Donald Trump's Biggest Allies Split With Him Over Jeffrey Epstein
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A number of President Donald Trump's biggest allies in the House of Representatives have split with him and called for the complete release of the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert - both major supporters of Trump - co-sponsored a discharge petition announced by Republican Representative Thomas Massie and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna to force a vote in the House to release the complete files.
The proposed act, called the Epstein Files Transparency Act, would mandate Attorney General Pam Bondi to make public all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials regarding Epstein that are in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) possession.
It was co-sponsored by several other Republican representatives, including Tom Barrett, Cory Mills, Eric Burlison, Jeff Van Drew, Eli Crane and Tim Burchett. It was also sponsored by Democratic representative Rashida Tlaib.
The petition requires 218 signatures to force House Speaker Mike Johnson to call a vote on the bill.
It comes after Trump said earlier this week regarding Epstein: "I don't understand what the interest or what the fascination is. I really don't... I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff, it's sordid, but it's boring. And I don't understand why it keeps going."
But he added that Bondi should release any "credible information" that the DOJ has regarding him.
President Donald Trump in the White House in Washington D.C. on Wednesday.
President Donald Trump in the White House in Washington D.C. on Wednesday.
Evan Vucci/AP Photo
This is a developing story. More to follow.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Trump convenes peace summit between longtime foes Armenia and Azerbaijan
The leaders of rival nations Armenia and Azerbaijan convened at the White House on Friday in a "Peace Signing Ceremony" that US President Donald Trump said would end a decades-long conflict between two former Soviet republics.
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Zelensky warns against ‘dead solutions' without Ukraine involvement
Volodymyr Zelensky dismissed the planned summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, warning that any peace deal excluding Kyiv would lead to 'dead solutions'. The meeting, scheduled for Friday in Alaska, is seen as a potential breakthrough after weeks of expressing frustration that more was not being done to quell the fighting. In a statement posted to Telegram, Mr Zelensky said Ukraine's territorial integrity, enshrined in the constitution, must be non-negotiable and emphasised that lasting peace must include Ukraine's voice at the table. Mr Zelensky said Ukraine 'will not give Russia any awards for what it has done' and that 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier'. Touching on Ukrainian anxieties that a direct meeting between Mr Putin and Mr Trump could marginalise Kyiv and European interests, Mr Zelensky said: 'Any solutions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time, solutions against peace. 'They will not bring anything. These are dead solutions, they will never work.' Ukrainian officials previously said Kyiv would be amenable to a peace deal that would de facto recognise Ukraine's inability to regain lost territories militarily. Mr Trump said he will meet with Mr Putin to discuss ending the war in Ukraine. 'It seems entirely logical for our delegation to fly across the Bering Strait simply, and for such an important and anticipated summit of the leaders of the two countries to be held in Alaska,' Russian state news agency RIA Novosti cited Mr Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, as saying. Such a summit may prove pivotal in a war that began more than three years ago when Russia invaded its western neighbour and has led to tens of thousands of deaths, although there is no guarantee it will stop the fighting since Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart on their conditions for peace. In comments to reporters at the White House before his post confirming the date and place, Mr Trump suggested that any agreement would likely involve 'some swapping of territories', but he gave no details. Analysts, including some close to the Kremlin, have suggested that Russia could offer to give up territory it controls outside of the four regions it claims to have annexed. Mr Trump said his meeting with Mr Putin would come before any sit-down discussion involving Mr Zelensky. Mr Trump also previously agreed to meet with Mr Putin even if the Russian leader would not meet with Mr Zelensky. That stoked fears in Europe that Ukraine could be sidelined in efforts to stop the continent's biggest conflict since the Second World War. Mr Trump's announcement that he planned to host one of America's adversaries on US soil broke with expectations that they would meet in a third country. The gesture gives Mr Putin validation after the US and its allies had long sought to make him a pariah over his war against Ukraine.
USA Today
3 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump never actually cared about making IVF affordable. He just wanted your vote.
President Donald Trump continues to make it clear that actually helping women isn't a priority with this administration. Turns out the 'father of IVF' isn't going to live up to the promise he made on the reelection campaign trail. Who could have seen that coming? After campaigning on the promise that the government would pay for in vitro fertilization or require insurers to cover it, The Washington Post reports that President Donald Trump has no actual plan to make the procedure more affordable. There are no talks of federal subsidies or Affordable Care Act coverage, and administration officials say that there is no plan to get insurance companies on board. When asked about this by The Post, the White House issued a statement saying, "The Administration is committed like none before it to using its authorities to deliver on this pledge" to make IVF more accessible in the United States. Of course, there's a difference between saying you're committed to doing something and actually doing it. I'm not shocked that Trump made a promise he has failed to keep – after all, this is the same man who said he was going to make the cost of living go down and stop the wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Unfortunately, this is just another instance of his administration failing to prioritize reproductive rights. Let's look at what Trump said about IVF during the campaign On the campaign trail, Trump was all-in on IVF, making the claim in August 2024 that the government or insurance companies would pay for the treatment. 'We want to produce babies in this country, right?' Trump said at the time. In February, the president signed an executive order giving domestic policy advisers 90 days to brainstorm ways to lower the cost of IVF and other fertilization treatments. The deadline came and went without any public progress, and the administration recently declined to comment on it. Opinion: Planned Parenthood isn't the only loser in Supreme Court case. Women lose, too. IVF is an incredibly cost-prohibitive procedure that accounts for about 2% of births annually. The nonprofit organization KFF reports that the cost of a single round of IVF can range between $9,000 and $14,000. In the executive order, Trump claimed the costs could get up to $25,000. It's no surprise that an administration determined to pinch pennies is backing away from a plan that would cost them a lot of money, nor is it surprising that Trump would come to realize that forcing the insurance industry to do anything would hurt his chances at future donations. More than anything, it's unsurprising that Trump would go back on a promise that, while controversial in right-wing circles, would benefit families who want to have children. IVF isn't the only reproductive rights challenge we face The fight for IVF is closely linked to the fight for reproductive freedom and abortion access. It comes down to whether women can make decisions about their bodies and their ability to start a family, regardless of the beliefs of others. Opinion: Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me. In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos were considered human beings, leading IVF clinics in the state to pause services out of fear. The legislature quickly introduced a bill that protected patients from potential legal issues, but it didn't address embryonic personhood. The entire situation revealed how complex the legal landscape could become after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision overturning Roe v. Wade, to the point that it could even harm people who are actively trying to conceive. Not financially supporting IVF comes at a time when women have lost the right to choose when and how they are going to start a family: The government is making it clear that women are subject to the whims of politicians, rather than being able to make decisions about their own bodies. Trump officials never actually cared about making IVF affordable, just like they don't actually care about improving the conditions for people who want to start families but can't afford to. It was all so that Trump could get reelected. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno
