the looming threat. Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, for instance, said in an interview her team has been in touch with Schiff’s office about how to prepare to be the subject of a Trump investigation.
“We’ve already created a break-glass plan for ourselves if the spotlight turns to others in the caucus,” said Slotkin. A former CIA analyst from a swing state, her decision to support impeaching Trump in 2019 helped catalyze the successful vote in the House.
“It’s based on the experience we’ve watched Adam go through,” she continued of her own preparations. “How do you have a lawyer ready to go? How do you make sure … you know the legal left and right limits of what you can and cannot do? How do you think about a legal defense fund? I mean, there’s a lot of details.”
Schiff’s national profile precedes his current predicament, which means he’s had a considerable infrastructure supporting him. In the years between his election to the House in 2000, his rising to prominence during the first Trump administration, and then winning a Senate seat last year, he has assembled a team of Democratic firms and advisers.
He is standing up a legal defense fund and has an $8.6 million campaign war chest, more than $2 million of which was raised in the year’s most recent fundraising quarter alone — notable because he is not up for reelection until 2030.
A spokesperson for Schiff would not say how much cash is currently in the legal defense fund, but donations from any unrelated individual into that fund cannot exceed $10,000 per fiscal year and lawmakers cannot transfer campaign money into the account. Per Senate rules, members may set up a legal expense trust fund to pay for their defense, but they have to regularly disclose contributions and spending to the Senate Ethics Committee.
Schiff is being represented by the legal giant WilmerHale; one of his lawyers is Preet Bharara, a former U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York who was fired by Trump in 2017 for refusing to follow orders to resign as a Barack Obama-era appointee.
On Capitol Hill, Democrats want Republicans to step up and offer support, too.
“We’re in the middle of a totalitarian takeover, in part, because even threatening major political figures like Adam Schiff … with arrest undoubtedly has a chilling impact on political speech,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in an interview. “It’s been heartbreaking to see relative silence from Republicans in the face of these threats.”
Schiff said he has not yet heard directly from GOP colleagues about his case. However, Murphy is among some Senate Democrats, including Blumenthal, who say they are privately back-channeling with Republicans about the DOJ’s actions against Trump’s political enemies, including Schiff.
For many of the Republican Senators who work alongside Schiff daily, the situation is complicated. Notoriously chatty Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) — Trump loyalists who serve with Schiff on the Senate Judiciary Committee — declined to discuss the matter.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) would only point to the probe’s reportedly dimming prospects when asked for his reaction to the case.
“I just go by what I saw on television, that the people in the Justice Department thought … it was a difficult case to win,” he said.
A spokesperson for the Department of Justice declined to comment and pointed to a recent social media post from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche denying news reports about the obstacles in charging Schiff for mortgage fraud.
Some Senate Republicans are avoiding comment on Schiff’s predicament by maligning former President Joe Biden for weaponizing the Justice Department — exactly what Democrats say is happening now under Trump.
“I don’t know the underlying facts, but I believe the Department of Justice should enforce the law and not be weaponized the way it was for four years under Joe Biden,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in an interview.
Further underscoring the treacherous terrain in which Schiff now finds himself is that some Republicans are outwardly eager to have him targeted.
“Adam Schiff was probably the most corrupt member of Congress when it came to pushing the totally false collusion hoax. … He used his position as chair of Intel to push that thing,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). He was referring to the accusations during the first Trump impeachment trial that centered around claims that Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to dig up information about Biden.
Johnson, the chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, is now leading an inquiry into revelations that Biden special counsel Jack Smith obtained the phone records of Republican lawmakers as part of his probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
“It’s unfortunate the Democrats in California would elect someone like that who’s been censured by the House, that is so thoroughly proven a liar,” said Johnson, referring to a Republican-led 2023 House effort to condemn Schiff for his role in investigating Trump.
“He needs to be investigated,” he added.
Congress
Why Kristi Noem’s ouster could mean trouble for Pam Bondi
Attorney General Pam Bondi was already in trouble with congressional Republicans. Now she could be facing an even more existential threat to her political future after President Donald Trump ousted Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, showing his willingness to ax Cabinet members who lose trust within the GOP.
Bondi is under intense scrutiny for her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. As many as 20 Republicans might be prepared to back an effort to render punishment against the nation’s top prosecutor for slowwalking the materials’ release, according to the Democrat helping lead the charge. And five Republicans joined with Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Wednesday to subpoena her testimony.
The White House is signaling confidence in Bondi’s leadership. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, pointed to Trump’s remarks Thursday during an unrelated news event where he called Bondi a “terrific person” who is proving “how tough she is and I think the next three years she’s going to really prove it.”
“Attorney General Pam Bondi has worked tirelessly to successfully implement the President’s law and order agenda,” Jackson said in a statement. “The President has full faith in the Attorney General.”
Justice Department spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre in a statement extolled what the attorney general has done to deliver transparency in the Epstein case and comply with the bill passed by Congress that mandated the files’ release. She said those lawmakers who remain critical of the administration “refuse to accept the truth.”
“These members know we are not hiding anything, and their laughable antics to score cheap political points at the expense of victims will not sway our mission to uphold the rule of law and keep the American people safe,” said Baldassarre, who also provided a bulleted list of “DOJ Wins” and a handful of quotes from Congressional Republicans lauding the attorney general.
And to be sure, Noem’s situation was unique. She oversaw an agency whose federal immigration enforcement agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota, faced questions about whether she spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on a self-promotional ad campaign and clashed with border czar Tom Homan.
But Noem’s back-to-back disastrous congressional hearings this past week laid bare the extreme lack of confidence among Republicans in the outgoing secretary’s leadership, and revealed the extent to which Trump can be influenced by the sentiment of lawmakers in his party. For Bondi, the situation is becoming increasingly dire.
Asked whether he believed Bondi continued to have support among House Republicans, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who voted to subpoena Bondi in committee, responded, “I don’t know.”
“I just think it’s time to get some answers,” he added. “She’s in the batter’s box. I’d say … let her hit.”
Democrats are also preparing to train all their attention on Bondi now that Noem is no longer a top political target.
In a news conference Thursday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Bondi and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller — an architect of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement agenda — have “got to go.”
“We’re going to approach those two toxic individuals with the same intensity that has now led to the termination of Kristi Noem,” Jeffries added.
Bondi is not the only other high ranking administration official who remains under the microscope on Blue Light News. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is also facing calls from Democrats to resign for not previously disclosing the full extent of his ties to Epstein, though he has not been charged with any wrongdoing.
One House Republican, Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, had plans to formally call for an Oversight Committee vote to subpoena his testimony — an outcome Lutnick preempted by announcing he would sit for a transcribed interview with members of the panel voluntarily.
Bondi, however, has absorbed the brunt of GOP ire. For months, her handling of the case against convicted sex offender Epstein has spurred outrage from a swath of the MAGA base, which clamored for years for the federal government to release the case materials in its possession and begin to hold powerful people to account for their crimes.
The DOJ’s decision last July to withhold further Epstein-related information, even after Bondi at one point boasted about having Epstein’s so-called client list on her desk, prompted an all-out revolt in Congress. It culminated in the passage of legislation, co-sponsored by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), forcing the department to make all the files public.
Under Bondi’s leadership, the DOJ ultimately blew past the statutory deadline to comply with the new law. Officials later claimed the department had fulfilled all its obligations, despite withholding case files and making redactions that appeared to go beyond the scope of what the bill permitted.
“I’m not impressed with Bondi on the Epstein files, and I’ll make that abundantly clear when I depose her whenever that day comes,” said Mace, who brought the motion in the Oversight hearing Wednesday to subpoena the attorney general. “She’s lost a lot of support among the base [and] up here as well.”
Senior House Republicans have since last summer been perplexed and often alarmed by Bondi’s handling of the Epstein matter, with even some members of Speaker Mike Johnson’s leadership team privately arguing her decisions fueled the House GOP rebellion over the Epstein case, according to four people granted anonymity to share direct knowledge of the situation.
GOP leaders now are aware that Bondi could stir more fallout on Blue Light News if she testifies as expected. One senior Republican, granted anonymity to speak candidly, described her judgement as “not good on Epstein,” adding, “it certainly hasn’t helped us.”
Among the potential political liabilities for Bondi: an ongoing bipartisan effort to try to hold her in inherent contempt. Such a measure, which has not been deployed successfully in decades, would allow the House to impose its own punishment on Bondi — including potentially permitting the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms to take her into custody.
Khanna said he and Massie had discussed that they would have “20 Republicans who may be open to a contempt filing if she doesn’t release more files … I do believe she’s in trouble.”
Under pressure, the Justice Department released more Epstein files late Thursday, including witness interviews with a woman who claimed she was sexually assaulted by Trump when she was young. The president has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and has not been charged with a crime, and the White House has said the accusations are baseless and lack credibility.
Oversight Democrats had previously announced they were looking into the potential withholding of those specific materials containing the woman’s allegation. None indicated Friday the department’s actions were satisfactory.
“The world is watching as Pam Bondi continues to aid this White House cover-up,” said the panel’s top Democrat, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, in a statement Friday morning. “We look forward to having her testify under oath before the Oversight Committee as soon as possible.”
Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said his members are “trying to get an update” on where the DOJ stands with the Epstein files. Asked whether Bondi is on shaky ground, he said, “I have no idea. You’ll have to ask the president.”
Still, some House Republicans insist Bondi maintains broad support within their conference and that the Oversight members are outliers who don’t represent the consensus view of the party.
“There are several members of that committee that are perhaps seeking higher office,” said Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas). “I don’t know if intentions are always pure.”
Mace is running for governor. The other four who voted to subpoena Bondi — Burchett and Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Michael Cloud of Texas — are seeking reelection to the House.
Their actions also suggest they are making a broader political calculation — that their voters see the Epstein case as a potent issue that could carry weight heading into election season.
Boebert said Thursday she had no intention to “go after” the attorney general but is eager to find out why the federal Epstein investigation has not yet resulted in further accountability or prosecutions.
Massie, who does not sit on the Oversight panel but questioned Bondi last month at a combative House Judiciary hearing, said he believed the closed-door setting afforded by a sworn deposition would give Bondi the opportunity to provide more substantive testimony.
He suspected that his Republican colleagues would act increasingly independent of the White House in the coming months, as more lawmakers choose to retire and primary season passes. He also pointed to Noem as evidence that Trump’s cabinet members are dispensable.
“I guess it shows it’s possible that he would, you know, replace people,” Massie said.
Meredith Lee Hill, Mia McCarthy, Kyle Cheney and Erica Orden contributed to this report.
Congress
Republicans confront the massive cost of Trump’s Middle East war
Republicans on Capitol Hill are preparing to confront a staggering price tag for the war in the Middle East after closed-door briefings this week detailed the rapid consumption of expensive munitions and the lack of any firm deadline for the end of the military campaign.
Asked how much the Iran offensive would cost, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) didn’t sugarcoat it.
“A lot,” he replied.
Senior Republicans privately expect President Donald Trump’s administration to request tens of billions of dollars for the Middle East conflict and other military needs from Congress in the coming days, with some GOP lawmakers hearing estimates that the Pentagon is spending as much as $2 billion a day on the war.
Three F-15E jets shot down by friendly fire in Kuwait are estimated to cost $100 million alone. But Trump officials in private briefings have declined to give lawmakers any specific numbers, according to six congressional Republicans granted anonymity to describe the internal discussions.
A White House request for supplemental funding could further balloon once it hits Capitol Hill, according to four other people with direct knowledge of the matter. Farm-state Republicans want an additional $15 billion in tariff relief for farmers, while others float adding tens of billions of dollars in wildfire aid to get enough Democratic support to pass the massive bill.
The prospect of a growing new spending measure has GOP leaders bracing for a messy internal fight, with fiscal hawks who have long decried “forever wars” and bloated Pentagon budgets deeply unsettled by some of the cost estimates flying around on Capitol Hill. At the very least, some are planning to demand offsetting spending cuts.
“I haven’t seen any specifics … but if it’s unpaid-for, I generally have an issue,” Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) said.
Another House Republican granted anonymity to describe the conversations among GOP hard-liners said, “It’s not a ‘hell no,’ but it should be offset somehow.”
The topic is now looming over next week’s House Republican policy retreat, which kicks off Monday with a speech from Trump at the president’s resort in Doral, Florida. If the administration sends its formal funding request in the coming days, House GOP leaders will be forced to confront the issue head on.
At least some are expressing unqualified early support for any administration request. House Foreign Affairs Chair Brian Mast (R-Fla.), for instance, said in an interview this week he is ready to support an emergency funding bill spending tens of billions of dollars on the Iran operation alone.
That sentiment could be challenged by the congressional Republicans who are privately wary of the open-ended timeline and shifting rationales for the war. One House Republican recently remarked that Trump’s pledge to do “whatever” it takes, including entertaining boots on the ground, sounded like “President Lyndon Johnson going into Vietnam.”
Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, a vulnerable Pennsylvania Republican, noted that “as much as we need to neutralize their capabilities to continue to attack us, we do also need to make sure that we don’t get dragged into a forever war.”
Asked in an interview if Congress is ready to approve a $50 billion Pentagon funding package, Speaker Mike Johnson replied that he didn’t know the specific number yet but Congress would pass the bill “when it’s appropriate and get it right.”
“We’re waiting on the White House and [the Pentagon] to let us know, but we have an open dialogue about it,” Johnson said.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who is attuned to the spending concerns among the fiscal hawks inside the GOP ranks, demurred when asked about the potential for a $50 billion package.
“We’re still just in the first few days of this conflict, and there’s no ask yet from the Department of War for a supplemental,” Scalise said in an interview Wednesday.
He referenced the laborious talks ahead: “When that time comes, we’ll obviously have very serious conversations, because it’s important that the Department of War have the tools they need to keep America safe.”
A bigger potential headache is brewing for Johnson as members of his conference debate whether additional military funding should go in a much-discussed but long-shot budget reconciliation bill. That could move to Trump’s desk along party lines without Democratic support, but only if Republicans are almost completely unified.
House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in an interview this week he expected the chamber to move forward on an initial emergency funding bill but that a second filibuster-skirting megabill could contain additional Pentagon spending, along with some possible offsetting cuts.
“It’s not just for the current conflict,” Arrington said. “There are things that need to be retooled fundamentally at the Defense Department, and the president’s team is making a really good case for that.”
Rep. Ralph Norman, one GOP hard-liner who has objected in the past to big Pentagon budgets, now says he would “absolutely” support a $50 billion bill without offsets.
“I don’t like it, but with what this president’s doing with income — the GDP is increasing, the money he’s bringing in for other investments — to handicap him on that, that’s a problem,” said Norman, who is running for South Carolina governor and seeking Trump’s support.
In the Senate, some GOP appropriators are cautioning that any war funding bill will be a big lift — and warning the administration to get specific, and fast.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the “administration should not be taking anything for granted.”
“If they come to us at the end of the month and say, ‘This is what we want, and basically, deliver the votes’ … it’s not a winning strategy, in my view,” she said. “You’ve got to start making the case.”
Katherine Tully-McManus and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.
Congress
GOP fundraiser with Hegseth scrapped amid Iran War buildup
Rep. Zach Nunn has postponed a planned “Top Gun” themed fundraiser with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that had drawn criticism over its timing — at the start of a war that has already resulted in U.S. casualties.
The Iowa Republican announced the postponement Thursday on social media.
Nunn had said Hegseth would appear at the fundraiser on Saturday, hours after the initial U.S.-Israeli airstrikes in Iran. The event, called “Top Nunn” and billed as a “salute to the troops,” was scheduled for later this month in a Des Moines suburb.
On Tuesday, the Pentagon publicly identified the first U.S. deaths in the war, troops who were killed by an Iranian drone strike in Kuwait. The six soldiers were assigned to an Army Reserve command based in Nunn’s district, and two of them were from Iowa.
The announcement of the fundraiser drew strong condemnation from Democrats, who accused Hegseth of leveraging the war for political purposes. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Katie Smith attacked Nunn’s event as “callous and disqualifying” in a statement on Wednesday.
Nunn, a former intelligence officer for the Air Force, explained the postponement in a social media post while offering condolences to the families of the troops who were killed.
“Operation TOP NUNN is postponed. We will have more to share about the event soon, and all ticket holders will be notified of the new date,” Nunn said. “Our prayers are with the families and our action is with our troops on the frontlines.”
Nunn said he plans to attend the arrival of the remains of the six soldiers at Dover Air Force Base on Saturday along with President Donald Trump.
Nunn paid his respects to the six soldiers in a speech on the House floor Thursday and led a moment of silence.
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics11 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’



