Speaker Johnson says House won't vote on Epstein resolution before recess
The news came after the House Rules Committee advanced the measure last week, and as the lower chamber prepares to break for the weeks-long August recess on Thursday.
Asked if the House will vote on the resolution before leaving Washington, Johnson told reporters: 'No.'
The Speaker said he wants to leave time for the administration to act on the matter before moving ahead with congressional action. Last week, President Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to request that the grand jury transcripts in the Epstein case be unsealed. Trump has tried to downplay the matter, urging Republicans to drop the issue.
'Here's what I would say about the Epstein files: There is no daylight between the House Republicans, the House, and the president on maximum transparency,' Johnson said in the Capitol on Monday. 'He has said that he wants all the credible files related to Epstein to be released. He's asked the attorney general to request the grand jury files of the court. All of that is in process right now.'
'My belief is we need the administration to have the space to do what it is doing and if further Congressional action is necessary or appropriate, then we'll look at that,' he added. 'But I don't think we're at that point right now because we agree with the president.'
Johnson's announcement came less than one week after Republicans on the House Rules Committee advanced a non-binding resolution calling for the release of some information related to the case involving Epstein, a convicted sex offender. It specifically directs Bondi to publicize 'all credible' documents, communications and metadata related to the investigations of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of sex trafficking, but allows her to make exemptions.
The panel advanced the resolution after GOP lawmakers on the committee voted down a similar measure earlier in the week that was spearheaded by Democrats. Republicans on the panel took heat from the MAGA base after opposing the measure, which prompted the vote on the GOP-crafted legislation last week.
Asked last week if he would stage a vote on the legislation Johnson stopped short of making any commitments, suggesting the purpose was to give Republicans on the panel political cover.
'The Republicans on the Rules Committee, most of them that were present, voted against Democrat amendments to try to hijack that. That was the right thing for them,' Johnson said last week. 'They were wrongfully tarred and feathered by people who did not understand what was happening and said that they were covering up for they were in favor of concealing Epstein files. It's simply not true.'
'So the resolution that was advanced tonight in the Rules Committee was for them to go on record and say no, of course, we're for transparency, of course,' he continued. 'Every single one of the Republicans on the Rules Committee are for transparency and for releasing the files, just as the president of the United States is, and they wanted that to make crystal clear. Make it crystal clear. I think their vote tonight did.'
Still, there is deep frustration among some Republicans over the administration's handling of the case. Trump campaigned on releasing the files and many people now in his Cabinet helped amplify theories about what was in them.
Underscoring that sentiment, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has teamed up with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) on a resolution to release the files in the case. The pair is vowing to start a discharge petition for the legislation in an attempt to force it to the floor. The resolution already has at least 10 GOP co-sponsors.
Johnson on Monday downplayed the effort.
'Discharge petitions are never a good idea in the House,' he told reporters on Monday. 'It is a tool of the minority party, not the majority. The majority party has stated its position, and it is mine and it is the president's, that we want maximum disclosure. So the rest of it is a political game that Democrats are playing and I hope Republicans won't go into that.'
Other rank-and-file Republicans — including some of the president's closest allies — have expressed their displeasure with how the administration has approached the situation.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), one of the president's top supporters on Capitol Hill, aired an ominous message Monday morning.
'If you tell the base of people, who support you, of deep state treasonous crimes, election interference, blackmail, and rich powerful elite evil cabals, then you must take down every enemy of The People. If not. The base will turn and there's no going back. Dangling bits of red meat no longer satisfies. They want the whole steak dinner and will accept nothing else,' she wrote on X.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
3 minutes ago
- Axios
6 quick questions to help you understand the Epstein probe
Struggling to understand where we are in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking probe? You're probably not alone. The big picture: We've answered six questions to explain the basics of the Epstein investigation and President Trump's past relationship with the financier, given the intensifying public pressure on this administration to release court files. Case in point: On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other Senate Democrats announced they'd use an obscure federal law to get the Justice Department to release more Epstein court documents. Schumer said the request includes "all documents, files, evidence and other materials" in the DOJ's and FBI's possession related to the case. Here are the questions we're answering about Epstein: Who is Jeffrey Epstein and who did he know? Epstein was a powerful financier in New York who became well-known for his wealth. He was later charged with sex trafficking but died before facing trial. He had a mysterious yet opulent lifestyle, according to multiple reports. His social circle included Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, per the Miami Herald. How did Epstein know Trump? Trump and Epstein's association received renewed attention this month following a Wall Street Journal report alleging a "bawdy" birthday letter to Epstein that bore Trump's name. Throughout the '90s, Trump and Epstein were seen together at social events. Trump spoke fondly of Epstein in a 2002 interview with New York Magazine, calling him a "terrific guy." "He's a lot of fun to be with," Trump said at the time. "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life." Yes but: In 2004, the two went head-to-head in a property fight for a Palm Beach mansion, according to The Washington Post. When Epstein was arrested and charged in 2019, Trump told reporters he wasn't a "fan" of Epstein and hadn't spoken to him in 15 years. "He was a fixture in Palm Beach. I had a falling out with him a long time ago," Trump said. What was Jeffrey Epstein arrested for? In 2019, Epstein was charged in federal court in Manhattan with sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors. He pleaded not guilty and was held without bail. Multiple women filed lawsuits against Epstein following his arrest. Flashback: Epstein was indicted on minor prostitution charges in 2008. The charges were dropped in exchange for Epstein pleading guilty to a single count of solicitation of prostitution with a minor. He planned to serve an 18-month stint at the Palm Beach County stockade compound. He was released roughly five months early. When did Jeffrey Epstein die? Epstein died in 2019 after an apparent suicide at Manhattan's Metropolitan Correctional Center. Law enforcement officials said at the time that Epstein hanged himself before he was found in his jail cell. Epstein was under extra security in a special unit of the prison, but he was not under suicide watch. Trump at the time called for a "full investigation" into Epstein's death. He also elevated a conspiracy theory that linked Epstein's death to the Clintons. Context: Trump's Justice Department and FBI said in July that they concluded that there was no evidence that Epstein was murdered. The administration released a video that showed no one entered the area of the prison where Epstein was held when he died. The 10-hour video had a "missing minute" that, authorities said, stemmed from an old surveillance recording system that resets everyday — leaving one minute unrecorded. What is the Epstein list? Many in MAGA circles have speculated for years that Epstein kept a "client list" of powerful figures. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested it was on her desk in a Fox News interview in February when the DOJ released more than 100 pages of documents related to the case, including flight logs, a redacted contact book and masseuse list and an evidence list. Yes, but: The Justice Department and FBI concluded in July there was no evidence that Epstein blackmailed powerful figures or kept a client list. FBI deputy director Dan Bongino clashed with Bondi over the handling of the files and even took a day off from work over the squabble. What is the Epstein files debate? Zoom out: The Trump administration's release of the Epstein files triggered a debate between Trump's followers, Republicans and Democrats. Many have called for the release of all files related to Epstein for transparency sake. What's next: Senate Democrats said Wednesday they planned to use the "Rule of Five" law, which allows any five members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to request information about any matter related to the committee, to push the DOJ to release more details from the Epstein case.
Boston Globe
3 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Bessent says new Trump child savings accounts are ‘back door for privatizing Social Security'
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Bessent's remarks. The idea of privatizing Social Security has been raised, and abandoned, by Republicans before, as millions of Americans have come to rely on the certainty of the federal government providing monthly checks in old age. Privatization proposals would shift the responsibility for retirement funds away from the government onto Americans, through personal savings accounts that may or may not be enough to live on. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Under the GOP's 'big, beautiful bill,' as the law is called, Republicans launched a new children's savings program, Trump Accounts, which can be created for babies born in the U.S. and come with a potential $1,000 deposit from the Treasury. Advertisement Much like an individual retirement account, the Trump Accounts can grow over time, with a post-tax contribution limit of $5,000 a year, and are expected to be treated similarly to the rules for an IRA, and can eventually be tapped for distribution in adulthood. Advertisement But Bessent on Wednesday allowed for another rationale for the accounts, suggesting they could eventually be the way Americans save for retirement. 'In a way, it is a back door for privatizing Social Security,' Bessent said while speaking about the program. Ever since the George W. Bush administration considered proposals to privatize Social Security more than 20 years ago, Republicans have publicly moved away from talking about the issue that proved politically unpopular and was swiftly abandoned. In the run-up to the 2006 midterms, Democrats capitalized on GOP plans to privatize Social Security, warning it would decimate the program that millions of Americans have come to rely on in older age. They won back control of both the House and the Senate in Congress. The Democrats warned Wednesday that Bessent's comments showed that Republicans want to shift the government-run program to a private one and are again trying to dismantle the retirement program that millions of Americans depend on. 'Donald Trump's Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent just said the quiet part out loud: The administration is scheming to privatize Social Security,' Tim Hogan, a spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement. 'It wasn't enough to kick millions of people off their health care and take food away from hungry kids. Trump is now coming after American seniors with a 'backdoor' scam to take away the benefits they earned,' Hogan said. The program has faced dire financial projections for decades, but changes have long been politically unpopular. Social Security's trust funds, which cover old age and disability recipients, will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2034, according to the most recent report from the programs trustees. Advertisement Those officials have said those findings underline the urgency of making changes to programs. Trump, attuned to Social Security's popularity, has repeatedly said he would protect it. Throughout his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly said he would 'always protect Social Security' and said his Democratic opponents, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, would destroy the program. During the 2024 presidential primary campaign, he also accused other Republicans who have expressed support for raising the age for Social Security of being threats to the program. Trump said in an interview with NBC's 'Meet the Press' in December after he won the presidential election, 'We're not touching Social Security, other than we might make it more efficient.' His White House this year said Trump 'will always protect Social Security.' Social Security Agency Commissioner Frank Bisignano, a Wall Street veteran, was asked at his confirmation hearing in March about whether Social Security should be privatized and said he'd 'never heard a word of it' and 'never thought about it.'
Los Angeles Times
3 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Has America's longstanding friendship with Israel reached a breaking point?
Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist right-wing government can't win the 'total victory' over Hamas that the Israeli prime minister repeatedly demands; even Israeli defense officials have said so. But he — or, more to the point, Israel — can lose. With the starvation of Gaza, Netanyahu is hastening a break in the bipartisan U.S. support for Israel, support that has endured for the entire lives of most Americans. After straining that broad backing for two decades by denying Palestinians' humanity and overtly courting Republicans over Democrats in the U.S., Netanyahu is inviting a complete rupture by his culpability for Gazan babies wasting away in the arms of their helpless parents. Many more children and adults have died, of course, since the start of Israel's war to avenge Hamas terrorists' gruesome murders of 1,200 people and abduction of 251 more in their attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. This week the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry's toll surpassed 60,000 killed, including 18,500 children. But for the most part, the world hasn't seen close-ups of kids' corpses pulled from rubble after Israeli air strikes. Now, though, despite Israel's restrictions against international reporters in Gaza, we're increasingly seeing graphic videos and photos of dying, starving kids, as well as desperate, hungry adults. Meanwhile, Israel continues its bombing and allows into Gaza a mere drip-feed of humanitarian aid, estranging some longtime allies — France, Britain and Germany among them — as well as Democrats and independents in the U.S. Congress who for much of Israel's existence were Israel's most stalwart supporters. That's a loss that Israel literally can't afford: For decades, it has been far and away the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid (eclipsed for now by war aid to Ukraine). On Monday, independent Sen. Angus King of Maine announced he'd no longer support aid to Israel 'as long as there are starving children in Gaza due to the action or inaction of the Israeli government.' His statement began, 'I cannot defend the indefensible.' And Netanyahu's war policies are indefensible, however justified Israel's war against the genocidal Hamas was at its start. It is beyond painful and tragic to watch a nation born of the sympathy of a world horrified by the newsreel footage of human skeletons emerging from Nazi camps now bearing responsibility for the pictures coming from Gaza. The Israeli government itself stands accused of war crimes and genocide even by its own citizens, including some former leaders. Yet the prime minister has the gall to tell us that our eyes are lying: 'There is no starvation in Gaza,' Netanyahu insisted on Monday. That lie was so bald-faced that even the liar in chief, Netanyahu's pal Donald Trump, called him out. Asked on Monday about Netanyahu's denial, President Trump told reporters he'd seen the clips of starving Gaza children on TV. 'That's real starvation stuff,' he said. 'I see it, and you can't fake that.' Not exactly how most people would express empathy and outrage, but we take what we can get. Trump also went on about how the United States would step up to create new food centers in Gaza, seemingly unaware that the United States already is involved, complicit actually, in the failed 'humanitarian' effort that supplanted United Nations and independent humanitarian groups in Gaza and spawned the current crisis. After Israel in March abandoned a ceasefire that Trump had taken credit for, it blocked all goods into Gaza for nearly three months to pressure Hamas to surrender. FYI, hunger as a weapon of war is a war crime. Instead of hundreds of aid centers run by experienced humanitarian organizations, Israel created a shadowy, misnamed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation with a handful of centers run by U.S. contractors and policed by Israeli troops. Since May, more than 100 Gazans have reportedly died of hunger, but 10 times as many have been shot dead, according to the U.N., by trigger-happy soldiers firing 'warning shots' at the predictably overrun food sites, turning them into killing fields. And lest we forget, in the West Bank Palestinians continue to be tormented and killed by militant Jewish settlers, backed by the Netanyahu government. U.N. data shows that violence against Palestinians is at a higher level than any time in two decades. The suffering, and the transformation of Israel's image from from David to Goliath, from righteous to wrathful, is in turn transforming U.S.-Israel politics, no doubt to Israel's long-term detriment. On Tuesday a new Gallup polling report was headlined '32% in U.S. Back Israel's Military Action in Gaza, a New Low.' That poll was conducted earlier in July, mostly before the torrent of heart-rending photos of malnourished babies. Americans' reduced support for Israel's actions in Gaza was driven by increased opposition among Democrats and independents. Republicans' approval of Israel's war is up, likely reflecting Trump's support for Netanyahu — and the administration's zeal to tar as an antisemite anyone or any institution critical of Israel's government. In February, amid the since-abandoned ceasefire, Gallup found just 46% support for Israel among Americans overall, the lowest level in its 25 years of tracking. Until 2022, both Republicans and Democrats sided with Israel over the Palestinian territories in their long-running dispute. Since then, Democrats have tipped in favor of the Palestinians, presumably reflecting disgust that was building before the war with Netanyahu's long, antidemocratic and self-serving rule. Similarly, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs reported in May on the growing partisan divide on U.S. support for Israel. It concluded: 'a long-term shift in public opinion could lead to reduced U.S. support for Israel down the line.' That polarization of support in the United States, Israel's most longstanding and crucial ally, is Netanyahu's legacy. It's not a good one for the Jewish people, or for America. Bluesky: @jackiecalmesThreads: @jkcalmesX: @Jackiekcalmes
