Carl Gibson

'Frustrated' Republican senators turn on GOP leader over 'politically toxic' provision

Senate Republicans are expected to vote soon on whether to keep a controversial provision that was included in the legislation that reopened the federal government after the recent 43-day shutdown. But that language is causing significant division among the Senate Republican Conference.

That's according to a Tuesday article by Politico's Hailey Fuchs and Jordain Carney, who reported that senators are planning to discuss that section in a Wednesday lunch meeting. The provision in question would allow Republican senators whose phone records were accessed by former Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith's team as part of their "Operation: Arctic Frost" investigation to sue the government for up to $500,000.

"[C]onfusion, frustration and anger ran rampant about what has quickly become branded as a politically toxic, taxpayer-funded windfall for a select few," Fuchs and Carney wrote.

Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) joked that there could be "some stabbings" when the topic comes up during the Senate GOP's lunch. He told Politico that the provision violated "trust and good faith" among his fellow Republicans.

"Whoever put this in had an obligation to tell us about it, and they didn’t," Kennedy said.

House Republicans are expected to vote Wednesday to repeal the provision, which Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) characterized as a "pretty serious mistake" and a "cash payout to Republican senators." But Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has continued to defend it in spite of the House vote, insisting that the language "doesn't apply to them."

Despite Thune's insistence on keeping the lawsuit language in place, Republicans are distancing themselves from it. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) went on the record to Politico that he would vote for its repeal, and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) blamed "the leaders" for the provision and that she "played no role" in crafting it.

Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) along with Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) all had their phone records seized by Smith's prosecutors. However, only Graham has publicly promised to sue for the $500,000, while other senators have either opposed it directly or said they would insist on a non-monetary judgment if they did pursue litigation.

Click here to read Politico's full article.

'Jammed by their own incompetence': DOJ may not be able to scrub Trump from Epstein files

President Donald Trump appears likely to sign the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act into law this week, which would compel the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all remaining evidence pertaining to deceased child predator Jeffrey Epstein that has yet to be made public.

However, Epstein's brother, Mark, recently said that a "pretty good source" told him the DOJ is "sanitizing" the Epstein files ahead of their likely release in order to downplay implications for Republicans. But one veteran journalist is arguing that even if Attorney General Pam Bondi attempts to release doctored documents, the effort could still backfire and make the administration's Epstein problem even worse.

"I get the concerns that AG Bondi and FBI Director Patel may try to scrub all Trump references and images in the Epstein files before they are released," former CNN, Fox News and NBC journalist David Shuster wrote Tuesday on his official X account. "Well, there are nearly 1,000 FBI/DOJ staff who looked at the files in March with no compartmentalizing, limits, or controls."

As Shuster pointed out, Bondi ordered DOJ staff to comb through approximately 100,000 pages of documents pertaining to Epstein's two federal investigations in 2006 and 2019 earlier this year. The New York Times reported that between February and April, DOJ staff pored through the evidence four times.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (who was Trump's former personal lawyer) explicitly told attorneys to flag any mention of Trump in the files. Shuster argued that one of the may DOJ staffers would likely report any noticeable changes to lawmakers and undermine any attempt by the administration to shield high-profile figures from accountability.

"Bondi and Patel will be jammed by their own incompetence," Shuster wrote. "Because if the AG and FBI director try to scrub Trump references now, there will be more than a few FBI/DOJ whistleblowers who will notice the removals and alert Congress. Check mate."

The Epstein Files Transparency Act passed the House overwhelmingly on Tuesday by a vote of 427-1, with Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) being the only "no" vote. Capitol Hill journalist Jamie Dupree reported that the House is expected to walk the legislation to the Senate on Wednesday, where it is expected to pass.