Massie: DOJ ‘hiding behind' victim protection in Epstein controversy
'The Department of Justice says they will not be releasing further Epstein material in order to protect what they say is more than 1,000 victims, many of whom were underage,' NBC News's Kristen Welker said during an interview with Massie Sunday on 'Meet the Press.'
'I want to read you a little bit of a DOJ memo which writes, quote, 'Sensitive information relating to these victims is intertwined throughout the materials. One of our highest priorities is combatting child exploitation and bringing justice to victims. Perpetuating unfounded theories about Epstein serves neither one of those ends.' What is your response to the concern that releasing these files could ultimately hurt the victims, Congressman Massie?' Welker asked.
'Well, look, that's a straw man. Ro and I carefully crafted this legislation so that the victims' names will be redacted and that no child pornography will be released. So, they're hiding behind that,' Massie responded, referring to an effort he and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) are undertaking to force a vote in Congress on releasing Epstein-linked files.
'But we're trying to get justice for the victims and transparency for America,' the Kentucky Republican added in an interview highlighted by Mediaite. 'And so, you know, we've redacted things before. We don't want to hurt the victims. We're doing this for the victims.'
President Trump and his administration have been facing heavy criticism over their handling of information related to Epstein in recent weeks, with the controversy also causing chaos in Congress.
Last Wednesday, the House broke for its weeks-long August recess, shutting down a day earlier than planned as the Epstein controversy brought the chamber to a standstill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
Judges skeptical of Trump using emergency powers for tariff spree
WASHINGTON — A panel of appeals court judges bombarded a Trump administration attorney Thursday with pointed questions about the president's use of emergency powers to levy reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries — hours before 'Liberation Day' duties were set to take effect. The 11-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit put their most searching inquiries to Assistant US Attorney General Brett Shumate. 'The negative balance of goods is decades and decades old,' one jurist said before asking how the trade deficit could be considered a national emergency given its longstanding nature. Shumate argued that the gap between US imports and exports had widened recently and further contended that Congress has given presidents broad leeway to wield tariffs. He cited a 1975 appeals court decision that permitted former President Richard Nixon to slap a 10% charge on imported merchandise to combat inflation four years earlier. 4 The Trump administration argued that President Trump has the authority to slap tariffs against foreign countries unilaterally. REUTERS 4 The court hearing comes before President Trump's Aug.1 deadline for countries to make deals. Bloomberg via Getty Images The hearing on Thursday dealt with the Trump administration's challenge to a May 28 decision by the US Court of International Trade quashing most of the president's tariffs. The appellate court promptly paused that decision to give time for it to hear the White House case. At issue is Trump's use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs without congressional approval. The act gives presidents sweeping powers to regulate international financial transactions and trade, including by imposing economic sanctions, but has never been used to tax imports. 'IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them,' a judge griped at one point. Shumate admitted that 'no president has ever read IEEPA this way' but insisted Trump's interpretation did not violate the law. 4 The White House has signaled that tariff negotiations with other countries will go down to the wire ahead of the Aug. 1 deadline. A coalition of 12 blue states and five small businesses brought the case, hoping to get the president's tariff regime thrown out. Neal Katyal, representing the businesses, warned of 'staggering consequences' should the fees be allowed to go ahead. 'You just heard an argument … that our federal courts are powerless, that the president can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for as long as he wants, so long as he declares an emergency,' chided Katyal, a former solicitor general under Barack Obama. Heading into the court hearing, Trump stressed the high stakes and warned that if the courts side against him, it could be a death knell to his trade agenda. 'If our Country was not able to protect itself by using TARIFFS AGAINST TARIFFS, WE WOULD BE 'DEAD,' WITH NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL OR SUCCESS. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' he dramatically warned on Truth Social. 4 President Trump has made overhauling US trade relations a key pillar of his second term agenda. Bloomberg via Getty Images It is unclear when the appellate court will rule on the case, V.O.S. Selections v. Trump. Regardless of the outcome, the matter is likely to go to the Supreme Court. Since unveiling a slate of customized tariff rates April 2, Trump has imposed a blanket 10% duty on all imports while negotiating framework deals with some of America's biggest trading partners. Those include the European Union, United Kingdom, Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Cambodia and Thailand.
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Greene says Israel is ‘systematically cleansing' its enemies as she rips US aid
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) on Thursday wrote a lengthy post condemning Israel's treatment of Palestinians while ripping the United States' support of foreign conflict through military aid. She also called on Christians to pay attention to the situation in the Gaza Strip, calling it 'absolutely unacceptable.' 'Are innocent Israeli lives more valuable than innocent Palestinian and Christian lives? And why should America continue funding this?' Greene questioned on X. 'The secular government of nuclear armed Israel has proven that they are beyond capable of dealing with their enemies and are capable of and are in the process of systematically cleansing them from the land,' she added. The Georgia representative has been outspoken about her disdain for the humanitarian crisis in Israel in recent days. Greene told her followers, 'many of us, even though we are Christians, no longer want to fund and fight nuclear armed secular Israel's wars especially when it leads to starving children and killing innocent people including Christians.' 'Of course we are against radical Islamic terrorism, but we are also against genocide,' she added. It is the second time this week she has referred to the situation in Gaza as a genocide. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denied there is starvation among Palestinians in Gaza. On Monday, President Trump said there was 'real starvation' in Gaza, breaking with him. The Gaza Health Ministry is reporting that 147 people, including 88 children, have died from malnutrition and starvation since October 2023, when Hamas killed approximately 1,200 people and took 251 hostage, launching a war with Israel. In recent days, the United Kingdom and France announced they would recognize Palestine as a sovereign state in response to ongoing conflict. The UK also said it would conduct air drops with aid while transporting the sick to its homeland for treatment. On Thursday, the White House said U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and U.S. special envoy for peace missions Steve Witkoff would travel to Gaza to discuss aid distribution. Some of Greene's colleagues in Congress sharply disagreed with her statement earlier this week. 'I [honestly] don't care what crazy pants thinks. And why is that news and her views on that right now?' Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) said when asked about Greene's remarks. 'It's not a genocide, you know, that's just not the case. And she's entitled to her opinion, but I'm entitled to not really care what her views on that is,' he added later. Despite criticism, on Thursday, Greene doubled down on her stance. 'None of this is antisemitic and I, along with millions of Americans, refuse that manipulative label,' Greene wrote. 'It's the consequences of decades of America LAST policies, nonstop foreign intervention, and the American people clearly seeing the truth and suffering,' she added.
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
As America Backslides On Clean Energy, States Will Fill The Leadership Void
The federal government has ceded its leadership on climate and clean energy, but America doesn't have to. And in statehouses across the country, it isn't. A slew of federal legislation and executive action, including President Trump's big tax bill, signed into law on the Fourth of July, is dismantling the policy and economic foundation that in recent years unleashed hundreds of billions of dollars in private investment into clean technology across the U.S. It's not just a loss for the climate – it's also a blow to U.S. competitiveness in a changing global economy. It means less new power at a time of growing electricity demand, fewer manufacturing jobs on U.S. soil, and weaker footing in key strategic industries that will command the 21st century. But as much as this backsliding in Washington is regrettable, it presents an opportunity in states across the country. Having seen federal clean energy policy drive unprecedented clean energy investment nationwide, state policymakers know full well what's at stake – for the climate, yes, but also for jobs, energy affordability, and innovation. If the administration won't deliver for the nation, governors and state lawmakers should seize the opportunity for their communities, businesses, and economies. Here's how. Grid modernization America's aging electric grid is in serious need of modernization to efficiently and affordably deliver power across the economy. It's especially urgent as energy demand spikes with the growth of artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and vehicle electrification. Even states that are building new clean energy at a record pace – such as Texas, New Mexico, and Kansas – will face challenges in powering their economies without new capacity in the transmission lines that carry power over long distances. States can meet this challenge by both improving existing transmission infrastructure and making it easier to build new transmission lines. Some already have, with action in red, blue, and purple states alike – from South Carolina to Ohio to Colorado to Oregon. Policymakers should encourage utilities and other transmission line owners to modernize existing infrastructure, while also responsibly reform their permitting processes to make it easier to build new transmission lines so we can adequately meet our growing electricity needs without sending utility rates skyrocketing. Affordable clean cars The federal government hasn't merely targeted federal policies designed to support electric vehicle adoption. It has also taken aim at state policies, with Congress acting to revoke federal approval for vehicle standards adopted by California and several others under the Clean Air Act – even though these standards had wide support from businesses because they provided a clear, predictable timeline to increase clean vehicle sales and adoption. Despite the federal overreach, states still have a significant opportunity to support electric vehicle growth in the U.S. In June, 11 governors announced the launch of the Affordable Clean Cars coalition, which will collaborate across state lines on policies and investments that make it easier to own and operate electric vehicles. With their work just beginning, more states ought to join the coalition to help businesses and consumers access the cost-saving vehicles they want while bolstering a technology that will be critical to U.S. competitiveness in the coming years. California reauthorization California lawmakers face an urgent and crucial task in the coming weeks. For more than a decade, the Golden State has operated one of the nation's most important climate policies – its cap-and-trade program. It's exactly the kind of market-based policy approach that economists have long cited as the most efficient and affordable way to reduce carbon pollution, by putting a price on the vast risks of climate change, encouraging the private sector to act accordingly to reduce pollution while using the funds to invest in solutions that better serve the economy. And in California, the fourth largest economy in the world, it has worked. But with the program due to expire in 2030, uncertainty about its long-term future is making it less effective and reducing revenue by billions of dollars that could be used to invest in communities, including by taking action to protect against climate-driven threats and rising energy bills. Lawmakers must reauthorize the cap-and-trade program through 2045 before the current legislative session ends in September. Providing a clear, predictable, and market-based policy foundation will position California to continue leading the nation in climate and clean energy policy at a time when that leadership is so strongly needed.
