GOP lawmakers caution Trump, Bondi on Maxwell pardon
Republican senators are waving the caution flag after Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche met with Maxwell in Florida recently to gather more information on what she knows about Epstein's illicit activities.
The meeting came while Trump and Bondi were under pressure from MAGA-aligned activists to order the Justice Department to release all of its files related to Epstein.
GOP lawmakers say that Trump and Bondi need to proceed carefully on any decision to pardon Maxwell or lighten her sentence for sexually exploiting teenage girls.
They worry it could be seen as rewarding her for making statements to distance the president from Epstein's activities, or further fuel conspiracy theories about a government cover-up to protect powerful people who were in Epstein's orbit.
'It's ridiculous that he would consider shortening a sentence for somebody who aided and abetted sexual trafficking as she did,' said a Republican senator who requested anonymity to comment on the sensitive topic.
'She's trafficking underage children. I can't imagine anything she could say could nullify her heinous crimes,' the senator added.
The senator said Maxwell has incentive to 'lie' to reduce her sentence.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that Maxwell has lied under oath before, citing the perjury charge that was filed against her for making false statements during a civil deposition in 2016.
'They ended up dropping the perjury charge against her but we know she's a liar because even though they dropped that charge — because it was a lesser charge — she demonstrated that she lied,' he said. 'What will a demonstrated liar do if they know that they can get a break? Lie more?'
'I don't think that her testimony is worth the paper it's written on because she's a liar,' he said. 'She also exploited young girls.'
'I think she's not a trustworthy witness,' he added. 'She has a vested interest in lying so she can get relieved of some amount of her 20-year sentence.'
Blanche, the No. 2-ranking official at the Justice Department, met with Maxwell on July 24 and July 25 to discuss Epstein's crimes and other individuals who may have been involved in them. He wrote on social media that 'no one is above the law — and no lead is off limits.'
Maxwell has told House lawmakers that if she were to receive clemency, she would testify 'openly and honestly' before Congress about Epstein, according to a letter her attorney David Markus sent to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Markus told ABC News that Maxwell did not ask Blanche for a pardon but confirmed that she is seeking 'relief' from her prison sentence.
Maxwell's attorneys are asking the Supreme Court to overturn her 2021 conviction.
Prison officials confirmed on Friday that they moved Maxwell from a federal prison in Florida to a lower-security federal prison camp in Texas, where inmates are allowed to move around relatively freely.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she has 'no idea what to expect out' of the conversations between Maxwell and the Department of Justice but questioned if she could provide any new evidence that would merit a pardon or a significant reduction of her sentence.
'Just because she comes and gives testimony doesn't necessarily mean [she] should be given any kind of a pardon, I don't think. There's a lot more that has to be looked at,' she said.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said the president and the attorney general would need to come up with a strong explanation for pardoning Maxwell or commuting her sentence.
'I honestly think it would be difficult' to grant Maxwell a pardon or sentence reduction, he said. 'But, once again, it's a prerogative that every president has on a federal crime.'
'If these are federal crimes, the president has the ability' to offer a pardon or approve clemency, he said. 'Every executive officer has to make up their own mind and then they have to be able to justify how they did it, and why they did it.'
Rounds, a former governor, said pardons and paroles can be a good thing, but the executive, whether the president or a governor, has 'to know the reason why you're giving a pardon.
If Maxwell gets a lighter sentence, Trump 'would have to explain why,' he said.
'On a political basis, you just simply have to explain your actions and justify your actions,' he added.
Rounds observed the difficulty of justifying leniency toward Maxwell is 'probably one of the reasons it would be difficult to do in the first place.'
Trump told Newsmax on Friday that he hasn't been asked to grant Maxwell a pardon, but he noted he has the power to do so.
'I'm allowed to do it, but nobody's asked me to do it,' he said. 'I know nothing about the case.'
Trump said he thought that Blanche, his former defense attorney, was meeting with Maxwell 'to make sure that innocent people aren't hurt' if the Justice Department releases the Epstein files.
The president has faced backlash from activists in his MAGA base after the Justice Department and the FBI announced in an unsigned memo last month that it would not release additional information and denied the existence of an Epstein client list, even though Bondi said in February that the list was sitting on her desk.
The Wall Street Journal reported last month that Bondi and her deputy told Trump in May that his name was in the Epstein files.
Democrats have sought to use the Epstein controversy against Republicans and Trump.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) has demanded an all-senators briefing on the Epstein files and criticized Blanche for meeting with Maxwell.
'There is every reason to fear that Donald Trump could offer Ghislaine Maxwell a pardon in exchange for silence, or even worse, phony exoneration,' Schumer said on the Senate floor.
'Let me be clear: Trump is sending his personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to try and execute a corrupt cover-up, potentially offering leniency to a woman who also abused the victims,' he said. 'Enough. Enough. Enough with the hiding. Enough with the excuses. And enough with the cover-up.'
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) last week expressed skepticism that a pardon for Maxwell is on the table.
Asked if Trump should rule out pardon, Thune said, 'That's up to him but it looks to me like she's going to spend a good, long time in jail.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Pfizer CEO shares 3 pillars of company's cost-cutting efforts
Pfizer (PFE) topped second quarter expectations, but looming Trump-era pharmaceutical tariffs remain a concern. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla joins Market Domination to discuss the company's earnings results and cost-cutting efforts. He also notes that a manufacturing shift would require a grace period due to long timelines. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination. Pfizer reporting a beat on revenue and earnings for its second quarter. But the pharmaceutical manufacturer is facing new hurdles with tariff threats and calls from President Trump to lower prices. Our own, Julie Hyman, and senior health reporter, Anjalee Khemlani, spoke with the CEO about cost-cutting efforts and the future of the firm. I would call it more its productivity enhancement and margin expansion. We do that by implementing three things. One, it is focus. So we stop doing things that they are not that important, and we double down on things that they are. The second is technology. Technology right now offers tremendous opportunities for improvement of productivity, particularly AI and simplification of our business process. There is a lot of waste that is happening when you have complicated structures that require usually more people than if you have streamlined your areas. And this is where we are. We have announced a program that we are on track to exceed actually this year. And then announced an additional 1.7 billions of cost reductions, 1.2 billions of that until '27 will happen in SGNA in administrative and marketing and selling expenses. And that will fall to the bottom line. 500 millions will happen in R&D, and that will be reinvested all back in R&D. So it's not just the cost-cutting though, obviously, investors also want to see growth on the top line, growth in revenues. You guys did have growth in revenues this quarter by 10%. And the revenue growth has been more volatile. So how do you keep that momentum going and also find stability? Yes. If you see the elements of our revenues, the volatile piece is mainly our COVID. Because COVID could happen in different quarters every year. Usually there are two waves every year and in sometimes like 23, one way, the summer or the winter are stronger. And the same as in 24. So it's a different year by year. So I think that's the variability. The rest of the business, it's a very strong, continuous growth momentum, I think, and new products and recently acquired products contributed 4.7 billion dollars in this first half of the year. And they are growing at 15%. So it's very solid. I do want to talk about the backdrop from Washington. Because that's something that involves, that affects not just you, but the whole industry. You're also currently the head of the Pharmaceutical Industry Association. You did say on the call that you have a special relationship with members of this administration. Of course, we've heard the president be critical of the industry. What do you feel you have been able to educate President Trump about to sort of better help him understand the industry's perspective? I said we have a special relation with the president because that relation was cemented during the COVID crisis. He was very concerned. He want to make sure that we speed up the development of vaccines. So we speak every second week. So he was very active and he would ask about studies and where we are, and what can we do to accelerate. So it was very, it was a bonding, let's say, exercise. No, I, I think he's educated. Of course, it doesn't go into the details, is not his job, but he understands the dynamics. I had multiple times the opportunity to discuss with him the impact that the middleman has in the prices in the US. And he understands this very well and he speaks very vocally about it. Other things that they are subsidizing, that they are taking out of the prices of pharma, so that the patient pays a lot, but then we don't collect all of that because it goes to other areas like 340B. So he, what he wants to achieve, it is to have a better deal. He's very competitive. He doesn't like that others paying less. And he wants to fix it and we are very productively discuss, productively discussing right now what we can do on that. And the president did say in an interview today that tariffs could eventually reach 250%. He's talking about a phase in of that. Are you confident that you'll avoid that outcome for the industry, that 250% on imports of pharmaceuticals? I don't want to speak for the president, but what he said today, which was very important also was that it will be a very small tariff in the first couple of years. And then he opened actually the window for a grace period. Because I had this discussion with him and I had this discussion with multiple other members of the administration, but a manufacturing site to be completed, it takes more than five years for our industry. We in North Carolina, we just completed, not just, but we completed recently a few years back, the build of one manufacturing site. But was one product only, and it took us four and a half years and that was our record. So you can't just say you need to do it immediately and pay tariffs until you transfer. We can't afford to pay tariffs and the investments to transfer. Right. Makes sense. I want to bring in our Anjalee Khemlani, who, of course, you also know, our senior health reporter to talk more about some of these issues. So Anj, I know you're also, of course, watching the pricing debate very closely. Yeah, that most favored nations clause. Albert, I love the letter. Got your special, you know, name crossed out on there from Trump. But going to the contents of it, I know you've already talked about the DTC push and getting that direct to consumer push. You've already unfolded a strategy there, so you're really ahead of the curve there. But I want to actually talk about the pricing part of it because we've had notes from analysts talking about how it's really unfeasible to do most favored nations pricing the way that it's laid out in that letter. Can you talk to us about how you're planning for that? We are planning for all different scenarios of different ways of implementing something like that. And we are discussing and making mitigation plans. But we don't know how that will end up. We are still discussing it with with the president, how and what will be the devil could be on the details in this case. And talking about the tariffs as well. I know that with the manufacturing push, the industry had been trying to really pull the president away from these tariffs and conversations around it with the more than $200 billion in investments. Explain to us how that works considering that 90% of prescription drugs are generics and those are the ones that are cheaper to make, come from overseas, have smaller margins. Therefore, not really appealing to companies like you to produce. Meanwhile, the branded drugs are mostly produced here with the API is coming from overseas. So can you just put it together for us on how it would really impact you with tariffs coming in? What components? Depends on the product and depends how the custom authorities define a country of origin. First of all, you are right that generics are more than nine prescriptions per 10 in the US. And those are the cheapest medicines anywhere in the world. The generic prices in the US are the cheapest of any medicine. I think again, patients are paying way more than the real price of the generics, because of ways that the insurance system and the benefits work. But even with that, they are the cheapest generics in the world. Then the 10% or less that they are, they're branded. Many of them are manufactured here, as you know, probably. We have 13 sites in the US of manufacturing. 11 are manufacturing plants and then two are gigantic warehouses, almost like a plant. So we do a lot of them here, but we over the years, we produce some stuff outside. And Ireland is a typical example, Switzerland is a typical example, other places are typical examples. And those we need to understand if they will be the API will dictate the country of origin or where the final product is made.
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
More people disapprove of Trump than less in latest polls for California, US
Recent efforts by the Trump administration are shaping the future of California, from the effects of the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' on residents to how federal immigration enforcement policies could impact the state's economy. In July, California saw federal officials visit Alcatraz as part of President Donald Trump's interest in reopening the prison. More recently, efforts to redistrict Texas in favor of Republicans — championed by the president, as USA TODAY reported — have Gov. Gavin Newsom looking to countermaneuver it through California's maps. At the state level, Attorney General Rob Bonta said he's filed 37 lawsuits against the Trump administration, some of which pertain to education, public health, and FEMA-related funding. At the local level, numerous Californians attended one of dozens of local demonstrations held in mid-July to protest the Trump administration. Of course, not all Californians and state officials perceive Trump and his administration negatively. But based on two recent polls, the president's favorability can certainly improve in the blue states. In California, the president holds a net approval rating of -31.6 percentage points, according to The Economist. A Civiqs poll found that in California, 29% approve of Trump, 68% disapprove, and 3% neither approve nor disapprove as of Monday, Aug. 4. Back in late May, a Public Policy Institute of California survey found that 70% of Californians disapproved of Trump's handling of his job, just a single percentage point increase from a February survey. Here are several other recent polls to get a wider view of how people view the president's job performance. Trump approval rating: Gallup, New York Times and more The Economist/YouGov poll: 40% approve of Trump, 55% disapprove of Trump and 4% are not sure, according to figures retrieved on Tuesday, Aug. 5. Emerson College poll: A poll of U.S. voters conducted from July 21-22 found Trump's approval rating was at 46% while 47% disapproved. The credibility interval, similar to a margin of error, was plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. Fox News poll: A poll conducted from July 18-21 under the direction of Beacon Research and Shaw & Company research found that 46% approval of Trump's job performance while 54% disapprove. Gallup poll: Trump has a 37% approval rating in a poll from July 7-21, down several percentage points from his second term average of 42% so far. It's his lowest job approval rating to date in his second term. New York Times poll: New York Times tracks the 'daily average of polls conducted by dozens of different organizations,' showing that as of Tuesday, Aug. 5, the president's approval rating is at 44% while his disapproval rating is at 53%. Quinnipiac University poll: A poll from July 10-14 of self-identified registered voters nationwide found that 40% approved of Trump's handling of his job while 54% disapproved. The margin of effort was plus or minus 2.7 percentage points. Reuters/Ipsos poll: A poll from July 25-27 that surveyed 1,023 U.S. adults nationwide found 40% approved of Trump's performance while 56% disapproved. The poll had a margin of error of 3 percentage points. Paris Barraza is a trending reporter covering California news at The Desert Sun. Reach her at pbarraza@ This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Trump approval rating: What polls show for California, the U.S.
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
JD Vance to visit Indiana amid push for redistricting. Will Braun call special session?
Vice President JD Vance is visiting Indianapolis on Aug. 7 to speak with Gov. Mike Braun about the possibility of redistricting the state's congressional districts amid the Trump administration's push to increase the GOP majority in the House. Braun didn't rule out calling a special session to redraw the Hoosier State's congressional districts in an attempt to squeeze in another Republican seat ahead of the 2026 midterms. Republicans already hold seven of Indiana's nine U.S. House seats, but Braun's comments come as the Trump administration has encouraged other states to take up mid-decade redistricting to help maintain a GOP majority in the House after next year's elections. The redistricting process is already underway in Republican-led Texas where new congressional maps would give the GOP in that state five additional U.S. House seats. The effort resulted in Texas Democrats fleeing to Illinois on Aug. 3 to disrupt legislative procedures. What would it take to redistrict in Indiana? Braun would have to call a special session for the Indiana General Assembly if Republicans decide they want to redraw Hoosier congressional maps. House Speaker Todd Huston and Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, both Republicans, have not responded to IndyStar questions through spokespeople about whether Trump has contacted them or if they have an appetite to draft new maps. It's likely U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan's 1st District seat in Northwest Indiana would be a signature focus of any redistricting efforts at the Statehouse, although some national outlets have reported longtime Indianapolis U.S. Rep. Andre Carson's 7th District seat could be targeted as well. National Republicans have targeted Mrvan's seat as a flip opportunity for the last two election cycles and are poised to again in 2026, especially as Northwest Indiana's rust belt communities have voted more Republican over the years. 'I think this seat is one that belongs in the Republican column,' House Speaker Mike Johnson told IndyStar in 2024. But Mrvan has still defeated his Republican challengers, winning reelection in 2022 by nearly six percentage points and in 2024 by eight percentage points. When did Indiana last go through redistricting? State lawmakers last went through redistricting in 2021 following the 2020 U.S. Census. At that time, Republicans left Mrvan's seat alone. Instead, they further cemented GOP grip on the 5th Congressional District after now-U.S. Rep. Victoria Spartz defeated Democrat Christina Hale by four points in a nationally-watched race in 2020. Since then, Spartz has won general election contests in 2022 and 2024 by double-digit percentage points over her Democratic opponents. The 2021 congressional maps also adjusted the boundaries of the 6th Congressional District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Jefferson Shreve, to include the southern portion of Indianapolis. Some Republicans at the time criticized the move as potentially minimizing the voices of more rural communities in that district. This story will be updated. Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at Sign up for our free weekly politics newsletter, Checks & Balances, curated by IndyStar politics and government reporters. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: JD Vance to visit Indiana amid push for redistricting
