Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should testify before Congress
Asked if he would support efforts to have Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell testify before Congress, the speaker said 'I'm for transparency.' He also appeared open to congress issuing subpoenas to the FBI and Department of Justice to force them to turn over any previously undisclosed files. 'We're intellectually consistent in this... I trust him (Trump). He put together a team of his choosing and they're doing a great job,' the Republican said. 'It's a very delicate subject but we should put everything out there and let the people decide.'
'The White House, and the White House team, are privy to facts that I don't know. I mean this isn't my lane, I haven't been involved in that. But I agree with the sentiment that we need to put it out there.' He also specifically mentioned Attorney General Pam Bondi's previous remarks noting she had Epstein-related documents on her desk before the DOJ claimed last week that no 'client list' exists.
'Pam Bondi, I don't know when she originally made the statement, I think she was talking about documents, as I understood it they were on her desk,' Speaker Johnson claimed. 'I don't know if she was specific about a list or whatever. But she needs to come forward and explain that to everybody ... I am anxious to get this behind us.' His sentiment appeared to cut against the White House's reluctance to engage on the topic.
Last week Trump balked after a reporter asked him about Epstein, and Trump posted over the weekend a sprawling Truth Social post seemingly questioning voter's interest in the case. However, as pressure has grown on Attorney General Pam Bondi to release sealed documents on the financier's crimes and jailhouse death, Trump has seemingly relented and is now for additional files being released.
'The attorney general has handled that very well. She's really done a very good job. I think when you look at it, you'll understand that. I would like to see that also, but the credibility is very important,' he said about the Epstein files Tuesday. Firebrand Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., along with other conservatives have been pushing for more information on the Epstein case.
'I fully support the transparency on this issue,' Greene said Tuesday. 'I also think Pam Bondi is doing a great job.' On Monday evening one Republican, Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina, voted for a amendment to a bill that would've forced Bondi to release unseen Epstein files on a public portal within 30 days of passage. Norman joined all the Democrats on the Rules Committee push the files into the light of day, however, most Republicans voted down the amendment. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, did not cast a vote in the matter.
Roy and Norman are both members of the House Freedom Caucus, a conservative flank of the House GOP that - in line with their anti-swamp antics - are eager to see what is contained in the elusive documents. Democrats, meanwhile, have seen Republican floundering over the files' release as a sign of division - and they are seeking to exploit it for political gain. 'It makes no sense why they want to hide the evidence against Epstein, and the potential client lists that the attorney general is talking about,' the amendments author, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told the Daily Mail.
He heaped praise on Greene and Norman for being supportive of the documents' release. 'They should release the files and let the chips fall where they may for whoever for Democrats or Republicans,' Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., similarly told the Daily Mail. 'It's really, I think, kind of insulting to their own base, because it's like they campaigned on it,' he added. 'Either they were lying from the get go, or they're covering something up that's in there that they don't want to get out.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Manhunt for inmate ‘mistakenly' released from New Orleans jail where 10 previously escaped
Authorities in New Orleans are searching for a man with a "violent criminal history," who was 'mistakenly released' from a jail where 10 inmates escaped earlier this year. Khalil Bryan, 30, was released from the Orleans Parish Jail on Friday in what authorities refer to as "human error," after he was confused with another inmate with a 'similar last name', according to Orleans Parish Sheriff Susan Hutson. 'I want to make a sincere apology to the people of New Orleans. The mistaken release of Khalil Bryan was a serious error, and as sheriff, I take full responsibility,' Hutson told reporters at a press conference. It comes just over two months after the escape of 10 inmates from the same jail on May 16. While eight were recaptured relatively quickly by authorities, one evaded police until June, and the final inmate remains at large. On Friday, Superintendent Ann Kirkpatrick of the New Orleans Police Department, addressed Bryan directly, telling him that he was 'a fugitive.' 'Even though it was a mistaken release from custody, you are on notice. You are a fugitive,' Kirkpatrick said. 'I'm going to ask that you turn yourself in. 'You and others who may be harboring him at this moment will be subject to prosecution yourself, because you are on notice. Mr Bryan is a fugitive at this point.' Explaining how Bryan's release was possible, Hutson explained the mishap stemmed 'from a clerical misidentification where he was confused with another individual sharing a similar last name.' 'While our systems are designed to catch these discrepancies, human error led to a breakdown in the verification process,' she said. Hutson added that an internal investigation had been launched and the Parish Sheriff's Office was working with all relevant partners to locate Bryan. 'I want the public to know this should not have happened,' she said. 'It was a failure of internal processes, and the public has every right to expect better.' Hutson added that disciplinary action would be 'forthcoming.' Prior to his mistaken release, Bryan was being held on charges including possession of stolen property, drug paraphernalia and resisting an officer. He has an active warrant for aggravated assault with a firearm, domestic abuse, child endangerment and home invasion, as well as a "violent criminal history," including aggravated burglary, aggravated assault with a weapon and aggravated criminal damage to property, Kirkpatrick said. Anyone with information about Bryan's whereabouts are urged to call police and authorities warn he should not be approached.
Daily Mail
10 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Victory for Christian foster mom agency tried to ban after she said she wouldn't give trans child hormones
A widowed Christian mom-of-five scored a major legal victory after a federal appeals court ruled that the state of Oregon violated her constitutional rights by barring her from adopting foster children because of her refusal to support gender transitions. Jessica Bates, who says her faith prevents her from using preferred pronouns or facilitating hormone treatments, was blocked by the state after she said she could not affirm an LGBTQ + child's identity. She sued - and now, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals has sided with her, calling the state's policy a violation of her free speech and religious freedom. 'This is a win not just for me, but for people of faith who want to help kids without compromising their beliefs,' Bates said after the ruling. In a 2-1 decision issued on Thursday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) policy that effectively barred Bates from becoming a foster parent. Bates was refusing to comply with the state's requirement to 'respect, accept and support' a foster child's gender identity and sexual orientation. 'We hold that Oregon's policy violates the First Amendment as applied to Bates,' wrote Judge Daniel Bress in the court's majority opinion, joined by Judge Michael Daly Hawkins. The court ordered a preliminary injunction blocking the state from using its current policy to prevent Bates from moving forward with the adoption process. Bates, who lives in Malheur County, said she felt 'called by God' to care for additional children after losing her husband. The five children she already has are her biological kids. She had hoped to adopt two siblings under the age of nine but was disqualified after refusing to sign a commitment to fully affirm an LGBTQ+ child's identity, including using chosen names and pronouns or providing access to gender-related medical treatments. 'I believe God gives us our gender/sex and it's not something we get to choose,' Bates wrote in her application. 'I have no problem loving them and accepting them as they are, but I would not encourage them in this behavior.' The state of Oregon argued that its policy is essential to ensure the safety and well-being of vulnerable children in its custody. But the appeals court disagreed, finding the regulation was overly broad and imposed an unconstitutional burden on Bates' free speech and religious liberty. 'It is not narrowly tailored to impose on Bates an extreme and blanket rule that she may adopt no child at all based on her religious faith,' Bress wrote. The court emphasized that the state could simply avoid placing LGBTQ+ children with Bates while still allowing her to foster or adopt. The lone dissent came from Judge Richard Clifton, who warned that Bates was seeking to foster 'only on her terms,' and that the state had a legitimate interest in protecting children from potential rejection or harm. 'Parents would not be expected to entrust their children to caregivers who volunteer that they will not respect the child's self-determined gender identity,' Clifton wrote. The case has drawn national attention and praise from conservative groups, including the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which represented Bates. 'Because caregivers like Jessica cannot promote Oregon's dangerous gender ideology to young kids and take them to events like pride parades, the state considers them to be unfit parents,' said ADF senior counsel Jonathan Scruggs. 'That is false and incredibly dangerous, needlessly depriving kids of opportunities to find a loving home. The 9th Circuit was right to remind Oregon that the foster and adoption system is supposed to serve the best interests of children, not the state's ideological crusade.' In an interview with KGW8, Bates reiterated her commitment to loving all children in her care, but said she would not affirm an LGBTQ+ identity or allow permanent medical interventions like hormone therapy. 'I'm still gonna love them deeply,' she said. 'But just like my biologicals, I probably will not allow them to do any, like, permanent... hormone injections, anything that's going to rob them of their God-given body.' Bates said she would not use a child's chosen name or pronouns and would instead steer the conversation toward her Christian faith. 'God makes our identity,' she said. 'It might not feel like a gift right now... but that's something actually really special, and you are beautiful and perfect, just how you are right now.' Asked whether she would reject an LGBTQ+ child, Bates said she would never kick a child out - except in cases of 'sexually aberrant' behavior. 'The Christian sex ethic is very narrow and simple... any of the sexual activity that's outside of God's defined institution of marriage is something I would not be OK with in my house,' she added. The court's decision now sends the case back to a lower court in Oregon, where Bates' constitutional claims will be reconsidered under strict scrutiny - the most rigorous standard in constitutional law. Historically, policies that fail this test are rarely upheld. ODHS has not yet said whether it plans to appeal the decision, but a spokesperson for the Oregon Department of Justice acknowledged the setback. 'We are disappointed in the ruling but are reviewing to determine next steps,' said Jenny Hansson. Meanwhile, Bates says she intends to continue the foster care certification process - and insists that her position is about faith, not hatred. 'I would hope that we would have open communication,' she said. 'But I would probably, you know, remind them of Christ, my Christian faith that... God makes our identity, and that's something sacred and holy.' The ruling is expected to have wide ramifications for how states balance nondiscrimination policies with religious freedom in the child welfare system and is already being hailed by Christian conservatives as a landmark win in the culture wars.
Daily Mail
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Why Candace Owens claims Brigette Macron was born a man, her 'war against perverts who run the world'... and why that's not even the most controversial part
The Duchess of Sussex is 'despicably racist', the Covid-19 vaccine is 'pure evil' and 'secret Jewish gangs' are doing 'horrific things' in Hollywood. Followers of the firebrand Right-wing commentator Candace Owens have become accustomed to endlessly outlandish opinions.
