(NEW YORK) — Tom Barrack, a longtime friend of Donald Trump’s who chaired the committee that raised more than $100 million for his inauguration, has been charged with acting as an agent of a foreign government and obstruction of justice.
Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn said Tuesday that in 2016, Barrack illegally sought to use his influence with the new president on behalf of the United Arab Emirates.
In May 2016, according to the indictment, Barrack “took steps to establish himself as the key communications channel for the United Arab Emirates” to the Trump campaign and, that same month, gave a co-defendant a draft copy of an energy speech then-candidate Trump was preparing to deliver. The co-defendant then sent it to a UAE official and solicited feedback.
“Congrats on the great job today,” court records quoted the Emirati official saying in an email to Barrack after Trump delivered the speech. “Everybody here are happy with the results.”
A spokesman for Barrack, 74, told ABC News that “Mr. Barrack has made himself voluntarily available to investigators from the outset. He is not guilty and will be pleading not guilty.”
At a court appearance in California, where he was arrested Tuesday morning, Barrack was ordered detained after prosecutors described him as “an extremely wealthy and powerful individual with substantial ties to Lebanon, the UAE, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” who “poses a serious flight risk.”
Between May 2016 and October 2017, Barrack “repeatedly promoted the United Arab Emirates and its foreign policy interests during media appearances” after soliciting direction from his co-defendant and UAE officials, the indictment said.
“The defendant promoted UAE-favored policy positions in the Campaign, in the Administration, and through the media, at times using specific language provided by UAE leadership,” assistant U.S. Attorney Jacquelyn Kasulis wrote in the court filing. “The defendant never registered as an agent of the UAE, as public disclosure of his agreement to act at the direction of senior UAE officials would have diminished, if not eliminated, the access and influence that the UAE sought and valued.”
The allegations involving Barrack came to light as part of a House Oversight Committee investigation, ABC News reported in July 2019.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Wednesday he would hold a key test vote on a bipartisan infrastructure deal — even though the Republicans involved in the talks say they won’t give Democrats the votes they need to meet the Senate’s 60-vote threshold to start debate on the bill.
While Schumer’s effort appeared doomed to fail — handing him and President Joe Biden at least a temporary political loss on a top priority — the White House said Wednesday the president was “extremely supportive” of Schumer’s strategy aimed at jump starting negotiations on the measure that would spend $1.2 trillion on “traditional infrastructure.”
“This vote is not a deadline to have every final detail worked out. It is not an attempt to jam anyone,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Wednesday morning.
“According to the negotiators, spurred on by this vote this afternoon –- they are close to finalizing their product,” he argued. “Even Republicans have agreed that the deadline has moved them forward more quickly. We all want the same thing here – to pass a bipartisan infrastructure bill. But in order to finish the bill, we first need to start.”
Key Republican negotiators in the bipartisan group of senators who have been trying to work out the deal say they believe they can finalize it by Monday.
“We are making tremendous progress, and I hope that the majority leader will reconsider and just delay the vote until Monday. That’s not a big ask of him,” GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told reporters Monday morning.
The group huddled over Mexican food and wine behind closed doors for over two hours late Tuesday night, but left without squaring all of their differences on how to pay for package.
Schumer, the Republicans say, is well-aware of their position that waiting until next week to hold a vote would heighten the chances of success.
Negotiators said Tuesday that there are about six remaining issues with the bipartisan bill, the thorniest of which is how to structure spending on public transit systems.
At the same time, the senior lawmaker expects the legislation to be finalized by Monday, and that includes the nonpartisan analyses by various agencies breaking down all of the financing options, how much revenue would be produced, and a final price tag.
Republicans, in particular, will be looking to show that the $579 billion in new spending is fully paid for.
If the vote seems certain to fail, Schumer could switch his vote to the losing side at the last minute, enabling him as majority leader, under Senate rules, to call up the vote again for reconsideration.
The Wednesday vote is to start debate on a shell bill because there is no final bill from the negotiators. It would serve as a placeholder should negotiators strike a final deal.
The measure is separate from a much larger bill Biden and Democrats are pushing that would spend $3.5 trillion on so-called “human infrastructure” such as child care.
Democrats plan to push that through the Senate with no Republican votes, using a budget tool called “reconciliation.”
A federal judge rejected a request from students to block Indiana University’s vaccine mandate this week, clearing the way for the school to require students to get the COVID-19 shot to attend class.
The ruling may set a precedent for future cases about COVID-19 vaccine mandates at universities, according to Eric Feldman, a professor of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, though he cautioned against generalizing too much from the case at hand.
“We’ve got a Trump-appointed judge in a relatively conservative district, dealing with an issue that I think will be a variety of courts,” Feldman said. “My guess is we’re going to see other opinions that track this opinion.”
“The law is on the judge’s side,” he added.
The lawsuit alleged that the university violated students’ rights as well as Indiana’s recently passed vaccine passport law, which prohibits state and local governments from creating or requiring vaccine passports. In the lawsuit, the students claimed they were being coerced into vaccination and that if they did not comply, they would face “the threat of virtual expulsion from school.”
In June, school administrators announced that students would have to verify their vaccination status with the school unless they applied for a medical or religious exemption. Those without exemptions could have their class schedules canceled, their student IDs deactivated and wouldn’t be allowed to participate in on-campus activities, according to the lawsuit.
“This certainly impacts the public interest,” said U.S. District Judge Damon Leichty, who was nominated to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana by President Donald Trump in 2018. However, “the students ‘are not asking to be allowed to make a self-contained choice to risk only their own health’ in making this decision — their decision necessarily bears on the health of other students, faculty, and staff,” the South Bend judge added.
“The balance of harms doesn’t weigh in the students’ favor here.”
Contrary to the students’ claim that they were being forced into unwanted medical treatment, the judge said students could choose from alternatives, including getting a vaccine, applying for a religious or medical exemption, applying for a medical deferral, taking a semester off, going to another school or taking online courses.
“That leaves the students with multiple choices, not just forced vaccination,” Leichty said.
Feldman pointed to Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, a 1905 Supreme Court decision that found public entities have the right to impose vaccine mandates to protect the public’s health. “One would expect based upon Jacobson and many, many cases that have followed, that courts are more likely to support the mandate than to find against it,” Feldman said.
Feldman described the ruling as “awfully detailed and thoughtful” but pushed back on Leichty’s assertion that the constitutionality of vaccine mandates at universities is a novel question. While COVID-19 vaccines are new, universities have long mandated other vaccines for students who attend, Feldman explained. “What arguably makes the COVID-19 vaccine mandate unique is that the vaccines were approved under emergency use authorization, but full approval is inevitable, so that distinction will soon be moot,” he said.
Chuck Carney, a university spokesperson, told ABC News that “when the case was filed, we felt confident in the outcome that we would prevail.” He added, “we appreciate the quick and thorough ruling, which allows us to focus on a full and safe return. We look forward to welcoming everyone to our campuses for the fall semester.”
Indiana lags slightly behind the national average in vaccinations. As of Monday, 46% of residents had received at least one dose, and 44% were fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By comparison, 57% of Americans have gotten at least one shot, and 49% are fully vaccinated.
(WASHINGTON) — After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday rejected two of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s recommendations for the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, McCarthy said he would pull all his Republican nominees unless she reverses course.
Pelosi rejected two of McCarthy’s recommendations — Reps. Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio, a staunch defender of former President Donald Trump.
Banks and Jordan both voted to overturn the election results on Jan. 6 and Pelosi said their appointments could impact “the integrity of the investigation.”
“I have spoken with him this morning about the objections raised about Representatives Jim Banks and Jim Jordan and the impact their appointments may have on the integrity of the investigation,” she said in a statement. “I also informed him that I was prepared to appoint Representatives Rodney Davis, Kelly Armstrong and Troy Nehls, and requested that he recommend two other Members.
“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” she said.
“The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision,” Pelosi added.
. @SpeakerPelosi tells me she spoke with McCarthy about her decision to reject two of his picks to serve on the Jan. 6th commission.
I asked her why she made the decision. She told me “January 6th.” And left it at that. pic.twitter.com/hYUTu4UjGG
McCarthy shot back at a news conference on Wednesday, saying Pelosi had created “a sham process.”
“House Democrats must answer this question,” he said. “Why are you allowing a lame-duck speaker to destroy this institution? This is the people’s house, not Pelosi’s House.”
He said unless Pelosi changes her mind and seats all five nominees, “we will not participate.” But, he said, Republicans will run their own investigation to answer why the Capitol was “ill-prepared” for the riot — something he and Republicans have blamed Pelosi for.
“Speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken the unprecedented step of denying the minority party’s picks for the Select Committee on January 6,” he said in an earlier statement. “This represents an egregious abuse of power and will irreparably damage this institution. Denying the voices of members who have served in the military and law enforcement, as well as leaders of standing committees, has made it undeniable that this panel has lost all legitimacy and credibility and shows the Speaker is more interested in playing politics than seeking the truth,” it read in part.
The House Select Committee was expected to hold its first hearing on Tuesday.
House GOP Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., on Tuesday signaled some of the lines of inquiry Republicans would try to advance — calling for an examination of “the whole array of political violence that led up to Jan. 6 and still has gone on after that” along with the security posture on Capitol Hill before the insurrection.
“There have been many questions raised about why there hasn’t been a higher National Guard presence,” Scalise said, hitting on a point McCarthy drove home on Wednesday.
As to how Republicans would respond to Democrats calling for GOP members to testify under oath about Jan. 6, Scalise said he would “let members of the committee discuss that and debate that.”
Asked at his press conference if he was still prepared to testify about his phone call with Trump during the riot, McCarthy said his phone call is “out there.”
“The question is, you make a phone call after people are in the Capitol to advise the president of what’s going on, doesn’t get to the answer of why were we ill-prepared,” he said. “That’s really playing politics, and it really shows if that’s the issue that they want to go to, before they want to drive, we don’t get all the answers.”
President Joe Biden did not answer shouted questions on the Jan. 6 commission developments while departing the White House Wednesday, but the White House issued a statement emphasizing that Biden stands behind Pelosi’s decision to reject two of the Republican lawmakers.
“The President has made clear that the shameful events of January 6th deserve a full, independent, and transparent investigation to ensure something like that never happens again, and he has full confidence in the Speaker’s ability to lead that work,” White House spokesperson Michael Gwin said in a statement.
(WASHINGTON) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday she rejects two of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s five recommendations for the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol — Reps. Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio.
Banks and Jordan both voted to overturn the election results on Jan. 6 and Pelosi said their appointments could impact “the integrity of the investigation.”
“Monday evening, the Minority Leader recommended 5 Members to serve on the Select Committee,” Pelosi said in a statement. “I have spoken with him this morning about the objections raised about Representatives Jim Banks and Jim Jordan and the impact their appointments may have on the integrity of the investigation. I also informed him that I was prepared to appoint Representatives Rodney Davis, Kelly Armstrong and Troy Nehls, and requested that he recommend two other Members.”
. @SpeakerPelosi tells me she spoke with McCarthy about her decision to reject two of his picks to serve on the Jan. 6th commission.
I asked her why she made the decision. She told me “January 6th.” And left it at that. pic.twitter.com/hYUTu4UjGG
“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” she said.
“The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision,” Pelosi said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday she rejects two of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s five recommendations for the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol — Reps. Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio.
Banks and Jordan both voted to overturn the election results on Jan. 6 and Pelosi said their appointments could impact “the integrity of the investigation.”
“Monday evening, the Minority Leader recommended 5 Members to serve on the Select Committee,” Pelosi said in a statement. “I have spoken with him this morning about the objections raised about Representatives Jim Banks and Jim Jordan and the impact their appointments may have on the integrity of the investigation. I also informed him that I was prepared to appoint Representatives Rodney Davis, Kelly Armstrong and Troy Nehls, and requested that he recommend two other Members.”
. @SpeakerPelosi tells me she spoke with McCarthy about her decision to reject two of his picks to serve on the Jan. 6th commission.
I asked her why she made the decision. She told me “January 6th.” And left it at that. pic.twitter.com/hYUTu4UjGG
“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” she said.
“The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision,” Pelosi said.
McCarthy reacted to the news in a statement of his own, calling Pelosi’s decision to reject his selections “unprecedented.”
“Denying the voices of members who have served in the military and law enforcement, as well as leaders of standing committees, has made it undeniable that this panel has lost all legitimacy and credibility,” McCarthy said. He went on to accuse the Speaker of being “more interested in politics than seeking the truth.”
“Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees,” McCarthy concluded, “Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts.”
The House Select Committee was expected to hold its first hearing on Tuesday.
House GOP Whip Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana, on Tuesday signaled some of the lines of inquiry Republicans would try to advance — calling for an examination of “the whole array of political violence that led up to Jan. 6 and still has gone on after that” along with the security posture on Capitol Hill before the insurrection.
“There have been many questions raised about why there hasn’t been a higher National Guard presence,” Scalise said.
As to how Republicans would respond to Democrats calling for GOP members to testify under oath about Jan. 6, Scalise said he would “let members of the committee discuss that and debate that.”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
That’s the latest message in a hot new merchandise drop for National Tequila Day that aims to help provide food security to hospitality workers as they continue to rally back from the throes of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Creative executive Dylan Hattem — founder of DS Projects, the company behind This T-Shirt — launched the charity-driven brand at the onset of the pandemic with a focus on authenticity and purpose to “help the people who power the restaurants and bars you love.”
Now, as patrons are able to once again saddle up to bars safely, they can do it in style with a custom tee made by This T-Shirt that also benefits the restaurant industry.
The merch-for-good brand teamed up with the Tequila Don Julio Fund to create an exclusive unisex tee. The net proceeds from each sale will be donated to No Us Without You, a non-profit that provides food security to undocumented immigrants, many of whom are the backbone of hospitality service in the greater Los Angeles area.
The shirt design is emblazoned with the phrase “Save Bars. Drink Tequila” on the front in a trendy, bright blue serif font. The back of the shirt contains a list of seven classic tequila cocktails in various large, bold typefaces: margarita, Paloma, Anejo old fashioned and tequila sunrise, to name a few.
The pre-shrunk premium cotton is also made from recycled material, and wearing it can serve as a reminder to support devoted bartenders, restaurant staff and hospitality workers — not to mention it can serve as a conversation starter to inspire more interest in the charity’s efforts.
The unisex T-shirts cost $40, with $37 per sale donated. It comes in six sizes, ranging from small to 3XL, and is available online through Sept. 20, 2021, while supplies last.
(EL DORADO, Calif.) — A couple whose gender reveal celebration triggered the El Dorado Fire in California last year that killed a firefighter and left 13 injured has been charged.
Refugio Manuel Jimenez Jr. and Angela Renee Jimenez each were charged with one felony count of involuntary manslaughter, the San Bernardino County District Attorney Jason Anderson announced Tuesday.
Other charges include three felony counts of recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury, four felony counts of recklessly causing a fire to inhabited structures and 22 misdemeanor counts of recklessly causing fire to property.
The El Dorado Fire sparked on Sept. 5, 2020, when the couple and their young children set off a smoke bomb at a gender reveal ceremony at El Dorado Ranch Park in Yucaipa, at the foot of the San Bernardino Mountains.
The device ignited dry grass on the hot day, authorities said. Despite trying to douse the flames with a water bottle, strong winds fanned the fire and it ripped through the wilderness and national forest land, fueled by extremely dry conditions, Cal Fire said at the time.
The fire burned over 22,000 acres across San Bernardino and Riverside counties and forced the evacuations of hundreds of residents, officials said.
Charles Morton, 39, a 14-year veteran firefighter, died while fighting the flames. The blaze also injured two other firefighters and destroyed several residential structures, prosecutors said Tuesday.
“He’s fighting a fire that was started because of a smoke bomb — that’s the only reason he’s there,” Anderson said.
The defendants were arraigned in court on Tuesday and entered not guilty pleas. They were released on their own recognizance.
If convicted on all counts, they could face sentences in the “lower teens to low twenties” in terms of years, Anderson said.
The charges for the couple are seen as a warning to others as much of the western U.S. remains hot and dry, with wildfires still spreading and more than 18 million Americans under heat alerts.
(GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba) — Following the transfer of the first Guantánamo Bay inmate of the Biden administration this week, remaining detainees at the offshore prison are hoping that a change in policy from the Trump years will bode well for their release, according to testimony obtained by ABC News.
Moroccan national Abdul Latif Nasser, 56, was released into the custody of his home country and reunited with his family on Monday after being held without charge for 19 years at the Guantánamo Bay detention center, on a U.S. naval base in Cuba. The U.S. Department of State authorized Nasser’s transfer five years after he was initially cleared for release during the Obama administration.
“The United States is grateful to the government of Morocco for its willingness to support ongoing U.S. efforts to close the Guantánamo Bay Detention Facility,” a State Department spokesperson told ABC News on Tuesday. “The Biden Administration remains dedicated to a deliberate and thorough process focused on responsibly reducing the detainee population and ultimately closing of the Guantánamo facility.”
Nasser’s departure made him the first inmate to be transferred from the facility since 2016, and leaves the number of remaining detainees at 39. In testimony shared exclusively with ABC News by U.K.-based legal charity Reprieve, which represents several Guantánamo detainees, those still inside the camp expressed hope in their prospects of freedom under President Joe Biden, after a Trump-era policy of refusing to release more detainees. They appealed to the 46th commander in chief to ensure their release.
Of the remaining Guantánamo detainees, 10 have been cleared for release, 10 are part of the military commissions process and two have been convicted, a senior administration official told a press briefing on Monday. The rest are eligible for review, and several of those inmates spoke about their hopes for release in the testimony shared by Reprieve.
Khalid Qassim, a 44-year-old Yemeni citizen, was denied recommendation for transfer out of Guantánamo Bay by the interagency Periodic Review Board last year, due to “his continued refusal to answer questions regarding pre-detention activities,” which the board said includes “involvement” in “basic and advanced training” from al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Qassim’s lawyers argue he was captured for a bounty and that his capture and detention is a case of mistaken identity due to false confessions under torture.
“I saw the national anthem and Biden speaking,” Qassim said in a conversation with his lawyer in January, two days after Biden’s inauguration, shared with ABC News. “You know, it used to almost be exciting when you saw Trump speak. Every time it was something new. What he said, he would say crazy things, how he loves dictators, things like this. It’s good to not hear some crazy talk.”
“Now it’s the attorneys’ work,” he added, “and the work of people like Kamala Harris or Nancy Pelosi to make sure we go home.”
In an op-ed published by The Guardian in 2017, Qassim wrote: “I have never been charged with a crime and I have never been allowed to prove my innocence. Yet I am still here.”
Ahmed Rabbani, a 51-year-old Pakistani citizen born in Saudi Arabia, is also being held in indefinite detention at Guantánamo Bay. He has not been recommended for transfer or charged with a crime but has been detained since 2004. He was named in the historic 2014 Senate Select Committee Report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s detention program as having been subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which he has described as “torture, pure and simple.”
“I would tell [Biden] I want to touch my child,” Rabbani said in a conversation in January, shared with ABC News. “I would tell him that I would like to die in the laps of my children. I do not want to go in a coffin or a body bag. I want justice. I have been held for political reasons, and I have nothing to do with the political reasons.”
Afghan national Asadullah Haroon Gul, 39, has been been detained at Guantánamo Bay without trial since 2007. He was captured by Afghan forces while serving as a commander of the now-former Hezb-i-Islami militia, known as HIG, which once fought alongside al-Qaida and the Taliban against the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan. The U.S. government detained Gul on the claim that he had regular contact with senior leadership within the al-Qaida and Taliban ranks and may have useful information regarding ongoing operations. But Gul’s lawyers argue that his war ended in 2016, when the HIG struck a peace deal with the Afghan government.
“I think Biden is serious about a lot of things,” Gul said in a conversation in June, shared with ABC News. “If we talk about justice I do not see any reason why I should not be released from here.”
Reprieve and other advocacy groups, such as the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Center for Victims of Torture, welcomed Nasser’s release but said that further action to speed up the closure of Guantánamo Bay is needed.
“Abdul Latif Nasser’s release shows how easy this process can be when there is political will, and that it can be done safely,” Reprieve’s deputy director, Katie Taylor, told ABC News on Wednesday. “We’re taking the Biden administration at their word. They say they want to close Guantánamo and the first step is to transfer the remaining men who have been cleared for release, followed by others who have never been charged with a crime.”
The anesthesia medication ketamine is showing increased promise as a treatment for people experiencing depression who haven’t found relief with other prescription medications.
Though ketamine is known for its recreational use as a party drug, it can also be prescribed legally by doctors. In recent years, ketamine has become more accessible for those struggling with depression. In 2015, there were fewer than 60 ketamine clinics in the U.S. Three years later, there were more than 300, according to the journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences.
Generic ketamine isn’t specifically approved as a depression treatment, but U.S. doctors are often allowed to prescribe Food and Drug Administration-approved medicines “off-label” for another use.
A growing body of evidence has shown ketamine, which has been used since the 1970s in the field of anesthesia, can be successful in treating depression and suicidal behaviors. In fact, ketamine is part of a growing field of research into whether drugs that have traditionally been viewed as illegal psychedelics or party drugs could, in certain contexts, help people with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and other behavioral health and psychiatric disorders.
In 2019, the FDA approved Spravato, a ketamine-related nasal spray drug, given in conjunction with antidepressants that has been shown to help people with treatment-resistant depression. But many clinics offer generic ketamine, often in the form of intravenous infusions.
Dr. Steven Mandel, founder and president of Ketamine Clinics Los Angeles, said because ketamine is already a low-cost generic drug, it’s unlikely that a pharmaceutical company would pay for the process that would be needed to get the drug approved specifically as a depression treatment.
“For a medicine like ketamine that is already approved and available, adding a new indication for the treatment of depression would probably cost tens of millions — if not hundreds of millions — of dollars,” Mandel said. “No one wants to spend that money.”
But ketamine’s unique status can create problems for patients. Ketamine’s use for depression is off-label and it is typically not covered by health insurances. Because of this, “there are some access issues,” said Dr. Panagiota Korenis, a psychiatrist and associate professor at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
“It’s often limited to a subset of the population that can pay out of pocket or be a part of a trial,” she said.
There are also certain risks associated with ketamine.
“It is a drug that can be abused potentially,” said Korenis, who noted that patients typically need to be treated in the clinic and typically cannot take multiple doses of the medication home with them.
Nevertheless, Korenis is hopeful that ketamine may prove itself as another powerful option for those with depression.
“Ketamine certainly is being shown to be a medication of interest and one that has potential for the future,” said Korenis.
Experts debate whether ketamine is a psychedelic and able to produce similar altered states of consciousness as MDMA and psilocybin, which have shown healing properties in some studies.
But many clinics are opting to administer ketamine in a manner similar to psychedelics in clinical trials. Ketamine-assisted psychotherapy, or KAP, is a combination of ketamine and therapy that is similar to psychedelic-assisted therapy used in recent carefully controlled clinical trials.
For example, MDMA, also known as molly or ecstasy, is a psychedelic drug that is now being studied in controlled therapy settings as a possible treatment for PTSD. But no psychedelic treatments are FDA-approved, meaning doctors cannot administer them outside of a clinical trial. MDMA is illegal for recreational use in the U.S.
For those who are unable to get into a clinical trial of psychedelics like MDMA and psilocybin, KAP may be the closest legal equivalent.
“Ketamine works for depression and suicidality — it works quickly, it’s safe,” said Mandel. “For the other medicines, we just don’t know. They seem to have great early promise, but we do need a lot more data and a lot more time before we can fully embrace them.”
Psychedelics like MDMA and psilocybin may require a couple of more years until they receive FDA approval, according to Rick Doblin, Executive Director of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies. In the meantime, Mandel hopes more patients learn about ketamine as an option for depression.
“Ketamine should be available to anyone suffering from these afflictions,” said Mandel.
Nicholas Nissen, M.D., is an author, host of the “Brain Health with Dr. Nissen” podcast and a contributor for the ABC News Medical Unit.
