Connect with us

Congress

Negative signs for Gaetz as senators brush off questions amid Trump pressure

Published

on

A negative sign looms for Matt Gaetz: Nearly a dozen GOP senators won’t commit to confirming him for attorney general, saying they want to let the process play out.

And many, even if they aren’t insisting on seeing the potentially damaging House Ethics report on the recently resigned lawmaker, assume the information will have to come out.

“He’s got an uphill climb,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a senior member of the conference who said she looked forward to meeting with Gaetz and the Judiciary Committee’s review of the nomination.

Promising to follow the vetting process doesn’t mean senators will necessarily oppose a nominee, but it’s notable given GOP senators are clearly wary of crossing President-elect Donald Trump. And it contrasts heavily with more Trump-aligned senators, many of whom have indicated they will support Gaetz no matter what. Given the litany of allegations against the Florida firebrand, including that he had sex with a minor, it leaves plenty of room for senators to opt against him later. Gaetz has denied any wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, Trump has called at least one senator personally to talk about Gaetz, and the attorney general nominee makes a few calls of his own. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, said he got a call from Gaetz on Thursday evening, and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said both Trump and Gaetz have called him. Cramer said Trump asked him to give Gaetz “a shot” and Cramer didn’t pick up the Gaetz call because he didn’t recognize the number.

“That was kind of the whole conversation,” Cramer said. “He’s the disrupter that the department needs. That’s the bottom line. And he doesn’t know that anybody else really will be.”

The House Ethics Committee is scheduled to meet Wednesday, as pressure intensifies on the panel to release their investigative findings about Gaetz — a report they’ve worked on for more than a year. The committee could vote to publish the report, bury it, or share it with senators. Many senators believe the report may come out in other ways if the panel tries to keep it under wraps.

Kennedy encouraged lawmakers on the committee to “follow the rules,” but added that “we live in a Washington, D.C., version of la la land and, as we all know, this place leaks like a wet paper bag.”

Incoming Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) refused multiple times to say whether he’d demand access to the House Ethics report on Monday, vowing his committee’s professional staff would obtain information on Gaetz. He added that questions on the former congressman’s conduct should wait until after confirmation hearings.

“You guys are all asking me these questions that would be better asked after the hearing, then we got some answers for you,” the Iowa Republican said.

Grassley declined to answer whether he would interview cooperating witnesses on Gaetz’s alleged conduct who have spoken with the House Ethics Committee.

Senators on the Judiciary Committee conducting their own investigation seemed to be a popular Plan B among lawmakers, if the House Ethics Committee doesn’t share the report. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) on Monday said that though he agrees with Speaker Mike Johnson in not wanting to disrupt the “integrity” of the ethics process, he sees that as “separate from the likelihood that whatever was in there is going to be released.”

Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), seen as a likely swing vote, said of the prospect of seeing the Ethics report: “If I feel like I don’t have sufficient information down the road, I’ll make that known.”

Still, it’s unlikely a truncated Senate investigation would have the breadth of the unreleased House Ethics report. An attorney told ABC News on Monday that two of his clients testified to the House Ethics Committee that Gaetz paid them for sex — and one of the women added that she witnessed the then-congressman having sex with a 17-year-old minor in 2017.

There is a vocal group of GOP lawmakers who say they’ll back Trump’s nominee picks, including Gaetz, no matter what.

“I don’t know why they wouldn’t” be confirmed, said Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who touted his strong rapport with Gaetz as a member of the House

“I’m gonna vote for Matt Gaetz,” said Sen.-elect Jim Banks (R-Ind.), who said he didn’t need to see the Ethics findings.

Only Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) have openly questioned the selection. Any nominee will be able to lose only three votes — with Vice President-elect JD Vance breaking the tie — to secure confirmation.

Democrats, meanwhile, are still eyeing ways to usurp the nomination. Some want to try and obtain information on Gaetz from federal agencies while they still have control of the committees, but not all members of the Judiciary Committee think that’s even possible.

“He’s made the nomination, and we’ll have to go through the ordinary process in the appropriate Congress,” Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said.

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Congress moves to scrutinize AI use in federal court

Published

on

A group of lawmakers are set to introduce legislation Thursday to examine the use of artificial intelligence in federal courts, according to bill text obtained by Blue Light News.

Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), along with Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.), are preparing to unveil the bipartisan, bicameral Research and Oversight of Artificial Intelligence in Courts Act of 2026. The bill would establish a 15-member task force to study the use of AI-powered speech-to-text and speech recognition tools, with a focus on privacy, civil liberties and accuracy.

The panel would include federal judges, prosecutors, court clerks and other judicial experts and would be required to report its findings to Congress and the attorney general within 18 months.

Clear federal guidelines for AI use in U.S. courts have yet to be established, as broader concerns about the technology grow on Capitol Hill. Last year, Reuters reported that two federal judges withdrew rulings in separate cases after lawyers flagged factual inaccuracies and other serious errors. In one New Jersey case, a draft decision that included AI-generated research was mistakenly posted to the public docket before undergoing review, according to the report. In response to questions from Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the judges attributed the snafus to court staffers using generative AI tools for drafting and research.

“As the Senate’s only former public defender, I know it firsthand: Court reporters and captioners are irreplaceable,” Welch said in a statement. “When it comes to the use of AI in the courtroom, there are still substantial privacy and civil liberty concerns that need to be addressed.” Wicker said, “Ensuring accuracy is critical to fair justice.”

Technology-related privacy and civil rights concerns are currently top of mind for lawmakers in Congress, as Speaker Mike Johnson seeks to put an 18-month extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on the House floor next week.

Continue Reading

Congress

Senate recess at risk if DHS shutdown continues, Thune says

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader John Thune suggested Thursday the Senate will not go on recess as planned at the end of next week if the Department of Homeland Security isn’t funded by then.

“We need to get this resolved and it needs to get resolved, you know, by the end of next week,” Thune said. “I can’t see us taking a break if the [department’s] still shut down.”

Thune’s comments to reporters come as a bipartisan group of senators, including members of the Appropriations Committee and a clutch of Democrats that helped negotiate the end to the last shutdown, meet privately in the Capitol with Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar.

The meeting — coming as TSA staffing issues create long lines at some airports — is the first sign in weeks of potential momentum in the DHS funding.

Continue Reading

Congress

Epstein’s lawyer tells House Oversight investigators he had ‘no knowledge’ of Epstein’s crimes

Published

on

Darren Indyke, Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyer and a co-executor of his estate, told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that he had no knowledge of the convicted sex offender’s crimes and rejected aspersions that he knowingly facilitated Epstein’s trafficking, according to a copy of prepared remarks obtained by Blue Light News.

The attorney’s defensive posture in the closed-door deposition on Thursday comes amid mounting pressure on the Justice Department and lawmakers to pursue criminal accountability for others who could have played a role in Epstein’s scheme. In his prepared opening statement, Indyke noted that he was appointed a co-executor of Epstein’s estate in 2019 by the U.S. Virgin Islands probate court, has cooperated with the Justice Department, and helped found the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program.

“Let me be clear: I had no knowledge whatsoever of Jeffrey Epstein’s wrongdoings,” Indyke told congressional investigators, according to the prepared remarks. “My complete lack of involvement in that misconduct is a matter of record: not a single woman has ever accused me of committing sexual abuse or witnessing sexual abuse, nor claimed at any time that she or anyone else reported to me any allegation of Mr. Epstein’s abuse.”

He maintained that his relationship with Epstein was not social in nature and that he was only one of the lawyers with whom Epstein consulted — a list that included Kenneth Starr, the former independent counsel who investigated the fallout of Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky.

“My primary role was to provide corporate, transactional and general legal services to Mr. Epstein and his companies, and I did so,” Indyke planned to say.

Only one person has been convicted as part of Epstein’s sex trafficking scheme: Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime associate now serving 20 years in prison for her role in the crimes. She is seeking a pardon from President Donald Trump.

Indyke is the latest in the Oversight committee’s string of closed-door depositions with people in Epstein’s orbit. Epstein’s onetime client and former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner and another co-executor of Epstein’s estate Richard Kahn also testified. House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) has also subpoenaed Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify before lawmakers over her handling of the Epstein files.

Unlike Wexner and Kahn, Maxwell invoked her Fifth Amendment right when she was questioned by the Oversight committee in a virtual deposition as part of its investigation into Epstein.

According to his prepared remarks, Indyke also denied any involvement in the facilitation of so-called “sham marriages” for women around Epstein, an allegation that appeared in a complaint filed in court by the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands. He described his onetime client as being “extremely contrite” after his 2008 sex crime conviction and added that he believed Epstein when he said did not know the woman was a minor.

“That I did not know what my client did in his private life may be difficult for some to believe, but it is true,” Indyke said.

Continue Reading

Trending