Sunday, February 15, 2026

RINO Senator John Cornyn Falls to Third in Primary Race, May Not Qualify for Runoff.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Allies of U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) have spent tens of millions to bail out his reelection campaign, but new polling shows him falling to third place behind challengers Ken Paxton and Wesley Hunt.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Texas Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), Representative Wesley Hunt (R-TX), and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The GOP primary’s first round of voting is scheduled for early March, with a potential runoff in late May in Texas.

🎯IMPACT: Cornyn could fail to make the runoff; challengers like Paxton and Hunt are gaining momentum among GOP voters.

IN FULL

U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) could lose his reelection bid without even making it to the general election, according to new polling of the Republican primary race in which he will face Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) and Representative Wesley Hunt (R-TX). With just weeks to go before the initial March vote—and the race likely going to a runoff in May—Cornyn trails both Paxton and Hunt, meaning he may not advance to the next round of the primary contest.

The J.L. Partners poll, released on Thursday, shows Paxton, an ally of President Donald J. Trump, leading the field with 27 percent of the vote, followed by Hunt at 25.7 percent. Meanwhile, Cornyn has fallen behind Hunt, at 25.5 percent. An additional 21.7 percent of voters say they remain undecided on which candidate they will back.

Notably, the polling in the primary race has narrowed from late last year, with a December survey showing Paxton at 29 percent and Cornyn and Hunt tied at 24 percent. The inability of Cornyn to generate significant movement in his polling numbers, despite allied SuperPACs spending upwards of $50 million in support of his campaign, suggests the 74-year-old Republican could face the toughest reelection bid in his nearly 24 years in the U.S. Senate. Conversely, the Lone Star Liberty PAC—backing Paxton—has spent just one percent of what Cornyn’s allies have.

Throughout the campaign, Sen. Cornyn has sought to portray him as an ally to President Donald J. Trump, while personally attacking Paxton and branding him a “fraud.” However, Paxton’s record as a Trump supporter is solid, while Cornyn previously argued against the America First leader standing for reelection in 2024 and lobbied Congress not to oppose the lawfare campaign against him. The National Pulse reported in May of last year that, in an effort to keep Trump from endorsing in the primary race, a SuperPAC backing Cornyn hired former Trump campaign chief and Republican National Committee (RNC) Chief Operating Officer (COO) Chris LaCivita as a senior advisor.

Despite the overwhelming money advantage and support from key GOP figures and political organizations like the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Cornyn has trailed Paxton in polling for most of the race. With it unlikely that any of the candidates will secure a majority of the vote outright in March, a runoff election will be held in May. If Cornyn cannot move ahead of either Hunt or Paxton, he’ll be eliminated from the race—with the top two candidates advancing. The winner of the runoff will face either Democrat state Rep. James Talarico or Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) in November’s general election.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Ex-CIA Dem Senator REFUSES to Comply With DOJ Investigation.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) has refused to comply with a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into a video she and other congressional Democrats produced, urging U.S. service members to resist what they called “illegal orders.”

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Senator Elissa Slotkin, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and five other Democratic lawmakers with military or intelligence backgrounds.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The controversy stems from a video released last year; Slotkin’s refusal was announced on Thursday via a statement on X (formerly Twitter).

💬KEY QUOTE: “They are purposely using physical and legal intimidation to get me to shut up.” — Sen. Slotkin.

🎯IMPACT: The DOJ will now likely weigh whether to issue subpoenas to sitting members of Congress who refuse to sit for voluntary interviews regarding the video.

IN FULL

Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) announced on Thursday that she will not comply with a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into a video she and five other Democrat lawmakers released last year in which they urged members of the U.S. military to ignore what the group characterized as “illegal orders.” The video prompted swift backlash from the Trump administration, with the President himself calling the Democrat message “seditious.” Secretary of War Pete Hegseth admonished Democrats for releasing the video, stating it was a “politically-motivated influence operation” that undermined trust in the military’s chain of command.

“Today, I sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro informing them that I will not be sitting down with them for their inquiry over a 90-second video I filmed in November,” Slotkin wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday, with an accompanying video elaborating further on her decision. The Michigan Democrat stated, “They are purposely using physical and legal intimidation to get me to shut up. But more importantly, they’re using that intimidation to deter others from speaking out against their administration.”

Attorneys for Sen. Slotkin delivered two letters on Thursday, one informing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro that Slotkin will not sit for a voluntary interview and instructed Pirro’s office to preserve documents for what they described as “anticipated litigation.” A second letter, delivered to Attorney General Pam Bondi, also stated that the Michigan Senator will not cooperate with the DOJ investigation and instead demanded that Bondi terminate the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) inquiry into the video.

 The National Pulse reported last month that Slotkin’s colleague, Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ)—who also appeared in the video—filed a lawsuit against the Department of War (DOW) and War Secretary Hegseth over action to demote him and cut his retirement pay as a consequence of the video. Notably, the DOJ’s requests have so far been voluntary, but prosecutors may escalate by issuing subpoenas.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Trump Endorses Japan’s Anti-Mass Migration Prime Minister Ahead of Sunday Snap Election.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump issued a full endorsement of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi ahead of Japan’s legislative election.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Donald Trump, Sanae Takaichi, and Japanese voters.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The endorsement comes ahead of Japan’s February 8, 2026, legislative election. A meeting at the White House is scheduled for March 19, 2026.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “SHE WILL NOT LET THE PEOPLE OF JAPAN DOWN! Good luck on your very important Sunday Vote.” – Donald Trump

🎯IMPACT: The endorsement highlights the strong U.S.-Japan relationship and emphasizes the shared priorities of Trump and Takaichi in national security, trade, and immigration.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump issued a high-profile endorsement Thursday for Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, calling Sunday’s snap Japanese legislative election “very important” and praising Takaichi as someone who has “already proven to be a strong, powerful, and wise Leader.”

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote that “The Great Country of Japan is having a very important Legislative Election on Sunday, February 8, 2026. The results of this Election are very important to the future of Japan.” He specifically highlighted Takaichi’s leadership and commitment to her country, saying she “truly loves her Country” and was impressive during his recent visit.

Trump also emphasized the close cooperation between the United States and Japan, noting that “the United States and Japan have worked closely together on making a very substantial Trade Deal, one that strongly benefits both Countries.”

Reiterating his support, the President wrote that “Prime Minister Takaichi is someone who deserves powerful recognition for the job she and her Coalition are doing and, therefore, as President of the United States of America, it is my Honor to give a Complete and Total Endorsement of her, and what her highly respected Coalition is representing.” He added a rallying message to Japanese voters: “SHE WILL NOT LET THE PEOPLE OF JAPAN DOWN! Good luck on your very important Sunday Vote.”

The endorsement comes as Japan prepares for a snap general election on February 8, 2026, to elect all 465 members of the lower house of its national legislature, the House of Representatives. The vote will shape the country’s political direction and could confirm the governing coalition’s mandate.

Takaichi, who became Prime Minister after winning the leadership of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and forming a coalition last year, is widely expected to secure victory in the election. Her campaign emphasizes economic stability, national security, and strengthening Japan’s role on the international stage. She has also expressed a decidedly anti-mass migration stance, vowing to crack down on criminal migrants in the country.

Trump’s endorsement underscores Washington’s strategic interest in continuity in Tokyo’s leadership. Trump also noted he looks forward to hosting Prime Minister Takaichi at the White House on March 19.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

LGBT Activist Judge Charged With ‘Official Oppression.’

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A Texas judge was arrested and charged with unlawful restraint and official oppression after allegedly handcuffing and detaining a defense attorney in her courtroom.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Bexar County Judge Rosie Speedlin Gonzalez and defense attorney Elizabeth Russell.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The arrest occurred on Wednesday, February 4, 2026, stemming from an incident that occurred in 2024 in a Bexar County courtroom, Texas.

🎯IMPACT: The arrest raises concerns about the stability and bias of activist judges in positions of power.

IN FULL

Bexar County, Texas Judge Rosie Speedlin Gonzalez—an outspoken LGBTQ activist—has been arrested and charged with a felony count of unlawful restraint by a judicial officer and a misdemeanor count of official oppression. The charges stem from a 2024 incident where Gonzalez allegedly handcuffed and detained defense attorney Elizabeth Russell in the courtroom during a probation hearing.

During the hearing on a motion to revoke probation, which occurred in December 2024, Russell’s client—who the attorney claims suffers from cognitive issues—answered “true” to one of the allegations presented by prosecutors. This prompted Russell to interject during the questioning and request for a moment to confer with her client. After an ensuing argument between Russell and Gonzalez, the latter ordered her court officers to handcuff the defense attorney and confine her to the jury box.

Judge Gonzalez—known for her far-left political and LGBTQ activism—has had a controversial tenure on the bench, facing a number of legal and ethical issues. In 2022, she was fined for attempting to bring a loaded rainbow-painted firearm through airport security in her carry-on luggage. Earlier, in 2019, she was sanctioned for displaying Pride flags in her courtroom, violating the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct.

Former staff members have accused Gonzalez of fostering a “hostile work environment” and exhibiting erratic and aggressive behavior, particularly toward defendants and litigants. Some described her as “unstable” and prone to violent outbursts.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

SCOTUS Allows Democrat-Drawn Districts Ahead of Midterms.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Supreme Court decided to allow California Democrats to proceed with new, gerrymandered maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: California Democrats, the state GOP, the Department of Justice (DOJ), Justice Elena Kagan, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The ruling was issued on Wednesday, impacting California and the U.S. as a whole.

🎯IMPACT: The decision allows Proposition 50 to move forward, potentially reducing Republican congressional seats in California from nine to four.

IN FULL

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to block California’s new congressional district map, allowing the state to proceed with new, gerrymandered boundaries ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The decision rejects an emergency request from California Republicans and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) seeking to halt implementation of the plan, known as Proposition 50.

Proposition 50 dismantled California’s independent redistricting commission and granted the Democratic-controlled legislature authority to redraw congressional lines. Supporters said the measure was intended to counter Republican redistricting efforts in other states and better reflect demographic changes, while critics argued it was designed to boost Democrat power in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Under the new map, Republicans could lose as many as five congressional seats, reducing the number of GOP-held districts in California from nine to four. Republican officials and voters filed suit shortly after the ballot measure passed, claiming the new districts relied too heavily on racial considerations and violated the Constitution and federal voting laws.

The Justice Department joined the legal challenge, arguing that California lawmakers improperly used race as a tool to achieve partisan goals. A three-judge federal district court panel rejected those claims in January. Following that ruling, opponents of the map asked the Supreme Court to intervene. The application was initially submitted to Justice Elena Kagan and then referred to the full Court, which denied the request for an injunction without issuing a written opinion.

California officials argued that blocking the map so close to the 2026 election cycle would disrupt candidate filings, campaign planning, and voter outreach already underway. Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and other Democrats praised the Court’s decision.

The ruling comes amid heightened national disputes over redistricting. In a separate case, the Supreme Court recently allowed Texas to use a Republican-drawn congressional map that could add several GOP seats, despite lower court claims that the plan discriminated against minority voters.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Dems Release Their DHS Funding Demands, Including Gutting Immigration Enforcement.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: Democrats outlined demands for changes to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations as Congress works to avoid a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shutdown.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and other Democrats; House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA); and the Trump administration.

📍WHEN & WHERE: February 4, 2026, at the Capitol in Washington, D.C.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “When Americans see the pictures of these goons beating people, pushing people, and even shooting and killing people, they say this is not America… It is reminiscent of dictatorship.” — Chuck Schumer

🎯IMPACT: The debate over DHS funding and changes could lead to a shutdown, affecting sub-agencies such as FEMA, TSA, and the Coast Guard.

IN FULL

Democrat lawmakers on Capitol Hill released their list of demands for changes to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations in exchange for the passage of long-term funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). While U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had their budgets largely appropriated in separate legislation over the summer, other DHS agencies like FEMA and the TSA remain unfunded for the fiscal year.

The looming DHS shutdown, set for February 13, is the result of Democrats demanding that the department’s budget be stripped from a package of appropriations bills adopted by Congress on Tuesday. By forcing the removal of DHS funding—replacing it with a two-week continuing resolution—the Democrats caused a brief government shutdown over the weekend but dropped their opposition to the larger appropriations package.

Democrats are now holding up a full-year appropriations bill until Republicans agree to their proposed immigration enforcement changes, which include mandatory body cameras, prohibiting immigration officers from wearing masks, tightening restrictions around warrants, and ending so-called “roving” patrols.

“When Americans see the pictures of these goons beating people, pushing people, and even shooting and killing people, they say this is not America,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said at a press conference on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, joined by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and a number of House and Senate Democrats. Schumer added, “It is reminiscent of dictatorship.”

The Democrat demands have already sparked opposition from Republicans. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) has already declared that requiring judicial warrants, rather than administrative warrants, for immigration enforcement actions is dead on arrival. “That is a road that we cannot or should not go down,” Johnson said.

Image by Adrian Hon.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

War Department Warns of ‘Extraordinary Measures’ if Dems Try to Seize Historic Military College.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Department of War says it may have to resort to  “extraordinary measures” if Virginia Democrats pass a bill to place the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) fully under state control.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Pentagon, Virginia Democrats, and VMI leadership.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Proposed legislation pending in Virginia, with the Pentagon issuing its warning late Tuesday, February 3.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “The stability of this proven leadership pipeline is a matter of direct national security interest,” said Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell.

🎯IMPACT: The proposed bills could end VMI’s current governance and funding, raising concerns about military readiness and state investment.

IN FULL

The U.S. Department of War says it may have to resort to “extraordinary measures” if Democrats in Virginia’s General Assembly pass a bill to bring the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) fully under state government control. House Bill 1374, proposed by Virginia Democrats, would dissolve VMI’s Board of Visitors and place the institution entirely under state governance.

“The Department of War is monitoring Virginia House Bill 1374, focused on the governance of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI), with significant concern,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). He continued, “For generations, the unique military environment at VMI has made the Institute a vital source of commissioned officers for the Armed Forces.”

Parnell further emphasized that “the stability of this proven leadership pipeline is a matter of direct national security interest and any action that could disrupt the ecosystem requires our full attention. DoW reserves the right to take extraordinary measures to protect the integrity of VMI and our commitment to the cadets and midshipmen currently training there remains steadfast.”

VMI has long been a political target for Virginia Democrats who have worked for decades to find ways to defund or close the storied military college. In addition to HB 1374, Virginia Democrats introduced House Bill 1377, which would establish a task force to determine whether VMI should continue receiving state funding. The bill follows a 2021 task force initiated by then-Governor Ralph Northam (D-VA), which accused VMI of widespread discrimination. If the new task force concludes that VMI has not adequately addressed these claims, the commonwealth could cut its funding entirely.

Virginia Delegate Dan Helmer (D), who sponsored HB 1377, argued that the state should not fund an institution “incapable of separating itself from a Lost Cause ideology that promotes White supremacy.”

VMI, which received 27.5 percent of its funding from Virginia in the last academic year, has a historical association with the Confederacy, having produced many of its generals during the Civil War.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

House Passes $1.2 Trillion Funding Bill to End Democrat Govt Shutdown.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The House of Representatives passed a $1.2 trillion funding deal to end the partial government shutdown, sending it to President Donald J. Trump for approval.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The funding deal passed on Tuesday after a four-day partial government shutdown.

💬KEY QUOTE: “We’ve got a very short time frame in which to do this, which I argued against, but the Democrats insisted on a, you know, a two-week window, which, again, I don’t understand the rationale for that.” – John Thune

🎯IMPACT: The funding deal keeps 97 percent of the government running through September 30, but leaves unresolved issues for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

IN FULL

The House of Representatives narrowly passed a $1.2 trillion funding deal Tuesday with a 217-214 vote, ending the four-day partial government shutdown. The package, which had cleared the Senate late Friday, now heads to President Donald J. Trump for his expected signature. The deal keeps 97 percent of the government operational through September 30, but leaves unresolved funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which faces a February 13 deadline.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) expressed skepticism about the timeline, calling it “an impossibility” to negotiate a DHS funding deal in just 10 days. “We’ve got a very short time frame in which to do this, which I argued against, but the Democrats insisted on a, you know, a two-week window, which, again, I don’t understand the rationale for that,” Thune stated ahead of the House vote.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) worked to secure enough Republican votes to push the deal through, despite opposition from some GOP lawmakers who were frustrated that the funding package did not include the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. The SAVE Act, which requires proof of citizenship to vote, has passed the House but remains blocked in the Senate by the 60-vote filibuster rule.

President Trump has been adamant about ending the shutdown as quickly as possible, urging House Republicans to send the funding package to his desk without changes. The shutdown, which began at midnight Saturday, has had minimal impact on federal operations compared to previous shutdowns. However, the funding lapse arose after Senate Democrats held up the appropriations bills in an attempt to shut down the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions.

The $1.2 trillion deal includes five appropriations bills and a two-week temporary extension of DHS funding. While Republicans have already funded key immigration enforcement agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Democrats are pushing for reforms such as mandatory body cameras and stricter accountability measures for officers. Speaker Johnson warned that holding up the DHS appropriations bill could impact critical operations like FEMA disaster response and TSA airport security.

Image by GPA Photo Archive.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

Mamdani Names Former Rikers Island Inmate as NYC Corrections Chief.

PULSE POINTS

âť“WHAT HAPPENED: New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) has appointed Stanley Richards, a former inmate at Rikers Island, as the city’s new Department of Correction commissioner.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Stanley Richards, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, U.S. District Court Judge Laura Taylor Swain, and the Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association (COBA).

📍WHEN & WHERE: Richards’ appointment was announced in New York City during a recent news conference.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “Stanley will make history in this role as the first ever formerly incarcerated person to serve as commissioner. That achievement is not merely symbolic.” – Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

🎯IMPACT: Richards is the latest controversial appointment by Mamdani, who, as mayor, has sought to elevate a number of radical and far-left ideologues to key posts in New York City.

IN FULL

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) announced he is appointing former Rikers Island inmate Stanley Richards as the city’s new  Department of Correction commissioner. Stanley served two and a half years on Rikers in the 1980s for robbery before finishing four and a half years of a nine-year prison sentence elsewhere. The appointment marks the first instance in New York City history of a former prisoner holding the position of commissioner, with Richards becoming the latest far-left ideological ally of Mamdani to be elevated to a key city.

“Stanley will make history in this role as the first ever formerly incarcerated person to serve as commissioner,” Mayor Mamdani said during a news conference announcing the appointment. He added, “That achievement is not merely symbolic. It is a testament to the thought and leadership he will bring to every member of correction staff and incarcerated New Yorkers underneath his purview.”

Following his release from the New York prison system in 1991, Richards began working as a counselor with the Fortune Society, a nonprofit organization that provides housing and re-entry assistance for ex-convicts, eventually rising to become the group’s president and CEO. A staunch far-left “prison reform” activist, Richards advocates against incarceration policies he claims are punishment-oriented. “Under Mayor Mamdani’s leadership, we will chart a path of hope, healing, and transformation,” Richards stated at the press conference announcing his appointment, adding: “[Mamdani’s] administration made clear that the future of Rikers is not endless confinement, scapegoating or demonizing.”

Previously, Richards served a stint as the first deputy commissioner of programs and operations at the Department of Correction under former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, as well as the vice chairman of the Board of Correction’s Task Force to Close Rikers. However, the choice of Richards is already being viewed with caution by those whose jobs it is to ensure public safety and security at Rikers and other city prison facilities.

“Despite the many false narratives that have portrayed COBA as an ‘obstacle to reform,’ we have been ready, willing and able to meet and work with anyone, as long as they respect the rights of our Correction Officers and understand that their safety and security matter,” Benny Boscio, president of the Correction Officers Benevolent Association (COBA), said in response to Mamdani’s decision tap Richards for Department of Correction commissioner, adding: “The jails cannot and will not operate as safely as possible if the concerns of our members are brushed aside. It is our hope that Mr. Richards understands that dynamic as he takes on this new role and demonstrates a commitment to putting safety and security before any political ideology.”

Notably, Richards will have only limited authority over Rikers Island, as the prison has been under federal oversight for the past 10 years. Last spring, U.S. District Court Judge Laura Taylor Swain appointed Nicholas Deml, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer and Vermont Corrections Department chief, as a federal monitor to oversee Rikers, granting him much of the authority and duties previously held by the city-appointed commissioner.

Image via NYC Mayor’s Office.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more

The Clintons Now Say They WILL Testify Before Congress on Epstein Connections.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Clinton, have agreed to testify in a House investigation into their ties with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Bill and Hillary Clinton, House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY), and the House Oversight Committee.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The offer to testify was made late Monday night, with depositions to take place on mutually agreed-upon dates.

đź’¬KEY QUOTE: “We don’t have anything in writing,” Rep. Comer said, but left the door open to reaching an agreement for them to testify, adding, “It depends on what they say.”

🎯IMPACT: While attorneys for Bill and Hillary Clinton say their clients will now comply with the Oversight Committee’s subpoenas, Chairman Comer stated he will not be dropping his push for criminal contempt of Congress charges for the time being.

IN FULL

Former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Clinton, appear to have reversed course late Monday night and agreed to testify in a House investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The decision comes after months of resisting in-person testimony regarding their alleged ties to Epstein and his visits to the Clinton White House.

The agreement, communicated through their attorneys, avoids—for now—a vote to hold the Clintons in criminal contempt of Congress. According to attorneys representing the former President and his wife, the couple now accepts Comer’s conditions and “will appear for depositions on mutually agreeable dates.” Still, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) says he will not drop his committee’s criminal contempt of Congress charges against the Clintons for their initial refusal to testify under subpoena. However, the House Rules Committee moved late Monday night to table the two contempt resolutions for the time being.

“We don’t have anything in writing,” Comer said, but left the door open to accepting the Clintons’ offer, noting that “it depends on what they say.” He stressed that the former President and his wife “don’t get to dictate the terms of lawful subpoenas.”

The National Pulse reported in late January that the House Oversight Committee, on a bipartisan vote, moved to adopt resolutions of criminal contempt of Congress against Bill and Hillary Clinton after months of negotiations over the conditions under which they would testify before the panel. Last month, both Bill and Hillary Clinton defied a congressional subpoena compelling them to testify before the House panel. The testimony was slated for January 13 and 14; however, an attorney representing the Clintons stated that neither would appear before the House panel and argued that the congressional subpoena is “legally unenforceable.”

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

show less
show more