Matt Gaetz being investigated for sex with 17 year old girl (DOJ declines to charge 2023-02-15)

But what he is really saying is that there is nothing nice about Gaetz in the report. If there was, of course they would publish it. But instead, because it probably confirms in great detail that Gaetz likes doing illegal drugs and/or having sex with teenagers, this should not see the light of day. Spoiler alert, Mr. Johnson: you haven’t buried this information. We already know these things. Trying to make it go away makes it look worse, not better.

I really hope someone leaks it. I really hope a Republican leaks it.

It means that when Johnson tried to read the report his son got an alert on Covenant Eyes. :slight_smile:

I agree that I hope someone leaks this report. If it is a Republican that would be extra delicious.

BUT, from what I can find and have read Johnson (who I despise and is a total hypocrite) is following the norm in the House in burying this report - it is typical for the Ethics Committee to withhold findings when the subject of the investigation is no longer a member.

Yes, they are going to fight to hide it because it will embarrass them but it is a typical action, whether a D or an R.

On various social media, from Andy Borowitz:

Oh, but he’s not a pedophile if she was a teenager! /s. some MAGA dope somewhere

It is quite possible that Gaetz is not being charged because its investigation has shown there is not enough evidence to charge and nobody we be charged with the same level of evidence.
It is also possible that they fear charging him would cause all those involved in the DOJ to be sacked and possible find some charge (perverting the course of justice?) put on them for being Trump haters.
Even if found guilty he would immediately be pardonned so there is no point investigating further.

I have always thought the POTUS has too much power as a lot of what he can do has no checks or balances (at least since politics has become so party based virtually noone would vote to impeach a president representing their party).

If you want to nitpick, he’s an ephebophile, which is basically being a diet pedophile.

Oh, snap!

Technically/pedantically true, but not in the case of a zinger like this.

This isn’t a criminal proceeding. There are no charges pending or possibly forthcoming. This was a House Ethics Committee investigation into actions by one of their members. The outcome was supposed to be a report in the findings of the investigation, which would then inform the committee on actions they might take. Not any criminal charges, just condemnation or expulsion.

The reason the report hasn’t been released yet is because it wasn’t due to be released until Monday. We don’t know what is in it, because it wasn’t finished and signed off.

Gaetz abruptly quitting means nominally there is no reason to finish the report, because the highest sanction would be expulsion, and he’s already gone.

Is it possible there is nothing in the report that violates House Ethics rules, that none of the accusations were supported well enough to find them confirmed? Sure. But that is highly unlikely, which I’m sure Johnson is well aware, because members of Congress are witnesses to his behavior.

Normally, there would be no justification for releasing the results, because there is no longer any impact on Congress. But since Gaetz is a candidate needing Senate approval, Congress does have an interest in knowing the results. Thus Cornyn saying he might subpoena it.

Of you are speaking about the previous criminal investigation, that ended a while back. Why the Justice Department didn’t pursue charges then is that they didn’t feel they could make the case because it relied on two witnesses with credibility problems. One would have been Greenburg, Gaetz’s friend who was charged and eventually pled guilty to certain charges.

So you might be correct that nobody else would have been charged in the same circumstance. It is also possible there was concern given his political status, a stronger case was needed than what they might have pursued against a non-politician. Not because of fears of retribution - this was concluded in September of 2022, the middle of Biden’s term. Rather, political consequences would put them under greater scrutiny, and the possibility of embarrassing the DOJ with failure weighed in the mix.

But that case has been closed and no charges recommended. It’s over.

Now this much I’m very much on agreement. The naked partisanship of the Republican Party has made Trump untouchable. They have surrendered all ethics, responsibility, and credibility. Sadly, a large percentage of the population believe the lies that prop up Trump and make the Party afraid to take a stand.

But I dispute this applies equally to the Democrats. Dems have shown in practice a willingness to go after their own for wrongdoing. If Biden had done half of the things Trump did, they would have supported impeachment and found him guilty.

There is not parity between the two parties. Not since the Tea Party emerged as a faction. MAGA has made that 100 times worse. Acting as if there is parity is precisely what the Republicans want. It’s the very essence of Trump’s defense - that the democrats are just against him politically and will do anything to get him out, including lying and pursuing false criminal and civil charges.

Thai falsehood is a huge part of why Donald Trump won. Too many people bought that narrative, and wouldn’t believe the warnings about what he’s going to do - like appoint Gaetz to destroy the DOJ and federal law enforcement.

I think the law doesn’t recognize that distinction. Underage = pedophile.

(I know there are some legal variances like loopholes for some 18 and 19 year olds. Not for 30 year olds, much less older men.)

And preemptively, I know Clinton wasn’t convicted and the votes were basically straight party. I don’t equate the issues of Clinton to the issues of Trump. Charges against Clinton were based on his personal life. Impeachment charges against Trump were for political actions taken while President.

The age of consent in my state is 16, as long as the older person isn’t in a position of authority over the younger person. State law on this issue can vary wildly.

True. But in Florida age of consent is 18.

Charges against Clinton were for perjury and obstruction of justice related to his personal life. These are crimes and he was guilty of those crimes, not that he should have been removed from office.

Yeah, I guess it depends on where his shenanigans take place. It’s not like he stays in Florida all the time.

But I’m not a lawyer so I’m just speculating.

That’s true. I meant some teenage boys won’t be prosecuted for having consensual sex with an underage girl under certain circunstances in some jurisdictions. They don’t get branded a pedophile in those situations. But other situations or similar situations in different jurisdictions may prosecute, and if convicted the boy goes on the sex offender list. I was just pointing out there are some fuzzy edge cases, so my blanket statement about the law and pedophilia had a CYA.

I didn’t mean otherwise.

Guess what. If she was a Florida resident, then he could be charged with a crime if he took her to another state with a lower age of consent.

He was not guilty- he was never indicted nor convicted. “Perjury” is a slippery crime.

Good point. I was speaking about impeachment, not a criminal trial.

And that is more or less an Indictment, then the Senate convicts.

Yes, but now you are begging the question. This started from my remark that partisanship in the impeachment trial vote against Clinton is different than the partisanship in the Impeachment trial votes against Trump. I didn’t phrase it that way directly, but that was the point.

Saying Clinton wasn’t convicted in the Senate proves that Clinton didn’t do anything wrong means Trump didn’t do anything wrong, because he wasn’t convicted in the Senate.

@hajario brought up crimes. Eventually, after the Senate trial,
Clinton admitted in an Arkansas court that he had “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice in the Jones case.” He had his law license suspended for five years.

And of course, I should point out the hypocrisy that the Republicans held Clinton’s Impeachment trial after he left office, but wouldn’t support Impeachment efforts against Trump for Jan. 6 because he would no longer be in office.

Your wiki link says:

The Senate finished a twenty-one-day trial on February 12, 1999, with the vote of 55 not guilty/45 guilty on the perjury charge[183] and 50 not guilty/50 guilty on the obstruction of justice charge.

Clinton left office January 20, 2001.