Congress

Why Kristi Noem’s ouster could mean trouble for Pam Bondi

Published

8 months ago

March 6, 2026

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

‘Look what I brought home for you’: GOP embraces earmark revival as Election Day looms

Published

1 day ago

October 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

With voters sour on Republican governance, GOP candidates in the most competitive House and Senate races are reaching for a time-tested message that has grown out of fashion in their party: bringing home the federal bacon.

A Blue Light News analysis of the dozen closest congressional races for Republican incumbents revealed that most are highlighting earmark success stories in the final days before voters head to the polls.

The ability to secure federal funding for pet projects back home — something many in the GOP have spent years trying to curtail — has given those candidates a positive talking point as President Donald Trump’s flagging approval ratings and widespread voter dissatisfaction over issues like the Iran war, high gas prices and tariffs weigh on other messages.

“When the president’s job approval is in the 30s, it is helpful for Republican candidates to be able to create some distance from the president. It’s challenging to do that without encouraging the president’s wrath,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres said in an interview. “But focusing on bringing home the bacon might be one very good way to do it without antagonizing the president.”

In Michigan, Rep. Tom Barrett is out with an ad about a $750,000 earmark for youth mentoring; in New York, Rep. Mike Lawler is talking about how he secured $120 million for local projects.

Rep. Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania is telling voters he has “brought back more than $110 million to our community,” including millions in earmarks, while Rep. David Valadao has run ads showcasing $500 million in earmarks for water projects in California’s Central Valley.

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a GOP moderate seeking to project independence from Trump in a competitive contest, has repeatedly touted the exact count of the earmarks she has locked in over the last half-decade for her home state of Maine.

The sum: 672 projects totaling $1.5 billion, “from Madawaska to Kittery, from Eastport to Rumford,” as she said in her opening statement earlier this month in her first debate against Democrat Troy Jackson. This past week, Collins has peppered voters with county-specific text messages detailing how much she’s secured for each area.

There are countless other examples of earmark campaigning among vulnerable Republican incumbents, though many conservatives remain reluctant to associate themselves with the practice. It still carries a stigma of corruption after two Republicans were sent to prison on related bribery charges in the mid-2000s, paving the way for the GOP to do away with earmarks in 2011.

That left GOP candidates unable to play up the clearest spoils of incumbency ahead of the “blue wave” of 2018. But Democrats revived them in 2021 with new safeguards, and now Republicans are taking advantage as they navigate another tough midterm cycle.

“That word ‘earmark’ can carry some negative baggage, especially among the old fiscal conservatives,” nonpartisan pollster Mike Noble said in an interview. “But when you describe that same expenditure as funding for a local water system, highway, public safety project — voters evaluate that differently.”

Recognizing the advantages, Republicans opted to keep earmarks around under unified party leadership in 2025, resulting in the enactment of almost $16 billion worth of earmarks this year. For those who still consider earmarks anathema to the GOP’s values of fiscal restraint, it’s causing complications on the trail.

Republican Rep. Bill Huizenga of Michigan is fielding criticism for not requesting any earmarks for his district. While he airs ads calling himself “tight with a buck,” his opponents are telling voters that lawmakers like Huizenga are increasing their net worth “while turning down community project funding.”

Some recent polling shows Huizenga trailing his Democratic challenger, state Sen. Sean McCann, by 1 percentage point.

McCann said in an interview he will “go to bat” for earmarks if he defeats Huizenga: “That’s an expectation that people have when you want to represent them — that you do the things that are important and secure crucial investments for the district.”

Huizenga defended himself in a statement, saying “earmarks have a long history of waste and abuse by politicians looking to enrich themselves in office.”

Huizenga noted that he has “helped secure hundreds of millions in federal investments for Southwest Michigan without requesting a single earmark,” including a $400 million grant last year for a nuclear power plant and $51 million for a housing redevelopment project.

He isn’t the only Republican incumbent in a tight race who has foregone earmarks. Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, who is facing a competitive challenge from former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola, refused to request cash for district-specific projects as part of the annual government funding process. Instead, he points to his support for efforts made possible through the 2021 infrastructure law signed by then-President Joe Biden, as well as other legislation and grants the Trump administration doles out for local efforts.

Trump officials have traveled to Alaska in recent weeks to stand alongside Sullivan in announcing the delivery of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for the state, including $38 million in energy grants and $250 million for rail infrastructure.

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), who appears to be in a dead heat with his Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton, also didn’t ask for any federal funding this year. But he is getting flak for seeking a $4.2 million earmark in 2024 to finance improvements to increase water to a wildlife refuge that borders his ranch.

Spokespeople for the Sullivan and Marshall campaigns did not respond to requests for comment.

Whether voters perceive earmark requests as positive or negative likely depends heavily on how a candidate frames the talking point, Noble said, acknowledging that incumbents rarely use the word in campaign ads or town hall speeches and instead speak broadly about how they “deliver” for their district.

“Voters, at the end of the day — it’s about direct benefit. What are they getting out of this deal? That’s one of the powers of incumbency. They have that ability to say, ‘Hey, look what I brought home for you,’” he said. “But again, what else are they going to talk about?”

Congress

GOP lawmakers start contemplating a diminished Donald Trump

Published

1 day ago

October 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Donald Trump will have his ironclad grip on congressional Republicans tested like never before if the party loses one or both chambers Tuesday.

Trump already appears to be gearing up to blame others if Democrats retake the House or the Senate. But within the halls of the Capitol, GOP lawmakers are contemplating whether the president’s ability to bend them to his whims will diminish if the party is swept out of power.

“We’ll see,” Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.) said when asked how much influence the president will have after the midterms, before praising Trump’s record and willingness to hit the campaign trail on behalf of Republican candidates.

Granted anonymity to speak frankly before the election, many of the 15 GOP lawmakers interviewed about the future of Trump’s influence said they believe his days of dictating outcomes with Truth Social posts and late-night phone calls could be coming to an end.

“It’s not like his persuasion is growing,” said a Republican senator. “Political capital is earned and lost the same way.”

One House Republican cast the potential fight for minority leader as an early test of Trump’s sway: “One would say that the president would have quite a bit of influence on who leads in the minority. But one would also say that he has less influence because some people would blame him” for a loss.

The member added: “That will be an interesting dynamic after Election Day. No one expects Trump to take any blame after the election. So if he doesn’t, who does?”

It’s hardly the first time Republicans have predicted that Trump’s days of dominating the GOP were on the wane. A broad swath of the party turned on him after the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, only to come back to the fold as he regained power.

Despite plenty of kvetching publicly and privately about some of Trump’s policies and personnel picks since being sworn in for a second term, most in the party have fallen in line — and few expect him to change his high-pressure style during his final two years in office.

Many Republicans anticipate he’ll weigh in on 2028 congressional primaries while also playing a loud role in determining the party’s presidential nominee — as well as weighing in on day-to-day machinations on Capitol Hill.

“He’s going to continue fully engaged … regardless of the outcome,” Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso said in an interview, praising Trump’s “very creative” and “thoughtful” ideas on domestic and foreign affairs.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) said in an interview “it’ll be challenging” for Trump if Republicans lose the House but said his influence would persist: “He still has the bully pulpit, and I say that in a good way.”

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said Trump “is the unequivocal leader, best messenger, and unmatched motivator for the Republican Party, and he is committed to maintaining Republican majorities in Congress.”

But unlike Trump’s last midterm drubbing, in 2018, a decisive loss this time would officially usher him into lame-duck status. While House members will all be campaigning for reelection with Trump still in office — and face the prospect of a presidential primary threat — only about a third of currently sitting Republican senators are in the same boat.

The rest will stand for reelection in 2030 and 2032, after Trump is out of office.

One GOP senator pointed to the party’s stable of vulnerable candidates and incumbents who have broken with Trump over the Iran conflict as a sign of things to come if Republicans take a battering Tuesday.

“He’s in trouble,” the senator said.

Another House Republican added that if Democrats win only a small majority in that chamber, Trump will “still carry a lot of sway.” But a “shellacking,” the lawmaker said, will have Trump “looking for our help more than we’d be looking for his.”

“If it’s truly a big blue wave, every committee will investigate the hell out of him the next two years and R’s will quickly start looking at [2028] and beyond,” the member added in a text message.

Trump will face a series of quick tests after the midterms. The House is expected to vote on whether to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth soon after members return. Some Republicans said if voters deliver a wipeout for their party amid widespread dissatisfaction with the Iran war, several of their colleagues could end up supporting the measure.

The president could also face headwinds if he tries to muscle a final party-line spending bill through Congress before Democrats take charge in either chamber and kill any chance for partisan legislation like the election bill known as the SAVE America Act. Republicans have already struggled to move these measures, and GOP lawmakers who just lost reelection could have little reason to rally behind them on their way out the door.

House Republicans are in particular keeping their eyes on whether Trump will weigh in on the GOP leadership races that will play out in the week after the election.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan of Ohio are expected to clash if Republicans are electing a minority leader. But many GOP lawmakers think Speaker Mike Johnson could have a shot at hanging on as the chamber’s top Republican if Trump wants it.

Jordan and Scalise are also both close Trump allies, and most Republicans are skeptical he would choose between the two.

“The president of the United States certainly has influence,” Jordan said in an interview. “I think he’ll continue to have influence.”

In the Senate, conservatives are privately questioning whether Trump will blame Senate Majority Leader John Thune if Republicans lose control of the chamber.

Trump sowed doubt about Thune’s leadership over the summer as he stewed about the Senate’s failure to act on the elections bill. But he more recently publicly defended Thune during the party’s midterm convention in September.

Many Republican senators expect Thune to keep his job even if Trump moves against him. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has aired frustrations about how the Senate is run but has repeatedly said he won’t run for leader and has declined to criticize Thune. Some GOP senators have privately speculated about whether Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has leadership ambitions, but few think he’s actually interested.

Trump turning on Thune “certainly would not” cause Thune to lose his leadership race, said one of the GOP senators, adding that it was “absolutely the case” that Thune would keep his job even if Trump balks.

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who is in line to run the Senate GOP campaign arm in the next Congress, said of Thune, “I don’t think there’s an insurgent movement that’s against him.”

Barrasso, the No. 2 Republican, is backing Thune as well. Asked about the speculation that Trump could turn on Thune, Barrasso said, “He’s going to get reelected as leader.”

Congress

Bill Foster cools on challenging Maxine Waters

Published

2 days ago

October 29, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Rep. Bill Foster is leaning against challenging Rep. Maxine Waters for the top Democratic spot on the House Financial Services Committee, according to two people with knowledge of his thinking who were granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations.

The Illinois Democrat has been considering a bid to topple Waters but has not made a final decision, the people said. The timeline for him doing so is unclear.

Democratic Rep. Sean Casten, also from Illinois, told Waters earlier this month that he plans to run against her, likely teeing up a major fight over the Financial Services role, which the California Democrat has held since 2013.

Most Financial Services Democrats on the committee have publicly backed Waters for the role.

Foster, who was first elected in 2008, previously discussed with Waters ways to reform the committee that would give subcommittee chairs more power to shape the panel’s agenda. A physicist with a doctorate, Foster is currently the top Democrat on a House Financial Services Financial Institutions Subcommittee.

A Foster spokesperson declined to comment.