Latest news with #R-La.
The Hill
15 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hill
In the works: A presidential pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell?
As any constitutional scholar will tell you, the Constitution devotes as much time defining the limits of presidential power as it does defining its broad reach. But there is one exception to this: the presidential pardon power. That broad power is clearly spelled out in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1: 'The President…shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.' The Supreme Court has, in effect, subsequently interpreted that provision as allowing a president to pardon anyone, anytime, for any offense (except impeachment). In his masterful book, 'The Pardon,' CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin argues that use of the pardon is the one time where a president is, for all practical purposes, a 'king.' Such an awesome power was bound to be abused, and several presidents, Republican and Democrat, have done so. Among other abuses, Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon to spare him from prison. Bill Clinton and Joe Biden pardoned members of their own families near the end of their terms. President Trump pardoned supporters who stormed the United States Capitol on Jan. 6. But no previous abuse of the pardon can compare with what dominated the Sunday morning news shows last weekend, and which Trump has so far not ruled out: A possible presidential pardon for Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. Let's remember who she is and what she is serving time for. Maxwell had more than a romantic relationship with convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. For years, she was Epstein's enabler and procurer. Several young women testified that it was Maxwell herself who had sought them out, introduced them to Epstein, persuaded them to have sex with Epstein and other prominent men, trained them in sexual techniques, and herself participated in some of their sexual encounters. In 2020, federal prosecutors charged that between 1994 and 1997, Maxwell personally ' assisted, facilitated, and contributed ' to the abuse of minor girls despite knowing that one of three unnamed victims was 14 years old.' She was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for what Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has accurately described as 'terrible, unspeakable, conspiratorial acts and acts against innocent young people.' And that should be the end of the story, but it's not. Suddenly, having failed in every other attempt to change the narrative on Epstein, the Trump administration is now counting on Maxwell to be its lifeline. Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal attorney, now deputy attorney general, rushed to Tallahassee last week and spent nine hours over two days interviewing Maxwell. Why? We know why Maxwell agreed to talk: She wants to get out of prison. She has already asked the Supreme Court to overturn her criminal conviction. And now she is clearly angling for a presidential pardon from a man who admits he was once one of Epstein's best friends. But by spending so much time with her, Blanche triggered a wave of speculation about a Maxwell pardon. This is especially bizarre, given that Maxwell has nothing to do with all the questions swirling around the White House about the Epstein matter. What Trump's MAGA base wants to know is why he and other administration officials spent six years spreading the conspiracy theory that Epstein was murdered while his client list was being covered up to protect powerful 'elites' only, once in office, to turn around and report that Epstein committed suicide and there is no client list. Why won't they simply release all the Epstein files? Granted, the idea that anyone convicted of sex trafficking in underage girls would merit a presidential pardon is unthinkable. Even Johnson, in a rare break with Trump, admitted ' I have great pause about that, as any reasonable person would.' But what's even more unthinkable is that Trump didn't immediately shoot it down. Instead, when asked by reporters whether he would consider a pardon for Maxwell, Trump would only offer a weak: 'It's something I haven't thought about. I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about.' Really? Whether or not to pardon a sexual predator is not something Trump should have to think about. His answer should have been an immediate, emphatic: 'No way, no how. Period.' It's insane even just to toy with the idea. Clearly, this is one point on which Republicans and Democrats can agree: Sexual predators don't get a mulligan. Ghislaine Maxwell does not deserve a presidential pardon. Trump should stop even teasing the possibility of giving her one.
Newsweek
17 hours ago
- Politics
- Newsweek
Epstein Scandal Is Just the Beginning of Government's Failures To Protect Kids
If people are really concerned about child sex trafficking, they should not treat it like a political tool. While it's always a good thing when child sexual exploitation receives the attention it deserves, the issue should be more than political fodder or a talking point for conspiracy theorists. It is, of course, important for the public to recognize and expose powerful people who exploit the vulnerable. That list is long—allegations have plagued Matt Gaetz, Bill Cosby, Robert Kraft, Linda McMahon, and Sean Combs, to name a few from recent headlines. The circumstances around Jeffrey Epstein's ability to obtain a secret plea deal while running an international child sex ring should absolutely be exposed. That being said, the problem of child sexual abuse and exploitation merits sustained attention. If people really care about sexual exploitation and trafficking, their focus should be on how the powerful fail to put children first both in politics and in society. A major battleground in the fight to protect children is social media and AI regulation. Following reports that leading Big Tech companies knew about their products' negative effects on children—including increased risks of sexual exploitation—legislators sprang into action. At the same time, however, other leading congressional figures have disrupted those efforts, allowing the exploitation to continue unchecked. People holds signs calling for the release of files regarding late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein participate in a protest as part of the 'Good Trouble Lives On' national day of action against the administration of... People holds signs calling for the release of files regarding late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein participate in a protest as part of the 'Good Trouble Lives On' national day of action against the administration of US President Donald Trump in Houston, Texas, on July 17, 2025. More RONALDO SCHEMIDT / AFP/Getty Images Last year, for example, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) did Big Tech's bidding to sink the Kids Online Safety Act, preventing it from receiving a vote in the House after it passed the Senate 91-3. Conservative news outlets identified Meta's control over House leadership as key to killing child protection legislation. This was the same congressional leadership that slipped a Big Tech-friendly non-budget provision into the budget bill that would have repealed all state legislation trying to curb AI exploitation of children. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) tried to do the same in the Senate, but was fortunately defeated when Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) had the courage to amend it—their amendment passed 99-1. But now that courage is being rewarded by Big Tech efforts to sneak the regulation moratorium into other legislation. Big Tech spent $51 million lobbying just last year, including to defeat legislation such as child online safety measures. Meta alone spent nearly $6 million dollars last quarter lobbying against, among others, child online safety provisions. The public should condemn these actions and, as we've already seen, if this child protection legislation can actually get to a vote, it passes in overwhelming margins. If those who are upset about Jeffrey Epstein really care about child sex trafficking, they should also be outraged at the Trump administration, which is currently undermining child sex trafficking protections. The Department of State "shut down" the office primarily responsible for combating human trafficking—the Office to Monitor and Prevent Human Trafficking—a move which one former U.S. ambassador-at-large to monitor and combat trafficking in persons describes as making it "impossible" to carry out what the law requires to address human trafficking. The administration also cut funding to a group that was tracking the nearly 20,000 Ukrainian children kidnapped by Russian soldiers from their families and brought to Russia, a well-known hub of human trafficking. Domestically, the Department of Justice cut more than $500 million in grants to victim services including "direct funding for victims' services for survivors of human trafficking." Additionally, it gutted the Civil Rights Division, which houses the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit. If those following the Epstein scandal really care about the sexual assault of children, they should continue to act when the Epstein story fades, to address the government's assault on the nearly 40 percent of trafficking victims who are children. The government—by carrying Big Tech's water in legislatures, by cutting offices that enforce trafficking laws, and by cutting services to trafficking victims—is not only abandoning victims but facilitating their exploitation. Activists who truly care about child exploitation must continue to pressure Congress and the executive branch to act to protect children as vigorously as they demand answers in the Epstein case. Mary Graw Leary is a Professor of Law at the Catholic University of America focusing on criminal law and human trafficking and a former state and federal prosecutor. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
The Hill
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Johnson on Gaza hunger crisis: ‘Hamas has stolen the food‘
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called the images of people, including children, starving in Gaza 'disturbing and heartbreaking,' but insisted that Hamas 'has stolen the food,' despite reports from the Israeli military that there is no proof that the Palestinian militant group had systematically stolen aid. Johnson, during an interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press,' was shown images emerging out of Gaza of children starving and was asked about Israel's decision to enact a 'tactical pause' on the fighting amid mass starvation concerns. He noted that Yechiel Leiter, Israel's ambassador to the U.S., and other Israeli officials told him that Hamas has stolen 'a huge amount' of food since the start of the conflict on Oct. 7, 2023. 'The images are disturbing and heartbreaking,' he said. 'We all want peace there in that region.' 'I will tell you that I have spoken to my Ambassador Leiter, the Israeli ambassador to the U.S. and to other Israeli officials,' Johnson added. 'This is important to note: Israel, since this war began, has supplied over 94,000 truckloads full of food. It's enough food to feed 2 million people for two years trying to get that into Gaza. But Hamas has stolen the food, a huge amount.' He also criticized 'the system,' calling it 'broken,' adding that beginning tomorrow, the IDF will open 'new channels of distribution to get it [food] to those people who are desperately in need.' 'The UN needs to work with Israel to make sure that the food is getting to the people that need it most,' he said. 'Meet the Press' Host Kristen Welker pushed back on Johnson's claim, citing a New York Times article that reported that the Israeli military never found proof that Hamas systematically stole aid from the United Nations, which is the largest supplier of emergency assistance to Gaza. Over the weekend, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) criticized President Trump over his handling of Gaza and called for an immediate ceasefire, more aid to the territory and the freedom of all hostages held by the Palestinian militant group Hamas. 'The starvation and death of Palestinian children and civilians in an ongoing war zone is unacceptable,' he said.
NBC News
3 days ago
- Politics
- NBC News
Rep. Thomas Massie says it should not be 'politically painful' to be transparent about Epstein files
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says on Meet the Press that he questions why releasing the Epstein files would be 'politically painful' for his party after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called for an early recess, delaying a vote on the Epstein files to 27, 2025
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Jon Stewart Explains Why Trump Is Totally Not Suing Over This 1 Move
Jon Stewart on Thursday argued that President Donald Trump won't hit billionaire Elon Musk with a lawsuit after the former White House official used his social media platform to declare that the president was in the so-called Jeffrey Epstein files. The 'Daily Show' host, in the latest episode of his 'Weekly Show' podcast, said the two have a relationship similar to the U.S. and China, where they understand that 'mutually assured destruction' is at play. 'I think they know enough about each other,' Stewart said. 'But he's been quiet lately, don't you think?' replied producer Brittany Mehmedovic of Musk. 'No question, I think, but he's still got his lovely social media platform, which is MechaHitler-ing all over people's timelines so it's still a very positive — net positive for humanity,' Stewart replied. Weeks before the Trump administration faced backlash over its handling of the Epstein case, Musk used his public breakup with Trump to drop a 'really big bomb' on X, alleging that the president was named in files tied to the late convicted sex offender. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' he wrote in the since-deleted post from June. The post arrived weeks before The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that Attorney General Pam Bondi informed Trump in May that his name was featured multiple times in the Epstein files. In recent weeks, Musk has addressed the Epstein fallout on X, calling it a 'cover up' and claiming there was 'only one reason' that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) shut down upcoming House votes to block a bipartisan effort to vote on the release of the Epstein files. 'I cannot for the life of me think why Trump wouldn't sue Elon for 'Trump is in the Epstein files,'' said Stewart before cracking a smile and adding that the president is 'so clearly all over' the files. Stewart then referred to Trump's threats to canceling government contracts with Musk's companies like SpaceX. ″[Then] they're like, 'Actually, we can't. There's no one else that can launch a satellite — we can't use NASA because we cut their funding to a point where they are a nonfunctioning organization, like we're gutting the very government that would give us options,'' he said. Related... Jon Stewart Hits Trump Right In The 'Penis' With Soaring Defense Of Stephen Colbert White House Seethes Over Shocking 'South Park' Premiere That Brutally Bashes Trump 'South Park' Goes Scorched-Earth On Trump In Shockingly NSFW Season Premiere
