Now that about 80 former members of Congress (the ones who are not truly retired) have officially been on the job market for almost a month, it's starting to become clear the pace at which many are moving through the revolving door between governance and advocacy.
Former House members have to wait one full year, and senators two years, before they may register as lobbyists and begin making direct appeals to their one-time colleagues about the shape of legislation. But during that time they're welcome to sign on with law firms and lobbying shops to provide behind-the-scenes political intelligence, strategizing and rainmaking advice. (The House Democrats' "good government" package, HR 1, would further limit how actively former members may support the lobbying of others during their so-called cooling off periods.)
Only a relative handful of Democrats still young enough to be attractive to K Street were defeated last year. The most prominent of then, former Rep. Joe Crowley of New York, is talking to several firms, while both former Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri and former Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois have taken up careers as political pundits, she on MSNBC and he on CNN.
But the progressive news site ThinkProgress is out this week with a roundup of Republicans who've recently moved out of offices on the House side of Capitol Hill and already landed new places "downtown."
Among those who gave up their seats voluntarily, Dave Reichert of Washington, who was chair of the Ways and Means subcommittee on trade, is now vice president of Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs. Lynn Jenkins of Kansas, who chaired the Ways and Means oversight subcommittee, has started her own lobbying shop based in Kansas.
And both Lamar Smith of Texas, a former chairman of both the Science and Judiciary committees, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, a former chairwoman of Foreign Affairs, have signed on as "senior consultants" at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.
Of the unsuccessful Senators who sought re-election, Indiana's Luke Messer has signed on with Faegre Baker Daniels Consulting while Ohio's Jim Renacci will run a political group back home advocating for pro-business causes in Columbus.
Two Pennsylvanians effectively forced out of their seats by a court-ordered redistricting have found new homes. Ryan Costello is the new managing director for Americans for Carbon Dividends, which supports a federal carbon tax. Charlie Dent, in addition to landing a CNN contract, is at DLA Piper.
Kevin Yoder of Kansas, who lost re-election while chairing the Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security, is now at Hobart Hallaway & Quayle Ventures. And just this week another November loser, Barbara Comstock of Virginia, announced she was joining Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz.
Eric Trump, the newly appointed ALT5 board director of World Liberty Financial, walks outside of the NASDAQ in Times Square as they mark the $1.5- billion partnership between World Liberty Financial and ALT5 Sigma with the ringing of the NASDAQ opening bell, on Aug. 13, 2025, in New York City.
Why does the Trump family always get a pass?
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche joined ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday to defend or explain a lot of controversies for the Trump administration: the Epstein files release, the events in Minneapolis, etc. He was also asked about possible conflicts of interest between President Trump’s family business and his job. Specifically, Blanche was asked about a very sketchy deal Trump’s son Eric signed with the UAE’s national security adviser, Sheikh Tahnoon.
Shortly before Trump was inaugurated in early 2025, Tahnoon invested $500 million in the Trump-owned World Liberty, a then newly launched cryptocurrency outfit. A few months later, UAE was granted permission to purchase sensitive American AI chips. According to the Wall Street Journal, which broke the story, “the deal marks something unprecedented in American politics: a foreign government official taking a major ownership stake in an incoming U.S. president’s company.”
“How do you respond to those who say this is a serious conflict of interest?” ABC host George Stephanopoulos asked.
“I love it when these papers talk about something being unprecedented or never happening before,” Blanche replied, “as if the Biden family and the Biden administration didn’t do exactly the same thing, and they were just in office.”
Blanche went on to boast about how the president is utterly transparent regarding his questionable business practices: “I don’t have a comment on it beyond Trump has been completely transparent when his family travels for business reasons. They don’t do so in secret. We don’t learn about it when we find a laptop a few years later. We learn about it when it’s happening.”
Sadly, Stephanopoulos didn’t offer the obvious response, which may have gone something like this: “OK, but the president and countless leading Republicans insisted that President Biden was the head of what they dubbed ‘the Biden Crime family’ and insisted his business dealings were corrupt, and indeed that his corruption merited impeachment. So how is being ‘transparent’ about similar corruption a defense?”
Now, I should be clear that I do think the Biden family’s business dealings were corrupt, whether or not laws were broken. Others disagree. I also think Trump’s business dealings appear to be worse in many ways than even what Biden was alleged to have done. But none of that is relevant. The standard set by Trump and Republicans is the relevant political standard, and by the deputy attorney general’s own account, the Trump administration is doing “exactly the same thing,” just more openly.
Since when is being more transparent about wrongdoing a defense? Try telling a cop or judge, “Yes, I robbed that bank. I’ve been completely transparent about that. So, what’s the big deal?”
This is just a small example of the broader dysfunction in the way we talk about politics.
Americans have a special hatred for hypocrisy. I think it goes back to the founding era. As Alexis de Tocqueville observed in “Democracy In America,” the old world had a different way of dealing with the moral shortcomings of leaders. Rank had its privileges. Nobles, never mind kings, were entitled to behave in ways that were forbidden to the little people.
In America, titles of nobility were banned in the Constitution and in our democratic culture. In a society built on notions of equality (the obvious exceptions of Black people, women, Native Americans notwithstanding) no one has access to special carve-outs or exemptions as to what is right and wrong. Claiming them, particularly in secret, feels like a betrayal against the whole idea of equality.
The problem in the modern era is that elites — of all ideological stripes — have violated that bargain. The result isn’t that we’ve abandoned any notion of right and wrong. Instead, by elevating hypocrisy to the greatest of sins, we end up weaponizing the principles, using them as a cudgel against the other side but not against our own.
Pick an issue: violent rhetoric by politicians, sexual misconduct, corruption and so on. With every revelation, almost immediately the debate becomes a riot of whataboutism. Team A says that Team B has no right to criticize because they did the same thing. Team B points out that Team A has switched positions. Everyone has a point. And everyone is missing the point.
Sure, hypocrisy is a moral failing, and partisan inconsistency is an intellectual one. But neither changes the objective facts. This is something you’re supposed to learn as a child: It doesn’t matter what everyone else is doing or saying, wrong is wrong. It’s also something lawyers like Mr. Blanche are supposed to know. Telling a judge that the hypocrisy of the prosecutor — or your client’s transparency — means your client did nothing wrong would earn you nothing but a laugh.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.