bookmark
The NYT story on Rep. Gaetz doesn't make sense, most specifically the timeline. This is not a complicated charge to present or prove. Whether the girl was 17 is a matter of impirical [sic] proof. Whether they traveled together outside Florida is a matter of documentary proof.
If she was 17, and they did travel, the only reason to hold off as long as they have is because they don't have a cooperative victim. The play for $25 million may have been a suggestion that the victim is considering being cooperative, but might be made to reconsider.
But Gaetz's statement is a pretty bold play, and I can't comprehend him doing so without something solid that she was 18 or older at the time. There is no reason for DOJ/FBI to have held off charging him as long as this has been open if they could make it stick.
I think he gets to one of the more peculiar elements of the entire story. The girl was either 17 or she wasn't. Even our FBI with all its problems can easily determine someone's actual birth date. If she was 17 and she's a cooperative witness, then it's an easy case to make particularly if she really did travel with him across state lines. If she wasn't 17, then the fact that the FBI is still (apparently) investigating Gaetz is HUGELY suspect and invites (deservedly) all kinds of questions about the propriety and motives of the investigations itself.
Of course, as some others have pointed out, if she had already reached the age of majority when the relationship with Gaetz began, what would be the premise of the alleged blackmail? IOW, who cares if she starts cooperating with the FBI if she was 18 when she started traveling with Gaetz? No one, and certainly not caring enough to pay $4.5M in an initial 'down-payment.'