'Swamp protects itself': Republicans shield Epstein-texting Democrat — allegedly to save Cory Mills' hide



A handful of Republican lawmakers joined forces with their colleagues across the aisle on Tuesday to shield Democratic House Delegate Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands from consequence over her involvement with infamous sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Critics have suggested that Republicans spared Plaskett as part of a "back end deal" to save Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), yet another humiliation.

'The Plaskett censure failed because house leadership exchanged that censure failure for the withdrawal of a vote to censure and refer Cory Mills.'

Among the over 20,000 pages of damning Epstein emails released by the House Oversight Committee last week were numerous text messages between the dead sex offender and Plaskett.

While the documents show Jeffrey Epstein was evidently on speaking terms with numerous Democrats after his 2008 felony conviction for procuring a child for prostitution, his text messages with Plaskett proved particularly controversial as they appeared to show that he influenced the delegate's behavior while she was conducting official business in Congress.

Epstein and Plaskett were exchanging messages during disgraced former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's testimony to the House Oversight Committee in February 2019. At one point, Epstein — who was evidently watching the hearing remotely — alerted Plaskett to Cohen's mention of former Trump executive assistant Rhona Graff and suggested she was the "keeper of the secrets."

"RONA??" responded Plaskett. "Quick I’m up next is that an acronym."

"Thats [sic] his assistant," said the sex offender.

RELATED: Epstein emails SHAME Obama/Clinton ally: Larry Summers quits public life amid calls for Harvard to cut ties

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC). Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Plaskett's office characterized the exchange as a politician simply fielding inputs from the public in hopes of getting "at the truth." South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman (R) and others alternatively recognized Plaskett's apparent efforts to coordinate her line of questioning with Epstein as a form of inappropriate collusion with a convicted sex offender.

Norman introduced a House resolution on Tuesday not only to censure and condemn Plaskett but to remove the Democrat from the House Intelligence Committee "for conduct that reflects discreditably on the House of Representatives for colluding with convicted felony sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing."

Censures have become fairly routine in recent years, and it's hardly unprecedented to remove a lawmaker from a committee.

For instance, in 2021, 11 nominal Republicans joined with House Democrats to strip Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) of her committee assignments over comments found to be too incendiary. The same year, Democrats joined then-Republican Reps. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Liz Cheney of Wyoming in approving a resolution to censure Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar (R) and strip him of his committee assignments over a provocative social media post.

Republicans showed a united front in 2023 when they voted Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) off the Foreign Affairs Committee over her criticism of Israel and perceived lack of objectivity.

In addition to noting that Plaskett's relationship with Epstein stands at odds with her carefully constructed public image as a "defender of justice and accountability," Norman's resolution states that:

Plaskett's willingness to receive instructions on official congressional proceedings from Epstein, a convicted felony sex offender with deeply concerning international associations, is especially alarming and inappropriate given her own past service in the U.S. Department of Justice and her current role on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and raises serious questions about Delegate Plaskett’s judgment, integrity, and fitness to serve.

Plaskett said in her defense on the House floor, "I know how to question individuals. I know how to seek information. I have sought information from confidential informants, from murderers, from other individuals because I want the truth."

The House voted 214-209 against censuring Plaskett on Tuesday night.

'The American people DO know what happened here!'

Joining the 211 Democrats who voted against Norman's resolution were three Republicans: Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska, Lance Gooden of Texas, and Dave Joyce of Ohio.

Another three Republican congressmen voted "present": Andrew Garbarino of New York, Daniel Meuser of Pennsylvania, and Jay Obernolte of California.

"The House failed to pass my censure of Dem. Stacey Plaskett, a sitting member of Congress who took direction from Epstein in the middle of a 2019 Oversight Committee hearing," Norman said in an X post after the vote. "This is the problem in Washington!! The establishment protects ITSELF, and the American people get pushed ASIDE."

Norman added, "What happened to accountability?"

Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert (R) similarly expressed revulsion over the failure by some of her peers to hold Plaskett accountable, writing, "Members of the House Intelligence Committee are supposed to be held to the highest standards of integrity, independence, and protection of our nation’s classified information — not communicating with known sexual predators during a committee hearing."

"It's disgusting our conference couldn't come together to remove Jeffrey Epstein's puppet off of the Intelligence Committee," continued Boebert. "I'm calling on the Department of Justice to investigate into Delegate Plaskett's relationship with Jeffery [sic] Epstein."

Some Republicans have suggested that elements of their party spoiled the vote as part of a deal with Democrats.

RELATED: Rep. Cory Mills' legal woes may not be over now that restraining order is granted

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) noted on the House floor, "I was wondering if the speaker of the House of Representatives can explain why leadership on both sides, both Democrat and Republican, are cutting back-end deals to cover up public corruption in the House of Representatives for both Democrat and Republican members of Congress."

Luna clarified her meaning on X, writing, "The Plaskett censure failed because house leadership exchanged that censure failure for the withdrawal of a vote to censure and refer Cory Mills to house ethics for investigation. The swamp protects itself."

Boebert responded, "The American people DO know what happened here!"

In retaliation for the effort to censure Plaskett, Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) revived her resolution to censure Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) and remove him from the Armed Service Committee on Tuesday. Axios indicated that the revival of the censure resolution made it a "privileged motion" enabling Clarke to bypass the Republican leadership and force a vote.

A spokesperson for Mills did not respond to Axios' request for comment.

With Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and possibly other Republicans also willing to vote for the measure, it's unclear whether the vote would have gone in Mills' favor — but Democrats spared him from finding out, moving to withdraw the censure vote after Republicans helped kill the Plaskett censure effort.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Thugs kick, stomp on woman's face in front of her children after she told attackers not to hop fence at pool



Multiple people kicked and stomped on a woman's face in front of her children after she told her attackers not to hop the fence at a pool in Norman, Oklahoma.

Samantha Milbee told KFOR-TV she and her family and friends were at a pool on Memorial Day when a group of about nine teenagers and two adults hopped the pool’s fence.

'They were stomping on my head, my face,' she recounted to KFOR. 'They were kicking me.'

Milbee noted to the station that Meadow Townhomes officials have been cracking down on pool rules, so after she noticed the people in the group jumping the fence and not wearing required wristbands, she confronted them.

“I just was like, 'Man, can y’all not climb our fence.' There was no attitude with it," she explained to KFOR.

Some members of the group didn't see it that way — and physically attacked Milbee.

"They were stomping on my head, my face," she recounted to KFOR. "They were kicking me.”

“They threw her on the pavement and started stomping on her head,” Derrick John, Milbee’s son, told the station.

He ran for help, and neighbors called police, KFOR reported.

“I was scared,” her son added to the station. “I was almost like, not paralyzed, but I didn’t know what to do.”

Photos of Milbee taken after the attack show a huge welt on the left side of her face, large scrapes and cuts on her right elbow and by her right eye — which is bloodshot in one photograph — as well as scrapes on the back of her neck.

Milbee suffered a concussion as well as broken blood vessels and scratches, KFOR said, adding that she called the attack "disgusting."

What happened next?

A report from the Norman Police Department indicates arrest warrants are out for two minors and 39-year-old Amanda Kelley for assault and battery, the station said, adding that police aren't looking for any other suspects.

But Milbee told KFOR she wants to warn others about how dangerous this group is: “I know it was mainly the girls that started the attack, but then it was everybody. … Everybody was involved.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Adam Corolla suggests people only listen to AOC because she's attractive



Comedian and podcaster Adam Carolla just flicked an internet's hornet's nest. During an episode of "Hannity," Carolla suggested the reason Democrats and the rest of us pay so much attention to the sayings and doings of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is largely due to her youthful good looks.

Video:

\u201cIf AOC was fat and in her sixties, would anyone listen to another thing she ever said\u201dpic.twitter.com/jfK0v6VglV
— Acyn (@Acyn) 1643942331

"Here’s a quick thought experiment: If AOC was fat and in her sixties, would anyone listen to another thing she ever said?”

That caused Sean Hannity to throw a metaphorical life preserve to Carolla, saying he wasn't sure he agreed with Carolla's assessment, and argued that yes her ideas were out there (like the Green New Deal), but that AOC has so much influence she was a bit of a de facto leader of the Democrat party, having more power than Nancy Pelosi.

Throwing caution to the wind, Carolla pushed aside the metaphorical life preserve and concluded that he agreed with Hannity, but if AOC "was a middle-aged, heavyset woman, would anyone care what she had to say."

Whether or not Adam Carolla feels the same about Hilary Clinton, that's yet to be seen or heard.

Quick to react since reacting quickly is what it does best, the mobs of Twitter had words. Not all of them are dripping politeness.

Adam Carolla on Hannity proving AOC correct.pic.twitter.com/psukcGb6cM
— Monkey Chunk (@Monkey Chunk) 1643945937
Hannity wanted to say \u201cattractive\u201d and then his whiteness held him back.
— Outspoken\u2122\ufe0f (@Outspoken\u2122\ufe0f) 1643946054


I had words: if Adam Carolla were thin, good-looking and young, he would still be a flaming asshole.https://twitter.com/CheriJacobus/status/1489440283787935751\u00a0\u2026
— Norman Ornstein (@Norman Ornstein) 1643945308


Adam Carolla is an unattractive, unfunny middle aged jerk.https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1489432510283096064\u00a0\u2026
— DrDinD \ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a (@DrDinD \ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a\ud83c\udf0a) 1643952686

Leftists already want Amy Coney Barrett impeached from SCOTUS if she doesn't do what they demand



Amy Coney Barrett has officially been an associate justice on the Supreme Court for barely 24 hours, but liberals have already concocted scenarios demanding that she be impeached and removed from the high court.

Despite the fact that Barrett has not yet heard a single case, liberals want Barrett to recuse herself from a critical case with major election implications, or else be removed from the court.

"If Amy Barrett doesn't recuse herself on the Pennsylvania voter suppression case going to the Supreme Court she should be impeached," radio host Chip Franklin said Tuesday.

If Amy Barrett doesn’t recuse herself on the Pennsylvania voter suppression case going to the Supreme Court she sho… https://t.co/bopWkj3QPV
— Chip Franklin (@Chip Franklin)1603811287.0

Franklin is referring to a case in which Pennsylvania Republicans have asked the Supreme Court to determine whether mail-in ballots received after Election Day should be counted.

As TheBlaze reported, the Supreme Court failed to make a determinative ruling last week — due, in part, to the court vacancy — which allowed a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which has a Democratic majority, to stand. The court had ruled that ballots received up to three days after Election Day should be counted, regardless of whether or not a ballot's postmark is legible or even present.

Meanwhile, lawyers representing the bureau of elections for Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, filed a motion with the Supreme Court on Tuesday requesting that Barrett recuse herself from the case.

"This recusal is compelled since Justice Barrett's 'impartiality might reasonably be questioned' ... given the circumstances of her nomination and confirmation," the attorneys said. The request was later rescinded because it had been filed without first consulting county leaders.

Others accused Barrett of engaging in a quid pro quo.

Norman Ornstein, a scholar who works at the American Enterprise Institute, claimed Trump appointed Barrett to "sway the election," and Barrett's participation in such a plot would warrant her impeachment.

"I repeat: If Barrett, acceding to a partisan swearing in at the White House, knowing that Trump explicitly said he nominated her to sway the election, does not recuse, it is an overt quid pro quo. The House should impeach her to leave an irrevocable stain on a dishonorable justice," Ornstein wrote on Twitter.

If Amy Coney Barrett goes on the Court and immediately votes for PA voter suppression, she should quickly be impeac… https://t.co/MdX2xWBXk9
— Norman Ornstein (@Norman Ornstein)1603564635.0
@eliehonig @Mimirocah1 I repeat:If Barrett, acceding to a partisan swearing in at the White House, knowing that Tru… https://t.co/eY5pUsBL59
— Norman Ornstein (@Norman Ornstein)1603763738.0

Similarly, PBS host Alexander Heffner propagated the conspiracy theory that Barrett will interfere with the election, claiming that Barrett "refusing to recuse herself" from the Pennsylvania mail-in ballot case — which implies that Barrett has an obligation to recuse herself, which she most certainly does not — "would clearly amount to a quid pro quo for Trump's re-election."

"By voting against the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and interfering in state's electoral practices, Barrett's rank duplicity will be unmistakable," Heffner claimed.

"This is when Democrats need to pounce on her ethically and legally dubious approach — to serve the interests of the Republican Party rather than uphold the law — and make the argument they were right about not seating her. Any public support for the nominee-turned-justice will crumble. And while there will not be a 2-3 majority to convict in the Senate, [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and House Democrats can swiftly impeach her," he continued.

Heffner, however, provided zero evidence to back his claim that Barrett will "serve the interests of the Republican Party rather than uphold the law."

In fact, Barrett made clear at her Senate confirmation hearings that the Constitution and law, not political ideology, is exactly what she is interested in serving.

Barrett will begin hearing oral arguments next week.