Congress
What does Gaetz’s withdrawal mean for the Ethics report?
House Democrats vowed to press forward with their plan to force the release of a long-awaited report into Matt Gaetz even after he withdrew from consideration as President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Attorney General.
But there are early signs that House Republicans, some of whom had indicated prior to Gaetz’s withdrawal that they supported the Democratic-led effort, are no longer on board. And Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.) the top Republican on the Ethics panel, told CBS Thursday that Gaetz’s withdrawal “should end the discussion of whether or not the Ethics Committee should continue to move forward in this matter.”
Democrats introduced a measure on Wednesday that would theoretically force a House floor vote that would make the Ethics panel release the report. It’s still unclear if that vote will be permitted under the House rules, but the vote could potentially occur as soon as the House returns from its Thanksgiving break in early December.
“While I welcome the news that Matt Gaetz is withdrawing from consideration for Attorney General, it remains important that the Gaetz report be made available to the American people,” Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), one of the Democratic sponsors of the effort, said in a statement.
A spokesperson for Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who introduced a similar measure, said he planned to press ahead, too.
Prior to Gaetz’s decision to withdraw from consideration, at least five House Republicans said they were prepared to support those efforts to force the report’s release. One GOP lawmaker who indicated they were planning to vote for the resolution, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said it’s “not a factor now.”
“Many of my colleagues told me they were voting yes” before Gaetz withdrew, the lawmaker said, adding that they would still vote for the resolutions if Gaetz indicates he’s returning for the next Congress.
It’s still unclear if Gaetz could return to the House in January, since he was reelected in November, and there have been rumors that he plans to run for Florida governor in 2026, with Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis term-limited. Gaetz did not immediately respond to a request for comment but has previously denied any intentions to mount a gubernatorial bid. His resignation letter had said he did not intend to serve again in the next Congress, though it’s unclear if he can reverse course now that he’s withdrawn from consideration for attorney general.
Democrats are still trying to iron out if they can actually force a vote, and some Republicans are arguing their colleagues can’t trigger a vote on a report that is not a final Ethics Committee product. Guest said the report was still in draft form on Wednesday, though two people familiar with the matter disputed that assertion.
Democrats had argued the report needed to be released because Gaetz was up for the highest-ranking law enforcement position in the country, though other lawmakers may find the argument less persuasive now that Gaetz is out of contention.
Another unresolved question: whether the motions introduced by Casten and Cohen are eligible for the fast-track legislative process that would force a vote on the floor. Ethics panel attorneys are in the process of discussing parliamentary issues with the two lawmakers, according to a person familiar with the matter, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.
The Democratic effort has already sparked one vow of procedural revenge from Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), who told Blue Light News on Thursday that he would introduce his own privileged resolution to try to force the release of other Ethics Committee reports after Congress returns from the break in December. Bishop declined to say which members he will target but smiled when asked if it was Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.).
“If we’re going to release the report, let’s release a lot of reports. Let’s go for full transparency,” added Bishop, who is retiring at the end of this term.
Meanwhile, it’s not just Republicans who are signaling they’re ready to move on from Gaetz.
“My interest in him, in his political future, our government’s future, is diminished dramatically by this decision. So there are lots of other things we need to do,” said Senate Judiciary Committee chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).
Jordain Carney, Olivia Beavers and Ursula Perano contributed to this report.
Adam Hamilton raised $10.6 million in the third quarter of 2026 across his Senate campaign and his joint fundraising committees, his campaign tells Blue Light News, a significant haul for the Kansas Democrat.
The fundraising total illustrates Democrats’ newfound bullishness about flipping a Senate seat in the deep-red state for the first time since 1932.
“This grassroots support sends a clear message: with three weeks until Election Day, Adam Hamilton is building the momentum to win,” said Hamilton campaign spokesperson Tyson Brody.
Hamilton’s third-quarter figure is nearly triple his $3.66 million second-quarter total. His campaign did not provide a current cash-on-hand total.
National Democrats began pumping money into Kansas in recent days, a sign of their growing hopes that Hamilton could win. Last week, Senate Majority PAC — Senate Democrats’ top super PAC — reserved $5 million in television ads backing Hamilton. American Bridge PAC and Lower Costs Now, a new group affiliated with former Vice President Kamala Harris’ super PAC, have spent in Kansas in recent weeks.
Republicans have also flocked to Kansas to prop up Marshall: Senate Leadership Fund, the Senate GOP’s top PAC, has spent or reserved nearly $11 million backing Marshall in the past week, according to tracking firm AdImpact.
“It took us five months to raise $15 million. [Marshall] got it in a day,” Hamilton said at a campaign event in Lawrence, Kansas on Monday. “So please help us.”
Marshall’s campaign has yet to release his third-quarter fundraising totals. As of mid-July, Marshall had over $5 million in the bank to $1.73 million for Hamilton.
A bipartisan Senate duo is urging Trump national security officials to “bring its full capacities to bear” to stave off threats posed by artificial intelligence — sooner rather than later.
Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell, the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee, and Republican South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, who serves on the Senate Armed Services cybersecurity subcommittee, are calling for a full government response to a growing number of cybersecurity breaches.
“Recent AI security incidents should serve as a warning,” the senators wrote in a Tuesday letter to Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton and White House Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios. “Advanced AI agents have escaped testing environments, bypassed safeguards, and gained unauthorized access to real-world systems owned by government agencies and private organizations.”
Spokespeople for Clayton and Kratsios did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Their letter comes as lawmakers struggle to hash out what legislation on AI safety, if any, might look like. Members are currently in recess ahead of the November elections and there’s little hope progress can be made by the year’s end.
But those lawmakers who have been engaged on the topic for years now have mapped out administrative actions the Trump administration could move on now, without waiting on Congress.
The Cantwell and Rounds priorities include: strengthening federal AI safety and security standards at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST; expanding independent testing capabilities at the Center for Advancing Innovation and Standards for Super Intelligence, Department of Energy and the national labs; and working with the tech industry to develop and deploy defensive AI tools.
Specifically, the senators wrote, new NIST standards should address the risks posed by advanced AI capabilities, including the “potential misuse by malicious actors” to conduct sophisticated cyberattacks, automate attacks at scale and agents that threaten external systems and critical infrastructure.
They also said the federal government capacity should be complemented by universities and other research organizations, as well as by private sector, third-party evaluators.
Finally, they point to ways the government could use existing programs at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to work with AI labs to help detect threats and reinforce vulnerable systems.
A bipartisan group of senators urged President Donald Trump to rescind his recent diesel deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday, amid bubbling anger on Capitol Hill about Trump’s announcement.
In a letter sent to the White House, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the senators warned that the president’s deal with Russia will not “achieve just ends” or benefit Americans.
“Granting Moscow the ability to sell Russian diesel freely in global markets damages American security interests and is a betrayal of the people of Ukraine, who continue to defend themselves from Putin’s murderous, illegal war,” wrote the lawmakers, led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “This deal is a gift to our adversary and a betrayal of our Allies; it should be rescinded.”
On Sunday, a smaller group of senators called on the president to “immediately reverse course” on the plan in a statement. Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) — who signed on to both — said Sunday there may be “a legitimate case for saying the president’s not following the law.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Trump announced in a social media post on Friday that Russia would “immediately supply” diesel fuel to global markets — including potentially the U.S. — to help relieve high prices driven, in part, by the ongoing war with Iran. Though Trump has repeatedly defended the U.S.’s actions against Iran, on Saturday he demanded an end to Ukrainian drone strikes that have crippled Russian oil refineries that he argues have caused the record-high oil prices.
The senators on Tuesday argued that the deal with Russia will have a “negligible impact” on fuel prices while providing Putin with “more fuel to finance his war machine” as Russia continues its “brutal attacks on Ukrainian civilians.”
The deal with Russia is a sharp pivot from a sweeping sanctions package signed into law last month. That legislation — championed by the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — was meant to deplete Moscow’s resources by targeting Russian officials, banks and a shadow fleet of oil tankers. It drew widespread bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress.
Senators on Tuesday referenced the package as they condemned Putin as a “tyrant.”
“For decades, America has stood as the bastion of freedom against tyranny, and American presidents have embodied our nation’s resistance to tyrants. Putin is a tyrant,” the letter reads. “Withdraw from this agreement, rescind General License No. 135, and execute the authorities provided under the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026. Maintain our legacy – and the duty America holds – as leader of the free world.”
In addition to Blumenthal and Tillis, Tuesday’s letter was signed by Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Jack Reed (R.I.), and Chris Coons (Del.) and Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Susan Collins (Maine), Alan Armstrong (Okla.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and John Cornyn (Texas).
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words