Connect with us

National

Reid recommits to ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal in lame duck

Senators talk of extending session to vote on gay ban

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reaffirmed on Monday his commitment to bring a vote "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal (Blade photo by Michael Key).

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) reaffirmed on Monday his commitment to bring “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal to vote in the lame duck session of Congress amid fears other legislative priorities will bump the issue from the agenda.

Reid pledged to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by year’s end on the Senate floor as he described a litany of legislative items he wants the chamber to take on during lame duck, including passage of the DREAM Act, renewing tax cuts for middle class families and ratification of the START Treaty.

“We’re also going to repeal the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law,” Reid said. “We’re going to match our policy with our principles and finally say in the United States, everyone who steps up to serve our country can be welcome.”

Legislation to repeal the military gay’s ban is pending before the Senate as part of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. A previous attempt to bring the legislation to the Senate floor in September failed when a united Republican caucus blocked consideration of the measure.

Many senators — including Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) — said they wanted a more fair amendment process with more amendments for the minority as a condition to moving forward with the legislation.

In his remarks, Reid said Republicans are blocking consideration of the defense authorization bill because they don’t believe they have the votes to take out the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” provision by amendment once the legislation reaches the floor.

Reid said when Republicans refuse to debate the defense authorization bill, they also “hold up a well-deserved raise for our troops, better health care for our troops and their families” as well as other important initiatives for the U.S. military.

A White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also affirmed President Obama wants Congress to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before lawmakers adjourn for the year.

“The White House remains fully committed to passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, including the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ during the lame duck,” the official said. “This is a priority for the president, and are we confident that the Congress will be able to address this issue this year.”

Concern that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal may have fallen from the schedule emerged when Reid offered remarks earlier in the day and didn’t include the defense authorization bill as among the legislative items for which he would file cloture on Monday.

Instead he listed other items, including the DREAM Act and legislation that would provide healthcare benefits and compensation to workers who responded to Ground Zero during the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Reid only mentioned the defense authorization bill after Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) reminded him on the floor to say something about the legislation.

The majority leader responded by saying he had bipartisan conversations on Sunday about trying to find a way to move forward with the defense authorization bill.

“The issue on that, Madam President, is what we do with amendments,” Reid said. “And without belaboring the point here, I would be happy to consider doing a number of amendments if we had time agreements on those amendments. But to just have an open process — at this stage, I don’t see how we can do that.”

Jim Manley, a Reid spokesperson, said Reid didn’t include “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” among the items on which he would file cloture on Monday because the Senate leadership is still in talks to find enough Republican support to move forward with the defense authorization bill.

“Discussion are ongoing that involve Sen. Levin, Sen. [Joseph] Lieberman, Sen. Collins and others about trying to put together a debate that will satisfy folks and both of the aisle,” Manley said.

Manley said he couldn’t make a prediction on when these discussion would conclude, but said Reid remains committed to bringing up the legislation to a vote during lame duck.

Despite the commitment from Reid for a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” concerns that time will run out before lawmakers act persist.

In a brief exchange with the Washington Blade on Capitol Hill, Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) expressed concerns about being able to move forward with the defense authorization in the limited time that remains in the session.

“The longer this go on the more difficult it becomes, but I’m obviously … still hopeful,” Levin said.

Christopher Neff, deputy executive director of the Palm Center, a think tank on gays in the military at the University of California, Santa Barbara, acknowleged that time is an issue as he said he still sees a path forward for repeal.

“The calendar, in my estimation, has always been a bit more difficult than the vote count, but I do think that there are scenarios where this can be finalized for a signature before Congress adjourns,” Neff said.

Neff cited what he perceived as Obama’s commitment to repeal as a reason for why repeal can still happen and noted a recent call the president made to Levin against stripping the defense authorization bill of its “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” language.

“President Obama has shown strong leadership in reaching out to Sen. Levin and to Sen. Reid to try to move this process forward,” Neff said. “I think the White House has taken a leadership role on this and they want to see it delivered and I think there’s more to be done.”

Talk is emerging about extending the legislative session beyond what was previously planned to accomodate a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

During his earlier remarks, Reid set Dec. 17 as the target date for when he wants the Senate to adjourn for this Congress and said he doesn’t think his colleagues want to stay until Christmas Eve as they did last year.

But Manley said the Dec. 17 target date for adjournment is “not hard and fast” and “we’ll have to wait and see how long we’re going to need.” He added the entire Democratic caucus would agree to extending the session for that to happen.

In a statement, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said the Senate should stay in session for until the remainder of the calendar year if that’s what’s necessary to complete legislative work before the chamber, such as passage of the defense authorization bill.

“It’s time to follow Elvis Presley’s advice — we need ‘a little less conversation, and a little more action,’” Udall said. “I’m willing to stay through Christmas and New Year’s, if that’s what it takes, to fight for middle-class tax relief, the defense authorization bill, public lands legislation — which means jobs for Coloradans — and other important work.”

On Monday, the Huffington Post reported that Lieberman and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) were in favor of extneding the legislative session to pass “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“Sen. Lieberman believes that there are at least 60 votes to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ this year, provided that leadership allows time for sufficient debate and amendments,” Lieberman spokeswoman Erika Masonhall was quoted as saying. “Wanting to go home is not an acceptable excuse for failing to pass a bill that provides essential support for our troops and veterans and failing to take action that the president, the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have called for.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Peter Thiel’s expanding power — and his overlap with Jeffrey Epstein

Gay billionaire’s name appears 2,200 times in files, but no criminality alleged

Published

on

Peter Thiel (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

There are few figures in modern politics whose reach extends across Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and Washington, D.C., as Peter Thiel’s.

A billionaire venture capitalist, Thiel built his fortune at the dawn of the internet age and has since positioned himself at the highest levels of U.S. technology, finance, and national defense infrastructure. He is best known as a co-founder of PayPal, an early investor in Facebook, and the co-founder of Palantir Technologies — a data analytics firm that maintains significant contracts with U.S., U.K., and Israeli defense and intelligence agencies.

Over the last two decades, Thiel has also built an interconnected network of investment vehicles — Clarium Capital, Founders Fund, Thiel Capital, Valar Ventures, and Mithril Capital — giving him influence over emerging technologies, political candidates, and ideological movements aligned with his worldview. Through these firms, Thiel has backed companies in artificial intelligence, defense technology, biotech, cryptocurrency, and financial services, often positioning himself early in sectors that later became central to public policy debates.

Born in Frankfurt, West Germany, in 1967, Thiel immigrated to the United States as an infant. He later attended Stanford University, earning a degree in philosophy before graduating from Stanford Law School in 1992. As an undergraduate, he founded The Stanford Review, a conservative student publication that opposed what it described as campus “political correctness.” The paper became a platform for combative and contrarian arguments that previewed themes Thiel would revisit in later essays and speeches about elite institutions, democracy, and technological stagnation.

Thiel’s professional ascent coincided with the explosive growth of the dot-com era. In 1998, he co-founded PayPal, helping pioneer digital payment systems that would become foundational to online commerce. When the company was sold to eBay in 2002 for $1.5 billion, Thiel emerged a multimillionaire and part of what would later be known as the “PayPal Mafia” — a loose but influential network of founders and early employees who went on to launch or invest in some of Silicon Valley’s most dominant firms.

In 2004, Thiel made one of the most consequential investments of his career, providing $500,000 in seed funding to Facebook, then a fledgling social network founded by Mark Zuckerberg. He became the company’s first outside investor and later served on its board. That early bet proved extraordinarily lucrative and cemented Thiel’s status as a major venture capitalist with a reputation for identifying transformative platforms before they reached scale.

The same year, he co-founded Palantir Technologies. Initially backed in part by In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, Palantir developed software — including its Gotham platform — designed to help defense, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies integrate and analyze massive datasets. The company’s tools allow users to map relationships, identify patterns, and visualize complex networks across financial records, communications data, and other digital trails.

Over time, Palantir secured billions of dollars in public-sector contracts. It has worked with the U.S. Department of Defense, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and allied governments abroad. Public reporting has documented that its global government contracts exceed $1.9 billion, including agreements with Israeli defense entities — relationships that reportedly expanded following the Oct. 7 attacks in Israel. Critics have raised concerns about civil liberties and surveillance, while supporters argue the company provides essential national security tools.

By the mid-2000s, Thiel was no longer simply a wealthy entrepreneur. He was a financier operating at the intersection of capital, advanced technology, and government — with investments embedded in some of the country’s most sensitive security systems. His political giving would later extend that influence further, including support for candidates aligned with his populist and nationalist leanings– notably Donald Trump in 2016.

As his wealth and influence expanded, so too did his proximity to other powerful — and, in some cases, controversial — figures in global finance.

Among them was Jeffrey Epstein.

Thiel’s name appears more than 2,200 times in documents released so far by the U.S. Department of Justice related to Epstein. A name appearing in legal filings does not, by itself, indicate wrongdoing. However, the extensive references illustrate that Epstein’s social and financial network intersected with elite figures in technology, academia, politics, and finance — including individuals connected to Thiel’s business and philanthropic circles.

Epstein’s legal troubles became public in 2005, when police in Palm Beach, Fla., investigated allegations that he had sexually abused a minor. In 2008, he pleaded guilty in state court to soliciting prostitution from a minor under a plea agreement that was widely criticized as unusually lenient. He served 13 months in county jail with work-release privileges and was required to register as a sex offender. Comparable federal charges can carry significantly longer sentences.

Despite that conviction, Epstein continued to maintain relationships with prominent business and political figures for years. The extent to which members of elite networks remained in contact with him after his guilty plea has been the subject of extensive scrutiny.

Documents released by the Justice Department indicate that individuals connected to Thiel’s philanthropic and investment circles communicated with Epstein after his conviction. One document shows an invitation, sent on behalf of the Thiel Foundation, for Epstein to attend a technology event in San Francisco. Additional financial records and reporting indicate that between 2015 and 2016, Epstein invested approximately $40 million in funds managed by Valar Ventures, one of Thiel’s firms. Other records reflect meetings and correspondence, at times arranged through intermediaries. Epstein also extended invitations to his Caribbean residence.

There is no evidence that Thiel was involved in Epstein’s criminal conduct. The documented interactions do, however, show numerous planned meetings between the two both in the Caribbean (where Epstein’s infamous island is located) and across the world, while also raising questions about why business relationships continued after Epstein had pleaded guilty to a sex offense involving a minor and was a registered sex offender. For critics, that continued engagement speaks to the insular nature of elite finance, where access to capital and networks can override reputational risk.

Palantir represents another overlap. In emails made public through Justice Department releases, Epstein referenced Palantir in correspondence with Ehud Barak, the former Israeli prime minister who also maintained ties to Epstein. The emails do not indicate that Epstein had operational involvement in Palantir or access to its systems, however, they show that he discussed one of Thiel’s most strategically significant companies — a firm deeply integrated into Western defense and intelligence systems — with senior political figures abroad.

Separately, Thiel’s long-running dispute with Gawker Media offers additional insight into how he has exercised power outside traditional political channels.

After Gawker published an article in 2007 that publicly identified Thiel as gay, he later secretly funded litigation brought by professional wrestler Hulk Hogan over the outlet’s publication of a sex tape. The lawsuit resulted in a $140 million judgment against Gawker, which ultimately filed for bankruptcy. Thiel later confirmed his financial backing of the case, framing it as a defense of privacy and a response to what he considered reckless media behavior.

The episode demonstrated Thiel’s willingness to deploy substantial financial resources strategically and, at times, discreetly. It also illustrated how wealth can be used to influence institutions — whether through venture capital, political donations, or litigation.

Taken together, the record does not establish criminal liability for Thiel in connection with Epstein. It does, however, situate him within a dense web of elite finance, national security contracting, political influence, and reputation management. As additional documents related to Epstein continue to emerge, that web — and the decisions made within it — remains a subject of public interest and ongoing scrutiny.

Continue Reading

National

Supreme Court deals blow to trans student privacy protections

Under this ruling, parents are entitled to be informed about their children’s gender identity at school, regardless of state protections for student privacy.

Published

on

Transgender rights activists protest outside the Supreme Court in early 2026. (Washington Blade Photo by Michael Key)

The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a California policy that allowed teachers to withhold information about a student’s gender identity from their parents.

The policy had permitted California students to explore their gender identity at school without that information automatically being disclosed to their parents. Now, educators in the state will be required to inform parents about developments related to a student’s gender identity, depending on how the case proceeds in lower courts.

The case involves two sets of parents — identified in court filings as John and Jane Poe and John and Jane Doe — both of which say their daughters began identifying as boys at school without their knowledge, citing religious objections to gender transitioning.

The Poes say they only learned about their daughter’s gender dysphoria after she attempted suicide in eighth grade and was hospitalized. After treatment for the attempt and after being returned to school the following year, teachers continued using a male name and pronouns despite the parents’ objections, citing California law. The Poes have since placed their daughter in therapy and psychiatric care.

Similarly, the Does say their daughter has intermittently identified as a boy since fifth grade, but while their daughter was in seventh grade, they confronted school administrators over concerns that staff were using a male name and pronouns without informing them. The principal told them state law barred disclosure without the child’s consent.

Both sets of parents filed lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California challenging the state policy that protects students’ gender identity and limits when schools can disclose that information to parents.

The justices voted along ideological lines, with the court’s six conservative members in the majority and the three liberal justices dissenting.

“We conclude that the parents who seek religious exemptions are likely to succeed on the merits of their Free Exercise Clause claim,” the court said in an unsigned order. “The parents who assert a free exercise claim have sincere religious beliefs about sex and gender, and they feel a religious obligation to raise their children in accordance with those beliefs. California’s policies violate those beliefs.”

In dissent, the three liberal justices argued that the case is still working its way through the lower courts and that there was no need for the high court to intervene at this stage. Justice Elena Kagan wrote, “If nothing else, this Court owes it to a sovereign State to avoid throwing over its policies in a slapdash way, if the Court can provide normal procedures. And throwing over a State’s policy is what the Court does today.”

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas indicated they would have gone further and granted broader relief to the parents and teachers challenging the policy.

The emergency appeal from a group of teachers and parents in California followed a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that allowed the state’s policy to remain in effect. The appeals court had paused an order from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez — who was nominated by George W. Bush — that sided with the parents and teachers and put the policy on hold.

The legal challenge was backed by the Thomas More Society, which relied heavily on a decision last year in which the court’s conservative majority sided with a group of religious parents seeking to opt their elementary school children out of engaging with LGBTQ-themed books in the classroom.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed disappointment with the ruling. “We remain committed to ensuring a safe, welcoming school environment for all students while respecting the crucial role parents play in students’ lives,” his office said in a statement.

The decision comes as the Trump administration has taken a hardline approach to transgender rights. During his State of the Union address last week, President Donald Trump referenced Sage Blair, who previously identified as transgender and later detransitioned, describing Blair’s experience transitioning in a public school. According to the president, school employees supported Blair’s chosen gender identity and did not initially inform Blair’s parents.

President Donald Trump acknowledges Sage Blair, pictured second from left, during his speech at the State of the Union on Feb. 24. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Last year, the court upheld Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors and has allowed enforcement of a policy barring transgender people from serving in the military to continue during Trump’s second term.

Continue Reading

Florida

Comings & Goings

Gil Pontes III named to Financial Advisory Board in Wilton Manors

Published

on

Gil Pontes III

The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected]

Congratulations to Gil Pontes III on his recent appointment to the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors, Fla. Upon being appointed he said, “I’m honored to join the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors at such an important moment for our community. In my role as Executive Director of the NextGen Chamber of Commerce, I spend much of my time focused on economic growth, fiscal sustainability, and the long-term competitiveness of emerging business leaders. I look forward to bringing that perspective to Wilton Manors — helping ensure responsible stewardship of public resources while supporting a vibrant, inclusive local economy.”

Pontes is a nonprofit executive with years of development, operations, budget, management, and strategic planning experience in 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and political organizations. Pontes is currently executive director of NextGen, Chamber of Commerce. NextGen Chamber’s mission is to “empower emerging business leaders by generating insights, encouraging engagement, and nurturing leadership development to shape the future economy.” Prior to that he served as managing director of The Nora Project, and director of development also at The Nora Project. He has held a number of other positions including Major Gifts Officer, Thundermist Health Center, and has worked in both real estate and banking including as Business Solutions Adviser, Ironwood Financial. For three years he was a Selectman, Town of Berkley, Mass. In that role, he managed HR and general governance for town government. There were 200+ staff and 6,500 constituents. He balanced a $20,000,000 budget annually, established an Economic Development Committee, and hired the first town administrator.

Pontes earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.

Continue Reading

Popular