
Analysis: Why Republicans can't hide from their Epstein problem
The day-early dismissal is rather transparently to avoid an issue that Trump wants no part of, buy themselves some time, and maybe even hope the issue just fades away.
But the issue is showing no signs of quieting, with many Trump supporters continuing to press for more transparency over Epstein and the administration taking steps – albeit limited ones – to try to quell the unrest.
Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky even predicted to CNN on Tuesday that the files would ultimately come out – either the easy way or the hard way.
So what are the key pressure points here in forcing the issue?
Comer, in his comments to Manu Raju, pointed to the looming threat of a discharge petition. This is an effort spearheaded by fellow Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie that would force the House to vote on releasing the Epstein files if 218 members – from a majority of the 435 districts – sign on.
'The president, by September, will surely have turned over everything,' Comer predicted. 'If things haven't been turned over by then, I think the Massie resolution will pass on the floor.'
Discharge petitions are rarely successful in actually forcing votes on the underlying legislation – only about 4% of the time, according to the Brookings Institution – but the mere threat of them can force leaders to cut deals and act on similar measures.
Thus far, Massie's discharge petition has the support of 12 House Republicans, including him. If nearly all of the House's 212 Democrats signed on, that could be enough to get it to 218.
But there's a real question about whether these Republicans would actually follow through. Discharge petitions are provocative because they undercut leadership – and in this case would undercut Trump.
House Speaker Mike Johnson on Tuesday criticized Massie for teaming with Democrats and not pushing a similar measure under the Biden administration. But he also made clear he was paying attention.
'So do I have some concern about that? I do,' Johnson said. He added: 'So let me just say about Thomas Massie: Could you just accept my Southern 'bless his heart?' OK? I don't know what else to say about it. We're for maximum transparency. We're engaging in that right now, and we don't need political games.'
But these Republicans seem to be saying: We're ready to do this if you don't want to take the easy route. It's up to Johnson and Trump to try and call their bluff – to the extent it's actually a bluff.
The House's move might seem like a great way to get away from the issue – to head home and let things settle.
But home isn't always a great place for such things. We've seen over and over again how lawmakers departing Washington to interact with their constituents can inflame situations.
The most significant recent example is the rise of the tea party starting in 2009, which really got its foothold during the August recess.
Tense scenes also greeted Republicans during the first August recess of Trump's first term in 2017.
Indeed, there is a long tradition of these periods serving as flashpoints, dating back decades.
And just a few months ago, Republicans began urging their members not to hold town halls after some ugly scenes over the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cuts.
We also know that Democratic-leaning voters are highly motivated right now. A CNN poll released last week showed 72% of them said they were 'extremely' motivated to vote in next year's midterm election; that was much higher than Republican-leaning voters (50%) and suggested Democratic-leaning voters were even more motivated than they were at the tail end of the 2024 presidential election. That suggests they could come out in force.
But it might not just be Democrats forcing the issue over the August recess. Americans overall disapprove of Trump and his administration's Epstein actions by more than 3-to-1 margins in recent polls – by far his worst issue.
The Republican base is unprecedentedly unhappy with Trump's handling of this. Even pro-Trump influencers are pressing for more. And this is an issue that would seem to motivate the most vocal portions of the GOP base.
It remains to be seen how many Republicans will even hold town halls or public events. But if they don't, that will also be telling. And it's not difficult to see this becoming a powder keg.
While the discharge petition effort is being led by some of the more unwieldy members of the House Republican Conference, they're not the only ones pressing for more Epstein information.
Others are pushing for middle-ground congressional action that could at least keep the issue alive or pushing the administration hard to relent.
Comer and Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee are pressing forward with an effort in the House Oversight Committee to subpoena Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. (The Trump administration signaled Tuesday that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche will seek a separate interview with Maxwell.)
Both Comer and Burchett suggested they're acting independently of Trump.
'I know that President Trump has said he's going to release all the information they have,' Comer said. (Trump has not, in fact, said this.) 'But we have members that want to go a little bit further, be a little more aggressive.'
Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio told CNN this week that Bondi, who over-hyped the release of the Epstein files and made a series of curious statements, should be called to testify and explain herself.
Democrats have suggested these kinds of things are half-measures, but they could still add fuel to the fire.
Other prominent Republicans also continue to press the case, including Republican Sen. Thom Tillis.
'Release the damn files. It makes no sense to me,' Tillis said Wednesday at an Axios event, adding: 'Either the promise to release the files during the campaign was either overplayed and we got a nothingburger if the files get released, or it's something really disturbing. And that's actually even a more compelling reason to release it.
'And this nonsense – well, we've got to protect the innocent, witnesses, those sorts of things – that's called redactions. We do that all the time,' he added.
Tillis' commentary reinforces that there are just no good answers here for the GOP, shy of a sizable disclosure.
And the North Carolina Republican, who can speak more freely now that he's not running for reelection, also assured this was going nowhere because of that.
'If anybody thinks that this is going to go away because the House left a day early or something, this is going to be like those zombies in 'The Walking Dead,' ' Tillis said. 'Every time you think you've killed it, another one's just going to come out of the closet after you.
'This is going to be an issue all the way through next year's election.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kevin Hassett, a Trump official floated as the next Fed Chair, claimed the jobs report's revisions shows the numbers are 'unreliable.'
President Donald Trump's acolytes are scrambling to rationalize his decision to fire the nation's top labor statistician after she delivered a bruising reality check. Trump was confronted with a weak jobs report Friday showing just 73,000 new jobs for July—far fewer than expected—along with a staggering downward revision of 258,000 fewer jobs for May and June. Trump dismissed the numbers as 'rigged' and 'phony' before firing Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner Dr. Erika McEntarfer, who was confirmed in a bipartisan vote in 2024.


New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Tulsi Gabbard explains why Russia must have thought Hillary Clinton win was ‘inevitable'
The Russians privately felt it was 'inevitable' that Hillary Clinton would triumph in the 2016 election, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said on Miranda Devine's 'Pod Force One' podcast. Despite widespread narratives that Russia was in President Trump's corner, Moscow's objective was to sow chaos in the American political process and brace itself for a Clinton presidency, Gabbard claimed, citing the trove of intelligence documents her team has released. 'It surprised me that all of these documents still existed, quite frankly,' Gabbard said in an episode set for release Wednesday. 'As we've learned in later documents that we've reviewed throughout that campaign, Russia believed that Hillary Clinton would win the election. Advertisement 'They felt it was inevitable.' Last month, Gabbard's team began disclosing a trove of documents that gave a behind-the-scenes look at the intelligence community's machinations during the 2016 election cycle regarding the probe of Russian interference. 4 Tulsi Gabbard accused the Obama administration of mounting a campaign to subvert President Trump. Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post Advertisement 4 Hillary Clinton once implied that Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset. Getty Images This included a House Intelligence Committee report from 2020 that claimed the Russians may have had intelligence that Clinton was 'placed on a daily regimen of 'heavy tranquilizers' and while afraid of losing.' That was supposedly due to her alleged 'psycho-emotional problems, including uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness.' Gabbard pondered why that supposed Russian intelligence wasn't leaked to the public if Moscow's chief objective was to prop up Trump and undermine Clinton. Advertisement 'If Russia aspired to help Trump get elected, which is what the manufactured January 2017 intelligence community assessment says with high confidence, according to Brennan and Clapper, then Putin would have released the most damaging information and emails to help President Trump,' she said. 'It was intentionally withheld and not released because they assumed that Hillary Clinton would win that election, and their plan,' Gabbard added, citing the 2020 House Intelligence Committee report, '[was to] wait until maybe days or weeks before her inauguration to release these documents.' The Russians were widely alleged by US officials to have hacked Democratic National Committee emails during he 2016 campaign. 4 Narratives about Russian interferences in the 2016 election haunted President Trump during his first term. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement The 2020 House Intelligence Committee report had concluded that Russian strongman Vladimir Putin's 'principal motivations in these operations were to undermine faith in the US democratic process' and that he didn't necessarily prioritize propping up one candidate over the other. 'The American people, I think, have been, and our republic, has been most harmed by this,' Gabbard said of the Russia collusion narrative. 'Of course, President Trump went through hell and his family because of this Russia hoax that was manufactured by President Obama and his administration.' Critics such as former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper accused Gabbard of peddling 'patently false' accusations about their Russiagate activities. Much of what Gabbard has released centered around rebuffing a 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), which concluded among other things that 'the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.' Brennan, Clapper and others have pointed to a 2020 bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report, which noted the panel 'heard consistently that analysts were under no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions.' Clapper and Brennan recenty penned an op-ed insisting that the intelligence community report never referenced 'collusion' between Trump and the Russian government, and stood by their claims that the Kremlin prefered him in the 2016 election. Tulsi Gabbard's Russiagate claims Tulsi Gabbard's claims of election interference focus on the controversial 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, which President Barack Obama ordered his intel chiefs to compile. The report fueled the Russiagate investigations against President Trump. Gabbard alleges it amounted to a political hit job, claiming Obama officials knowingly used shaky intel and then lied about it. Gabbard's new claims are based on a 2020 House Intelligence Committee report, which she has publicly released. Its findings differ in some key ways from both the Obama report and a previously released Senate Intelligence Committee report. Democrats, however, point to the Senate report, which was backed by then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — now Trump's secretary of state. That supports some of the findings of the Obama report. Here are the biggest points — and what the dueling intel reports say: The Steele dossier The House report contradicts the claims of Obama officials that they never relied on the discredited Steele dossier — which was compiled by Hillary Clinton's campaign — as part of the Russiagate investigation. In a 2017 House hearing, Obama CIA Director John Brennan denied that his agency used the Steele dossier for intelligence assessments. However, the full Steele dossier was still included as an attachment to the Obama intel report, the newly public House report found. Additionally, according to the House report, Brennan, FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe pushed to use the Steele dossier for the Obama intel report. Senior intel officials also confronted Brennan about the legitimacy of the Steele dossier, the House report said, but he shrugged it off. Brennan's response was reportedly, 'Yes, but doesn't it ring true?' The Senate investigation found that the Steele dossier was not used as part of the Obama intel report. Obama's involvement Gabbard claimed Wednesday that Obama ordered the creation of the 2017 intel report and suggested it 'was subject to unusual directives directly from the president and senior political appointees.' She added: 'Obama directed an intelligence community assessment to be created, to further this contrived false narrative that ultimately led to a year-long coup to try to undermine President Trump's presidency.' The 2020 Senate intel report confirmed that Obama ordered the report to be drafted, but did not comment on the political motivations. Obama said that 'the bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.' Did Putin want Trump to win? The Obama report said that 'Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability' and that Putin had a 'clear preference for President-elect Trump.' But the House report contradicted this, saying that Putin's 'principal motivations in these operations were to undermine faith in the US democratic process.' The Russian strongman also seemed to expect Clinton to win, and held back on 'some compromising material for post-election use against the expected Clinton administration.' The Senate report said lawmakers were given 'specific intelligence reporting to support the assessment that Putin and the Russian Government demonstrated a preference for candidate Trump.' Did Russia alter the 2016 election? To buttress her claims that the Obama intel report was political interference, she highlighted the findings of multiple intelligence agencies that Russia 'had neither the intent nor capability to impact the outcome of the US election.' On this, all three reports are in agreement. Gabbard pointed to how Obama ordered the 2017 ICA of Russian interference in the 2016 election and his administration's machinations detailed in the document dump to accuse the 44th president of subversion. Advertisement 'What we now know came from President Obama was a covert mission, essentially, to subvert the will of the American people, create this lie that would challenge the legitimacy of President Trump's election and the four years of his administration, resulting and affecting in what was truly a years' long coup,' Gabbard said. Reps from Obama have refuted those characterizations, saying that the 'bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.' 'Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes,' Obama spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement last month. 4 Tulsi Gabbard has drawn President Trump's attention with the document dump on Russiagate. REUTERS Advertisement Gabbard made referrals to the Justice Department based on her findings, and the DOJ has since formed a 'strike force' to comb through the claims.


Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Texas Democrats leave the state to block vote on redrawn House map backed by Trump
Advertisement 'This is not a decision we make lightly, but it is one we make with absolute moral clarity,' said Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, in a statement. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up To conduct official business, at least 100 members of the 150-member Texas House must be present. Democrats hold 62 of the seats in the majority-Republican chamber. At least 51 Democratic members are leaving the state, said Josh Rush Nisenson, spokesperson for the House Democratic Caucus. 'Apathy is complicity, and we will not be complicit in the silencing of hard-working communities who have spent decades fighting for the power that Trump wants to steal,' he said. The move marks the second time in four years that Texas Democrats have fled the state to block a vote. In 2021, a 38-day standoff took place when Democrats left for Washington, D.C. in opposition to new voting restrictions. Advertisement Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called a special session of the Legislature that started last month to take up the redistricting effort, as well as to respond to flooding in Texas Hill Country that killed at least 135 people in July. Trump has urged Texas Republicans to redraw the map to help the party net a handful of seats in the midterms next year. 'For weeks, we've been warning that if Republicans in Texas want a showdown — if they want to delay flood relief to cravenly protect Donald Trump from an inevitable midterm meltdown — then we'd give them that showdown," Democratic Party Chair Ken Martin said in a statement. 'That's exactly what Texas Democrats did today: blowing up Republicans' sham special session that's virtually ignored the plight of flood victims in Kerr County.' Speaker Dustin Burrows said the Texas House would meet as planned on Monday afternoon. 'If a quorum is not present then, to borrow the recent talking points from some of my Democrat colleagues, all options will be on the table. . .,' he posted on X. Attorney General Ken Paxton on X said the state should 'use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law.' 'Democrats in the Texas House who try and run away like cowards should be found, arrested, and brought back to the Capitol immediately,' he wrote. Abbott's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment Sunday afternoon. Texas Republicans last week unveiled their planned new U.S. House map that would create five new Republican-leaning seats. Republicans currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats. Advertisement By leaving the state, Democrats are looking to block Republicans from the needed quorum to hold votes on the map set for Monday. The Texas House has rules to fine lawmakers $500 each day they break a quorum. Paxton has said previously that if Democrats break quorum, 'they should be found and arrested no matter where they go.' A large chunk of the Texas Democrats are heading to Illinois, where Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker had been in quiet talks with them for weeks about offering support if they chose to leave the state to break quorum. Pritzker, a potential 2028 presidential contender, has been one of Trump's most outspoken critics during his second term. Last week, Pritzker hosted several Texas Democrats in Illinois to publicly oppose the redistricting effort. California Gov. Gavin Newsom held a similar event in his own state. Pritzker also met privately with Texas Democratic Chair Kendall Scudder in June to begin planning for the possibility that lawmakers would depart for Illinois if they did decide to break quorum to block the map, according to a source with direct knowledge who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations. Now, with Texas Democrats holed up in Illinois and blocking the Trump-backed congressional map, the stage may be set for a high-profile showdown between Pritzker and the president. Trump is looking to avoid a repeat of his first term, when Democrats flipped the House just two years into his presidency, and hopes the new Texas map will aid that effort. Trump officials have also looked at redrawing lines in other states, such as Missouri, according to a person familiar with conversations but unauthorized to speak publicly about them. Advertisement Associated Press writer Nadia Lathan in Austin contributed to this report.