(WASHINGTON) — Bipartisan members of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee have fired off a letter to Secretary Denis McDonough alleging that the VA flouted congressional intent when it approved bonuses totaling nearly $11 million to senior executives — meant for other workers helping process new health benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances.
Democratic chairman John Tester of Montana and Republican Jerry Moran of Kansas, along with 11 other senators from both parties, are demanding more information about the VA’s approval of bonuses to senior executives in the central office in Washington.
The VA’s inspector general found in a May 9 report that the funds, appropriated by the Pact Act as recruitment incentives for “critical skill” workers, were improperly given to the executives, some of whom took home more than $100,000.
Congress intended that the money be used to hire and retain specialists needed to process billions in new benefits for veterans dealing with health issues from being exposed to burn pits, Agent Orange and other toxic hazards.
The average bonus paid out was over $55,000, the report said, compared to incentive payments for non-executive staff of just over $8,000.
An aide to the Senate committee told ABC News some VA officials questioned the bonus payments but did not “speak up because of … ingrained culture.”
The letter, first obtained by ABC News, says the inspector general referred the cases of nine senior executives to the Justice Department, which declined to pursue a criminal investigation. The senators say they “remain seriously concerned” about what could have been a conflict of interest in which executives chose to dole out bonuses for themselves or their senior peers.
The committee is seeking the documentation that justified the payments as a part of a request for data and information that would be “a first step” in assuring funds from the Pact Act are being used according to the intent of Congress and VA policy, the aide said.
“VA’s flagrant misuse of recruitment and retention incentives … is unacceptable and deeply concerning,” the senators said in their letter.
They said they share the concerns of the inspector general and “senior officials who initially raised the alarm” about the awards that were paid out to an “unspecific group of senior executives based in Washington, D.C.”
The senators are also seeking information on recoupment of the bonuses. Most executives returned the money or agreed to do so in September, but 19 challenged the decision, according to the inspector general report.
Some resigned after being told they needed to pay back the bonus money. It’s unclear whether the VA will be able to recoup bonuses from those who’ve resigned.
Tester said he “takes seriously” the issue of firing officials over the incident, the committee aide said, but is fact-finding and pressuring McDonough for information before making any calls for discipline.
“This report must serve as the beginning of the end of these inconsistent management and oversight structures and an opportunity to strengthen the Department,” the senators wrote to McDonough.
President Joe Biden speaks at a campaign rally in Philadelphia, May 29, 2024. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — As New York City jurors deliberate over whether to convict former President Donald Trump on charges that he falsified business records to hide a payment to an adult film star from the American public before the 2016 election, it’s still not clear how President Joe Biden would address a potential guilty verdict.
Such a verdict would create an unprecedented situation: a major candidate for president convicted on criminal charges. The trial could also result in a hung jury or a not guilty verdict.
While generally speaking, running against a convicted felon could be a political gift, the Biden campaign is unlikely to dramatically alter its messaging if the jurors find Trump guilty, a senior campaign official told ABC News.
The only way to stop Trump is at the ballot box, the official said, that Trump’s future is up to voters, not the court.
Biden has largely made just in-passing references to his opponent’s trial.
On the first day of the trial, in April, when a reporter asked Biden if he would watch coverage of the proceedings, the president shook his head, “no.”
Two days later, while discussing Trump’s economic record at a Pittsburgh event, Biden noted that his predecessor “is busy right now” — a reference to the ongoing trial.
That same week, in Scranton, Pennsylvania, the president criticized Trump’s treatment of women, a possible veiled reference to the trial, where Stormy Daniels, the pornstar Trump paid off, described leaving a sexual interaction with Trump “shaking.” Trump has long denied the sexual encounter.
Speaking about being put on a most-eligible bachelors list after his first wife died, Biden said, “Unlike the guy running, I didn’t take advantage of any [women].”
As Biden and Trump challenged the other to debate, Biden said he knows Trump was “free on Wednesdays” — a dig that stemmed from Trump’s hush money trial not being in session on Wednesdays. Biden’s campaign even sold “Free on Wednesdays” t-shirts.
Asked on Wednesday how much attention Biden has paid to the Trump trial as jurors deliberate, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said she hadn’t spoken to the president about it.
“The president is focused on the American people — delivering for the American people,” Jean-Pierre said in response.
Biden campaign aides have been similarly coy.
“Through sunny days and stormy nights, Joe Biden’s campaign isn’t about fighting through his own trials, tribulations and personal grievances,” James Singer, a campaign spokesman, wrote in a statement during the trial’s opening week.
The campaign broke precedent this week, however, dispatching actor Robert De Niro and two former police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to downtown Manhattan to speak to reporters near the courthouse.
“I love this city. I don’t want to destroy it. Donald Trump wants to destroy not only the city, but the country, and eventually he can destroy the world,” De Niro said.
Michael Tyler, a campaign communications director for the Biden campaign, nevertheless tried to distance the press conference from the trial.
“We’re not here today because of what’s going on over there,” he said, pointing to the courthouse. “We’re here today because you all are.”
(AUSTIN, TEXAS) — Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales narrowly defeated his GOP opponent in Tuesday’s high-profile runoff race to represent Texas’ district that includes the cities of Uvalde and Eagle Pass — with only a few hundred votes between them.
The Associated Press projected that Gonzales will win the Republican primary runoff election for Texas’ 23rd Congressional District. He faced off against Brandon Herrera, an activist and internet personality who runs a YouTube channel called “The AK Guy” that features videos of Herrera testing out and building guns.
There appears to be a razor-thin margin between the candidates. As of Wednesday morning, according to unofficial election results from the Texas Secretary of State, Gonzales leads with 50.69% of the vote, with around 15,000 votes; followed by Herrera with 49.31%, around 14,600 votes. (Voter turnout was relatively low, as it is for many runoffs in general.)
Gonzales declared victory hours before the projection.
“The future of America remains as bright as ever. Thank you #TX23 for continuing to place your faith in me,” Gonzales wrote on X on Tuesday night.
It is possible that Herrera could request a recount, as the difference between the vote count is less than 10%, which aligns with Texas’ recount rules. That endeavor would be at his own expense and he would only get the money back if the recount changed the result.
Gonzales found himself in such a narrow runoff after getting only 45% of the vote in Texas’ March 5 Republican primary. In Texas local or state elections, the state holds runoff elections if no candidate gets a majority of the vote (over 50%). Herrera received about 25% of the vote in March.
The subsequent runoff pitted Gonzales, a moderate-leaning Republican, against Herrera, a newcomer aligned with the more hard-line wing of the party.
Gonzales, who was first elected to the Republican-leaning seat in 2020, has faced criticism from the state’s Republican Party and from others on the right, including the Texas Republican Party, ever since he voted for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act gun control legislation in 2022, which Congress passed after the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.
Gonzales’ vote on the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was a subject of attacks from Herrera, who campaigned heavily on gun ownership rights.
Gonzales has continued to defend his record, including on the border, and his moderate tone on gun control legislation, including the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Asked on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday whether he thinks the vote eventually caused the runoff, Gonzales said, “I am in a runoff for a reason. Part of that was that vote. And, you know what, I knew it at the time.”
The incumbent still received strong backing from the Republican establishment during his run, including endorsements from Speaker Mike Johnson, Rep. Elise Stefanik, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and other well-known statewide and national officials.
Herrera had picked up support from some key Republican figures, including Reps. Matt Gaetz and Bob Good.
Gonzales had a very strong fundraising advantage over Herrera, and has benefited more than his opponent from outside spending, including from super PACs that placed ads on airwaves and online, according to financial filings from this past cycle (both before and after the initial primary) and an analysis by OpenSecrets.
Herrera framed the heavy spending supporting Gonzales as an indication of his own momentum and of Gonzales’ desperation.
(NEW YORK) — Former President Donald Trump has been making history these past few months, running a third straight presidential campaign while under multiple criminal indictments.
His legal fate is now in the hands of a jury in New York, where he’s charged with falsifying business records to disguise alleged a hush money payment to an adult film actress. The payment, prosecutors say, was designed to hide an alleged sexual encounter from voters shortly before the 2016 election.
The trial has fueled speculation over how politically damaging a conviction would be, with a recent ABC News/Ipsos poll finding that a fifth of Trump’s supporters said they would either reconsider their support (16%) or withdraw it (4%) if that happened.
But as the jury deliberates, Republican strategists told ABC News that the other side of the coin — an acquittal or hung jury — could offer the presumptive GOP nominee a chance for vindication and a political boost.
“If this jury is hung or doesn’t convict him, it is a huge shot in the arm to him. … I just think it gives him fresh wind under his wings, a breath of fresh air and he gets to undo the shackles and go out there and rail against this two-tiered system of justice,” said veteran GOP strategist Dave Carney. “It would give him a whole new talking point, and I think he would feel the burden lifted. I think it would make him a better candidate.”
Testimony at the New York trial was sometimes dominated by sordid details of Trump’s purported encounter with actress Stormy Daniels — which he denies — to revelations that Michael Cohen, the one-time Trump fixer turned harsh critic, stole from Trump’s company.
The jury’s verdict will likely be similarly head-turning, both given the prospect of a former and possibly future president being on trial amid both parties’ efforts to claw out even the slightest advantage in a presidential race anticipated to hinge on razor-thin margins in just a few swing states.
And in a race where the 538 national polling averages have barely budged, even Trump’s foes view a possible acquittal as a rare opportunity for him to boost his chances in November against President Joe Biden.
Mike Madrid, an anti-Trump GOP strategist and Lincoln Project co-founder, noted that the former president has a “fundamental problem with the base,” noting recent primaries in which former South Carolina GOP Gov. Nikki Haley has won as much as 20% of the vote despite having dropped out of the race in March.
“A lot of that’s gonna come back, it’s not like he’s gonna lose 20%,” Madrid said. “But if he loses 10%, he’s gonna lose in big fashion. So, what happens to those people that are already predisposed to get up and vote against him when he’s not running against anybody? Does an acquittal help? Yeah.”
“What it does is, it prevents leakage of a candidate that is already facing a historic problem with his base,” he added of a possible acquittal. “That’s what this does, it stops the bleeding.”
On top of that, the New York case is likely the only one of four Trump cases that’ll actually make it to trial before Election Day, meaning an acquittal could help him paint himself as both a victim of a weaponized legal system and cleared of any wrongdoing in all of his indictments.
“He’s thrown them all into one pot together and declared them all partisan witch hunts, despite the fact that they are completely different in the seriousness and import of the various allegations,” said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. “An acquittal is verification of everything that Trump has said about at least this trial, and probably others.”
Strategists predicted any Trump crowing over a potential acquittal could be supercharged by the New York setting for the trial — a city that gave him less than a quarter of the vote in 2020.
“If he’s acquitted, he gets to do the victory lap and use that as a mantra that It was just politically charged and even in Antifa, communist-laden New York City, whatever he’s going to say, even they acquitted him, and that’s how much of a sham this is,” Madrid said.
Trump has already demonstrated an ability to claim he’s been cleared of wrongdoing, regardless of the facts.
The then-president in 2019 claimed “complete and total exoneration” after special counsel Robert Mueller declined to bring charges against him in his investigation into allegations of collusion with Russia in the 2016 race — a mischaracterization of the details of Mueller’s report but a decision that allowed Trump to declare victory nonetheless.
And while Trump has been able to hit the trail in between days in court, an acquittal in the New York case could free him up to discuss a broader range of issues beyond his legal travails.
“It gives him a chance to focus like a laser beam on the economy and indicting Biden and his incompetence,” Carney said. “If Trump doesn’t have to carry the baggage of the lawsuit, I think it gives him the freedom to really, really lay out his agenda and indict the president for lack of actions or the actions that caused this. And that’s what people care about.”
Still, Trump has lacked message discipline in this and past campaigns, possibly hindering his ability to seize on beating the New York case. And Democrats cast doubt on the idea that an acquittal would fundamentally change the perceptions of a man who spent decades in the public eye and four years in the White House.
“I think it can make people who are already enthusiastic angrier and more enthusiastic,” said New York Democratic strategist Jon Reinish, “but I don’t think it does anything to those who are in the middle.”
Yet already, the cases themselves appeared to provide Trump a polling bump while he was still running in a crowded 2024 GOP primary, leading some Republicans to suggest the pump is primed for another boost should the jury fail to convict the former president.
“If the legal cases against Trump themselves have boosted Trump in the polls, which it appears they have, because people see wrongdoing with the cases, it is not a stretch to believe that if he’s acquitted, that’s just going to lead to a boost for Trump,” said one GOP strategist supporting Trump.
National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby speaks during the daily briefing in the Brady Briefing Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2024. (MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Biden administration on Tuesday expressed sympathy after dozens of civilians were killed in an Israeli airstrike in Rafah over the weekend, but signaled it would wait for a full Israeli investigation to play out before taking any action.
“You’ve all seen the images, they’re heartbreaking, they’re horrific. There should be no innocent life lost here as a result of this conflict,” National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby said during a White House press briefing.
“Israel, of course, has a right to go after Hamas. And we understand that this strike did kill two senior Hamas terrorists who are directly responsible for attacks against the Israeli people,” he continued.
But eliminating those two Hamas targets cost at least 45 Palestinians their lives and inflicted gruesome injuries on scores of others when the strike ignited a large fire that tore through a nearby encampment, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.
The strike is the single deadliest attack since Israel launched its offensive in Rafah more than two weeks ago and graphic images from its aftermath have prompted international fury, further isolating Israel on the international stage and escalating pressure on the Biden administration to pull back military support.
In a statement issued Tuesday, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the attack “in the strongest terms,” declaring “the horror and suffering must stop immediately.”
Although officials across Washington mourned the loss of life in Rafah, they indicated they would wait for more answers about the circumstances surrounding the strike to come to light before responding any further.
“As a result of this strike on Sunday, I have no policy changes to speak to,” Kirby said. “It just happened. The Israelis are going to investigate it. We’re going to be taking great interest in what they find in that investigation, and we’ll see where it goes from there.”
When ABC Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce pressed Kirby on whether the White House believes the strike was “precise and proportional” as the administration said was necessary, he said he would not get ahead of the full IDF investigation.
And while Kirby did condemn the loss of life in Rafah, he was careful not to criticize Israel directly.
After an initial review of the strike, the Israel Defense Forces said the strike was targeted and munitions used in the attack could not have caused such a large blaze — that something else must have fueled it — pointing to what it said was a Hamas weapons depot in the vicinity as a possible cause.
The IDF also rejected claims that the strike directly hit an area designated by the Israeli government as a safe zone for Palestinian civilians, saying the target is located more than a kilometer-and-a-half — or a little under a mile — away.
As Israel conducts a more comprehensive probe into the incident, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said the U.S. would press the country’s government to “present those facts publicly, so we along with the rest of the world can make the kind of assessments that we need to be able to do.”
While a full investigation will likely take weeks to complete, President Joe Biden already is facing intensifying scrutiny for what critics say is his vague “red line” for Israel’s latest military offensive.
Earlier this month, Biden vowed he would halt shipments of some U.S. bombs to Israel if the country’s forces were to “go into Rafah.”
U.S. officials later said he was referring to a major invasion — “smashing” into the heavily populated city in southern Gaza — but they have yet to specify exactly what would trigger consequences for Israel, saying only that they don’t want to see military operations reach the same scale as those Israel used in Khan Younis and Gazan City earlier in the war.
So far, the Biden administration has defined Israeli military activity in Rafah as “limited,” but UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini said on Tuesday that warfare in the area had already prompted a mass exodus — forcing one million people to flee in search of safety.
The McCombs Avenue grade separation under construction during a high-speed rail project in Kern County, Calif., April, 19, 2022. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Congressional Republicans are demanding information from Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on what they call a “highly questionable” high-speed rail project in California, according to a letter first obtained by ABC News.
The ambitious plan aims to build a lengthy high-speed rail corridor that would ultimately connect Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and several cities in between. California voters first approved the initiative in a 2008 ballot measure.
But, the “California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) still has not completed a single segment of the system, the total estimated cost has ballooned to $128 billion and counting, and there is no expected completion date,” according to the letter from Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the ranking member on the Senate Commerce Committee, and Missouri Rep. Sam Graves, chairman of the House Transportation Committee.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority said work is underway on the first 171-mile stretch of railway from Merced to Bakersfield, and that the overall project has created more than 13,000 jobs statewide, according to a May press release.
But Cruz and Graves said the project has faced a series of delays and isn’t nearly close to fully funded, including an extra $2.5 billion still needed for the Merced section currently under construction and slated for completion between 2030 and 2033.
The lawmakers are now demanding the Department of Transportation brief both committees and provide documents on the status of project, particularly focusing on a recent federal grant of $3 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to the California High-Speed Rail Authority.
“Despite evidence that continues to show that the California High Speed Rail project has critical issues indicating there is no reasonable path forward for successful completion of the project…the Biden administration continues to allocate substantial federal taxpayer dollars to this highly questionable endeavor,” their letter read.
In response to the letter, a Department of Transportation spokesperson told ABC News, “High-speed rail will revolutionize travel and expand economic opportunity here in America. We’re not only supporting projects that are underway, and, in the case of California, already employing thousands of people– we’re also building a pipeline of potential projects across the country that will take shape in the decades to come.”
The move by GOP lawmakers comes as President Joe Biden continues to tout infrastructure improvements and investments in things like high-speed rail from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law on the 2024 campaign trail as one of his signature achievements.
The law, signed by Biden in 2021, authorized $1.2 trillion for transportation and infrastructure spending with $550 billion dedicated for new programs. Both Cruz and Graves voted against the legislation, despite it providing billions of dollars in funding for their states.
“Politics are politics. This project has been a political football from the beginning,” Brian Kelly, CEO of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, told ABC News in a statement. “The fact is, where we are under active construction, creating jobs and investing into the local economy, the work of this project has turned opponents into supporters. As we continue to advance high-speed rail into other parts of the state we expect to see that continue.”
The authority said it continues to pursue funding to complete the entire first phase of its project, which will cover San Francisco to Los Angeles.
(WASHINGTON) — The Democratic National Committee will move to conduct virtual proceedings to certify President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party nominees before Ohio’s Aug. 7 ballot certification deadline, and before their in-person convention beginning Aug. 19, the party confirmed to ABC News on Tuesday.
This could take a significant moment away from Biden and the Democratic party as the official nomination at convention is historically met with fanfare and celebration, but Biden will become the official nominee virtually, perhaps without the typical pomp and circumstance. The campaign said that while there will be a virtual roll call and nomination of Biden and Harris, the DNC will still hold in-person ceremonial events for each process at their convention during the week of Aug. 19 in Chicago.
The move came moments before the Ohio Senate convened on Tuesday for a special session to address Biden’s ability to appear on the state’s general election ballot in November — which the GOP-led legislature has tied up with an effort related to campaign finance, something Democrats oppose. The bill passed in the Ohio Senate on Tuesday without any Democratic support.
DNC Chair Jamie Harrison said that Democrats will themselves address the conflict and “land this plane on our own.”
“Joe Biden will be on the ballot in Ohio and all 50 states, and Ohio Republicans agree. But when the time has come for action, they have failed to act every time, so Democrats will land this plane on our own,” he said in a statement provided to ABC News.
“Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice,” Harrison added.
Ohio’s Republican Gov. Mike DeWine still urges a legislative remedy to the ballot access concerns.
“While I understand the Democratic National Committee has just today proposed a work-around to help get President Biden on the Ohio ballot, it is prudent legislation be passed to get this done. As I previously said, we do not want to leave something so basic as having the sitting President of the United States on the ballot to others when this can-and should-be done legislatively. It’s the right thing to do,” DeWine said in a statement.
“For these reasons, it is important that a bill or multiple bills that accomplish these common-sense measures come to my desk right away this week. It’s the right thing to do,” DeWine added.
Ohio Democratic Chair Liz Walters said that the party would not “trade Ohioans’ ability to hold their government accountable for presidential ballot access.”
“Once again, Republican politicians at the statehouse are playing politics with our democracy,” she said in a statement. “Just like when they attempted to take away our rights and freedoms last year, Ohio Republicans have shown their blatant disregard for the rights of voters, and we won’t let them get away with another effort to hold our democracy hostage.”
Neither the party nor the Biden campaign have confirmed a date when this virtual nomination could happen, but it will definitely be before the Aug. 7 Ohio ballot certification deadline.
To conduct the virtual roll call, the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee will need to vote on Tuesday, June 4, on a resolution to propose changes to the call to allow for virtual party proceedings. Then, in the coming weeks, the resolution will be voted on by the full DNC membership. Once the resolution is adopted, the remainder of the pre-nomination process will follow the standard order of operations.
(COLUMBUS, Ohio) — As Ohio lawmakers convened on Tuesday for a special session to address President Joe Biden’s ability to appear on their general election ballot in November, the Democratic National Committee said it would move to conduct virtual party proceedings to certify Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party nominees — a move that works around Ohio’s ballot certification deadline.
Ohio’s Senate Republicans ultimately passed a bill that would both allow Biden to appear on their general election ballot in November, but also bar foreign contributions to ballot issue campaigns. The latter was a direct response to GOP objections to the “Issue 1” campaign last year that constitutionally protected abortion in the state. The move came without Democratic support, however, with members seemingly empowered to vote against the legislation following the DNC announcement.
“We don’t need your fix. The DNC just released a statement several minutes ago that says we’re going to hold a virtual vote of our delegates across the country and nominate President Biden to the ballot,” State Sen. Bill DeMora said on Tuesday. “We don’t want a legislative fix that holds the voters and their rights to the whim of the majority.”
Biden’s ballot access had been uncertain in Ohio because of a conflict over the president’s official party nomination and state election certification deadlines. The DNC’s move to hold virtual nominations bypasses the ballot access concerns in the state.
Ohio law mandates that political parties confirm their presidential candidates 90 days before the general election — on Aug. 7. While Biden wouldn’t have been the official nominee until the DNC convenes on Aug. 19, after the deadline — however the virtual nomination helps ensure that Biden is nominated before the Aug. 7 deadline.
The legislation Ohio Senators passed Tuesday extended the deadline to 74 days, which is Aug. 23, following the DNC. The House still needs to take up the bill.
The Ohio Senate on Tuesday considered just one bill that combined both the ballot issue fix for Biden and also the banning of foreign contributions to issue campaigns. Democrats had objected to Ohio Republicans’ efforts to vote push the two issues through during the special session, arguing that the GOP has made a legislative fix to address ballot certification — a measure that has been granted to both parties in previous election cycles — a political one.
“This special session and the combination of these two bills is a political trade made to try and extract some price to be paid for President Biden being on the ballot,” said House Democratic Whip Dani Isaacsohn during a House Government Oversight Committee meeting on Tuesday morning.
Republicans have denied the assertion that they were being “partisan” in trying to combine the issues.
“Which side is really being partisan? Because if we all agree that foreign election interference and foreign contributions into our elections are a problem, then why would somebody vote no on this bill?” said Republican Sen. Rob McColley.
Ohio is the only state where Biden would not qualify to be on the ballot this November. Alabama had also encountered conflicts between their ballot certification and Biden’s official nomination, but their legislature unanimously passed a fix in May that was then signed by Gov. Kay Ivey, a Republican.
“The fact that we couldn’t — like Alabama and any other state that had to deal with the issue this time — just pass a clean bill and put Biden on the ballot and deal with all the other issues … separately. But to put them together has been the thing of heartburn for all of us,” said Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, a Democrat, Tuesday on the floor.
The special session to fix the issue legislatively was urged by Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, last week.
DeWine also endorsed the GOP-led initiative to bar foreign money from issue campaigns, however.
The Biden campaign has maintained that the president will “be on the ballot in all 50 states.”
“Election after election, states across the country have acted in line with the bipartisan consensus and taken the necessary steps to ensure the presidential nominees from both parties will be on the ballot. And this election is no different — Alabama, with full Republican support, and Washington State are already taking action to ensure that voters can exercise their right to vote for the candidate of their choice in November,” Charles Lutvak, a spokesman for the Biden campaign, said in a statement to ABC News.
ABC News’ Mike Pappano contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — With prosecutors and defense gearing up for the end of trial in former President Donald Trump’s Manhattan hush money case, legal observers said, in their opinion, prosecutors appear to have made a strong case, but a lot is riding on closing arguments and jury instructions.
Both sides have rested their cases with the defense only calling two witnesses to the stand including Robert Costello — an attorney and longtime Trump ally — who sought to discredit one of the prosecution’s key witnesses — former Trump fixer Michael Cohen.
Both sides are delivering their closing arguments to the jury on Tuesday, and Judge Juan Merchan will instruct the jury on the law ahead of deliberations expected to begin on Wednesday.
Legal observers told ABC News they felt the prosecution did a good job of laying out a motive for why the charge of falsifying business records was allegedly committed as well as the underlying campaign finance or election interference crimes, which potentially bumps up the charges to felonies.
The prosecution laid out the investigation and connected Trump to Cohen’s actions, but it is possible a jury may not be convinced, according to Brian Buckmire, trial counsel at Hamilton Clarke and ABC News legal contributor.
Two “reasonable people” could look at the facts and evidence presented and have two opposite opinions. One person could see that Trump falsified business records and allegedly committed some of the crimes he has been charged with and that “it is reasonable that he intended to defraud the American people and the government by falsifying these documents,” Buckmire said.
While another could see that “this case is built upon an individual that I don’t believe that being Michael Cohen. And so I can’t believe each and every element of this crime, because of the person that’s giving me the information,” he said.
“So, did they prove their case?” Buckmire said. “But it just specifically depends on the 12 that they selected.”
“It really comes down to the closing arguments, whoever gives them, on either side, really has to button up this case in a way that says, ‘my side is correct.’ And the prosecutor having the last word of closing arguments — that to me is a big advantage,” Buckmire said.
A third expert said that he thought an acquittal is “out of reach” for Trump.
“This was a winnable case. It still is not a slam dunk, in my view, having been there every day for the prosecution,” CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen said in an interview with Jim Acosta on Monday. “I think the odds of conviction are somewhere upwards of 80%.”
“In part because of this scattershot approach, the defense is not really gunning for an acquittal. That’s out of reach here,” he opined. “What they are hoping for is one angry juror.”
Another legal observer who said the prosecution has made a strong case, said it is possible the judge may declare a mistrial if it takes the jury too long to deliberate.
“I’m curious to see how long the jury’s out. That’s always an interesting thing to see. Particularly, if they’re having trouble reaching a decision, when does the judge then decide that there’s been enough time for the jury to have been out that they declare a mistrial and a hung jury?” said Chris Timmons, a former prosecutor and ABC News legal contributor.
“I’d be concerned about the hung jury in this case,” Timmons previously told ABC News.
“One of the jurors who made it onto the jury said that he got his news from two different sources, one of which being Trump’s Truth Social. So I think he’s going to be more likely to want to believe anything that the president says,” Timmons said, referring to what the juror had consumed prior to the trial beginning.
Jurors have been instructed to not read about or listen to discussions of the case in the media.
Did the prosecution prove their case?
Another expert told ABC News the prosecution has done a good job of arguing the facts in this case.
“Even though Trump keeps arguing that the facts, that people are lying and so forth, I don’t buy any of that and I don’t think the jury is going to buy any of that,” Gregory Germain, an attorney and Syracuse professor of law, told ABC News.
“The judge needs to do a good job on those jury instructions, or there’s a likelihood, I think, that the case will get reversed on appeal if they get a conviction,” Germain said.
Buckmire said Merchan said he will stick closely to the model instructions set out by state criminal jury instructions, unless there is something the protection or defense want him to deviate from.
Other legal observers are unsure whether the prosecution has made its case to the jury.
“The pieces are all there. But is it there beyond a reasonable doubt?” former Brooklyn prosecutor Julie Rendelman told the BBC. “I don’t know.”
“It only takes one juror,” she added.
Cohen’s testimony could also pose issues for the jury.
“You are relying on a witness who in many respects … comes with a larger load of baggage than others,” Rendelman said. “It makes it a bit more difficult to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.”
For a conviction, the prosecution needs to prove to the jury that Trump knew he allegedly falsified the records and that it was being done for political reasons — to keep the public from knowing that he made a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels – Timmons said.
“It’s a little bit of a technical charge and so the jury may struggle with that,” Timmons said.
Did the defense hurt their case by putting Costello on the stand?
The defense has made two contradicting theories of defense in their case — which could be a problem for them, Buckmire said.
“In the defense’s own case, they argued that this is just democracy, this is just the way that things are done, that Donald Trump may have known about the ins and outs of this deal, but it’s not a crime,” Buckmire said.
Buckmire added that Bob Costello’s testimony could have harmed the defense case.
“But, Bob Costello came on and said that Michael Cohen told him that Donald Trump knew nothing about this, didn’t know the ins and outs of this. And so for the defense, what are they going to argue in summation? Because both things can’t be true,” Buckmire said. “That can backfire on them.”
Cohen testified that he lied to Costello.
Costello’s testimony was a “disaster” for the defense, a legal observer told Courthouse News.
“If anything, I think it made the people’s case on this whole pressure campaign issue even stronger than it was,” retired New York judge George Grasso told Courthouse News.
Grasso said it is likely that Costello’s behavior on the stand, which Merchan to excuse the jury and press from the court room, was like that of a “mob lawyer” and likely didn’t help the defense.
“I think the jury saw enough of this. I think the jury probably, legitimately, has a lot of respect for the judge,” Grasso said, adding that Costello’s behavior “probably turns off the jury.”
Buckmire said he thinks the trial is likely to result in a hung jury or the jury could find Trump guilty.
“I don’t think the defense gave anyone who believes their side enough ammunition to convince the other side,” Buckmire said.
(WASHINGTON) — The Democratic National Committee will move to conduct virtual party proceedings to certify President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party nominees before Ohio’s Aug. 7 ballot certification deadline, and before their in-person convention beginning Aug. 19, the party confirmed to ABC News on Tuesday.
This will take a big moment away from Biden and the party — the official nomination at convention is typically met with fanfare and celebration, but he will become the official nominee virtually, without the pomp and circumstance.
The move came moments before the Ohio Senate convened on Tuesday for a special session to address Biden’s ability to appear on their general election ballot in November — which the GOP-led legislature has tied up with a separate bill related to campaign finance, something Democrats oppose.
“Joe Biden will be on the ballot in Ohio and all 50 states, and Ohio Republicans agree. But when the time has come for action, they have failed to act every time, so Democrats will land this plane on our own. Through a virtual roll call, we will ensure that Republicans can’t chip away at our democracy through incompetence or partisan tricks and that Ohioans can exercise their right to vote for the presidential candidate of their choice,” DNC Chair Jamie Harrison said in a statement provided to ABC News.
The Biden campaign said that while there will be a virtual roll call and nomination of Biden and Harris, the DNC will still hold in-person ceremonial events for each process at their convention during the week of Aug. 19 in Chicago.
Neither the party nor the Biden campaign have confirmed a date when this virtual nomination could happen, but it will definitely be before the Aug. 7 Ohio ballot certification deadline.
To conducting the virtual roll call, the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee will need to vote on Tuesday, June 4, on a resolution to propose changes to the call to allow for virtual party proceedings. Then, in the coming weeks, the resolution will be voted on by the full DNC membership. Once the resolution is adopted, the remainder of the pre-nomination process will follow the standard order of operations.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
ABC News’ Mike Pappano contributed to this report.
