 "Is Trump’s grip on Republicans and the Maga movement starting to slip?")
Once defined by absolute fealty to Donald Trump, the Republican landscape is witnessing a shift that would have seemed improbable only months ago.
The sitting United States president, long accustomed to unified backing from both congressional allies and the broader Maga movement, is now a growing level of resistance from within his own ranks.
These developments have emerged not on the margins of the Republican party, but from within the circle of lawmakers who were once among Trump’s most vocal defenders.
Public disagreements have come from Georgia’s Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Colorado’s Representative Lauren Boebert — figures who previously positioned themselves as unwavering supporters of Trump.
How Greene broke from Trump’s inner circle
Marjorie Taylor Greene, once one of Trump’s closest political allies, has emerged as a central figure in this unexpected internal conflict.
Her political identity was largely forged within the Trump orbit, beginning in 2020 when she campaigned in northern Georgia by embracing conspiracy theories, championing election fraud claims, and aligning herself heavily with the then-president.
Trump had enthusiastically endorsed her early in her career, describing her as a “future Republican Star” and “a real WINNER!” at a time when many GOP leaders distanced themselves from her.
She built her public persona on fierce loyalty to the Trump agenda, supporting his effort to overturn election results in Georgia and echoing the false claims that drove the events of January 6, 2021.
When Trump returned to power, Greene positioned herself as one of the most influential voices in the new Republican majority, often serving as an enforcer of his political brand.
Their alliance, however, deteriorated rapidly this year.
Tensions surfaced when Greene began contemplating a 2026 Senate challenge against Democrat Jon Ossoff. Trump claimed he had privately warned her against the idea, saying he showed her internal polling suggesting she “didn’t have a chance.”
Greene later declined to pursue either the Senate race or the Georgia governorship, accusing a “good ole boy” political culture within the state of jeopardising Republican control — comments that signalled growing frustration not only with local GOP leaders but also with Trump’s guidance.
The rift escalated sharply once Greene began criticising Trump’s approach in his second term. She has repeatedly argued that his focus on international issues has overshadowed what she views as more urgent domestic concerns.
She has also expressed disappointment with his reluctance to push for broader disclosure of files connected to the Epstein case — an issue she believes resonates deeply with Republican voters.
Trump, in turn, responded with open hostility.
In a series of social media posts, he accused Greene of constant negativity, writing, “All I see ‘Wacky’ Marjorie do is COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN!”
He then attempted to attach a new moniker to her, calling her “Marjorie Taylor Brown” and adding, “Green grass turns Brown when it begins to ROT!”
Greene has not attempted to de-escalate the situation. Instead, she has publicly positioned herself as someone driven more by the public’s needs than by loyalty to Trump or any party structure.
“I believe in the American people more than I believe in any leader or political party and the American people deserve so much better than how they have been treated by both sides of the aisle,” she posted.
She also claimed that “threats against me are being fuelled and egged on by the most powerful man in the world.”
Political observers in her home district note that Greene has long been unpredictable, often shifting her stances in ways that are difficult to anticipate.
Jason Shepherd, a political science professor in Georgia who once resigned from a party position due to disagreements with Trump supporters, told CBS News, “I don’t know if she has any core convictions, except for what will help her the most.”
How Boebert defied Trump over the Epstein Files
Boebert, known for her staunch support of the US president, was thrust into direct conflict with senior administration officials last week after she refused to step away from a procedural effort designed to compel the release of Epstein-related documents held by the US Department of Justice.
Inside the White House situation room, FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi pressed her to reconsider her support for the discharge petition aiming to force a vote on releasing the files.
They argued that she should trust the administration’s handling of the matter and avoid a public confrontation with the president.
Boebert, however, was unmoved.
She stated her concern for Epstein’s victims, her desire to identify any others who may have been involved, and her mistrust of earlier inquiries.
Her refusal placed her at odds not only with Trump but also with House leadership. Despite warnings that pushing forward could create legislative complications, she kept her name on the petition and confirmed that she would vote in favour of the bill when it reached the floor.
Only a small cohort of Republicans joined the effort — Greene, Thomas Massie, and Nancy Mace — a notable list given that they all risked alienating their party’s leader.
The petition reached the required 218 signatures after newly sworn-in Representative Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat, added her support.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has attempted to steer Republicans away from the effort, arguing that allowing the Oversight Committee to complete its review would produce more comprehensive results.
Even if the bill passes the House, its path is far from assured. It would need Senate approval — a step Majority Leader John Thune has not committed to — and ultimately Trump’s signature.
The situation has placed Trump in a politically awkward position, particularly given that his administration’s own reports in July found no “evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”
How the Epstein Files have forced Trump to change sides
For years, Trump has shaped Republican policy priorities with minimal pushback, even when his actions diverged sharply from established conservative positions.
Congressional Republicans rarely opposed him, and when they did, it was often on foreign policy — areas where Trump’s base tended to be less engaged.
The Epstein dispute has changed that pattern.
The push for transparency on the files has strong support among Republican voters, creating a rare situation in which the base’s demands override Trump’s personal preference.
After resisting calls for months, Trump abruptly shifted course and told Republicans to vote in favour of releasing the files.
He wrote on social media, “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” before blaming the controversy on “Radical Left Lunatics” and portraying the issue as a distraction from Republican legislative victories.
During his previous term and throughout his presidential campaigns, Trump established himself as a Republican leader whose influence often proved decisive, even when positions were unpopular or untested.
That dynamic appears to be weakening.
Recent elections have revived concerns about the party’s performance when Trump is not directly on the ballot.
Republican lawmakers, aware of the political cost of defying voter sentiment on the Epstein issue, calculated that opposing the release could be far more damaging than contradicting the president.
At the same time, recently unsealed documents from the Epstein estate have created complications for Trump, even though he has not been accused of wrongdoing.
Emails in which Epstein claimed Trump “knew about the girls” recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, and references to time spent with Virginia Giuffre, have increased calls from the public and from legislators for comprehensive transparency.
Despite the absence of criminal allegations, the political optics have not favoured the White House.
Even Republicans who remain aligned with Trump privately acknowledge that these developments indicate diminishing political capital — a concern that grows more pressing as the next election cycle approaches.
With inputs from agencies
 "‘There can be no white-washing of terrorism’: At SCO meet, Jaishankar asserts India’s right to defend")
 "Madvi Hidma: The key cases that made him India’s most wanted Maoist")
 "Why the US selling F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia is controversial")
 "Doha, NY, Niagara, Moscow…: Jaishankar criss-crosses continents as India goes on diplomatic drive")
 "‘There can be no white-washing of terrorism’: At SCO meet, Jaishankar asserts India’s right to defend")
 "Madvi Hidma: The key cases that made him India’s most wanted Maoist")
 "Why the US selling F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia is controversial")
 "Doha, NY, Niagara, Moscow…: Jaishankar criss-crosses continents as India goes on diplomatic drive")
