Politics

(PHOENIX) — Arizona lawmakers are reconvening on Wednesday after a week’s recess and could soon take up legislation to repeal a controversial 19th-century ban on almost all abortions in the state, which the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled is enforceable.

The Arizona state House is scheduled to hold a floor session first, followed by the state Senate.

The House may vote on House Bill 2677, introduced by Democratic state Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton to repeal the 1864 abortion law, which predates Arizona’s statehood and only provides exceptions to save the life of the pregnant woman.

The Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling reviving the ban immediately roiled the politics of the key swing state — being celebrated by abortion opponents and denounced by abortion access advocates and Democrats, while top Republicans, including Donald Trump, said it went too far.

The ban remains temporarily on hold but Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said this week that the earliest it could take effect is June 8.

Anyone found guilty of violating it will face two to five years in state prison. Mayes previously said she would not prosecute providers under the law.

Arizona Right to Life, an anti-abortion group, on Wednesday will hold a rally outside the state Capitol in support of the 1864 ban.

The Arizona for Abortion Access coalition is also set to hold a rally outside of the state Capitol.

How could Arizona’s House repeal the abortion ban?
Hamilton’s repeal bill has already passed two readings in the Arizona House, setting it up for a potential floor vote as soon as Wednesday — after one more step.

According a timeline detailed by The Arizona Republic, which two Democratic legislative aides confirmed to ABC News, here’s what the process would be:

A member would bring up a motion to waive the normal procedures needed for the bill that would repeal the abortion ban law, since the proposal has not yet been heard in a committee.

If that waive motion succeeds, it can go up for a full House vote and would need 31 votes to pass — a simple majority of legislators in the 60-member chamber.

As there are 29 Democratic members in the Arizona House, the bill needs just two Republican votes to succeed. The GOP members to watch are Reps. Matt Gress, David Cook and Tim Dunn.

Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma said last week that lawmakers will not “rush legislation on a topic of this magnitude without a larger discussion,” and Republican lawmakers quashed an earlier, Democratic-led effort to quickly repeal the ban.

“We as an elected body are going to take the time needed to listen to our constituents and carefully consider appropriate actions,” Toma said last week.

Republican leaders in both chambers are not expected to support the legislation. The Center for Arizona Policy, which has led the fight against abortion rights at the Legislature and successfully lobbied for myriad restrictions, is calling on GOP lawmakers not to repeal the 1864 ban either.

If the Arizona House votes yes on the bill, however, there are still more steps and procedures before the ban is formally repealed and off the books.

The proposal, after passing the state House, would then go to the state Senate for yet another vote to waive rules on the bill.

Two Republicans are needed to join Democrats in the state Senate as well, and Sens. Shawnna Bolick and T.J. Shope have said they’d support the repeal.

The legislation may have to go through further procedural steps given that it has not yet been read in the state Senate. That includes a rule requiring bills be heard on three separate days, so it will likely take at least three more days.

To repeal the 1864 ban immediately, lawmakers would have to include an emergency clause in their language but get a two-thirds majority vote for passage. Otherwise, anything approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor does not take effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session.

Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, opposes the ban.

“A law passed in 1864 by 27 men is the reason why my 22-year-old daughter now has fewer rights than I did at her age,” she wrote on X on Tuesday. “It’s absolutely outrageous. I’m committed to ensuring that future generations have the essential freedoms they deserve.”

She has reiterated that an executive order she signed in 2023 prohibits county attorneys from going above Mayes, the Arizona attorney general, who has said her office is still analyzing legal options and is continuing plans over what to do if litigation efforts are unsuccessful, including how Arizona can support abortion providers.

Potentially dueling ballot measures on abortion
The Arizona for Abortion Access campaign is working to get a potential constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot in November enshrining abortion access. The campaign has said that they have gathered more than 500,000 signatures – surpassing the necessary threshold.

The proposed amendment would amend Arizona’s Constitution to prohibit the state from legislating against abortion up until fetal viability, which is around 24 weeks into pregnancy; and it enshrines other abortion protections into law.

The Republican-led House counsel in Arizona has, separately, internally proposed a plan to rival the state’s abortion rights ballot initiative by adding ballot initiatives of their own in the wake of what they call “court chaos” on abortion policy, according to a presentation leaked Monday and shared with ABC News.

That proposal includes potentially legislatively-referred ballot initiatives that would compete with the Arizona for Abortion Access measure — to either return to a 15-week ban that had been in effect before the 1864 ruling or offer a six-week ban, with exceptions in both cases for rape, incest, fetal abnormalities and to save the life of “the woman” in the language presented.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Jury selection began Monday in former President Donald Trump’s first criminal trial over allegations that he falsified business records to conceal criminal conduct. Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels are among the witnesses expected to testify in the weeks-long Manhattan trial.

Trump is accused of allegedly engaging in a scheme with his then-attorney Michael Cohen and others to influence the 2016 election by suppressing negative information about Trump’s alleged sexual encounter with adult actress Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. He has denied the affair and all wrongdoing in the matter.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg impaneled a grand jury to hear the hush money case in 2023, which eventually voted to indict Trump.

Trump is facing 34 counts of falsifying business records. The New York trial is expected to run for six to eight weeks.

Here are the key players in the trial:

Michael Cohen
Trump’s former attorney allegedly coordinated the catch-and-kill scheme and directly sent a $130,000 hush-money payment to Daniels in the days ahead of the 2016 election.

Cohen was reimbursed $420,000 in 2017 — through 12 $35,000 payments — for that hush-money payment and other costs, and the records to falsely characterize those payments as legal expenses form the underlying 34 criminal counts in the New York case.

Cohen worked as an executive vice president at the Trump Organization and personal counsel to Donald Trump, describing himself as Trump’s “fixer.”

A lawyer in New York private practice who lived in one of Trump’s buildings, Cohen joined the Trump Organization after helping the former president with a real estate dispute and other favors.

In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to tax evasion, lying to Congress and violations of campaign finance law — when he made payments to Clifford. Cohen spent more than a year in federal prison before finishing his sentence in home confinement.

Cohen’s congressional testimony prompted the New York Attorney General to open its investigation into the Trump Organization’s finances. Cohen testified as a key witness in Trump’s civil fraud trial, where he alleged that Trump directed him and then Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to fraudulently inflate his net worth.

Judge Arthur Engoron in February ordered Trump and his company to pay more than $450 million in the civil lawsuit and banned the former president and his sons from running companies in New York for three years. Trump denied all wrongdoing and said he will appeal.

 

Stephanie Clifford a.k.a. Stormy Daniels
Daniels is an adult film actress who allegedly had a sexual encounter with Trump at a golf tournament in 2006. Trump has denied the allegations of an affair. In the days following the release of the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape in 2016, Cohen negotiated a deal to secure Daniels’ silence for $130,000, according to prosecutors.

Daniels has given multiple media interviews, written a book and featured in a documentary in the years after the story became public in 2018.

Daniels claims that she never wanted the incident itself to become public and that her sexual relationship with the former president was consensual. 
In March, Daniels told ABC’s “The View” that she is “absolutely ready” to testify at Trump’s criminal trial. 
“I’m absolutely ready. I’ve been ready. I’m hoping with all of my heart that they call me,” Daniels said. “I relish the day that I get to face him and speak my truth.”

Daniels unsuccessfully sued the former president for defamation in 2018 after Trump suggested her allegations about being threatened to keep quiet about her encounter with Trump was a “total con job.” A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, determined that Trump’s statement fell within the “‘rhetorical hyperbole’ normally associated with politics and public discourse,” and ordered Daniels to pay Trump’s legal fees.

Rhona Graff
Graff worked as Donald Trump’s longtime executive assistant at the Trump Organization, serving as the gatekeeper to the former president after she joined the company in 1987.

Trump described Graff as his “very loyal secretary” in the 1997 book “The Art of the Comeback.”

Serving as a senior vice president at the Trump Organization, Graff did not join the 
White House but remained a point of contact for anyone seeking Trump’s attention.

Graff was subpoenaed to answer questions by the New York Attorney General about the Trump Organization’s finances, including the company’s document retention policy and Trump’s oversight of his financial statements.

 

Hope Hicks
Hope Hicks served as Trump’s 2016 campaign press secretary, coordinating with Trump in the weeks ahead of the election as his aides and advisors attempted to silence long-denied allegations of his affair with Daniels, according to court records from a federal investigation.

Hicks held multiple senior level roles in the Trump White House. She no longer works for Trump.

Madeleine Westerhout
Westerhout served as Trump’s executive assistant for the first two-and-a-half years of his presidency, describing herself as Trump’s “primary gatekeeper.”

Westerhout also served as the director of Oval Office operations for eight months but left her role in August 2019 after she shared details of her work — including reportedly making comments about Tiffany Trump — at an off-the-record event with reporters.

“While Madeleine Westerhout has a fully enforceable confidentiality agreement, she is a very good person and I don’t think there would ever be reason to use it. She called me yesterday to apologize, had a bad night. I fully understood and forgave her! I love Tiffany, doing great!” Trump wrote on X (then Twitter) on August 31, 2019.

 

Jeffrey McConney
The Trump Organization’s longtime controller, McConney received the fraudulent invoices from Cohen and began processing them, according to prosecutors.

McConney prominently testified as witness for both the state and defense at Trump’s civil fraud trial last year, where he broke down to tears on the witness stand when questioned about his departure from the Trump Organization.

“To be hit over the head every time with a negative comment over something is just really frustrating, and I gave up,” McConney testified.

 

Karen McDougal
McDougal is a former Playboy model who alleged that she had a 10-month affair with Trump in 2006 and 2007. Trump denied having a sexual relationship with McDougal.

Executives at the National Enquirer contacted McDougal in June 2016 with an offer to tell her story, with the intention to kill it, according to prosecutors. American Media Inc. eventually paid McDougal $150,000 for her story with the understanding that the Trump Organization would reimburse AMI for the payment, according to prosecutors.

 

David Pecker
David Pecker served as the longtime chief executive of American Media Inc., which published the National Enquirer.

Shortly after Trump announced his presidential campaign, Pecker met with Trump and agreed to act as the “eyes and ears” of the campaign by looking out for and killing negative stories about Trump, according to the Manhattan DA.

Pecker allegedly directed a 2015 deal to pay $30,000 to a former Trump Tower doorman — regarding the false allegation that Trump allegedly fathered a child out of wedlock — to take place because of his prior agreement with Cohen and Trump. Cohen allegedly insisted that the deal stay in place even after AMI discovered it was false. AMI paid the doorman, according to the Manhattan DA.

 

Dylan Howard
Dylan Howard worked as the editor-in-chief of the National Enquirer between 2014 and 2020.

Howard allegedly communicated with Cohen to buy McDougal’s story and to coordinate Daniel’s hush-money payment, according to prosecutors.

Trump and Cohen agreed to reimburse AMI for the payment and AMI signed an agreement in September 2016 to transfer then rights to the story to the Trump Organization for $125,000, but the deal fell through before the reimbursement took place, according to prosecutors.

Deborah Tarasoff
Tarasoff worked in the Trump Organization’s accounting department and allegedly helped arrange for Cohen to be reimbursed for Daniel’s hush money payment.

 

Keith Davidson
Davidson is an attorney who negotiated the payments for Daniels and McDougal. He is the “Lawyer B” mentioned in the indictment.

In a 2019 interview with ABC News, Davidson described how the release of the Access Hollywood tape served as the “catalyst” for the hush money payment to Daniels.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Sen. Bob Menendez may blame his wife when he stands trial next month on political corruption charges, according to a court document unsealed Tuesday after news organizations, including ABC News, fought to make it public.

The potential line of defense was filed secretly earlier this year, before the judge agreed Menendez and his wife would be tried separately due to Nadine Menendez’s undisclosed medical condition. The senator’s trial is scheduled to begin May 6 in Manhattan federal court.

Defense attorneys said Menendez could take the stand in his own defense and implicate his wife by suggesting she kept information from him and he was unaware of her allegedly illegal activities.

“While these explanations, and the marital communications on which they rely, will tend to exonerate Senator Menendez by demonstrating the absence of any improper intent on Senator Menendez’s part, they may inculpate Nadine by demonstrating the ways in which she withheld information from Senator Menendez or otherwise led him to believe that nothing unlawful was taking place,” the filing said.

Menendez is accused of accepting, cash, gold bars and other perks from New Jersey businessmen in exchange for official favors to benefit the businessmen and the governments of Egypt and Qatar. He has pleaded not guilty.

The senator announced last month that he will not be running for a fourth term as a Democrat in the fall.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senators are expected to square off Wednesday, largely along party lines, over whether to proceed with a full-scale trial of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of immigration policy and the southern border.

House GOP managers delivered two articles of impeachment against Mayorkas Tuesday, and the next step in the proceedings calls for senators to be sworn in as jurors, sitting as a court of impeachment, on Wednesday afternoon at 1 p.m. EDT.

But after senators take the oath, how things go from there is a somewhat open question.

Democrats control the Senate, and if they stick together, they could quickly vote to dismiss — or table — the articles without ever holding more of a trial. It would take 51 votes.

Democratic leaders have kept their cards close to the vest about managing the articles, but there’s little appetite among Senate Democrats to hold a full-scale impeachment trial.

Many Democrats believe that the articles of impeachment, which accuse Mayorkas of “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and “breach of public trust” are baseless and politicized.

“Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement,” Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor on Tuesday. “Let me say that again: Impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement. Talk about awful precedents. This would set an awful precedent for Congress. Every time there’s a policy agreement in the House, they send it over here and tie the Senate in knots to do an impeachment trial? That’s absurd. That’s an abuse of the process. That is more chaos.”

Schumer has promised to manage the articles “as expeditiously as possible” but has not said exactly what that would look like.

He’s facing a fight from Senate Republicans, many of whom are enraged at the suggestion that there wouldn’t be a full trial.

“This is raw gut politics,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said during a news conference on Tuesday where he shared the stage with the House impeachment managers.

“What Senator Schumer is going to do tomorrow — it is fatuous, it is fraudulent and it is an insult to the Senate. It is a disservice to every American citizen who believes in the rule of law,” he said.

Beyond complaining, though, there’s very little Republicans can ultimately do to get their demands met if all Democrats stick together.

But it’s not clear that they will.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., faces a difficult reelection fight in increasingly-red Montana this fall. He hasn’t yet said whether or not he would support a motion to dismiss and has repeatedly told reporters he’d wait to make a decision until he’s read the articles.

Notably, when the articles were being read aloud in the Senate by impeachment manager Rep. Mark Green on Tuesday, Tester, who had previously been seated in the chamber, left his seat and headed to the cloak room.

He caught flack for it from Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, during the GOP news conference shortly after.

“Jon Tester was nowhere to be found because apparently it was too frightening to hear the managers imply read the facts of the people that were dying because of policies he supports,” Cruz said.

It’s unclear what Tester will ultimately decide. But if he sticks with his party, there is ultimately very little Republicans can do to force a trial to go on. That doesn’t mean they’ll make things easy.

If Democrats want to quickly table the trial, Republicans are expected to offer a number of procedural points of order that would force votes and could eat up several hours of floor time.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told reporters after a closed-door lunch Tuesday that there’s been an ongoing behind-the-scenes discussion about an agreement that would allow several hours of debate over whether a trial is necessary before a motion to dismiss is ultimately voted on.

“For those of us who would like to have some discussion or debate the potentially offer that we are going to be considering I think offers us an opportunity to build our case,” Tillis said.

Such an agreement would require the consent of all senators, and it’s unclear if that could happen.

Senators might also try to send the trial to a committee for it to be heard, as they’re permitted to do when an impeachment is brought against someone who is not a sitting president.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who has been among those demanding a trial, suggested this might be an “acceptable” outcome.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he will strongly oppose Democratic efforts to quash the impeachment effort, saying it is the chamber’s solemn duty to take the matter seriously.

“The Senate will be called for just the 19th time in our history to rule on the impeachment of a senior official of our government. It’s a responsibility to be taken seriously,” he said.

“I intend to give these charges my full and undivided attention. Of course, that would require that senators actually get the opportunity to hold a trial. And this is exactly what history and precedent dictates. Never before has the Senate agreed to a motion to table articles of impeachment,” McConnell said.

“I’ll strenuously oppose the effort to table the articles of impeachment and avoid looking at the Biden administration border crisis squarely in the face,” he added.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Dozens of prospective jurors poured back into a Manhattan, New York criminal court Tuesday morning for the second day of former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

Seven jurors have been selected so far to decide the legal fate of the first U.S. president ever to face criminal trial. Prosecutors allege that Trump falsified business records related to a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. Trump pleaded not guilty last year and has denied all wrongdoing.

Although the parties estimated that jury selection could take as long as two weeks, on Tuesday, Judge Juan Merchan suggested opening statements could begin this coming Monday.

Here are four of the biggest takeaways from Day 2 of the historic trial:

First batch of jurors selected

By the end of the day on Tuesday, seven jurors — including an oncology nurse, an attorney, a teacher and an IT consultant — were selected.

Although defense attorneys previously argued against holding the trial in New York City, many of the jurors impaneled so far have appeared mainly to have neutral or even somewhat positive feelings about Trump.

At least two of the final jurors expressed positive feelings about the former president.

“He walks into a room, and he sets people off one way or another,” the juror said. “I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy can do all of this. Wow, that’s what I think.”

A woman who works as a teacher, who said she “doesn’t really care for the news,” praised Trump for his outspokenness.

“President Trump speaks his mind,” she said. “And I’d rather that than someone who’s in office who you don’t know what they’re thinking.”

Trump says alleged hush money payment was a ‘legal expense’

In remarks to reporters Tuesday morning, Trump defended himself, pushing back against prosecutors’ allegations that payments made to Michael Cohen were improperly labeled as legal expenses.

“I was paying a lawyer, and I marked it down as a legal expense, some accountant,” Trump said. “I didn’t know. That’s exactly what it was. And you get indicted over that?”

Prospective juror speaks out

Kara McGee — a prospective juror who was excused from the Trump case — told ABC News that she didn’t approve of Trump’s presidency but emphasized the importance of a fair trial.

“I don’t like him, I don’t approve of what he did as president,” said McGee said. “But the right to a fair trial is extremely important. And if this would serve to uphold that, then that would be my priority.”

McGee was excused from the case because of scheduling conflicts with her job.

“No matter what you think about someone as a person, or what other things they may have done, what he is on trial for is a very specific thing that even he deserves the right to a fair trial,” she continued.

Jurors interrogated over anti-Trump social media posts

Proceedings grew contentious Tuesday afternoon after defense attorney Todd Blanche sought to strike prospective jurors based on social media posts that he said contradicted their assertions of fairness.

One woman had posted a video on Facebook of people having a “dance party” on a Manhattan street a day after the 2020 election, which Blanche called “extraordinarily hostile.” Merchan seemed baffled and denied the motion to remove her, saying he found her a credible juror.

But another potential juror was dismissed due to a social media post celebrating the end of Trump’s travel ban, which stated, “Get him out and lock him up.” Merchan agreed to strike the juror, saying the post showed “a desire that Trump be locked up.”

Another man was removed because he recently shared an AI video that mocked Trump, which included a fake Trump saying, “I’m dumb as f—-.”

“I thought it would be funny,” the prospective juror said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, over his handling of the border, were officially transmitted to the Senate on Tuesday.

The House impeachment managers, selected by Republican leadership, walked the two articles through the Capitol led by the House clerk and sergeant-at-arms. The charges against Mayorkas will be read aloud from the Senate dais.

The procession kickstarts trial proceedings in the Senate, where lawmakers will be sworn in as jurors on Wednesday.

House Republicans voted to impeach Mayorkas in mid-February over what they said was his failure to enforce border laws amid a surge in migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. The controversial vote, which had previously failed, was opposed by three Republicans and all Democrats.

The charges accuse Mayorkas of “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and “breach of public trust” — allegations he’s called “baseless.”

A department official, defending Mayorkas, said Congress should have impeached every Homeland Security secretary since the department’s inception if detaining all migrants is a requirement of the job — and no administration has detained 100% of people suspected of crossing the border illegally.

The House impeachment managers include Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and Reps. Andy Biggs, Ben Cline, Andrew Garbarino, Michael Guest, Harriet Hageman, Clay Higgins, Laurel Lee, August Pfluger and Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Top Republicans have demanded a complete Senate trial, but it’s possible Senate Democrats will move quickly to dismiss the charges or send the matter to be heard by a committee.

“It would be beneath the Senate’s dignity to shrug off our clear responsibility and fail to give the charges we’ll hear today the thorough consideration they deserve,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said. “I’ll strenuously oppose the effort to table the articles of impeachment and avoid looking at the Biden administration border crisis squarely in the face.”

Still, chances of a full-scale Senate trial are slim, though exactly how the impeachment proceedings will play out is still unclear.

The Senate has the option to either dismiss the trial outright or to require a committee to hear it instead. Senate Democrats are largely expected to move to dismiss — or table — a trial.

Mayorkas was on Capitol Hill earlier Tuesday to push lawmakers for more funding for the department as he testified about President Joe Biden’s 2025 fiscal year

“The dedicated public servants of DHS deserve full support, and the American people deserve the results a fully resourced DHS can deliver,” Mayorkas told lawmakers.

Mayorkas is only the second Cabinet secretary to be impeached in U.S. history after William Belknap, a former secretary of war, in 1876.

ABC News’ Mariam Khan, Allison Pecorin and Quinn Owen contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Attorney General Merrick Garland told lawmakers on Tuesday he has “complete confidence” in President Joe Biden’s mental fitness for office, despite findings by special counsel Robert Hur whose report issued in February included embarrassing and disputed characterizations about the president’s memory and age.

“If you’re asking me about my own observations as a member of the National Security Council and a member of the president’s Cabinet, I have complete confidence in the president,” Garland said during a House Appropriations hearing.

“I have watched him expertly guide meetings of staff and Cabinet members on issues of foreign affairs and military strategy and policy in the incredibly complex world in which we now face and in which he has been decisive — decisive in instructions to the staff and the subject in making the decisions necessary to protect the country,” Garland added.

The attorney general had faced criticism from some Democrats for not pushing back before against Hur’s descriptions of Biden’s memory in a report that scrutinized the president’s handling of classified records while he was out of office.

“We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter” as the “evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” Hur’s report stated.

Nonetheless, throughout that report, Hur painted a dim picture of the president — one that his political opponents immediately seized on — as sometimes struggling with memory issues and not able to remember when he finished his term as vice president or when his son Beau died.

Biden, his aides and attorneys forcefully rejected that assessment.

“How in the hell dare he raise that?” the president told reporters in a defiant press conference after the report’s release, continuing: “I don’t need anyone to remind me when he [Beau] passed away or that he passed away.”

Under questioning from lawmakers in March, Hur defended how he described Biden’s memory, insisting that “my assessment in the report about the relevance of the president’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair. I did not sanitize my explanation.”

Garland told reporters last month that the suggestion that he could censor or dilute Hur’s report was “absurd,” reasoning it would most certainly cause greater controversy than simply releasing Hur’s report as he had promised previously.

He declined at the time to comment directly on whether he personally believed Hur’s detailed descriptions of Biden’s mental acuity were appropriate to include.

His response on Tuesday was his most extensive personal defense of Biden since the report’s release, even as he told lawmakers he wasn’t seeking to comment on the report directly.

“With respect to domestic policy discussions, these are intricate, complicated questions that he has guided all of us through in order to reach results that are helpful and important and beneficial to the American people,” Garland said. “I could not have more confidence in the president.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson is forging ahead with a plan to try to pass aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan that’s been tied up in a political fight in Washington for months — but will the move cost him his job?

Johnson laid out a proposal to split the $95 billion foreign aid package passed by the Senate into three separate bills, one for each country, and a fourth bill loaded with conservative priorities.

Johnson spoke with President Joe Biden on Monday before unveiling his plan to his conference, two sources told ABC News. A White House official said it was waiting to see the plan “in detail” before discussing with Democrats how to proceed.

But Johnson’s approach is already causing more rancor with the right flank of his party, as a second member said Tuesday he would join Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s motion to remove him from the speaker post.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said he told Johnson in a closed-door conference meeting he would cosponsor Greene’s motion, which she introduced last month. Massie said he suggested Johnson “pre-announce” his resignation so Republicans can get to work on finding a new speaker and avoid any lapse in leadership.

ABC News Senior Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott asked Johnson for his response to Republicans who say that if he doesn’t step aside, they may oust him over this issue.

“I am not resigning,” Johnson answered. “And it is, in my view, an absurd notion that someone would bring a vacate motion when we are simply here trying to do our jobs.”

Johnson continued, “It is not helpful to the cause. It is not helpful to the country. It does not help the House Republicans to advance our agenda.”

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — After voting in February to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of the southern border, proceedings are expected to head to the next stage on Tuesday, when the articles of impeachment are transmitted to the Senate.

One thing is clear: This is not going to look like the impeachments we’ve seen in the last few years since a full-scale trial on the Senate floor is not likely, according to senators and leadership aides — despite what many House and Senate Republicans want.

The House voted to impeach Mayorkas on Feb. 13 by a vote of 214-213 over what Republicans claimed was his failure to enforce border laws amid what they call a “crisis” of high illegal immigration, allegations the secretary denied as “baseless.”

The DHS has blasted the impeachment efforts.

“Without a shred of evidence or legitimate Constitutional grounds, and despite bipartisan opposition, House Republicans have falsely smeared a dedicated public servant who has spent more than 20 years enforcing our laws and serving our country,” DHS spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said in a statement. “Secretary Mayorkas and the Department of Homeland Security will continue working every day to keep Americans safe.”

The House had originally planned to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate for consideration last week, but Speaker Mike Johnson delayed transmission in part at the urging of Senate Republicans, who hoped a delay would give the Senate more time to prepare and debate the merits of having a trial, which many Republicans want.

Despite that delay, chances of a full-scale Senate trial remain slim. Exactly how the impeachment proceedings will play out is still unclear — the Senate has the option to either dismiss the trial outright or to require a committee to hear it instead.

Senate Democrats are largely expected to move to dismiss — or table — a trial, but that would require every Senate Democrat to vote together to accomplish that, and Republicans will object.

Here’s how the proceedings are expected to play out:

House managers walk articles of impeachment to Senate

The next formal steps are expected to get underway at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday.

On Monday, in what’s called an “engrossment ceremony,” Johnson signed the articles, calling on the Senate to hold a trial.

On Tuesday, the articles will be ceremoniously walked across the Capitol, led by the House clerk and the House sergeant-at-arms and followed by the House impeachment managers. The articles will go from the House chamber through the Capitol rotunda to the doors of the Senate.

The House impeachment managers are: Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, Reps. Andy Biggs, Ben Cline, Andrew Garbarino, Michael Guest, Harriet Hageman, Clay Higgins, Laurel Lee, August Pfluger and Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The sergeant-at-arms will then announce the House impeachment managers on the floor of the Senate, who — once received — will be escorted to the well of the Senate, in front of the dais.

The articles will then be read aloud and, once done, the manager who presents them will say: “The managers request that the Senate take order for the trial, the managers now request leave to withdraw.”

Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray, D-Wash., will then announce the Senate will notify the House when it is ready to proceed with the trial.

Murray will preside over the Senate trial. Chief Justice John Roberts is not required to preside because it is not the trial of a sitting president.

The House managers will then make a ceremonial walk back to the House.

Senators sworn in as jurors

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said senators will be sworn in as jurors on Wednesday.

“After the House impeachment managers present the articles of impeachment to the Senate, Senators will be sworn in as jurors in the trial the next day,” Schumer’s office said in a statement.

Once the Senate is back in session for the trial, the oath is administered to the Senate as a group. The senators rise from their desks and and raise their right hands in unison.

Murray will then read the oath: “Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, now pending you will do impartial justice according to the constitutions and laws so help you God?”

Senators then come to the dais in groups of four to sign the oath book.

Then the sergeant-at-arms will make the proclamation: “Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye, all persons are commanded to keep silent on pain of imprisonment while the House of Representatives is exhibiting to the Senate of the United States an article of impeachment against Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.”

The Senate then begins voting on the organizational rules of the trial.

This is not likely to be a trial like the previous ones; it will not consume weeks of floor time. However, Senate leaders have been tight-lipped about their precise plans.

How proceedings could play out

One possibility is that the Senate could move very quickly to dispense with the trial. In that scenario, Senate Democrats can make a motion to dismiss — a move that would take only 51 votes.

If the vote reaches that threshold, the trial would be tabled and that would be the end of the matter. Democrats control 51 seats in the Senate, so if they stick together, they can dismiss the trial without any GOP support if they so choose.

While senators have the authority to vote to dismiss the trial, don’t expect most Republicans to agree.

In a letter to Schumer on March 28, Johnson, along with the impeachment managers, called upon Schumer to “fulfill your constitutional obligation to hold this trial.”

“To table articles of impeachment without ever hearing a single argument or reviewing a piece of evidence would be a violation of our constitutional order and an affront to the American people whom we all serve,” they wrote.

Another option is that the Senate votes to send the trial to be heard by a committee.

When someone who is not president of the United States faces trial, the Senate has within its rules the ability to have a special committee of senators hear the whole of the trial instead of the entire Senate.

The committee is called a “trial committee” and it is usually convened via an organizing resolution.

The Senate gets to set its own rules for a trial, so in most impeachment trials, there’s a debate over an “organizing resolution” — a proposed set of rules governing the trial that the Senate must vote to approve. If the Senate were to try to kick this trial to a committee, instructions to do so would likely be in this organizing resolution.

That resolution would be brought up, debated and voted on. If it were approved, the articles would then be kicked to the committee and sent off the Senate floor. Leadership would appoint members (usually six Democrats and six Republicans) to sit on that committee.

House managers would then present their impeachment case to the committee. Lawyers for Mayorkas would have time to present counter arguments.

The committee would make footage of its hearings available to the public and to senators. At the end of the trial, they would present a full report and recommendation to the whole of the Senate. The whole Senate would then vote on whether or not to convict.

The last impeachment to be heard by a trial committee with the impeachment of federal judge Thomas Porteous in 2010.

A final option is that the Senate holds a full-scale trial.

Sources have signaled to ABC News that there will not be an impeachment trial like the ones we’ve come to know from impeachment proceedings of former President Donald Trump.

Though it’s unlikely that we’d see a weekslong trial on the floor of the Senate, it’s still technically possible.

If it does, the Senate would adopt an organizing resolution and then managers would present their arguments.

It would take a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict Mayorkas.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday kicks off a multi-day campaign swing through Pennsylvania, in Scranton, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia — in what his campaign hopes to be a messaging contrast with Donald Trump as the former president goes on trial.

Biden, whom early polls show is in a close race with his predecessor, plans to focus on tax policy versus Trump, including in a stop at the United Steelworkers’ headquarters.

During a meeting with the Czech prime minister, Petr Fiala, on Monday, Biden shook his head “no” when asked by a reporter whether or not he would be watching Trump’s trial.

Rather, he plans to be “talking about the issues” that matter most to Americans, his campaign says, echoing what the White House has long said.

“Donald Trump and his team are gonna have to speak to his legal issues,” said Biden spokesman Michael Tyler, who also attacked Trump’s message of “revenge and retribution,” which he said is “going to be a continuation of the contrast the American people have been able to see since this campaign began.”

On a call with reporters on Monday, Tyler cited Biden’s personal ties to Pennsylvania, saying he sees the world from his “kitchen table” where he grew up in Scranton — while, Tyler argued, Trump sees the world from his “country club” at Mar-a-Lago, a reversal of Trump’s frequent boasts that his business success makes him a better leader.

“Nowhere is that contrast of world views on display more clearly than when it comes to who each candidate believes should be paying more in taxes and who they believe should be paying less,” Tyler said.

While the president regularly stops in Philadelphia, at the heart of a key battleground state, this is the first time he has visited Scranton since August.

His campaign wants to provide something of a split-screen with Trump as the former president’s historic New York trial is underway in which he’s accused of falsifying business records related to hush money paid to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

Trump denies the claims, including the alleged affair, and says he’s being politically persecuted, which the district attorney rejects.

He has regularly attacked Biden over high inflation, immigration and more, labeling Biden as the country’s “worst president.”

Biden’s campaign claims Trump plans to give billionaires tax breaks during his second term, while under Biden “nobody making less than $400,000 a year would see their taxes go up … [and] he would prioritize extending additional tax benefits to help working Americans in areas where they really need it,” said Brian Deese, a senior adviser.

In a memo, Biden’s campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, highlighted the inroads the campaign says it has made in Pennsylvania, a swing state that Biden won by about a 1% margin in 2020, four years after Trump won by slightly less 1%.

Among other assets, the Biden campaign cited seven offices in Philadelphia and surrounding counties. In the month of March, they opened 14 offices around the state in a single week and engaged 1,700 volunteers, they said.

“This election is going to be one by earning and not just asking for each American’s vote,” said Deese, the adviser. “We’re obviously looking at Pennsylvania right now, where the president is spending the week campaigning — and it’s a textbook example of how we’re going to earn those votes.”

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.