The House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to force the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

It was the product of a months-long pressure campaign by Democrats and the bill’s leaders, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif.

Several of Epstein’s survivors were present in the House chamber during the vote as well.

House GOP leaders had voiced concerns about the bill up until the final hours before the vote.

Nearly all House Republicans voted for it, as demands for transparency and President Donald Trump’s green light on the legislation gave them little recourse otherwise.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters at his weekly news conference on Tuesday that he would vote in favor of the bill, despite concerns about what he saw as limited protections for victims and other innocent people whose names may be released against their own wishes.

‘Who’s going to want to come forward if they think Congress can take a political exercise and reveal their identities? Who’s going to come talk to prosecutors? It’s very dangerous. It would deter future whistleblowers and informants,’ he said. ‘The release of that could also publicly reveal the identity, by the way, of undercover law enforcement officers who are working in future operations.’

House GOP leaders had also been supportive of a parallel investigation led by the House Oversight Committee that’s led to the release of thousands of pages of documents from both the DOJ and Epstein’s estate.

Massie, Khanna and the bill’s supporters argued it was the best recourse to get justice for Epstein’s victims, and they have criticized Johnson’s favored route as toothless. They have also contended the bill provides sufficient protections for Epstein’s victims.

Several other House Republicans told Fox News Digital on Monday night that they shared the speaker’s concerns and hoped that the Senate would make changes to the legislation.

Khanna and Massie, however, warned the Senate not to go too far during a press conference on Tuesday morning alongside several of Epstein’s victims.

‘Don’t muck it up in the Senate. Don’t get too cute. We’re all paying attention,’ Massie warned. ‘If you want to add some additional protections for these survivors, go for it. But if you do anything that prevents any disclosure, you are not for the people, and you are not part of this effort. Do not muck it up in the Senate.’

It’s not yet clear what Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., will do with the legislation.

His counterpart, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., signaled he would seek to force its consideration in the Senate.

‘Once the House passes the bill to release the Epstein files today, I will move for the Senate to immediately take it up and pass it — period,’ Schumer said in a statement.

‘Republicans have spent months trying to protect Donald Trump and hide what’s in the files. Americans are tired of waiting and are demanding to see the truth. If Leader Thune tries to bury the bill, I’ll stop him.’

President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing about his next move in Venezuela — simultaneously labeling President Nicolás Maduro the head of a terrorist organization and hinting the U.S. may be open to talks with the Venezuelan leader.

The moment captures a familiar pattern in Trump’s foreign policy: blending threats and outreach to keep opponents uncertain of U.S. intentions. His allies say the ambiguity is leverage; critics call it improvisation that risks miscalculation.

‘We may be having some conversations with Maduro, and we’ll see how that turns out. They would like to talk,’ Trump told reporters over the weekend.

The comment came shortly after Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated Cartel de los Soles a foreign terrorist organization, a move that expands U.S. legal authorities to pursue Maduro and his inner circle under counterterrorism statutes — and potentially as military targets.

Trump suggested the designation allows the U.S. military to target Maduro’s assets and infrastructure inside Venezuela.

‘It allows us to do that, but we haven’t said we’re going to do that,’ the president said.

Days earlier, Trump had hinted he’d made up his mind about whether to start a direct conflict.

‘I sort of have made up my mind — yeah. I mean, I can’t tell you what it would be, but I sort of have,’ he said.

The U.S. now has more military assets in the region than it has in decades, topped off by the arrival of the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, on Sunday. The Department of War — the renamed Pentagon under Trump — has carried out 21 strikes on maritime targets allegedly carrying drugs toward the U.S.

Trump also said he doesn’t believe he needs congressional authorization to carry out the strikes.

‘We like to keep Congress involved. I mean, we’re stopping drug dealers and drugs from coming into our country. … We don’t have to get their approval. But I think letting them know is good,’ he said.

‘Headed by the illegitimate Nicolás Maduro, the group has corrupted the institutions of government in Venezuela and is responsible for terrorist violence conducted by and with other designated FTOs as well as for trafficking drugs into the United States and Europe,’ Rubio posted on X about the new designation.

The ambiguity surrounding Venezuela is the latest instance of Trump’s unpredictable approach to foreign policy — a hallmark that has kept allies and adversaries uncertain of U.S. intentions for years.

Trump’s remarks fit a familiar pattern: publicly signaling both confrontation and conciliation in ways that leave world leaders guessing about his next move. Since his first term, he has used such ambiguity to keep counterparts off balance — a strategy that has, at times, produced diplomatic breakthroughs and, at others, strategic confusion.

In 2017, Trump threatened North Korea with ‘fire and fury’ before pivoting months later to a summit with Kim Jong Un in Singapore — the first direct meeting between U.S. and North Korean leaders.

In 2018, his shifting public tone on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi — alternating between defending and condemning Saudi Arabia’s leadership — again confounded U.S. partners. The following year, his abrupt decision to pull U.S. forces from northern Syria stunned both advisors and allies.

His stance on the Russia–Ukraine war has been similarly mercurial. At times, Trump has called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a ‘dictator’ and railed against continued U.S. aid to Kyiv.

At others, he has mused that Vladimir Putin ‘played’ him and floated plans to sell American weapons to Ukraine through allied funding — a swing that left officials in Washington and Europe unsure whether Trump intends to end the war through pressure or compromise.

Most recently, in mid-2025, Trump entered indirect talks with Tehran over sanctions relief and regional de-escalation before ordering surprise airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites — a reversal that underscored his tendency to keep adversaries guessing about U.S. red lines.

And on Tuesday — five months after the strikes and over seven years since he pulled the U.S. out of the 2015 Iran deal – Trump again suggested he would be open to talking with Iran about a potential deal on its nuclear ambitions.

‘I am totally open to it,’ he said.

Trump’s relationship with China has followed the same whiplash rhythm. He has threatened massive new tariffs and warned of ‘total decoupling,’ only to later describe President Xi Jinping as a ‘great friend,’ tout Beijing as a partner in fighting drugs and stabilizing markets and promise to expand student visas for Chinese students.

Whether Venezuela becomes the next stage for Trump’s blend of diplomacy and deterrence remains uncertain — which, for Trump, may be precisely the point.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is calling on neighboring nations to join in the Jewish state’s fight to expel Hamas out of the region.

‘Israel extends its hand in peace and prosperity to all of our neighbors and calls on them to normalize relations with Israel and join us in expelling Hamas and its supporters from the region,’ Netanyahu’s office wrote on X.

The statement follows the United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC) endorsement of President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza. The council adopted the plan, which would end the war and deploy an international stabilization force, on Monday.

In an address to the council, Waltz described Gaza as ‘a hell on earth’ after two years of conflict, saying the resolution offered the world a chance to replace ‘rubble where schools once stood’ with ‘a path to peace.’ The measure passed 14–0, with two abstentions — including Russia — and was adopted.

‘Voting yes today isn’t just endorsing a plan,’ Waltz said. ‘It’s affirming our shared humanity. A vote against this resolution is a vote to return to war.’

Netanyahu’s office praised the UNSC for adopting the deal and added that Israel believes the ‘plan will lead to peace and prosperity because it insists upon full demilitarization, disarmament and the deradicalization of Gaza.’

Israel also called for the release of the remaining deceased hostages: Ron Gvili, Dror Or and Sudthisak Rinthalak.

In addition to inviting other nations to join in efforts to expel Hamas, Israel also expressed hope that the plan would lead to the expansion of the Abraham Accords, a set of agreements brokered under Trump’s first administration. Countries that have already signed agreements normalizing their relationships with Israel are the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco.

‘True to President Trump’s vision, this will lead to further integration of Israel and its neighbors as well as expansion of the Abraham Accords. President Trump’s breakthrough leadership will help lead the region to peace and prosperity and a lasting alliance with the United States,’ Netanyahu’s office added.

A senior Trump administration official said in October, as the peace deal was going into effect in Israel and Gaza, that the U.S. was looking at the end of the war as an opportunity to expand the agreements.

‘There’s a lot of positive momentum that will pick up,’ a senior administration official told reporters. ‘Hopefully this will lead to much better sentiment and the opportunity to expand the Abraham Accords — to really just change the tone in the region.’

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

House lawmakers gearing up to vote Tuesday on a bill that would force the Justice Department to release all its files relating to Jeffrey Epstein are pressuring the Senate to pass the measure without any amendments.

The legislation is coming to the House floor Tuesday afternoon via a mechanism called a discharge petition led by Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. A discharge petition allows a bill to get a House-wide vote against leaders’ wishes, provided the petition gets support from most lawmakers in the chamber. In this case, the petition last week earned support from most lawmakers in the chamber, including from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.

‘This has never been political. This is not about questions of Trump or Biden. This is a question of doing the right thing for survivors. We’re going to get a vote today. I expect an overwhelming vote in the House of Representatives. And I don’t want the DC swamp playing any games,’ Khanna said Tuesday as he appeared at a press conference alongside Massie, Greene and some of Epstein’s survivors.

‘They need to pass this in the Senate, and they should not amend it. President Trump has said he would sign the Epstein Transparency Act. It’s going to get overwhelming support in the House. It should go straight to the Senate, and it should be signed. No amendments, no adding loopholes. Justice is long overdue,’ he added.

Massie reiterated Khanna’s statements. 

‘As Ro said, don’t muck it up in the Senate. Don’t get too cute,’ Massie warned the upper chamber. ‘We’re all paying attention. If you want to add some additional protections for these survivors, go for it. But if you do anything that prevents any disclosure, you are not for the people, and you are not part of this effort. Do not muck it up in the Senate.’

GOP lawmakers who spoke with Fox News Digital Monday evening said they would vote for the bill and were optimistic their colleagues would as well — though many of them said they still had concerns about how it was written.

It comes after House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who had been against the bill but pushed parallel transparency efforts in Epstein’s case, said he hoped it would undergo material changes when it reached the Senate to give more protection for innocent people whose names may appear in the files against their wishes.

‘These women have fought the most horrific fight that no woman should have to fight, and they did it by banding together and never giving up,’ Greene said Tuesday. ‘And that’s what we did by fighting so hard against the most powerful people in the world, even the President of the United States, in order to make this vote happen today.’

‘I was called a traitor by a man that I fought for five, no, actually, six years for. And I gave him my loyalty for free. I won my first election without his endorsement, beating eight men in a primary, and I’ve never owed him anything. But I fought for him for the policies and for America First,’ Greene said, days after President Donald Trump pulled his endorsement of the Georgia Republican. ‘And he called me a traitor for standing with these women and refusing to take my name off the discharge petition.’

‘Let me tell you what a traitor is,’ Greene added. ‘A traitor is an American that serves foreign countries and themselves. A patriot is an American that serves the United States of America and Americans, like the women standing behind me.’

‘And today, you are going to see probably a unanimous vote in the House to release the Epstein files. But the fight, the real fight will happen after that. While I want to see every single name released so that these women don’t have to live in fear and intimidation, which is something I’ve had a small taste of in just the past few days. Just a small taste,’ she added. ‘They’ve been living it for years, but the real test will be will the Department of Justice release the files, or will it all remain tied up in investigations?’

Khanna also called Tuesday the ‘first day of real reckoning for the Epstein class.’

‘We’re here to stand with forgotten and abandoned Americans against an Epstein class that had no regard for the rules or the laws,’ Khanna continued. ‘Because survivors spoke up, because of their courage, the truth is finally going to come out. And when it comes out, this country is really going to have a moral reckoning.’

‘How did we allow this to happen? There should be no buildings named after people in this Epstein class. There should be no scholarships named after them. They shouldn’t be enjoying the perks of being affiliated with corporations or universities, or writing op-eds or being lionized. And many of the survivors will tell you some of these people still are celebrated in our society. That’s disgusting. There needs to be accountability,’ he also said.

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on Tuesday revealed his decision on the House’s forthcoming vote on forcing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release its files on Jeffrey Epstein.

Johnson told reporters at his weekly press conference that he would vote in favor of the bill, despite concerns about what he saw as lackluster protections for victims and other innocent people whose names may be released against their own wishes.

‘I’m going to vote to move this forward,’ Johnson said.

‘I think it could be close to a unanimous vote, because everybody here, all the Republicans, want to go on record to show their from maximum transparency.’

The vote is expected on Tuesday afternoon at 2 p.m.

The legislation is a bipartisan product by Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky. Massie has been known to be a frequent critic of both Johnson and President Donald Trump.

Despite that, Trump gave House Republicans his blessing to vote for the bill on Sunday night. 

House GOP leaders had vehemently opposed the legislation for months, arguing it was written in a way that did not provide sufficient protections for innocents while also claiming it was unnecessary given the ongoing bipartisan investigation into Epstein’s crimes.

That probe, led by the House Oversight Committee, has produced tens of thousands of pages of documents both from the DOJ and Epstein’s estate.

Johnson made clear he still held concerns about the bill’s language and said he hoped it would be changed when the legislation was sent to the Senate.

‘We stated our opposition as long as possible, but we’re also for maximum transparency. So what am I to do as a leader in a situation like this?’ the speaker said.

‘I’m very confident that when this moves forward in the process, if and when it is processed in the Senate — which there’s no certainty that that will be — that they will take the time methodically to do what we have not been allowed to do in the House, to amend this discharge petition and to make sure these protections are there.’

He warned it could have a ‘chilling effect’ on future investigations as well.

‘Who’s going to want to come forward if they think Congress can take a political exercise and reveal their identities? Who’s going to come talk to prosecutors? It’s very dangerous. It would deter future whistleblowers and informants,’ he said. ‘The release of that could also publicly reveal the identity, by the way, of undercover law enforcement officers who are working in future operations.’

Johnson said he brought his concerns to Massie and Khanna but was told, in essence, ‘Jump in the Potomac.’

Massie and Khanna, for their part, held a press conference alongside one of the bill’s GOP supporters, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., on Tuesday morning.

‘Don’t muck it up in the Senate. Don’t get too cute. We’re all paying attention,’ Massie warned. ‘If you want to add some additional protections for these survivors, go for it. But if you do anything that prevents any disclosure, you are not for the people, and you are not part of this effort. Do not muck it up in the Senate.’

Rap star Nicki Minaj is garnering praise for using her platform to shed light on the persecution of Christians in Nigeria.

Ahead of Minaj’s scheduled appearance at the United Nations with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz, Knox Thames, a human rights lawyer, thanked the rapper for the attention that she and other stars, like Bill Maher, have brought to the issue.

‘The challenges in Nigeria have been happening for decades, and they’ve largely been ignored. So I welcome these unsuspecting allies shining a light on this,’ Thames said of the celebrities.

Thames, who served as a State Department special advisor for religious minorities under former President George W. Bush, former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump, said that in Nigeria, ‘the body count is just too high to ignore.’ While he would not say definitively that what is happening in Nigeria is a genocide, he said it is something that must be addressed.

‘This question of, ‘is there a Christian genocide happening?’ It’s a legal question. Genocide is defined by international law, and scholars will debate that. But what’s undeniable is that in the last 20 years, thousands of Christians have been killed, and the body count is just too high to ignore,’ Thames said.

Trump announced in late October that he was designating Nigeria as a ‘country of particular concern,’ citing the widespread killings of Christians in the West African nation.

‘Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria. Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter,’ Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Oct. 31. ‘The United States cannot stand by while such atrocities are happening in Nigeria, and numerous other countries. We stand ready, willing, and able to save our great Christian population around the world!’

Following the announcement, Minaj said the president’s statement made her ‘feel a deep sense of gratitude.’

‘Reading this made me feel a deep sense of gratitude. We live in a country where we can freely worship God. No group should ever be persecuted for practicing their religion. We don’t have to share the same beliefs in order for us to respect each other,’ Minaj wrote.

On Tuesday, Minaj will address the United Nations on the issue of the persecution of Nigerian Christians.

Waltz, who said he was a fan of the rapper, said on X, ‘I’m grateful she’s leveraging her massive platform to spotlight the atrocities against Christians in Nigeria, and I look forward to standing with her as we discuss the steps the President and his administration are taking to end the persecution of our Christian brothers and sisters.’

Minaj replied, ‘Ambassador, I am so grateful to be entrusted with an opportunity of this magnitude. I do not take it for granted. It means more than you know. The Barbz and I will never stand down in the face of injustice. We’ve been given our influence by God. There must be a bigger purpose.’

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

There’s no business quite like the U.S. arms business and no audience roars louder in approval than Saudi Arabia.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump is expected to close several deals with Saudi Arabia’s powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a visit that could see billions more in U.S. weapons flow to one of the world’s most prolific importers of military hardware.

Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that the U.S. will likely move forward with a deal to sell F-35 jets to Saudi Arabia.

The F-35, the crown jewel in Lockheed Martin’s portfolio, is among the most advanced fighter jets in the world and one of the most sought-after symbols of U.S. military might.

Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich monarchy is one of America’s most crucial strategic partners in the Middle East and one of the U.S. defense industry’s most dependable customers.

For Washington, the partnership means billions in defense revenue and a key ally in the Gulf. For Riyadh, it’s a pipeline to the world’s most advanced military technology and a symbol of its ambition to stand shoulder to shoulder with the world’s military powers in a volatile region.

According to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, between 2020 and 2024, Saudi Arabia was the top buyer of American-made arms, accounting for 12% of all U.S. weapons exports, followed by Ukraine (9.3%) and Japan (8.8%). The U.S. was also by far the kingdom’s main supplier, providing 74% of all Saudi arms imports during that period.

That level of spending underscores Saudi Arabia’s regional military ambitions, but globally, it’s the U.S. that dominates by an extraordinary margin.

With $997 billion in defense spending in 2024, the U.S. outspent every other nation several times over, investing more than triple what China, the world’s second-largest spender, devoted to its military.

Beyond defense spending, the U.S. also leads the world in arms exports, responsible for nearly half of all major weapons sold globally between 2020 and 2024. In total, 162 nations purchased major weapons systems, but just five importers, Ukraine, India, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, accounted for 35% of global imports, highlighting how concentrated the world’s arms trade remains.

The crown prince serves as the kingdom’s powerful understudy to his 89-year-old father, King Salman. Widely regarded as Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, he manages nearly all daily affairs of state and frequently represents the kingdom in international summits and diplomatic meetings.

Tuesday’s meetings will mark the crown prince’s first visit to the White House in more than seven years. 

The two last met in May, when Trump made his first state visit of his second term to Riyadh. He was welcomed with a fighter jet escort, an honor guard wielding golden swords and a parade of Arabian horses flanking his limousine.

It was a scene that captured the enduring spectacle of U.S.–Saudi ties, a partnership as opulent as it is strategic and one that remains vital to both nations’ ambitions.

The House Freedom Caucus is rallying behind one of its own members’ push to impeach U.S. District Judge James Boasberg.

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced an impeachment resolution against Boasberg last month for his role in Arctic Frost, a code name for ex-special counsel Jack Smith’s probe into President Donald Trump and the 2020 election.

Gill argued Boasberg acted in a partisan fashion when he signed off on subpoenas and gag orders related to the investigation, including subpoenas for phone records from several Republican legislators in Congress — the news of which was made public in documents released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, this year.

But it’s not immediately clear whether the push to impeach Boasberg is strong enough to launch an actual pressure campaign on House GOP leaders.

‘It absolutely should be done,’ House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., told Fox News Digital last week. ‘I think this is levels above what we thought was going on. His bias is pretty clear, someone with that kind of bias cannot exist in the federal judiciary.’

But Harris signaled it would not be an issue the conservative group would pressure House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on anytime soon.

‘No, we have other issues as well. We’re concentrated right now on the fiscal issues,’ Harris said when asked if he would bring the issue to House leaders. ‘But we have discussed that, and there is broad support to impeach the judge.’

Still, his conservative caucus appears largely supportive.

‘I think there’s considerable movement over here, particularly in light of, actually the genesis here, Arctic Frost … the massive concerns we have with what the judge is doing — just making up facts out of thin air and assumptions based on motives that have no basis,’ House Freedom Caucus Policy Chairman Chip Roy, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital.

Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., who is also running for governor of South Carolina, told Fox News Digital, ‘I hope so,’ when asked if this impeachment push would be stronger than the last.

‘He’s so partisan. He’s one of the rogue judges that exist today,’ Norman said. ‘There are consequences for what he did.’

Meanwhile, Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., pointed out that he was one of the earliest supporters of impeaching judges who conservatives saw as casting overly partisan rulings in the Trump era.

‘I think a lot of these judges have gone way out of bounds and violated their oaths. I’m in support of it, yeah,’ he told Fox News Digital.

He was more cautious when asked if it would yield results. ‘I don’t tend to have confidence in anything around here until I see action taken. Talk is cheap,’ Crane said.

Gill was one of several House Freedom Caucus members to introduce impeachment resolutions against Boasberg this past spring, when he issued an order temporarily blocking Trump’s deportation flights to El Salvador. 

At the time, however, Johnson warned Republicans that impeachment was not the most practical way to curb ‘rogue judges’ — pointing out that removal would require support in the Senate that simply was not there.

Instead, House GOP leaders rallied around a bill by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., subcommittee chair of the House Judiciary panel’s subcommittee on courts.

That legislation, aimed at limiting the power of district court judges to issue nationwide injunctions, passed the House in early April but was never taken up in the Senate.

Issa himself cautioned against moving too quickly toward impeachment when asked by Fox News Digital last week.

‘We have a number of rogue judges, and I think before we talk about impeachment, with so many people seeing wrongdoing, both the House and the Senate need to hold appropriate hearings and evaluate just what the proper definition of good behavior is and whether not just one, but multiple judges, may have clearly violated that,’ Issa said. ‘I think that’s the right way to approach it.’

Issa said he was ‘looking at’ holding a hearing on the matter when lawmakers returned to Capitol Hill after Thanksgiving.

Fox News Digital reached out to the U.S. Courts system, which declined to comment for this story.

House Republicans are cautiously supportive of a bipartisan bill aimed at forcing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all its files on Jeffrey Epstein’s case after President Donald Trump gave the bill his stamp of approval on Sunday night.

GOP lawmakers who spoke with Fox News Digital Monday evening said they would vote for the bill and were optimistic their colleagues would as well — though many of them said they still had concerns about how it was written.

It comes after Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who had been against the bill but pushing parallel transparency efforts in Epstein’s case, said he hoped it would undergo material changes when it reached the Senate to give more protection for innocent people whose names may appear in the files against their wishes.

‘I have real concerns about the discharge language in the House draft,’ Johnson said. ‘But I do have some comfort that, I think if and when it’s processed in the Senate, that they’ll be able to correct some of those concerns, if we have the protection of victims and whistleblowers and all the rest.’

The legislation is coming to the House floor on Tuesday afternoon via a mechanism called a discharge petition led by Rep Ro. Khanna, D-Calif., and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. The latter has found himself at odds with both Johnson and Trump on several key issues this year.

A discharge petition allows a bill to get a House-wide vote against leaders’ wishes, provided the petition gets support from most lawmakers in the chamber — which in this case, it did last week.

Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., a Trump ally who is running for governor in Florida, said he would vote for the bill but shared Johnson’s concerns.

‘Number one, Congress has never released criminal files ever in the history of Congress. Two, there are victims, and I know we’re supposed to be trying to do what we can to sanitize their names or cover their names or redact their names, but you know, that doesn’t mean it’s going to be foolproof,’ Donalds said.

‘You could have victims that don’t want to be released, be identified, and then they have to go relive this again. What about those women? What if those women have kids now? What if those women have husbands now and they don’t want to go through this? So I think there’s a reason why political bodies don’t release criminal files.’

Donalds said he would vote to release the files, however, to move past this chapter and help victims get closure.

‘It’s become such a huge distraction here on Capitol Hill. And I do want to see justice for those victims, if they were abused,’ he said.

Republican Study Committee Chairman August Pfluger, R-Fla., said, ‘I’m gonna vote in favor of it, but it’s not perfect, and there’s a lot of things that need to be addressed.’

‘Transparency is key. My district needs transparency. The president has nothing to hide, but things that need to be fixed, have to be fixed in the Senate,’ Pfluger, who pledged to support the bill before Trump’s blessing, said.

Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., said she had similar concerns ‘from the start.’

‘Once it goes to the Senate, if the Senate believes they need to have broader or, you know, bigger protections, then I think that’ll be up to the Senate to decide, but I’m ready to vote this out of the House and send it over to the Senate and get moving on it,’ Houchin said.

A member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., questioned whether such a move by Congress could get in the way of the DOJ’s active probes into Epstein.

‘I have concerns as well. I mean, you have the Department of Justice investigations taking place. Are we inadvertently interfering?’ he posed.

Ogles said, however, that he believed most House Republicans like himself would back the bill.

‘With the president coming out in support of it, I think that sends a clear message that he’s not afraid of what’s in it, the Democrats should be,’ he said.

Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., similarly said he believed Trump’s support alleviated some difficulties for Republicans.

‘I think it releases any angst they might have when we’re voting for it,’ McCormick said. ‘I think most people will vote for it, I don’t think it’s going to be a controversial bill at all.’

Houchin told Fox News Digital, ‘I think he moved the needle tremendously, just to say, you know, let’s have a vote on it and let’s stop talking about it.’

But Rep. Russell Fry, R-S.C., disagreed that Trump’s support had a significant effect on shifting the tide.

‘I mean, maybe a little bit, but I think people were largely there anyway,’ Fry said. ‘We talked about this on the campaign trail, The guy was a total dirtbag, did unspeakable atrocities on women in our country, and the public wants closure…this has been the most transparent Congress and administration on this subject in the country’s history.’

Trump posted on Truth Social on Sunday night, ‘House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax.’

It appeared to lead to Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, who notably said he would oppose the measure on Friday, changing his mind as of Monday night. He told reporters ‘everybody’ would vote in favor of the bill and pointed out, ‘Donald Trump made a decision.’

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., who was leading the Johnson-backed probe into Epstein, appeared similarly resigned on Monday.

‘At this point, I just think the best thing to do — there’s so much media frenzy and curiosity about this, and you know, the survivors act like they want everything to come out. I want everything to come out….any other villains in this, we’ll try to figure out what we can,’ he said.

And Massie told reporters that same evening that he would be open but cautious about any changes to his bill in the Senate.

‘If the Senate wants to improve this bill without limiting the disclosure, that would be fine by me. But if they try to monkey it up, I think those senators are gonna get in front of a freight train and be in a lot of trouble with their supporters,’ he warned.

Massie told Fox News Digital of Johnson’s concerns, ‘He needs to be for it or against it. I think he’s going to vote for it, so he must think there’s more good than bad.’

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has not yet said what he would do if the bill passed the House on Tuesday.

The U.N. Security Council on Monday adopted a U.S.-backed resolution to end the Gaza war and deploy an international stabilization force after Ambassador Mike Waltz urged members to support what he called ‘a bold, pragmatic blueprint’ born from President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan.

In an address to the council, Waltz described Gaza as ‘a hell on earth’ after two years of conflict, saying the resolution offered the world a chance to replace ‘rubble where schools once stood’ with ‘a path to peace.’ The measure passed 14–0, with two abstentions — including Russia — and was adopted.

‘Voting yes today isn’t just endorsing a plan,’ Waltz said. ‘It’s affirming our shared humanity. A vote against this resolution is a vote to return to war.’

The plan, developed through U.S.-led diplomacy with Qatar, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia, establishes a multinational stabilization force to secure Gaza, oversee demilitarization and protect civilians as Israel gradually withdraws.

Waltz said many of the peacekeepers will come from Muslim-majority nations, including Indonesia and Azerbaijan.

He credited Jared Kushner and special envoy Steve Witkoff with brokering the deal, which has already produced what he called ‘tangible results’ — a holding ceasefire and the release of 45 hostages by Hamas. Waltz said the United States remains committed to ensuring the return of the remaining hostages still believed to be held in Gaza.

‘This resolution charts a path for Palestinian self-determination after the Palestinian Authority completes key reforms,’ Waltz said. ‘It dismantles Hamas’s grip and ensures Gaza rises free from terror’s shadow — prosperous and secure.’

Following the vote, Waltz thanked Council members for what he called ‘a historic and constructive resolution’ and praised the coalition of nations that supported Trump’s plan.

He said the Board of Peace, which will be led by the president, ‘remains the cornerstone of our effort’ to rebuild Gaza and establish accountable local governance.

The board will coordinate humanitarian assistance, oversee reconstruction, and support a technocratic Palestinian committee responsible for day-to-day administration while the Palestinian Authority implements its reforms. Waltz said the stabilization force will ‘dismantle terrorist infrastructure, decommission weapons, and maintain the safety of Palestinian civilians.’

‘The path to prosperity requires security first,’ Waltz said. ‘Security is the oxygen that governance and development need to live and thrive.’

Russia abstained from the vote after circulating a rival draft. Waltz said hesitation and delay would only ‘cost lives,’ adding that ‘every day without this force, aid trucks lie idle, children starve, and extremists regroup.’

Trump praised the U.N. Security Council’s passage of the Gaza peace resolution Monday, calling it ‘one of the biggest approvals in the history of the United Nations.’

In a post on Truth Social, Trump congratulated world leaders and said the creation of the Board of Peace, which he will chair, represents ‘a moment of true historic proportion.’

Trump said the board will include ‘the most powerful and respected leaders throughout the world’ and pledged to announce additional members in the coming weeks. He thanked both Security Council members and partner nations — including Qatar, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Turkey, and Jordan — for backing the plan.

‘This will go down as one of the biggest approvals in the history of the United Nations,’ Trump wrote. ‘It will lead to further peace all over the world and is a moment of true historic proportion.’

Trump’s message echoed the themes laid out by Waltz, who credited the president’s leadership and diplomacy for uniting regional powers behind the peace initiative.

‘President Trump’s historic 20-point plan marks the beginning of a strong, stable, and prosperous region,’ Waltz said. ‘Under President Trump’s bold leadership, the United States will continue to deliver results alongside our partners to make lasting peace a reality.’