Top Stories Daily Listen Now
RawStory
RawStory

All posts tagged "chuck grassley"

'Not what they said': MS NOW spots strange shift in FBI response to Patel BMWs

Sen. Chuck Grassley's (R-IA) demand for answers from FBI Director Kash Patel spurred an interesting shift in the agency's messaging, a legal expert revealed Thursday.

MS NOW justice correspondent Ken Dilanian discussed the Senate Judiciary chairman's "deeply significant" demand during a live segment with anchor Alicia Menendez, explaining that it was notable that the Republican lawmaker did not make the letter public.

"So he's trying to thread the needle here, but he has a long history of conducting oversight of the spending of taxpayer money with both parties in power," Dilanian said.

"And he said that in his letter to Kash Patel... it's nothing personal. We just feel like we deserve answers about your use of taxpayer-funded resources, including your use of the FBI jet and your purchase of these BMW SUVs."

It was then Dilanian shared an update from the FBI, and noted an interesting addition he'd spotted.

"They did not respond initially when I queried them yesterday about this reporting, but I just now have a response," he said. "And one of the things they told me was that they purchased these BMWs from the State Department, and they were sitting idly in a warehouse. That is new information. That's not what they told us back in December when we first reported on this."

Dilanian described the fallout over the inquiry as Patel has faced mounting questions around his travel.

"But just in general, like this, you have this building sort of momentum of drip, drip, drip stories about Kash Patel and his use of government resources," he said. "We hear things all the time from people inside the FBI who are very troubled by it. They just don't think it's a good look. And now you have the senior Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee asking questions about it. And unlike the Democrats, he has the leverage to get these answers."

GOP senators issue Rubio warning about lapse in 'critical' intelligence collection: report

A pair of GOP senators is warning the Trump administration about a "significant" gap in "critical" foreign intelligence collection.

"We write with regret to ask that you plan for a potential significant gap in foreign intelligence collection," Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wrote in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Cotton and Grassley blamed the "lapse" on Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the Senate minority leader, for walking away from an extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, according to the letter.

Andrew Desiderio, the senior congressional reporter for Punchbowl News, noted in a post on X that Senate Democrats blocked the FISA extension in response to the appointment of Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence.

Cotton, the chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, and Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, added that "given the gravity of the situation, our two committees remain ready to assist."

The deadline for a FISA extension is next Friday, Desiderio noted.

'Merry band of looters' at Trump DOJ accused of paying millions to 'disgraced' FBI agents

The top-ranking Democrat in the House Judiciary Committee published a letter on Tuesday accusing Trump's Department of Justice of forcing the FBI to pay a "merry band of looters" and disgraced agents, including white nationalist allies and a Jan. 6 participant.

"It has come to our attention that you have used your office to improperly shower government cash on Donald Trump's political operatives and sycophants," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) wrote in a letter to Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche.

According to Raskin's seven-page letter, Blanche oversaw a DOJ office that ordered the FBI to "pay millions of dollars" to nearly a dozen "disgraced" agents accused of "criminal activity" and "major breaches of national security."

One such agent had their clearance suspended and then revoked because of "his presence within the restricted area of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021," referring to the violent riots that infamous day.

"The agent provided false and misleading information to investigators," Raskin wrote. "Despite this damning evidence, DOJ Office of the Deputy Attorney General agreed to make a lump sum payment of $63,500 to him and backpay amounting to hundreds of thousands of additional dollars."

Special agent Steven Friend was similarly reinstated despite his illegally recording FBI conversations, downloading classified FBI documents, and participating in "unsanctioned media interviews with Russian state media outlets," Raskin wrote.

The DOJ Office of the Deputy Attorney General again ordered the FBI to pay Friend more than $61,000 and "give him hundreds of thousands of dollars in back pay."

The same DOJ office directed the FBI to reinstate an FBI agent who refused to investigate "a violent white nationalist group, Patriot Front," and procured prostitutes while on assignment.

Raskin pointed out in his letter that the DOJ official negotiating the payments to these disgraced agents is Vance Day, who is known for "hanging up a picture of Adolf Hitler in his chambers" and "refusing to marry same-sex couples as an Oregon state court judge."

He added that the senior-most current staffers for Senator Grassley "explicitly instructed DOJ to issue these payments." Raskin called Grassley and the DOJ Office of the Deputy Attorney General a "merry band of looters."

In a Tuesday article, Politico reached out to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and his office framed the payments as whistleblower settlements.

"This seven-page screed is a disgusting and defamatory attempt to smear legitimate whistleblowers while protecting their Biden administration retaliators," Grassley's spokesperson Clare Slattery told Politico. "Senator Grassley stands by his efforts to defend and protect all whistleblowers."

Trump-aligned GOP senator takes swipe at president's failures on food costs

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley directly challenged the Trump administration's tariff policy, arguing that removing tariffs on fertilizer is essential to lowering food prices and increasing crop production.

Grassley cited reporting that the White House is working to reduce food costs, but contended the administration is approaching the problem incorrectly. "The fastest way is to take tariff off fertilizer farmers need to harvest an abundant crop," Grassley wrote on X. "Tariffs must go."

The Iowa senator's statement represents a significant crack in Republican unity on Trump's signature economic policy. Grassley, a longtime Trump ally, is publicly advocating for the removal of tariffs that the administration has championed as beneficial to American workers and manufacturers.

The contradiction highlights the unintended economic consequences of Trump's tariff regime. By imposing duties on fertilizer imports, the administration has inadvertently increased production costs for farmers, potentially limiting their ability to grow abundant crops and ultimately driving up food prices for consumers.

Grassley's intervention suggests growing concern among agricultural-state Republicans about the real-world impact of tariff policies on their constituents. As food inflation remains a significant concern for American households, the senator's public call to eliminate fertilizer tariffs indicates that some GOP lawmakers believe Trump's trade strategy is counterproductive to the administration's stated goal of reducing prices.

Even MAGA senators at a loss as Capitol Hill digests Trump's $230m DOJ demand

WASHINGTON — Even some Republican members of Congress are growing nervous about President Donald Trump's $230 million demand from the Justice Department, Raw Story discovered.

On Thursday, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) was among lawmakers who bothered coming to work during the government shutdown.

Asked for her views on Trump's hugely controversial claim that he should be compensated for being the subject of DOJ investigations into Russian election interference and his retention of classified information after leaving office, Moore Capito paused.

"I don't know that I've ever heard anybody being paid by the federal government for investigations into them," the senator confessed.

"I understand his frustration with it, but I don't think it's going to happen."

Moore Capito noted that there are likely a lot of people in the same position as Trump who wish they could do the same thing.

Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, for example, faced DOJ investigations into the use of private email for official business (Clinton) and retention of classified information (Biden) but were not offered settlements by the Justice Department.

Other Republicans preferred to dodge the issue.

Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) told Raw Story, "I'm not focused on that. I'm really not focused on that."

She then laughed, adding: "You ask me questions I really don't care about."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) said: "I don't have an opinion on it."

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) complained that his phone was identified by investigators as a number Trump kept calling in the days leading up to Jan. 6, 2021— the day Trump encouraged a mob of his supporters to “fight like hell” before sending them to the U.S. Capitol where hundreds attempted to block certification of Biden's conclusive victory in the 2020 presidential election.

When Raw Story asked if Hawley would be requesting a couple of million dollars for his trouble, Sen. Hawley said it would be "from the phone companies" if he sued.

"On money, we have civil damages in our court system," he said. "And the president knows how to use the court system."

Hawley joked that Trump could sue former FBI Director James Comey instead.

Trump already demanded that the DOJ indict Comey, who was then charged in the Eastern District of Virginia, for allegedly lying to Congress.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) agreed with the president that the Justice Department had been "mean" to him. However, Scott said the DOJ should only fork over the money Trump wants if Trump wins in court.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), a reliable backer of the President, said the taxpayer dollars in question already belonged to Trump.

"It's not taxpayer funds, it's his funds," Tuberville, who is now running for governor in Alabama, told Raw Story when asked if Trump should get a payout from the government.

The decision on whether Trump will get his compensation lies with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche — formerly Trump's criminal defense attorney.

On Thursday, CBS News reported the ranking Democrats on both the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees have asked the White House to turn over copies of Trump's claims for DOJ compensation.

Trump’s not constitutionally eligible for such payments, Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Robert Garcia (D-CA) wrote.

"The Founders feared presidents like you might one day be tempted to use their powers to steal U.S. taxpayer funds,” their letter said. “That's why they enshrined a very simple rule into the Constitution, which is called the Domestic Emoluments Clause.

“As President, you may not receive any payment from the federal government or any of the states, except for your salary, which is currently fixed by law at $400,000 per year."

Trump filed the claims before returning to the White House in January.

Back in the Senate on Thursday, Democrats were swift to condemn Trump's claims.

"He's corrupt. He will continue to be corrupt. We should not be surprised. He will do corrupt actions," Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) told Raw Story of Trump and his demand for $230m.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, called Trump's move a "terrible ethical violation."

The senior Democrat went on to tease exclusively to Raw Story that something more about the matter would come "tomorrow."

Senate Republican breaks with MAGA to back judges in Trump fight

WASHINGTON — The Republican chair of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee raised eyebrows by breaking with GOP orthodoxy when he told Raw Story federal courts are an essential check on the White House during this ongoing government shutdown.

While citing Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) and his sponsorship of a bill that would end the drama surrounding government shutdowns, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) exclusively told Raw Story the most important things for this divided Congress to fund are the courts — which have blunted, blocked, delayed and dismantled much of the MAGA momentum President Donald Trump has tried to rule with since January.

"I told Sen. Lankford that ... if he can't [pass] his entire bill to stop the shutdowns of government generally, he at least ought to get one for the judicial branch," Grassley told Raw Story Thursday — a day before the nation’s courts are expected to run out of funds.

Asked why the courts are so important, Grassley said: "Equal justice under the law."

That’s counter to Trump and other Republicans’ efforts to limit the power of courts, evident throughout this 119th Congress.

This spring, the GOP-controlled House of Representatives passed a measure to curtail federal judges’ power to issue broad national injunctions, even as MAGA Republicans have followed Trump’s lead and introduced articles of impeachment targeting five separate federal judges.

But Grassley doesn’t seem to have gotten the MAGA memo.

The 92-year-old Iowan’s words could be taken to indicate that he sees the courts as the final backstop against potential future Trump power grabs.

Only this week, a federal judge halted White House attempts to fire federal workers during the shutdown, a tactic meant to hurt Democrats who refuse to pass a GOP budget measure without concessions on healthcare cuts and action to avoid rising costs.

‘We’ll give them money'

Lankford's bill, the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act of 2025, would “take shutdowns off the table and force Congress to stay in town until their work is done,” according to a release.

A companion measure in the House is sponsored by House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-TX).

The measure also seeks to "provide for a period of continuing appropriations in the event of a lapse in appropriations under the normal appropriations process” and to “establish procedures and consequences in the event of a failure to enact appropriations, and for other purposes."

Courts have stayed open this far into the shutdown by “using court fee balances and other funds not dependent on a new appropriation,” according to the Administrative Office of the US Courts.

“If the shutdown continues after Judiciary funds are exhausted,” the body states, “the courts will then operate under the terms of the Anti-Deficiency Act, which allows work to continue during a lapse in appropriations if it is necessary … under this scenario, each court and federal defender’s office would determine the staffing resources necessary to support such work.”

Elsewhere at the Capitol on Thursday, as Raw Story sought reactions to Grassley’s remarks and whether senators were concerned by the impending lapse in court funding, most chose not to court controversy.

Asked if he was concerned about the federal judiciary running out of money, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), a member of the Judiciary and Budget Committees, said: “Nah, we'll give them money. They can move some money around.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), another Budget Committee member, said: “It's crazy we have to shut down. I … assume the Democrats will finally wake up when the FAA [Federal Aviation Administration], you know, is put into lots of long [flight] delays and stuff like that.”

Asked whether he was as concerned for the courts as Grassley was, Scott said: “It's not right. It's not right for people to be expected to work and then they don't get paid.”

Raw Story pressed: “But when it comes to judges, because the judiciary has been a check for Congress, sometimes, are you worried about having a limp ref?”

Scott said: “No … I mean … but they ought to be paid.”

‘Shutdowns are bad’

Among Democrats, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a member of the Judiciary Committee, bluntly told Raw Story: “I don’t know what they’re going to do and which courts have residual funding.”

Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Growth, said courts would “have to start making decisions about, like, what to prioritize.”

She added: “Shutdowns are bad. That's why the Republicans should negotiate with us to end this one.”

Sen. John Thune (R-SD), the Majority Leader, has said he will hold a vote on whether to stave off steep rises in health-care costs that await millions of Americans if subsidies under the Affordable Care Act are allowed to lapse — but only if Democrats yield and reopen the government.

Democrats have rejected that overture — as, on Thursday, they once again rejected the GOP spending bill.

Friday is the 16th day of the shutdown. The longest shutdown ever, under Trump’s first administration in 2019, lasted for 35 days.

'This is so rich': GOP senator slammed over 'shameful' social media celebration

Sen. Chuck Grassley's (R-IA) celebration of "National Whistleblower Day" drew massive condemnation on social media following the Emil Bove hearings in which the Iowa senator refused to allow three Department of Justice whistleblowers to testify.

In addition to the whistleblowers who accused Bove of encouraging attorneys under him to ignore court orders, more than 75 former federal and state judges and more than 900 former Department of Justice attorneys publicly called for lawmakers to block his nomination.

In the end, Bove was confirmed to a lifetime judgeship on Tuesday by just one vote.

Grassley posted Wednesday, "2day is natl whistleblower day Too often whistleblowers are treated like skunks at a picnic they r patriotic ppl trying to keep GOVT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PPL."

Popular liberal commentator @JoJoFromJerz responded, "You have got to be f------ kidding with this after jamming through Bove."

Ex-GOP commentator @TaraSetmayer wrote, "Is Grassley kidding? After he just jammed through Emil Bove’s confirmation ignoring 3 credible DOJ whistleblowers against him???? These people are incorrigible." She followed up with, "You’re a shameful hypocrite."

Influencer @Jimmyspolitics posted, "I worked in the senate w you and your staff. I always respected your integrity. I’m now ashamed of you. Shame on you for pushing Bove through. You know he did what he’s accused of. Shame on you!"

Anti-MAGA commentator Island Girl wrote, "This is so rich coming from you! Why didnt you listen to whistleblowers who presented evidence against Emil Bove?"

Liberal commentator @TAFORU posted, "Chuck Grassley’s Whistleblower Cosplay Is the Saddest Performance Since Rudy at Four Seasons Landscaping," adding, "Cute, Chuck. But yesterday you treated whistleblowers like roadkill to ram through Emil Bove—the most unfit judicial hack in modern history."

Senate Republicans move to prevent Trump's kingly ambitions: report

Senate Republicans slashed language from the House version of President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" that would have given him the powers of a monarch who could simply bypass the courts if they tried to stop him from pursuing his policy ambitions, according to a report in HuffPost.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released his committee's changes to the judicial section late Thursday night. Notably absent was a "jarring, one-sentence provision that House Republicans buried in their 1,116-page bill," according to HuffPost.

The provision in question "would restrict the ability of any court, including the Supreme Court, to enforce compliance with its orders by holding people in contempt."

The one-sentence provision appears in Sec. 70302 "Restriction of Funds," and reads, "No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued..."

According to HuffPost, "Contempt citations are an essential tool for the courts" because "they allow judges to threaten fines, sanctions or even jail if people disobey their orders."

Without contempt citations, the courts could simply be ignored.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told HuffPost that the contempt provision Republicans slipped into the massive spending bill was "a naked attempt to shield members of the Trump administration from court orders," essentially allowing them to operate with impunity, much like royalty.

"Not only does this provision appear to violate the constitutional separation of powers, it also violates Senate rules," wrote reporter Jennifer Bendery. "Republicans are relying on a fast-track legislative process known as budget reconciliation to move the bill, which means everything in it must be related to budget matters. Restricting judges’ abilities to hand down contempt orders has nothing to do with budgets."

Read the HuffPost report right here.

Lawmakers clash over key block that 'threatens to undermine the Senate'

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) is employing a tactic previously used by the GOP as he holds up the confirmation process for one of President Donald Trump U.S. attorney nominees, according to Politico.

The ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced this week that he was putting a hold on Jason Reding Quiñones's nomination for the Southern District of Florida, and might do the same with other Trump nominees.

"In doing so, Durbin would create a procedural hurdle that would likely slow Quiñones’ confirmation at a time when the Trump administration has yet to confirm any U.S. attorney nominees in the Senate," the article said.

Durbin likened his tactics "to those deployed by Vice President JD Vance, back when he was a Republican senator from Ohio," the report said.

EXCLUSIVE: Trump accused of new grift that puts Qatari plane in shade

"At that time, Vance put a hold on a number of Biden-era U.S. attorney nominees, vowing he would do so for every Department of Justice nominee in the wake of the department’s second indictment against President Donald Trump."

Durbin told the Senate on Thursday, “[T]here is now a new precedent for roll call votes on the Floor for confirming U.S. Attorney nominees. As I’ve said time and time again—there cannot be one set of rules for Republicans and another set for Democrats.”

Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) refuted the claim that Vance "set a new precedent when he put the holds on attorney nominees toward the end of the Biden administration."

In a statement, Grassley admonished that “Placing a blanket hold on all U.S. Attorney nominees before the Trump administration has filled even a single one of the 93 Attorneys’ Offices would constitute an aggressive, unprecedented attack on the American criminal justice system."

Grassley continued, “Holds should be used selectively. Blanket holds intended to wholly obstruct the confirmation process are misguided and threaten to undermine the Senate’s advice and consent role.”

Read the Politico article here.

'Are you proud?' GOP lawmaker grilled over 'shameful' Trump actions at heated town hall

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) hosted a town hall in Fort Madison, Iowa, on Tuesday, where voters expressed their frustrations on a variety of topics, including the economy, tariffs, mass federal cuts, and President Donald Trump's deportation policies.

One voter demanded, "We would like to know what you as the people, the Congress, who are supposed to rein in this dictator, what are you going to do about these people who have been sentenced to life imprisonment in a foreign country with no due process? Our government cannot do anything?"

A second voter asked a similar question: "I believe very strongly in my Christian faith. I preach on Sundays, and I believe very strongly in, 'we welcome the stranger.' I think turning away people who have come here for asylum is one of the most shameful things we are doing right now. "

ALSO READ: 'All hands on deck': Democrats unleash new strategy to derail Trump

And still another person interjected, "Are you going to bring that guy back?"

"That's not a power of Congress," Grassley answered, but the man insisted: "Supreme Court said to bring him back!"

"The president of that country is not subject to our U.S. Supreme Court," Grassley said of El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele, as several people muttered in disgust.

Reporter Steve Contorno told CNN's Boris Sanchez, "There was a considerable and palpable angst in this room, urging [Grassley] to do more, to stand up for Iowans and stand up to President Donald Trump. Concerns ranging from local issues, like how the tariffs will affect farmers, what's going to happen to veterans hospitals and rural hospitals, to some of the larger concerns we've seen over...proposed cuts to Medicaid and Medicare, and Social Security."

Contorno said one person asked Grassley, "point blank, 'Are you proud of Trump?'"

"Grassley notably not answering directly, saying, quote, 'There's no president I've agreed with 100% of the time.'" Contorno said.

Watch the clip below via CNN.