Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly on Tuesday called Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s investigation into him a “bunch of bull****” and said he believes it’s about sending a message to retired service members not to speak out against the president.

“This is very performative for him,” Kelly told reporters about the investigation.

Kelly said Hegseth raised the investigation during a closed-door briefing to senators on the military’s campaign in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean Sea targeting boats believed to be carrying drugs. According to Kelly, he asked a question about the boat strikes and Hegseth responded by chastising Kelly and other democratic lawmakers for posting a video urging troops not to follow illegal orders.

Hegseth asked Secretary of the Navy John Phelan to review Kelly for “potentially unlawful conduct” after the Arizona senator was featured in the video with five other Democrats who have served in the military and U.S. intelligence.

The Pentagon confirmed Tuesday in a prepared statement that it was “escalating” its review into Kelly from a preliminary review to an official “command investigation.”

Hegseth has said he believes the video by Kelly and others created confusion among troops and could encourage insubordination. Hegseth said he’s looking into whether the military should call Kelly, a retired Navy captain, back to active duty to face a court martial or some kind of administrative punishment.

On Monday, Kelly’s attorney, Paul Fishman, said in a letter to Phelan that if the Trump administration moves ahead with proceedings against Kelly in any forum, “all appropriate legal action” will be taken.

“To be clear: there is no legitimate basis for any type of proceeding against Senator Kelly, and any such effort would be unconstitutional and an extraordinary abuse of power. If the Executive Branch were to move forward in any forum—criminal, disciplinary, or administrative—we will take all appropriate legal action on Senator Kelly’s behalf to halt the Administration’s unprecedented and dangerous overreach,” Fishman wrote in the letter obtained by ABC News.

Kelly said he hasn’t heard anything from the Defense Department since he retired in 2011 when he was recognized for his 25 years of service.

“This is all bunch of bull****,” Kelly said Tuesday.

Kelly later added: “This is just about sending a message to retired service members, active duty service members, government employees — do not speak out against this president, or there will be consequences.”

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Kelly’s remarks to reporters on Tuesday.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump said Tuesday he’ll deliver a live national address on Wednesday at 9 p.m. from the White House.

“It has been a great year for our Country, and THE BEST IS YET TO COME!” Trump posted on his social media platform.

“I look forward to seeing you then,” he said.

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

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In candid interviews with Vanity Fair, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles opened up about President Donald Trump and his Cabinet over the first year of Trump’s second term.

Wiles took part in 11 interviews that occurred in real time. Two parts of those interviews were published on Tuesday.

In them, Wiles offered unreserved descriptions of top figures in the administration — including Trump, who she said has an “alcoholic’s personality.”

Wiles said Trump, who has repeatedly said he doesn’t drink alcohol, said he “operates [with] a view that there’s nothing he can’t do. Nothing, zero, nothing.”

She called Vice President JD Vance a “conspiracy theorist for a decade” and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought “a right-wing absolute zealot.” Billionaire Elon Musk, she said, was an “odd duck” and “avowed ketamine [user].”

Wiles also weighed in on Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, Musk’s slashing of federal government agencies and programs, the chaotic rollout of Trump’s tariff plans, the administration’s aims for Venezuela and more.

Wiles, responding to Vanity Fair’s articles, said it is a “disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history.”

“The truth is the Trump White House has already accomplished more in eleven months than any other President has accomplished in eight years and that is due to the unmatched leadership and vision of President Trump, for whom I have been honored to work for the better part of a decade,” Wiles wrote on X.

“Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story. I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team,” Wiles added.

ABC News has reached out to Condé Nast, Vanity Fair’s parent company, for comment on Wiles’ criticism.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Wiles on X. 

“Chief of Staff Susie Wiles has helped President Trump achieve the most successful first 11 months in office of any President in American history. President Trump has no greater or more loyal advisor than Susie. The entire Administration is grateful for her steady leadership and united fully behind her,” Leavitt wrote in a post responding to Wiles’ criticism of the articles.

Trump, Bondi and Musk have not publicly responded to the Vanity Fair articles.

Vance, at an event Tuesday in Pennsylvania, said he hadn’t read the Vanity Fair article but responded to Wiles’ remark that he’s been a “conspiracy theorist for the past decade.” Wiles made the comment on Vance while discussing the Epstein files.

“I haven’t looked at the article. I, of course, have heard about it. But conspiracy theorist, sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true,” Vance told reporters.

“And by the way, Susie and I have joked in private and in public about that for a long time,” he added.

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

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Barack Obama told House Democrats at an event on Sunday in Los Angeles that as they focus on trying to win control of the House of Representatives, they should not get caught up in ideological differences within the party and can “sort through” them later, according to excerpts of his comments provided to ABC News.

Ideological arguments within the Democratic Party between its progressive and moderate wings came into sharp focus during 2025’s key elections — particularly in New York City, as Democrats debated over the candidacy of democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani. This past year, Obama campaigned on the ground for the Democratic Party’s Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial candidates and spoke with Mamdani ahead of Election Day.

The party has also been divided over how to handle government funding and the expiration of Affordable Care Act subsidies.

Obama told the lawmakers to “focus” on winning back the Republican-controlled House in the 2026 midterm elections, indicating that after that the party could work more through those ideological divisions.

“Because I promise, when that gets done, we have enormous talent, and we are then going to be in a position, as the next presidential campaign ramps up, to sort through some of the differences,” Obama said, according to excerpts of his remarks obtained by ABC News.

Obama spoke in a conversation with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries at the event, which was hosted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to support House Democrats. The event was attended by Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, around a dozen members of the House, and other party supporters.

Obama said the Democratic Party’s “differences aren’t that big” — but “sometimes they get magnified because that’s the nature of social media.”

But, Obama said, more progressive Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, and moderates such as Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer and the “Blue Dog” Democrats “actually agree in making sure that people have a living wage, they can support a family,” and on issues such as people having health care and not being discriminated against.

ABC News has reached out to the offices of Ocasio-Cortez, Schumer, Sanders and Jeffries about Obama’s remarks.

While some Democrats have “tactical differences,” he added, “that shouldn’t be our primary concern because we’re fighting a bigger fight.”

“Our job is to focus like a laser on this upcoming election. That’s the short term,” Obama said, according to the excerpts.

He also told House Democrats that while the short-term goal is to win back the House, the longer-term goal is to “tell a story” to “bring [Democrats] back in.” But, he added, they won’t be able to bring those people back in “if we don’t win the House of Representatives.”

Obama told lawmakers that the party’s wins in 2025, while not surprising for him, have reenergized the party and show a path forward for discussing issues such as affordability and health care.

“If we bring energy and clarity and commitment to talking about things like affordability and making sure people have health care when they need it, and that they have the ability, if they work hard, to be able to support a family and create a better future for their children and their grandchildren … when we deliver that message, it resonates with people, and we have to have confidence in that,” Obama said, according to the excerpts of his remarks.

The challenge ahead, he told lawmakers later, is how the party strategizes toward the future and what it should do if it does win the House in 2026.

“With that as a bulwark, we’re now able to block some of the worst impulses that are coming out of this White House,” he added, according to the excerpts of his remarks. “We have a platform now to highlight some of the damage that’s already been done, and we can make an argument about how we’re going to deal with some big, long-term problems.”

ABC News’ Benjamin Siegel contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans — led by Speaker Mike Johnson — unveiled Friday a narrow health care package to address rising costs, but the plan does not extend the expiring enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies.

The GOP proposal — which will receive a vote on the House floor sometime next week — would expand the availability of association health plans and what are known as “CHOICE arrangements”; impose new transparency requirements on pharmacy benefit managers to lower drug costs; and appropriate money for cost-sharing reductions to reduce premiums in the individual market.

Association health plans allow employers to band together to purchase coverage.

Notably, the 111-page measure would not funnel additional money into health savings accounts.

“While Democrats demand that taxpayers write bigger checks to insurance companies to hide the cost of their failed law, House Republicans are tackling the real drivers of health care costs to provide affordable care, increase access and choice, and restore integrity to our nation’s health care system for all Americans,” Johnson said in a statement Friday.

Republicans are also discussing staging a vote on an amendment to the health care package that would extend the ACA subsidies. The specifics of the amendment are still being discussed, according to GOP leadership aides.

The Rules Committee plans to mark up the bill at 2 p.m. on Tuesday. The House would then have to vote on an amendment related to extending the subsidies and then the underlying bill before sending it over to the Senate.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, President Donald Trump said he wants a health care plan that would directly funnel aid to patients, adding that money should be given to people for health care through an insurance account.

“I think what most Republicans want to see– what is what I want to see, and I leave it to them, and hopefully they’re going to put great legislation on this desk right here: we want to see all of the money that’s been squandered and given to insurance companies because Obamacare is horrible health insurance,” Trump said.

He added, “And we want the money to go to the people. They’ll go in the form of an insurance account, health care account, or any other form that we can create with a lot of different forms. We want to give the money to the people and let the people buy their own great health care, and they’ll save a lot of money, and it’ll be great,” he continued.

But Trump also kept the door open, slightly, on extending ACA tax credits, saying he was going to “look into” the possibility of doing so with the assurance that an extension deal would come with some caveats that Republicans want.

House GOP leadership aides hope to pass the health care package next week — the last legislative week of 2025 that the House is expected to be in session for. 

 “The Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act will actually deliver affordable health care — and we look forward to advancing it through the House,” Johnson said.

Even if the measure does clear the House, the Senate is not likely to take any further major action on health care next week, leaving those enhanced premium subsidies all but certain to lapse.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries called the Republican proposal “toxic legislation” that doesn’t address the coming hike in ACA premiums.

“House Republicans are not serious about ending the healthcare crisis they have unleashed in this country,” Jeffries said in a statement. “After promising legislation for months, this 11th hour measure fails to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits that tens of millions of Americans rely on to afford their healthcare.”

Jeffries said Democrats are willing to work with Republicans on extending the subsidies, saying: “We are ready to work with anyone in good faith on the other side of the aisle who wants to prevent the Affordable Care Act tax credits from expiring at the end of the month.”

Ahead of the measure being introduced Friday, nearly a dozen House Republicans had publicly defied Johnson by trying to force a vote on extending the expiring subsidies.

As of Thursday, 11 Republicans had signed on to two discharge petitions — one filed by a Republican and the other by a Democrat — that would extend the subsidies.

In the Senate, two competing health care proposals aimed at addressing the expected premium spikes — one championed by Democrats and the other by Republicans — failed to advance earlier this week.  

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters on Friday that the type of munitions used by the military in a Sept. 2 boat strike — including on survivors in a second strike — were “anti-personnel” and designed to ensure the people on board did not survive, not just stop the drug shipment.

In question has been whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s orders to the military was to kill the people on board, stop the drug shipment — or both.

Warner, who has received classified briefings on the strike, also said that U.S. intelligence identified all 11 people on board and each person killed was linked to the drug trade, although the level of their involvement was unclear.

“It’s one thing to be a ‘narco-terrorist’ and another thing to be a fisherman that’s getting paid 100 bucks [who a] couple times a year, runs on one of these boats to supplement his income,” Warner said at a Defense Writers Group event, sponsored by George Washington University.

The Trump administration has defended the military operation as legal because it considers drug cartels “foreign terrorist organizations” that pose an imminent threat to Americans. Since Sept. 2, the military has launched 22 strikes against vessels accused of smuggling illicit narcotics, killing 87 people.

Many legal experts say President Donald Trump’s argument that criminal organizations selling drugs to Americans are “terrorists” is a stretch, although it will likely take months for a federal judge to weigh in.

Warner and other lawmakers have called on the administration to release the full video of the Sept. 2 strikes, which some Democrats have called a potential war crime because it killed two survivors. Lawmakers say they were told the military admiral who ordered the strike said they believed the survivors still posed a threat and were granted legal authority to kill them.  

Warner said he wants other documentation too, including the legal opinion that justified the Sept. 2 strike. Warner said the legal opinion shared with lawmakers in a classified briefing was drafted Sept. 5 — three days after the initial boat strike — and was not shared with Congress until late November.

“I have real questions … Was it altered between Sept. 2 and Sept. 5 because of some of the actions that took place?” he asked.

Warner said he is reluctant to call the Sept. 2 strikes a “war crime” until he has more information, and said he would like to see congressional hearings.

“I am very reluctant, unlike some of my folks, to get to assertions of illegality by Americans or war crimes, because once you make that claim, you can’t take it back,” he said. “And what it would do to morale, what it would do to how Americans view our military, what it would do to how the world views us, is really chilling.”

Hegseth has not held a press briefing to answer questions about the campaign since it begun and he has not testified publicly.

He has defended the administration’s efforts to attack alleged drug boats.

“We’ve only just begun striking narcoboats and putting narcoterrorists at the bottom of the ocean because they’ve been poisoning the American people,” he said at a Cabinet meeting earlier this month.

Hegseth has also expressed support for Adm. Mitch Bradley, the four-star officer who ordered the Sept. 2 military strikes, and his decision that day.

“Adm. Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat. He sunk the boat, sunk the boat, and eliminated the threat. And it was the right call. We have his back,” Hegseth added.

Bradley is being asked by lawmakers to return to Capitol Hill next week to testify.

An aide to the House Armed Services Committee, chaired by Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, said the panel is working to arrange a classified briefing for its members.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The National Trust for Historic Preservation, the privately funded nonprofit designated by Congress to protect historic sites, is suing in an attempt to stop the construction of the White House ballroom.

In a complaint filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for DC, the organization is asking for the project to be stopped until it completes the federal review process standard for federal building projects and seeks public comment on the proposed changes.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever—not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,” the complaint said. “And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in.”

“President Trump’s efforts to do so should be immediately halted, and work on the Ballroom Project should be paused until the Defendants complete the required reviews—reviews that should have taken place before the Defendants demolished the East Wing, and before they began construction of the Ballroom—and secure the necessary approvals,” the complaint continued.

In its complaint, the Trust argues that the project has not been filed with the National Capital Planning Commission as required by law; that it began without an environmental assessment or impact statement as required by the National Environmental Policy Act; and that the construction was not authorized by Congress.

The White House has continued to defend the construction of the ballroom.

“President Trump has full legal authority to modernize, renovate, and beautify the White House — just like all of his predecessors did,” Davis Ingle, a White House spokesperson, said on Friday.

The White House has previously attacked the Trust, saying it is run by “a bunch of loser Democrats and liberal donors who are playing political games.”

It has also argued that the nature of the project on the White House grounds does not require congressional approval, an assertion the Trust is challenging in its lawsuit.

News of the lawsuit was first reported by the Washington Post.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump claimed that he is granting a “full pardon” to Tina Peters, a former Mesa County, Colorado, clerk who was sentenced to nine years on state-level charges for election interference during the 2020 election.

However, the president does not have jurisdiction over state charges, and Colorado officials are pushing back, contending that the president’s promise of a pardon is unconstitutional. Trump’s announcement, which he made on social media Thursday, now likely sets up a legal battle for Peters, who has been seeking a pardon from Trump.

Peters was convicted in August 2024 for giving an individual affiliated with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a Trump ally, access to the election software she used for her county. Screenshots of the software appeared on right-wing websites that promoted false theories that the 2020 election was fraudulent.

Despite President Trump’s repeated assertions that the election was rigged, there were no proven cases of major fraud that affected the outcome.

Trump has repeatedly called for Peters to be released from her nine-year sentence, and on Thursday night said on social media that he was “granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!”

“Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections,” he said.

Trump’s announcement came as the administration attempted to move Peters to federal custody in order to have more jurisdiction over her. The move was denied by the courts.

In August, the president said in a social media post that if Peters wasn’t released, he would “take harsh measures.”

Colorado officials, however, questioned Trump’s authority over Peters’ conviction and pushed back against his claims.

“One of the most basic principles of our constitution is that states have independent sovereignty and manage our own criminal justice systems without interference from the federal government,” Colorado Attorney General Phill Weiser said in a statement Thursday.

“The idea that a president could pardon someone tried and convicted in state court has no precedent in American law, would be an outrageous departure from what our constitution requires, and will not hold up,” he added.

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold added that Peters “was convicted by a jury of her peers for state crimes in a state Court. Trump has no constitutional authority to pardon her.”

“His assault is not just on our democracy, but on states’ rights and the American Constitution,” she said in a statement.

As of Friday morning, no legal action has been taken against the Trump Administration over the president’s announcement.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — As House Speaker Mike Johnson eyes a vote next week on a to-be-announced health care package, a growing number of House Republicans are revolting against leadership by trying to force a vote on extending the expiring Affordable Care Act enhanced subsidies.

Nearly a dozen Republicans — many from swing districts — have signed onto dueling bipartisan discharge petitions to extend and reform the subsidies in the hopes of bypassing leadership and triggering a vote on the House floor. 

This move comes as the subsidies are set to expire at the end of the month, which will prompt health premiums for more than 20 million Americans to soar. 

While Johnson has not yet unveiled the specifics of his plan, an extension of the ACA subsidies is currently not expected to be included in the package. Johnson said the bill will “probably” be unveiled over the weekend ahead of next week’s anticipated vote. 

The speaker and GOP leaders, during a closed door meeting this week, provided Republicans a list of several options to address health care costs, according to multiple sources. Some of those options, sources said, include Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), cost-sharing reductions and making changes to pharmacy benefit managers. 

Lawmakers told ABC News they left that meeting with no clear consensus on how to address health care.

“You’re going to see a package come together that will be on the floor next week that will actually reduce premiums for 100% of Americans who are on health insurance,” Johnson said at his weekly news conference. “The overall system is broken, and we’re the ones that are going to fix it.” 

A group of mainly moderate Republicans, though, want to see the subsidies addressed by Congress before the expiration date. 

The discharge petitions would need 218 signatures for a vote to occur in the House, and it’s unclear if enough Democrats will provide their support to reach that threshold.

Most House Democrats have signed onto another petition led by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to extend the subsidies for three years. 

Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania filed a discharge petition that would extend the subsidies for two years, establish income caps for enrollees and regulate pharmacy benefit managers.

New Jersey Democrat Rep. Josh Gottheimer filed a separate but similar bipartisan discharge petition to extend the subsidies with reforms. 

As of Thursday, 11 Republicans had signed on to both discharge petitions.

Johnson threw cold water on the efforts by vulnerable Republicans hoping to hold a vote on the subsidies. 

“We’re working on a package of legislation that will reduce premiums for all Americans, not just 7% of them,” he said. 

Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, who supports both discharge petitions, warned about the impacts not extending the subsidies will have on the midterm election for Republicans.  

“I think it will be used like a sledgehammer a year from now. The reality will be bad,” he said. 

Bacon said if Congress fails to act, “all our constituents are going to be paying a lot more for their premiums and that’s unacceptable.” 

In the Senate, meanwhile, two competing health care proposals aimed at addressing the expected premium spikes — one championed by Democrats and the other by Republicans — failed to advance on Thursday, leaving the Senate back at square one.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem found herself in the hot seat on Capitol Hill on Thursday, defending herself from Democrats who sharply questioned the Trump administration’s hardline immigration actions.

In one notable exchange, Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., asked Noem if DHS had deported any military veterans — and she said the department has not. 

Magaziner then referred to a tablet with a man named Sae Joon Park on the screen, joining the hearing by Zoom.

Magaziner said Park is a Purple Heart recipient who was shot twice while serving with the U.S. Army in Panama in 1989, who was deported to Korea by the Trump administration.

“Like many veterans, he struggled with PTSD and substance abuse after his service,” Magaziner said. “He was arrested in the 1990s for some minor drug offenses, nothing serious. He never hurt anyone besides himself, and he’s been clean and sober for 14 years.”

When asked if she would thank Park for his service, Noem responded to the congressman, “Sir, I’m grateful for every single person that has served our country and follows our laws.”

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson later said Magaziner failed to mention that Park had a criminal history, although the congressman did address that in his remarks. 

“In 2010 an immigration judge issued him an order of removal. Park’s appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals that same month was dismissed by the Board in April 2011,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in the statement. “With no legal basis to remain in the U.S. and a final order of removal, Park was allowed to self-deport to Korea.”

In response to a question from Magaziner, Noem committed to reviewing Park’s case.

Magaziner also introduced a military veteran named Jim Brown, from Troy, Missouri, who was sitting in the gallery behind Noem. Browns’s wife — a native of Ireland — has lived in the U.S. for 48 years before being detained and facing deportation, the congressman said. Her only criminal record was writing two bad checks totaling $80 several years ago, Magaziner said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.