Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and his deputies are steering clear of defending former President Trump from felony charges brought by the Justice Department, signaling a deep split within the GOP over how to handle the former president’s legal problems. 

While House Republican leaders and the leading Republican candidates for president have rallied behind Trump and attacked the Justice Department for targeting him unfairly, key Republican senators are reluctant to shield the former president from charges that he willfully mishandled top-secret documents and risked national security. 

GOP senators say the 37-count indictment brought against Trump by special counsel Jack Smith is more serious and more credible than the 34 felony charges Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) brought against Trump in March.  

“There are very serious allegations in the indictment, and I think the Justice Department — as they attempt to prove their case — they’ve got a high burden of proof to convince people that they’re handling this fairly and as they would for any other elected official,” Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) said. 

Asked if he viewed the special prosecutor’s case as more credible than the charges brought forth by the Manhattan attorney general, Thune replied: “Oh yeah.” 

“That one was clearly, in my view, politically motivated, and the facts were pretty thin and the law was actually pretty thin in that case,” he said.  

By contrast, he said the special prosecutor’s indictment is “serious” and “very detailed.” 

“You’re talking about national security secrets, classified information,” he said.  

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), an adviser to the Senate leadership team, offered a blunt assessment when asked about the charges that Trump violated the Espionage Act and conspired to obstruct justice.  

“It’s not good,” he told reporters.  

The details and photographic evidence included in the indictment have added to the discomfort of Republican senators, especially those like McConnell, who view safeguarding the nation’s military capabilities as among their most important responsibilities.  

The Justice Department included photos of boxes of secret documents stored haphazardly around Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, including the image of boxes stacked up in a bathroom, another of documents scattered across a storage room floor and a third of boxes stacked in a ballroom, where potentially hundreds or even thousands of people could have had access to them.  

Republican senators worry the constant controversies swirling around Trump, and his pugnacious response to his critics, will make it very difficult for him to win a general election if he clinches the GOP presidential nomination next year.  

“I think his unwillingness to appeal to voters beyond his base makes it unlikely that he could win a general election,” Cornyn said.  

McConnell made no mention of the indictment when he spoke on the Senate floor Monday afternoon, and he did not respond to reporters’ questions as he walked to and from the Senate floor for his opening speech. 

Several GOP senators are warning that the move by other Republicans to rush to Trump’s side may be a mistake.  

“The charges in this case are quite serious and cannot be casually dismissed,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said in a statement. “Mishandling classified documents is a federal crime because it can expose national secrets, as well as the sources and methods they were obtained through.”

Murkowski told reporters Monday that the federal charges appear stronger than the case against Trump in New York and warned that having a nominee for president under indictment could spell disaster for the GOP in 2024.  

“I don’t think that it is good for the Republican Party to have a nominee and …. the frontrunner under a series of indictments,” she said.  

Murkowski declined to comment on Republicans who have rallied behind Trump but explained her own position: “I looked at what’s been laid out there and I think it’s serious stuff.” 

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) said the “allegations are serious and, if proven, would be consistent with his other actions offensive to the national interest, such as withholding defensive weapons from Ukraine for political reasons and failing to defend the Capitol from violent attack and insurrection,” referring to incidents that led to Trump getting twice impeached. 

Romney expressed exasperation over the situation Monday. 

“I’m increasingly angry as I think about it. The country is going to go through angst and turmoil and that could have been avoided if President Trump would have just turned the documents in when he was asked to do so. All he had to do when the subpoena came was give the documents back and he wouldn’t have been indicted and the country wouldn’t have gone through what it’s going through. This was entirely avoidable if he just turned in the documents. Why didn’t he?” he said.  

Both Murkowski and Romney have voted to convict Trump on impeachment charges, though Romney was the only Republican to vote to convict Trump over his actions related to Ukraine. 

Other senior Senate Republicans are also keeping their distance from Trump.

“I’m late for this meeting and I’m just going to run to the meeting,” Sen. Roger Wicker (Miss.), the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committees, told reporters as he walked quickly through the Capitol when asked about the national security implications laid out by the indictment.  

Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairwoman Joni Ernst (Iowa) told a Washington Post reporter: “Let’s talk about ‘Roast and Ride’ and how wonderful it was,” referring to the fundraising event she held with Republican presidential hopefuls earlier this month in Des Moines. 

Ernst said too much classified information is leaking out of secure confines but also criticized the Justice Department for indicting Trump but not high-profile Democrats such as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Biden. 

“I think across the board, we’ve seen many instances of classified documents getting out into areas where they shouldn’t be, but it seems there are two systems of justice here, one for President Trump and one for everybody else who’s had classified documents,” she said. 

The indictment gives political ammunition to Democrats who say Trump’s alleged crimes go to “the heart and soul” of the nation’s defense.  

“The indictment makes it clear that the information involved here was not casual, it went to the heart and soul of our defense of the United States, in terms of nuclear confrontations, maps, prepared invasion plans,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who also serves on the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee. 

Durbin said he was “concerned” that Aileen Cannon, a federal district judge who was nominated by Trump, may have a role in presiding over Trump’s case in Southern District of Florida. 

“I am concerned. She was a Trump appointee, she was overruled by the appellate court ... she's back in charge of this case again. This is an historic case,” he said.

"I still hope that she really does her very best to be neutral and a good judge," he added. 

Senate Democrats, caught off guard by President Biden’s decision to tap two senior advisers to negotiate a debt ceiling deal with Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), are warning the president not to agree to anything that would hurt low-income Americans or undermine the battle against climate change.  

Democratic senators are increasingly concerned that any deal that Biden strikes with McCarthy will include major concessions to House conservatives that they would find hard to support. 

“From my perspective, I’m sharing my deep concerns with the people at the table,” said Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) of her outreach to Biden and “his team” about the House Republican proposal to cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which McCarthy called a “red line” in the talks. 

What Democratic senators see as the growing likelihood that Biden will agree to cut tens of billions of dollars in nondefense domestic spending and make it easier to approve new fossil-fuel extraction projects has spurred some of them to urge the president to raise the debt limit unilaterally and circumvent Republican lawmakers altogether.  

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) addresses reporters after the weekly policy luncheon on Tuesday, April 18, 2023. (Annabelle Gordon)

A group of Senate Democrats including Sens. Tina Smith (Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) signed onto a letter urging Biden to prepare to use the 14th Amendment to raise the debt limit in the absence of a deal with McCarthy.  

“Kevin McCarthy has two main requests: Attack ordinary, working families across America by cutting the foundations for health care, housing, education and good-paying jobs, and unleash fossil fuels on America. And both of those are absolutely unacceptable,” Merkley told reporters Wednesday.   

"I want the president to see that he has the support in the Senate to use the 14th Amendment," he said. "He has support to say no to outrageous demands from the radical right." 

Senate Democrats had urged Biden for months not to negotiate with McCarthy over legislation to raise the debt limit, arguing that the full faith and credit of the federal government shouldn’t be used as a bargaining chip.  

More on the debt ceiling from The Hill:

• Conservatives make last-minute push for border security in debt ceiling package
• McCarthy shifts, voices new confidence in debt ceiling deal
• Freedom Caucus says ‘no further discussion’ on debt ceiling until Senate passes House GOP bill
• With Biden in Japan, Harris pushes White House message on debt ceiling

The president followed that advice for months, but he changed course this week by tapping two senior officials, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young and counselor Steve Ricchetti to take the lead in negotiating with McCarthy’s deputy, Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.).  

Democratic senators acknowledged on Wednesday that Biden now certainly appears to be willing to negotiate with McCarthy on raising the debt limit, and they see that as bad news given the spending cuts included in the legislation the House passed last month to raise the debt limit.  

“Yes, he’s negotiating. I don’t know what else what you call it,” said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who had urged Biden not to let House Republicans use the debt limit as a hostage.  

Schatz warned that Democrats on Capitol Hill wouldn’t vote for a deal that includes even a quarter of the proposals included in the House Republicans’ Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would cut spending by $4.8 trillion over the next decade and greenlight new fossil-fuel projects around the country.  

“No, we’re not going to swallow that,” he said. “I think that it is preposterous that the Speaker of the House has woken up sometime this week and decided that work requirements for needy families was his hill to die on, that this is some high principle that is worth taking the country to default.” 

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) arrives to the Senate Chamber for a vote regarding a nomination on Wednesday, March 15, 2023. (Greg Nash)

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said he will oppose any effort by House Republicans to use debt limit legislation to roll back the clean energy tax breaks included in last year’s Inflation Reduction Act. 

“If it’s about rolling back the IRA, I’m going to fight against that for sure because the energy community tax credits, they really help Virginia, including some of the parts of Virginia that need the most economic help,” he said. 

“There are a number of things I’m hearing about that would cause me concerns,” he said. 

At the same time, conservative Republicans say if Biden does not agree to significant spending reforms and policy concessions, any debt limit deal that may emerge from talks with McCarthy will fall flat with members of the House Freedom Caucus.  

A small group of House conservatives hold significant leverage over McCarthy due to his narrow majority and because it only takes only one House lawmaker to offer a motion to vacate the Speaker’s chair. 

Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), who has met with members of the House Freedom Caucus to help build GOP support for the House debt limit bill, warned that McCarthy doesn't have much "wiggle room" to agree to a deal that falls well short of the reforms in that legislation.

Biden set off alarms among Democrats on Capitol Hill by suggesting over the weekend that he would be open to stricter work requirements for SNAP and TANF, though he took Medicaid off the table.  

“I voted for tougher aid programs that’s in the law now, but for Medicaid, it’s a different story. And so I’m waiting to hear what their exact proposal is,” he told reporters during a bike ride in Rehoboth Beach, Del. 

Biden walked back that comment Wednesday before departing for a trip to Japan. 

“I’m not going to accept any work requirements that go much beyond what is already — I voted years ago for the work requirements that exist. But, it’s possible there could be a few others, but not anything of any consequence,” he said. 

Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) addresses reporters during a press conference on Thursday, February 9, 2023 to discuss reinstating paid sick days for rail workers. (Annabelle Gordon)

Biden plans to cut his trip short and return to Washington on Sunday to resume negotiations with McCarthy. 

Senior Democrats, however, argue adult recipients of federal food assistance already have to comply with work requirements, and penalties suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic are scheduled to go back into full effect.  

Stabenow said McCarthy wants to increase the age range for people who must meet work requirements for food subsidies.  

“From my perspective, it’s a non-starter and I’m very concerned about impacts on [the program]. The reality is we have work requirements starting again,” she said.  

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said she would also oppose stronger work requirements for SNAP benefits.  

Republicans are warning that the unprecedented indictment of former President Trump on multiple charges sets a dangerous precedent that will lower the bar for future political prosecutions while putting the nation on a precarious slippery slope. 

Some Republicans are comparing Trump’s indictment — over crimes related to the payment of $130,000 to an adult film actress — to the House Republican impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton in 1998 on charges related to his affair with a White House intern.  

They predict that indicting Trump will make future former presidents and other political figures more susceptible to politically motivated prosecutions.  

Democrats counter with the refrain that no person is above the law, regardless of whether he served in the Oval Office.  

But some Democrats were not thrilled to hear that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) would be the first prosecutor to indict Trump; the conduct he is targeting has been publicly known for five years and other prosecutors, including Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance Jr., passed on the opportunity.  

“I think it is a terrible precedent for the country. I think it’s bad for America, bad for the Republican Party and it’s bad for the political system in our country. Once you start down this path, there’s no way you’re going to reverse it. That’s what we saw with impeachment,” said Vin Weber, a Republican strategist and former member of the House GOP leadership.  

“We’re going to see political prosecutions brought, some of them for meritorious reasons, some of them to advance the careers of the prosecutors. But all of this is harmful to America and our political process,” he added.  

Weber said “another whole aspect” of the case is that Trump is the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, according to 10 of the most recent national polls.  

“There are people in this vast country of ours who have less than sterling motivations and you want them to be inhibited by rules that we’ve established, informal rules, that are designed to protect the whole system,” he said.     

“Once this wall of precedent has been destroyed, we’re going to find people around the country who are going to find reasons to engage in political prosecutions,” he added, noting that some Republicans are talking about the possibility of bringing charges against President Biden or his son Hunter after he leaves office.  

“I don’t know if that’s likely or not but we’re going to see something somewhere,” he said.  

Some Republican officeholders are framing Trump’s indictment as motivated purely by politics. 

“These charges aren’t about enforcing the law. Democrats barely pretend they are. They are the left telling the nation, we’re in charge here. And if you threaten us, we will destroy you,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) tweeted last week.  

Former Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), a one-time adviser to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s (Ky.) leadership team, said “it’s extremely dangerous for our democracy to indict a former president unless there is an unequivocal violation representing a very significant offense.” 

“This does not appear to rise anywhere near that. In fact it appears to be extremely political from a distance,” he added. “So I think it sets a precedent, and it’s a very dangerous precedent for democracy.  

“It creates an atmosphere where the courts are being used as a political weapon,” he said. “It undermines I think the confidence of the American people in their democracy, in their legal system.” 

Critics of Bragg’s case, such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), point out that Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, made the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election and the statute of limitations in New York is two years for misdemeanors and five years for minor felonies.  

These critics believe Bragg will try to tie that payment to an effort to conceal another crime, most likely a violation of campaign finance law, to get around the statute of limitations. 

Cruz noted that a similar charge was brought against former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) and was thrown out at trial. Edwards used nearly $1 million in payments from his political backers to support his mistress during the 2008 campaign. Democrats at the time criticized the charges brought by a Republican prosecutor as politically motivated.  

“Bragg’s case is even weaker because [the New York law in question] is ordinarily a misdemeanor with a two-year statute of limitations, so he couldn’t bring the claim,” he said. “In order to get it to be a felony, there’s a separate New York statute, which requires you have a fraudulent business record that aided in another crime. 

“He’s got to bootstrap presumably a federal campaign finance violation, which the federal government declined to bring,” Cruz explained. “The core allegation at the heart of Bragg’s case is that Trump mischaracterized a payment as legal fees when it was not in fact legal fees. 

“Hillary Clinton at the exact same time, in 2016 during the presidential campaign … paid $1 million for the Steele Dossier to be compiled — the fake and fantastical work of fiction that her oppo research team put together that tragically became the basis of [Special Counsel Robert’ Mueller’s] investigation,” he said.

Cruz said Clinton also characterized the funding of the Steele Dossier research as legal payments, arguing that this shows Bragg is playing politics.

“It make obvious this is partisan politics,” he said.  

Experts say the precedent set by indicting Trump will reverberate into the future.  

“Every time a threshold is crossed in politics, it sets a predicate for another line to be crossed. Once a taboo is violated politically, it just makes it easier to do it a second time. There’s precedent,” said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University.  

He said Bragg’s case appears to be weaker than possible charges anticipated from Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith and Georgia's Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.  

“I think it would be better if the precedent were stronger. If it were an open-and-shut case, it would be harder to argue … local district attorneys shouldn’t have the power to indict presidents,” he said.  

Baker said the “gravity” of the allegations against Trump related to his alleged role inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and to his alleged role in trying to subvert the election results in Georgia in 2020 would give any charges brought by the Department of Justice or the Fulton County DA's office more credibility than Bragg's case.