A Kentucky Republican and a California liberal: The unlikely alliance pushing Trump on Epstein
Asked for comment, Bannon listed Khanna as one of a group of figures on the populist left and right who have found common ground on 'neo-Brandeisian antitrust.'
On X, Massie is keeping a live whip count of cosponsors for his proposal to release the Epstein files and encouraging his 1.3 million followers to ask their representatives if they support the idea. When Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Thursday the Justice Department will move to release grand jury transcripts — a decision seen as an attempt to appease the MAGA base — Massie declared: 'Folks, Keep the pressure on, it's working. But we want all the files.'
Should it come to pass, the resolution would be symbolic — Congress doesn't have the power to force the Justice Department to release any information. But under procedural rules, action on the floor can't take place until September, meaning that Trump's Epstein problem could linger in Congress for several more weeks.
Khanna said he has a 'very friendly' relationship with Massie. The idea for the discharge petition came about after Khanna introduced an amendment to release the Epstein files, and Massie texted him to propose they draft a bill on the topic.
'We text back and forth all the time. I will often see him on the House floor, pick up the phone and call him,' he said. 'Obviously, we come from different ideological perspectives, but there are areas where we have agreement in making sure that we're preventing wars of choice overseas and transparency.'
A spokesperson for Massie declined to comment. Earlier this week, Massie said in an interview that the pressure will intensify on House Republicans over the upcoming recess.
'They probably want to let the steam out, but this will build momentum over August,' Massie said. 'They can't sweep it under the rug.'
It's not the first time Massie, often an iconoclast in his party, has found strange bedfellows in Democrats. He and other conservatives joined forces with libertarian-minded and anti-interventionist lawmakers on digital privacy and war powers measures. And just last month, he teamed up with Khanna on a measure to reign in Trump's ability to use military force in the Iran-Israel conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration recommends location verification for AI chips
By Stephen Nellis SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump's administration on Wednesday recommended implementing export controls that would verify the location of advanced artificial intelligence chips, a move that was applauded by U.S. lawmakers from both parties in both houses of Congress. The recommendation was part of a broader AI blueprint released on Wednesday that aimed to boost exports of AI hardware and software to U.S. allies and relax U.S. environmental rules to speed the construction of new AI data centers. But the plan released Wednesday also said the U.S. should continue denying access to advanced U.S. AI chips made by companies like Nvidia and AMD to foreign adversaries. It added the U.S. government should "explore leveraging new and existing location verification features on advanced AI compute to ensure that the chips are not in countries of concern." The recommendation drew support from two lawmakers who previously introduced bills that would require location verification of chips after sale over concerns that they are finding their way to countries such as China, where their export is banned. Key details - such as how the technology would be implemented and how much cost it would add - remain to be worked out, both in the proposed bills and the Trump administration's recommendations. "I was encouraged to see that the recommended export control policy includes location verification mechanisms and aligns closely with our bipartisan Chip Security Act. I look forward to learning more of the technical details and next steps for end-use verification," Representative Bill Foster, an Illinois Democrat who helped introduce a chip-location bill in May, told Reuters. "Senator Cotton was pleased to see verification included in President Trump's AI Action Plan, as it's a vital part of his bipartisan, bicameral Chip Security Act and an important tool to keep advanced American technology out of the hands of Communist China," said Patrick McCann, a spokesperson for Senator Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican who introduced a similar bill in the U.S. Senate.
Boston Globe
16 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Appeals court finds Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship unconstitutional, upholds block
'The district court correctly concluded that the Executive Order's proposed interpretation, denying citizenship to many persons born in the United States, is unconstitutional. We fully agree,' the majority wrote. Advertisement The 2-1 ruling keeps in place a decision from U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour in Seattle, who blocked Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship and decried what he described as the administration's attempt to ignore the Constitution for political gain. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The White House and Justice Department did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. The Supreme Court has since But the 9th Circuit majority found that the case fell under Advertisement 'We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a universal injunction in order to give the States complete relief,' Judge Michael Hawkins and Ronald Gould, both appointed by President Bill Clinton, wrote. Judge Patrick Bumatay, who was appointed by Trump, dissented. He found that the states don't have the legal right, or standing, to sue. 'We should approach any request for universal relief with good faith skepticism, mindful that the invocation of 'complete relief' isn't a backdoor to universal injunctions,' he wrote. Bumatay did not weigh in on whether ending birthright citizenship would be constitutional. The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment says that all people born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to U.S. jurisdiction, are citizens. Justice Department attorneys argue that the phrase 'subject to United States jurisdiction' in the amendment means that citizenship isn't automatically conferred to children based on their birth location alone. The states — Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon — argue that ignores the plain language of the Citizenship Clause as well as a landmark birthright citizenship case in 1898 where the Supreme Court found a child born in San Francisco to Chinese parents was a citizen by virtue of his birth on American soil. Trump's order asserts that a child born in the U.S. is not a citizen if the mother does not have legal immigration status or is in the country legally but temporarily, and the father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. At least nine lawsuits challenging the order have been filed around the U.S. Advertisement Associated Press writer Rebecca Boone contributed to this story.
Los Angeles Times
16 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
House resolution seeks to stop plan to shoot nearly half a million owls
Rep. Troy E. Nehls, a Republican from Texas, backed by 17 co-sponsors from both political parties, introduced a resolution Wednesday that could mark the end of a plan to protect spotted owls in the Pacific Northwest. The plan calls for shooting roughly 450,000 barred owls over 30 years in California, Oregon and Washington, because they are outcompeting spotted owls, pushing them out of their native territory. The spotted owls are in rapid decline. Northern spotted owls are listed as threatened under California and U.S. endangered species laws, and there may be as few as 3,000 left on federal lands. Federal wildlife officials have proposed endangered species protection for two populations of California spotted owls. In a statement, Nehls called the owl-culling plan, approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Biden administration, 'a waste of Americans' hard-earned tax dollars.' He estimated it will cost $1.35 billion, based on a $4.5-million contract awarded to the Hoopa Valley Tribe in Northern California last year to hunt about 1,500 barred owls over four years. That is about $3,000 per owl. The bipartisan alliance says killing the owls is also inhumane and unworkable. Co-sponsors of the resolution consist of 11 Republicans and six Democrats, including three California representatives — Josh Harder (D-Tracy), Adam Gray (D-Merced) and Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), according to Nehls' office. The effort makes use of the Congressional Review Act, a tool sometimes employed by new presidential administrations to reverse rules issued by federal agencies in the final months of prior administrations. In late May, the Government Accountability Office concluded the plan was subject to the act. To stop the owl-culling plan, both chambers of Congress would need to pass a joint resolution by majority vote and President Trump would need to sign it. If successful, the resolution would preclude the Fish and Wildlife Service from pursuing a similar rule, unless explicitly authorized by Congress. The plan already faced setbacks. In May, federal officials canceled three related grants totaling more than $1.1 million, including one study that would have remove barred owls from over 192,000 acres in Mendocino and Sonoma counties. Another would have removed them from the Mendocino National Forest. Some scientists and conservationists say nixing the plan would mean the end for northern spotted owls. The raptor, dark brown with bright white spots, prefers old-growth forests. It became the central symbol of the so-called timber wars in the 1980s and '90s when environmentalists and logging interests fought over the fate of old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. Barred owls are slightly larger, more aggressive and less picky when it comes to habitat and food — giving them an advantage in competition for resources. 'If we don't move forward with barred owl removal, it will mean the extinction of the northern spotted owl, and it will likely mean the extinction of the California spotted owl as well,' Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center, told The Times last week. He pointed to a long-term field experiment that showed spotted owl populations stabilized in areas where barred owls were killed. Barred owls originated in eastern North America and expanded west along with European settlers who planted trees and suppressed fires, biologists believe. Government scientists see barred owls' presence in the Pacific Northwest as invasive, but some argue that it's natural range expansion. 'Protecting spotted owls is an imperative, but assaulting other native wildlife occupying the same forests is not ethical or a practical means of achieving that goal,' said Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and Center for a Humane Economy, who has helped galvanize opposition to the culling plan.
