Matt Gaetz: Troubled Nomination Or Target?

The Case Against Gaetz Is Disturbingly Murky.

I will begin this by drawing an important line: no one who participates in the sex trafficking of minors should be in government at all, let alone serving as Attorney General.

That must be the starting point, because sex trafficking of a minor is the allegation around which corporate media is building the narrative that it presumes will derail now ex-Congressman Matt Gaetz’ nomination to be Donald Trump’s Attorney General.

NBC News spoke to more than 15 additional Republican sources who agreed that there are not enough votes in the Senate to confirm Gaetz, and some estimated that closer to 30 Republicans consider him unqualified.

While many in Washington have cast more than a little shade on Donald Trump’s choice for Attorney General due to a lack of a substantial legal career, including a noticeable absense of prosecutorial experience, the point that corporate media is presenting as the proverbial straw that breaks the Gaetz camel’s back is shaping up to be an allegation involving the sex trafficking of a 17 year old girl.

Yet the Department of Justice has already investigated the allegation—and declined to pursue charges.

Is this allegation genuine or the latest smear tactic by those in the DC Swamp who wish to see Donald Trump’s second Presidential Administration derailed at ever turn?

Normally, this is the point where I ask “what do the facts say?”

However, “facts” are not exactly in abundance here—and this is the problem with this narrative.

The allegations against Gaetz emerged in 2020, when a former associate of his, Joel Micah Greenberg, pled guilty to a string of charges, which included sex trafficking of a minor.

Wearing a jail jumpsuit and a blue surgical mask and in shackles, Greenberg admitted his guilt to six of the 33 charges initially filed against him — identity theft, stalking, wire fraud, conspiracy to bribe a public official and sex trafficking of a minor.

Asked by the judge in Orlando federal court if all the counts against him were factual, he repeatedly said “yes” and “I do.”

Greenburg’s own legal issues began with an indictment filed against him by the Department of Justice for stalking and identify theft in 2020.

According to the indictment, Greenberg, who is the elected Seminole County Tax Collector, engaged in a course of conduct that caused and attempted to cause substantial emotional distress to a political opponent who worked at a school located in the Middle District of Florida. As part of that course of conduct, Greenberg caused letters to be sent to the school where the employee worked. The letters falsely represented that they had been sent by an anonymous “very concerned student” of the school who had information that the school employee had engaged in sexual misconduct with a particular student, which Greenberg knew was false.

As the investigation and indictement of Greenburg proceeded, superseding indictments would be filed which added on charges of sex trafficking as well as numerous other offenses.

"Greenberg used his position as Seminole County Tax Collector to engage in, and facilitate, the commission of federal offenses, including sex trafficking of a child, illegally obtaining personal information from a motor vehicle record ... illegally producing identification and false identification documents, aggravated identity theft, wire fraud and money laundering," federal prosecutors said in the newly unsealed third superseding indictment.

When Greenburg began dropping Gaetz’ name, the Department of Justice naturally began investigating Gaetz.

Then House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy found this turn of events rather conveniently unsettling, saying at the time there were serious implications.

In an interview with Fox News, McCarthy said he hadn't heard from the Justice Department, which The New York Times reported Tuesday night was investigating Gaetz and the allegations.

NBC News confirmed Wednesday that Gaetz is under investigation for possible sex trafficking in a case that stems from an associate of Gaetz and that there is a separate investigation into allegations by Gaetz that he is the victim of extortion.

"I just read the story. Those are serious implications," McCarthy said.

For his part, McCarthy publicly stated no House actions would be taken against Gaetz without an indictment.

Asked whether he would take any action against Gaetz, such as removing him from the Judiciary Committee, as Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., has demanded, McCarthy said: "DOJ has not told me anything. If a member at my conference gets indicted, they will get removed from a committee. He says this is not true. And we have a newspaper report that says something else. We'll find out the basis."

Gaetz, meanwhile, was pushing back against the allegations by raising one of his own, namely that someone was attempting to extort money from him.

Mr. Gaetz said in an interview that his lawyers had been in touch with the Justice Department and that they were told he was the subject, not the target, of an investigation. “I only know that it has to do with women,” Mr. Gaetz said. “I have a suspicion that someone is trying to recategorize my generosity to ex-girlfriends as something more untoward.”

Mr. Gaetz called the investigation part of an elaborate scheme involving “false sex allegations” to extort him and his family for $25 million that began this month. He said he and his father, Don Gaetz, had been cooperating with the F.B.I. and “wearing a wire” after they were approached by people saying they could make the investigation “go away.” Mr. Gaetz claimed the disclosure of the sex trafficking inquiry was intended to thwart an investigation into the extortion plot

Such was the state of the public record of the controversy surrounding Matt Gaetz in 2021. There were allegations made against Matt Gaetz. There were allegations made by Matt Gaetz.

What facts do we have? We have the fact that there were allegations made against Matt Gaetz, and by Matt Gaetz. We have the fact that Joel Micah Greenberg was indicted numerous times for stalking, identity theft, and sex trafficking. We have the fact that corporate media reported rather heavily on the allegations when they were made. We have the fact that the DoJ conducted an investigation into the allegations.

Broadly speaking, those are the facts—which is to say there’s not a lot of fact here.

The Department of Justice investigated the allegations against Matt Gaetz. However, that investigation ultimately failed to produce any criminal charges.

By 2022, the investigation was considered “stalled”.

But the sex-trafficking investigation into Gaetz now appears stalled, according to seven attorneys who represent witnesses, people who have been subpoenaed or have spoken to investigators. The attorneys briefed on aspects of the case say federal investigators appear stymied by concerns about the credibility of two key witnesses or a lack of direct evidence implicating Gaetz, who has denied all wrongdoing.

Doubts about prosecuting Gaetz have mounted for months among many of those seven attorneys. It’s also an opinion held by some within the Justice Department, according to a recent Washington Post article. Citing people familiar with the matter, the paper reported that career prosecutors internally recommended that Gaetz not be indicted.

According to the Washington Post, the investigation centered around a trip to the Bahamas involving an ex-girlfriend, as well as Gaetz’ alleged sex-trafficking victim.

Investigators set out to determine if the congressman paid for sex in violation of federal sex-trafficking laws and have examined his dealings with the then-17-year-old, people familiar with the matter have said. Earlier this year, a federal grand jury in Orlando heard testimony from associates of Gaetz, including an ex-girlfriend.

The ex-girlfriend was among several women on a trip Gaetz allegedly took to the Bahamas in 2018 that has been of particular interest to investigators. The 17-year-old at issue in the investigation was also on that trip, though by that time she was already 18 or older, people familiar with the matter have said. She has been a central witness in the investigation, but people familiar with the case said she is one of two people whose testimony has issues that veteran prosecutors feel would not pass muster with a jury.

Despite having specific dates and places upon which to base an investigation, DoJ investigators were reluctant to trust the testimony of the available witnesses.

We should note also that the DoJ apparently also was uncertain about the credibility of the alleged victim herself.

Available news articles do not disclose the basis for questioning the credibility of the alleged victim, so there is no conclusion to be reached other than to note that the DoJ did not have enough confidence in her testimony to want to take it trial.

By early last year, the Department of Justice brought its investigation into Matt Gaetz to a close without charges being filed.

“We have just spoken with the DOJ and have been informed that they have concluded their investigation into Congressman Gaetz and allegations related to sex trafficking and obstruction of justice and they have determined not to bring any charges against him,” Gaetz attorneys Marc Mukasey and Isabelle Kirshner said in a statement.

Gaetz’s office added, “The Department of Justice has confirmed to Congressman Gaetz’s attorneys that their investigation has concluded and that he will not be charged with any crimes.”

Prosecutors had spent months investigating Gaetz's personal conduct and, specifically, allegations that he was part of a scheme that led to the sex trafficking of a 17-year-old girl. At the core of their investigation was testimony from a former Gaetz associate, Joel Greenberg, who worked as a Florida tax collector.

However, the House Ethics Committee resumed an investigation of Matt Gaetz initiated in 2021, largely covering the same ground as the DoJ.

The ethics panel has been investigating Gaetz off and on since 2021, most recently focusing on alleged sexual misconduct, illicit drug use, accepting improper gifts, obstruction and other allegations. But the results of that probe may not become public because Gaetz resigned from the House at noon on Thursday. The Ethics Committee has jurisdiction only over sitting House members.

This we know because the House Ethics Committee specifically stated that it suspended its investigation for the duration of the DoJ investigation.

On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced it had initiated a review into allegations that Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct and/or illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift, in violation of House Rules, laws, or other standards of conduct.  The Committee deferred its consideration of the matter in response to a request from the Department of Justice (DOJ).  In May 2023, the Committee reauthorized its investigation after DOJ withdrew its deferral request. 

While Gaetz’ resignation from Congress effectively halts the committee’s investigation, it is still unclear if the committee will make a public report of its findings.

The House Ethics Committee was scheduled to meet Friday, three sources familiar with the meeting told NBC News, and one of those sources said that releasing the Gaetz report was expected to be among the topics on the agenda. Punchbowl News previously reported Wednesday that the Ethics panel had planned to release a "highly damaging" report about Gaetz on Friday, citing multiple sources familiar with the probe.

But Gaetz's resignation complicates things, and the meeting was canceled, according to a source with direct knowledge.

Although the panel lost jurisdiction over Gaetz when he resigned, there is precedent for releasing ethics reports after or on the same day that a lawmaker leaves Congress. It happened in the case of former Rep. Bill Boner, D-Tenn., two months after he resigned in 1987 to become Nashville's mayor, and with former Rep. Buz Lukens, R-Ohio, on the day he resigned in 1990.

For his part, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has come out saying the Ethics Committee should not report publicly on its investigation of Matt Gaetz.

“I’m going to strongly request that the Ethics Committee not issue the report, because that is not the way we do things in the House,” Johnson told reporters at the U.S. Capitol. “And I think that would be a terrible precedent to set.”

However, even if the Ethics Committee should make a public report, it would still be a public report of matters the Department of Justice determined lacked sufficient evidence for criminal prosecution.

We may be certain that the Ethics Committee did not uncover any new and damning evidence, for if it had, particularly in light of the DoJ investigation, the committee would be morally and even legally obligated to turn that evidence over to the DoJ. There has been no reporting of any such evidence in the possession of the Ethics Committee.

Which leaves the Ethics Committee report, should it come out, very likely in the same space as we are now: We would have the fact that there were allegations made against Matt Gaetz, and by Matt Gaetz. We would have the fact that Joel Micah Greenberg was indicted numerous times for stalking, identity theft, and sex trafficking. We would have the fact that corporate media reported rather heavily on the allegations when they were made. We would have the fact that the DoJ conducted an investigation into the allegations.

We still would not have a lot of actual facts.

Thus we come back to the line I drew at the beginning: No one who participates in the sex trafficking of minors should be in government at all, let alone serving as Attorney General.

If Matt Gaetz has been involved in sex trafficking, or if he has committed a sexual assault of any kind, then no, he should not be Attorney General.

However, the key word in that sentence is “if”. Matt Gaetz has been accused of sex trafficking. Matt Gaetz has not been charged with sex trafficking, and certainly has not been convicted of the crime.

For his part, Gaetz has been constantly categorical in his denials: the alleged events did not happen at all.

Moreover, Matt Gaetz has a history of tilting at the DoJ windmill. One of his more (in)famous moments in Congress came in July, 2019, during his cross-examination of Robert Mueller after Mueller released his Special Counsel report on then-President Trump and found no evidence of any “Russian Collusion”.

In particular Gaetz went after the DoJ for its apparent bias against Donald Trump.

Gaetz has also been a vocal critic of the DoJ with respect to its handling of investigations into Hunter Biden.

Suffice it to say, the DoJ is no friend of Matt Gaetz. Given the vehemence with which the Department has pursued Donald Trump over allegations surrounding the J6 riot at the US Capitol in 2021, we rather have to presume that any political influence that might have been deployed in the Gaetz investigation would have been deployed against Gaetz and not on his behalf.

Smith Indicts Trump For Doubting The Deep State

Indeed, the DoJ has been a target of Gaetz’ most intense criticisms.

Specifically, he criticized Mueller for the apparent bias of his team which pursued shaky leads on Trump but failed to evaluate the veracity of information in the infamous—and now discredited—Steele Dossier. 

“Here's what I am kind of noticing Director Mueller, when people associated with Trump lied, you threw the book at them. When Christopher Steele lied, nothing. So, it seems to be when Glenn Simpson met with Russians, nothing. When the Trump met with the Russians, 3500 words. And maybe the reason there are these discrepancies in what you focused on is because the team was so biased and pledged to the resistance. And pledged to stop Trump,” Gaetz told Mueller at the hearing. 

After the Trump Justice Department appointed special prosecutor John Durham to investigate any errors in the Russia investigation, Gaetz criticized him for, in his view, failing to deliver a thorough probe. “For the people like the chairman who put trust in you, I think you let them down. I think you let the country down. You are one of the barriers to the true accountability that we need,” Gaetz told Durham during a hearing. 

There is absolutely no love lost between the DoJ and Matt Gaetz.

Has Matt Gaetz been involved in sex trafficking of minors? At present there appears to be insufficient evidence to satisfy the Department of Justic to bring criminal charges.

Is there enough evidence to disqualify Matt Gaetz from being Attorney General? Certainly we must conclude the voters in his Florida district do not believe that to be the case, as Gaetz was re-elected in 2022 and again in this most recent election. The allegations by themselves were inadequate to derail his congressional career.

The allegations, of course, remain. Certainly corporate media is framing those allegations as sufficient cause for GOP Senators to refuse to confirm Gaetz as Attorney General.

Yet allegations are not proof of anything. Even if one wanted to assert the allegations as evidence, they would stand more as evidence of Joel Greenburg’s mendacity in attempts to mitigate his own legal troubles than anything else. They would arguably stand as yet another example of the lawfare which has stained the Department of Justice’ reputation in recent years. They would not stand as evidence against Matt Gaetz.

If there is good evidence against Matt Gaetz, then the matter should be presented to a jury. If the matter will not be presented to a jury, we are forced to conclude there is not good evidence against Matt Gaetz.

That leaves us in the unhappy position of the allegations being weaponized against Matt Gaetz as yet another example of the lawfare form of persecution that has become a staple of the DC Swamp.

Should sufficient substance emerge later to present the allegations against Gaetz to a jury, those supporting Gaetz’ nomination as Attorney General will have quite a bit of egg on their faces. As I have come out in support of Gaetz’ nomination as Attorney General, I will be one of those who will not look at all good if they develop evidentiary support.

However, that sufficient substance is not here now, and these allegations are not at all new. There has been ample time for the DoJ to investigate, for witnesses to come forward, for evidence to be gathered. In all that time, not enough evidence has emerged to persuade the DoJ to proceed to criminal charges—and the DoJ’s bias in this case is far more likely to be against Gaetz than in favor of Gaetz.

Until there is sufficient substance to the sex trafficking allegations against Matt Gaetz to bring criminal charges (or at the very least a civil litigation), it would be inappropriate for the Senate to consider them in evaluating Matt Gaetz for the position of Attorney General in Donald Trump’s incoming Administration.

The Senate needs to confirm Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.