Congress
Thune faces first loyalty test: What to do with Trump’s most controversial Cabinet picks
A series of controversial Cabinet picks have become an early test for how Senate leader-in-waiting John Thune will balance proving his loyalty to Donald Trump with the interests of his wide-ranging conference.
So far, he seems to be giving the president-elect wide deference.
Trump hasn’t finished his selections yet, but three picks for some of the most influential roles in the Cabinet are already prompting anxiety among GOP senators who must decide whether to confirm them: Matt Gaetz for attorney general, Pete Hegseth for secretary of Defense and Tulsi Gabbard for director of national intelligence. And Blue Light News first reported another pick Thursday afternoon: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Services secretary.
Broadly, Republican senators, led by Thune (R-S.D.), say Trump should be allowed to fill out his Cabinet the way he wants — though a couple are openly expressing doubts, especially on Gaetz. Nominees can only afford to lose three votes on the Senate floor and still get confirmed.
“We don’t know until we start the process,” Thune said about Gaetz’s chances of getting confirmed. “And that’s what we intend to do with him and all the other potential nominees.”
The wait-and-see approach isn’t a ringing endorsement, and Thune will have his work cut out for him if he moves forward on confirming each nominee. In addition to publicly aired doubts from Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Thursday he wanted to see a House Ethics Committee report on Gaetz that details an investigation into several allegations against the attorney general nominee, including that he had sex with a minor. The chair of that panel has indicated the report won’t be released now, because Gaetz resigned from the House on Wednesday night.
The Department of Justice conducted its own investigation as part of a sex trafficking probe and, according to Gaetz’s lawyers and DOJ officials, decided not to bring criminal charges. Gaetz has denied any wrongdoing.
There are issues with Hegseth, Gabbard and Kennedy, too. Combat veteran Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) has said Hegseth needs to “explain” his recent comments on a podcast that “we should not have women in combat roles.” Gabbard has sparked concern within the intelligence community due to her sympathetic views on autocrats like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. And some senators have dodged questions about confirming Kennedy — who has touted for years the debunked claim that vaccines cause autism — before reports of his official pick.
There’s a general theory on Senate-confirmed nominations that new presidents will offer a sort of sacrificial lamb, a nominee meant to go down to make others look better or provide cover to purple-state senators to approve others. But GOP leaders said they don’t think that’s Trump’s intention here, and regardless, more than one failure could sour Thune and Trump’s relationship early in the term. Thune has vowed to advance Trump’s agenda, and his nominees are the first test on how effectively he can deliver.
“He’s got a hard job,” said one GOP senator, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Be careful what you ask for. He knew it was going to be hard. He knew President Trump was going to put people in there that people [were] going to question.”
But, the senator noted, Thune remains responsible for getting members “on the same page, and that’s tough as Republicans.”
Compare it to 2017, when Republican senators had a slightly slimmer majority to confirm Trump’s picks in his first term. At the time, Trump had to withdraw his secretary of Labor nominee Andrew Puzder after it became clear he didn’t have the votes in a 52-48 Senate majority. Puzder faced multiple accusations of misconduct, most notably his admission that he did not pay taxes on the services of an undocumented immigrant who worked for him for years.
Puzder was the only Cabinet nominee that Trump had to pull in his first year, though he was far from alone over the four-year term. Senate Republicans, even those closely aligned with Trump, aren’t eager to hop into another bruising series of confirmation fights — or deal with cascading withdrawals again.
And in a further sign of the general levels of deference to Trump, leading GOP senators aren’t actively pushing back on suggestions that the president-elect use recess appointments for picks that may not have the votes in the Senate.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said she doesn’t think there’s been “any serious discussions on how to move forward on a recess appointment, because hopefully it’ll prove unnecessary.”
Republicans frequently brushed off questions about confirming the controversial nominees by pointing to the need for a thorough vetting process. And some argued that even if that process turned up negative information on nominees, it was in Trump’s best interest to find out before they were confirmed.
“We need to have a complete vetting of the nominees — not only so we know that the nominee is qualified but also to protect the president,” Cornyn said. “I’m sure it’s not in his best interest to have any surprises.”
“I don’t have any preconceived notions about it,” Cornyn later added about Kennedy’s planned nomination to HHS. But he said he’s “sure” Kennedy’s strong anti-vaccine position “will come up.”
With regards to Gabbard, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — a close Trump ally — noted that “we have different foreign policy positions at times” but that he intended to give broad latitude to the president-elect in selecting his government.
“I’m gonna do with Trump what I do with everybody: Let you pick your people,” he told Blue Light News. “Defer to your choice, unless it’s too far.”
Collins, who voted against multiple Trump nominees in his first term, said she “can’t imagine” that the issues contained in the House Ethics Committee’s report about Gaetz wouldn’t “become public, either through the committee’s extensive investigation or the FBI report or questions asked by committee members at Mr. Gaetz hearing.”
“Mr. Gaetz is an example of where the Senate’s role is critical to take a look at allegations and at his fitness for a very important job,” Collins added.
And Murkowski, after saying Wednesday that Gaetz was not a “serious” pick, declined to weigh in on Trump’s selections on Thursday, saying she needs to meet with her constituents.
Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), who’s broken with Trump on occasion, said he needed to learn more about each of the picks, especially Gaetz.
“I don’t know enough to be concerned right now,” he told reporters. “I think it would be responsible for me to learn more about each of these nominees.”
Others in the conference said nothing, even an adverse report from the House Ethics Committee, would shake their confidence and willingness to confirm Gaetz as attorney general.
“He’s very talented, and anyone who has spent any time with him knows he’s very smart and capable. I’m going to vote to confirm him,” said Sen.-elect Jim Banks (R-Ind.). “I’m not gonna speculate about what [the Ethics report] says or what it doesn’t say, because we don’t know what it says.”
Joe Gould contributed to this report.
Congress
Congress moves to scrutinize AI use in federal court
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.
Congress
Senate recess at risk if DHS shutdown continues, Thune says
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.
Congress
Epstein’s lawyer tells House Oversight investigators he had ‘no knowledge’ of Epstein’s crimes
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.
-
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
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship6 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
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’
