Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The “contemporaneous notes” that former Vice President Mike Pence says he took related to Jan. 6, 2021, amid a pressure campaign urging him to overturn the 2020 election, are now being raised in special counsel Jack Smith’s case against former President Donald Trump.

Pence, who is running against Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has emerged as a potential key witness at trial after Trump was indicted last week in Washington on four federal charges over his efforts to reverse his presidential election loss and remain in power.

Trump pleaded not guilty at his arraignment on Thursday and later claimed to reporters that “this is a persecution of a political opponent” by the federal government, which prosecutors deny.

(Trump faces two other indictments, in New York state and in federal court in Florida, and has pleaded not guilty to both. He denies all wrongdoing.)

The former vice president, who was ordered to testify in April before the federal grand jury investigating Jan. 6, has said in multiple media appearances that he has no plans to testify as a witness at Trump’s future election interference trial but will comply with the law.

It’s a prospect Trump’s attorneys have insisted they welcome, arguing that Pence will not help prosecutors establish “Trump had corrupt or criminal intent.”

“Mike Pence will be one of our best witnesses at trial,” John Lauro said on Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland has defended the case, saying last week, “Mr. Smith and his team of experienced, principled career agents and prosecutors have followed the facts and the law wherever they lead.”

Here’s what’s known — from Trump’s election interference indictment, recent interviews with Pence and from Pence’s memoir — about the notes the former vice president said he was taking around Jan. 6.

Where are the notes mentioned?

The notes Pence says he took at the time are directly mentioned twice in Trump’s Jan. 6 indictment.

The first reference to Pence’s “contemporaneous notes” is on page 33 of the indictment, in a mention of a meeting on Dec. 29, 2020: Trump falsely told Pence then that the Justice Department was “finding major infractions” in the 2020 election, according to Pence’s notes, the indictment states.

The second direct reference to the notes in the indictment is in reference to a meeting on Jan. 4, 2021, when Pence pushed back on the legality of a proposal to send electoral votes back to states. The indictment states that the meeting included one of Trump’s unnamed alleged co-conspirators, “Co-Conspirator 2,” whom ABC News has identified is likely attorney John Eastman.

The indictment states: “During the meeting, as reflected in the Vice President’s contemporaneous notes, the Defendant knowingly made false claims of election fraud, including, ‘Bottom line – won every state by 100,000 of votes’ and ‘We won every state,’ and asked – regarding a claim his senior Justice Department officials previously had told him was false, including as recently as the night before – ‘What about 205,000 votes more in PA than voters?'”

While the notes are directly mentioned twice, other alleged interactions between Trump and Pence are laid out in the indictment, with details strikingly similar to those in Pence’s memoir, “So Help Me God.”

What’s in Pence’s memoir?

Several conversations between Trump and Pence that are detailed in Trump’s Jan. 6 indictment are also detailed in Pence’s memoir, “So Help Me God,” which was released in November.

For example, in one parallel, the indictment states, “On December 25, when the Vice President called the Defendant to wish him a Merry Christmas, the Defendant quickly turned the conversation to January 6 and his request that the Vice President reject electoral votes that day. The Vice President pushed back, telling the Defendant, as the Vice President already had in previous conversations, ‘You know I don’t think I have the authority to change the outcome.'”

In his book, Pence wrote that he called the president to wish him a Merry Christmas — a tradition over the past four years — and that “not surprisingly, the conversation turned quickly to the election challenges.”

“‘You play a big role,'” Pence wrote that Trump said. “But it was clear from our conversation he had been saying something different.”

Another notable phone call Pence wrote about includes when Trump allegedly called him “too honest” for opposing efforts to have him stop the 2020 election certification on Jan. 6, in his ceremonial role as president of the Senate.

The indictment states: “On January 1 [2021], the Defendant called the Vice President and berated him because he had learned that the Vice President had opposed a lawsuit seeking a judicial decision that, at the certification, the Vice President had the authority to reject or return votes to the states under the Constitution. The Vice President responded that he thought there was no constitutional basis for such authority and that it was improper. In response, the Defendant told the Vice President, ‘You’re too honest.'”

Pence wrote in his book that Trump said, “‘You are being savaged. If it gives you the power why would you oppose it?'”

“I told him, as I told him many times before that I did not believe I possessed the power under the Constitution to decide which votes to accept or reject. He just kept coming,” Pence wrote. “‘You’re too honest,’ he chided, predicting that hundreds of thousands are going to hate your guts and people are going to think you’re stupid.”

Pence also recalled a conversation on Jan. 3, 2021 — also described in the indictment — where he wrote that Trump told him, “You could be a historical figure. But if you wimp out you’re just a somebody.”

The indictment goes on to recount how on Jan. 6, 2021, members of the crowd at the Capitol would chant, “Hang Mike Pence!” and “Traitor Pence!” after Trump tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done…”

Pence has broadly pinned much of the blame for Trump’s push to overturn the election results on some of his lawyers.

He has declined to comment on Trump’s intent and hasn’t recounted a conversation where Trump said he lost the election, though the indictment accuses Trump of knowingly spreading false claims that he won and, at one point in early January 2021, acknowledging he would be succeeded as president by “the next guy.”

Was Pence in the habit of note-taking?

Pence was inspired to take notes at the time because he wanted to make sure any legitimate election challenges were heard, he told ABC News in a gaggle with reporters last week.

“Candidly, I was trying to keep an open mind about the objections that were going to be brought to the floor,” he said. “I was fully prepared to make sure that we heard all the arguments, concerns that members of Congress had brought. But because of the riot [at the Capitol on Jan. 6], and because of the assertion by the president and his crackpot lawyers that I can overturn the election, the violence that ensued eclipsed all of that.”

He elaborated on his note-taking process on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, saying he wasn’t always in the practice of keeping such records but decided to because of the significance.

“I have some limitations of what I can talk about relative to the grand jury, but there was, from time to time, particularly at important moments, I had a practice of scribbling a note or two on my calendar just to memorialize it and remember it and I did that in this case,” Pence said. “I generally didn’t make a practice of taking notes in meetings over a four-year period of time [while in office]. But given the momentous events that were unfolding, I did take a few notes reminding myself of what had been said.”

“Look, I’m a student of American history,” he added. “I knew the founders of this country would never have given any one person the right to choose what electoral college votes to accept and which ones to reject. I was very consistent with the president about that, and my recollections all reflect that.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(GRAND CANYON VILLAGE, Ariz.) — President Joe Biden visited Arizona on Tuesday to tout climate investments and designate a new national monument.

Nearly a million acres of land near the Grand Canyon will become Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni, or the Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument. Thousands of cultural sites belonging to a dozen Tribal Nations will be protected, and the area will be off-limits for any future uranium mining projects.

“Today marks an historic step of preserving the majesty of this place,” Biden said, adding the designation will “help right the wrongs of the past and conserve this land of ancestral footprints for all generations.”

“That very act of preserving the Grand Canyon as a national park was used to deny indigenous people full access to their homelands, to the places where they hunted, gathered and took precious sacred ancestral sites,” Biden said. “They fought for decades to be able to return to these lands, to protect these lands from mining and development, to clear them of contamination, to preserve their shared legacy for future generations.”

Biden’s Arizona visit is his first stop on a three-state tour during which he’ll tout policy victories that will inject billions of dollars into climate infrastructure and clean energy projects. He contended preserving the lands as a national monument is a positive for the planet and for the economy.

But ahead of his arrival, Republicans blasted Biden’s decision, saying it would create dependency on the federal government.

“This administration’s lack of reason knows no bounds, and their actions suggest that President Biden and his radical advisors won’t be satisfied until the entire federal estate is off limits and America is mired in dependency on our adversaries for our natural resources,” said Rep. Bruce Westerman, chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources. “This land belongs to the American people, not any administration or bureaucrats who think they make the laws. … I fail to see any rationale in this proposal beyond a selfish political agenda that locks away the very resources we depend on for our daily lives. If President Biden moves forward with this insane proposal, I will fight it in Congress and advocate for responsible stewardship of our resources.”

He was also criticized by one Democrat who said Biden hadn’t done enough to tackle extreme heat that’s blanketed the state this summer.

“I do think he should be doing more,” Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., told ABC News ahead of Biden’s visit.

Gallego said when he greeted Biden on Monday, he brought up legislation he’s introduced in Congress to add extreme heat to FEMA’s list of major disaster qualifying events so they can draw federal funds.

“Just as northeasterners don’t have to deal with flooding on their own and midwesterners don’t have to deal with blizzards on their own, Arizona communities shouldn’t have to deal with our increasingly dangerous summers on their own — and I’ll keep pushing to ensure they don’t have to,” the congressman said.

Phoenix was an epicenter for deadly, triple-digit temperatures in June and July. The city broke records for consecutive days of high heat, and at one point reached an all-time high of 118 degrees.

Biden touched on extreme heat during his remarks Tuesday, as he said there is “more work ahead to combat the existential threat of climate change.”

“Extreme heat is America’s number one weather-related killer,” the president said. “Extreme hills heat kills more people than floods hurricanes and tornadoes combined. And it’s threatening the farms, the forests, and the fisheries of so many families depend on to make a living.”

Last month, the Biden administration announced some new steps aimed at helping communities and protecting workers impacted by the weather. That included a first-ever Hazard Alert issued by the Labor Department as well as investments to boost water storage capacity and develop more sophisticated weather forecasts.

In addition to designating the new national monument, the administration also announced on Tuesday a $44 million injection to strengthen climate resilience in national parks. That will include 43 projects across the nation as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the White House said.

The money will come from the Inflation Reduction Act, passed by Democrats last year. Biden took a swipe at Republicans in Congress for voting against the legislation.

“These are investments in our planet, our people and America itself,” Biden said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has replaced his presidential campaign manager, Generra Peck, with his gubernatorial office’s chief of staff, James Uthmeier, several sources have confirmed to ABC News.

Sources also confirmed to ABC News that Peck will remain on the campaign as chief strategist.

Peck’s departure from her position comes after the DeSantis campaign shed off more than one-third of its campaign staff in July.

ABC News has reached out to Peck for comment.

The shift for Peck comes as some people close to the campaign blame her for the campaign’s current struggles and stagnation in the polls. The latest national polling numbers from FiveThirtyEight show DeSantis stagnating through the summer and declining recently — trailing former President Donald Trump, 53% to 15%.

As ABC News has previously reported, the DeSantis campaign evaluated it burned through cash too quickly and hired too many people early in the campaign, with Federal Election Commission documents showing that 92 staffers worked for the campaign during its first fundraising period. The campaign also spent about $8 million in the first six weeks of the governor’s presidential run, per the documents.

The change in leadership in the governor’s campaign comes as he is holding more intimate campaign events, getting up close and personal with voters in the early nominating states.

“James Uthmeier has been one of Governor DeSantis’ top advisors for years and he is needed where it matters most: working hand in hand with Generra Peck and the rest of the team to put the governor in the best possible position to win this primary and defeat Joe Biden,” DeSantis’ campaign communication director Andrew Romeo told ABC News in a statement.

A source with knowledge of the campaign shakeup told ABC News the governor had to change the dynamic of his campaign, calling the change in leadership a “realignment” rather than a “reset.”

“DeSantis needs to change the trajectory of his campaign,” the source said.

Tallahassee-based Republican consultant Brett Doster described Uthmeier as a “competent” and “aggressive” guy who was “important” in pushing through this year’s Florida legislative agenda.

“Uthmeier is a guy who has already proven that he’s got the governor’s and the first lady’s trust,” Doster told ABC News. “And I don’t think that’s any reflection necessarily on where Generra was, but I think that they just needed to make a change as they get ready to orient themselves for the next push.”

The development was first reported by The Messenger.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ATLANTA) — As the Fulton County investigation into 2020 election interference in Georgia continues, the former lieutenant governor of the state has been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury, he said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Monday night and confirmed to ABC News.

“I will continue to share the facts as I know them around this investigation in hopes of figuring out what really happened,” former Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, a Republican, wrote.

Duncan served as president of the Georgia Senate in 2020, when Rudy Giuliani — who has previously been notified that he is a target of the investigation in Georgia — appeared during a hearing to push false 2020 election fraud claims.

The subpoena comes as Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis — who has been probing Donald Trump and his allies’ efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia for over two and a half years — appears to be nearing the end of her work.

She has previously said that her charging announcement would come by Sept. 1, and at the end of last month she said that her “work is accomplished.”

“We’ve been working for two and a half years,” she told the local outlet. “We’re ready to go.”

Duncan, who is a CNN contributor, said in an interview with Wolf Blitzer on Monday that “We can never repeat that in this country,” according to an article from the outlet.

“Certainly I never want to see that happen in my home state of Georgia, a lot of good peoples’ lives were uprooted, a lot of people’s reputations have been soiled,” Duncan said.

When reached by ABC News, Duncan confirmed he received a subpoena. Asked about the timing of his testimony, he said: “I do not have any additional details at this time.”

Trump’s legal team last week filed a notice of appeal signaling their intent to appeal a judge’s orders denying their efforts to have DA Wallis removed from her probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia.

Trump has publicly denounced the investigation and has denied all wrongdoing.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(FORT PIERCE, Fla.) — The judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case is raising questions about special counsel Jack Smith’s use of an out-of-district grand jury to conduct his probe.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon is demanding answers from Smith on his office’s use of another grand jury to purportedly continue to investigate Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving office, even though Trump has already been indicted on charges by a separate grand jury impaneled in Florida.

The development came in a stinging ruling Judge Cannon issued Monday morning, in which she ordered two sealed filings submitted by Smith on her docket struck from the record.

The filings were tied to the motion from Smith’s team last week seeking a hearing on potential conflicts of interest that could arise due to the lawyer for Trump aide and co-defendant Walt Nauta — who was charged in the indictment along with Trump — also representing other witnesses who could be called against Nauta in the case.

“The Special Counsel states in conclusory terms that the supplement should be sealed from public view ‘to comport with grand jury secrecy,’ but the motion for leave and the supplement plainly fail to satisfy the burden of establishing a sufficient legal or factual basis to warrant sealing the motion and supplement,” Cannon said in the ruling.

Cannon, in the ruling, then asked for Nauta’s attorney, Stanley Woodward, to file a motion stating his concerns about “the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate and/or to seek post-indictment hearings on matters pertinent to the instant indicted matter in this district.”

Cannon said that motion, as well as any related motions from Trump’s attorneys, is due by Aug. 17.

Cannon’s order didn’t directly explain why she is seeking arguments at this juncture regarding the legality of using an out-of-district grand jury.

The judge then ordered the special counsel to reply on or before Aug. 22.

Although Cannon doesn’t specify the location of the other grand jury, ABC News has previously reported that sealed proceedings in the classified documents probe were heard by a grand jury in Washington, D.C.

Trump pleaded not guilty in June to 37 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information ranging from U.S. nuclear secrets to the nation’s defense capabilities, and took steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get the documents back.

Nauta, his longtime aide, also pleaded not guilty to related charges.

A superseding indictment subsequently charged Trump, Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira, the head of maintenance at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, with two obstruction counts based on allegations that the defendants attempted to delete surveillance video footage at Mar-a-Lago in the summer of 2022.

Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(SAN DIEGO) — Two Navy sailors accused of spying for China will appear in federal court on Tuesday in California, days after being arrested and accused of surreptitiously relaying sensitive government information to foreign officials.

Jinchao “Patrick” Wei, a petty officer 2nd class, was arrested Wednesday and charged with espionage — more specifically, conspiracy to and committing the communication of defense information to aid a foreign government.

Petty Officer Wenheng Zhao, of Monterey Park, California, was also arrested Wednesday, by FBI and NCIS agents, and is charged with conspiracy and receipt of a bribe by a public official.

Wei will be in court in San Diego for a detention hearing at 2 p.m. local time.

Zhao will be in court in Los Angeles for a detention hearing at 10 a.m. local time.

Both men had initial appearances on Thursday. Zhao has not entered a plea; Wei had a plea of not guilty entered on his behalf. Wei’s attorney did not return a request for comment and Zhao has not retained a lawyer who could comment on his behalf.

What prosecutors allege the sailors did

According to the indictment against him, 22-year-old Wei served as a machinist’s mate aboard the amphibious ship USS Essex, which has recently been receiving maintenance at Naval Base San Diego.

Zhao, 26, worked at the Naval Base Ventura County in Port Hueneme and had an active U.S. security clearance who had access to classified information, officials said last week.

Both Zhao and Wei are accused of having passed along national defense information to Chinese intelligence officials in return for cash payments, though their cases are separate.

They are alleged in their indictments to have each worked with Chinese intelligence officers to whom they passed along sensitive information related to the technologies they worked with and about upcoming Navy operations, including international military exercises.

Zhao’s indictment states he had access to material classified as secret, as did Wei, who was born in China and became a U.S. citizen in 2022 as he was allegedly also sending information to his handler, according to his indictment.

“Through the alleged crimes committed by these defendants, sensitive military information ended up in the hands of the People’s Republic of China,” Matthew Olsen, the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for national security, said at a press conference in San Diego last week.

“The charges demonstrate [China’s] determination to obtain information that is critical to our national defense by any means so it can be used to their advantage,” Olsen continued. “The alleged conduct also represents a violation of the solemn obligation of members of our military to defend our country to safeguard our secrets and to protect their fellow service members.”

China didn’t comment after Wei and Zhao’s arrests last week but generally denies being involved in espionage abroad.

U.S. officials said Wei allegedly began communicating with an intelligence officer from China’s government in February 2022 who tasked him with passing photos, videos and documents concerning U.S. Navy ships and their systems.

Wei is alleged to have passed along imagery of the USS Essex, provided the locations of various Navy ships and provided manuals for systems aboard his ship and other Navy ships.

In June 2022, Wei was paid $5,000 by the Chinese intelligence official after having passed along the initial batch of those manuals, officials alleged.

Zhao is alleged to have begun working with a Chinese intelligence official in August 2021 and continuing to do so through at least May of this year, according to his indictment. He worked as a construction electrician.

He passed along photos and videos, blueprints for a radar system in Okinawa and operational plans for a “large-scale” U.S. military exercise in the Pacific Ocean, officials claim in the indictment.

In exchange for this information, the indictment against Zhao alleges that he received around $14,866 in payments from the Chinese intelligence officer.

Martin Estrada, the U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, said Thursday that Zhao “betrayed his sacred oath to defend our country” and “sold out his colleagues at the U.S. Navy.”

“The case against Mr. Zhao is part of a larger national strategy to combat criminal efforts from nation state actors to steal our nation sensitive military information,” Estrada said.

A Navy spokesperson said in a statement last week, of Wei and Zhao, that “we take allegations of misconduct seriously, and the Navy is cooperating with the Department of Justice.” The spokesperson referred other questions to prosecutors.

ABC News’ Alexandra Hutzler and Alex Stone contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump’s legal team says that a protective order proposed by special counsel Jack Smith would infringe on Trump’s right to free speech.

Trump’s attorneys made the argument in their response Monday to the special counsel’s motion for a protective order over the discovery evidence in the case against Trump for allegedly seeking to overturn the 2020 election.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors” targeting several states; using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations”; and trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results” — all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.

The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has dismissed the probe as politically motivated.

Monday’s filing argues for narrower limits on the protective order, which Trump’s attorneys say would protect sensitive materials while ensuring Trump’s right to free speech.

“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in their filing. “Worse, it does so against its administration’s primary political opponent, during an election season in which the administration, prominent party members, and media allies have campaigned on the indictment and proliferated its false allegations.”

Smith’s indictment against Trump, unsealed last week, disputes that he is being charged for exercising his First Amendment rights, instead alleging that he perpetrated three criminal conspiracies as “unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”

Smith asked the judge for the protective order on Friday, referencing a social media post Trump made Friday afternoon in which he said, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”

In a statement issued after Smith’s filing on Friday, the Trump campaign said the post was aimed at political interest groups.

“The Truth post cited is the definition of political speech,” a Trump spokesperson said in a statement.

The proposed protective order submitted by Smith does not seek to bar Trump from commenting on the case in its entirety, but would restrict Trump and his attorneys from disclosing evidence such as materials returned from grand jury subpoenas and testimony from witnesses and other exhibits shown to the grand jury. It does not limit Trump from discussing materials that were already available to the public separate from the government’s investigation.

Smith’s attorneys have said the proposed order is largely modeled after similar protective orders issued in other cases.

But in their filing on Monday, Trump’s attorneys accuse Smith’s team of asking Judge Tanya Chutkan to “assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump’s political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive materials, and non-sensitive, potentially exculpatory documents.”

Trump “does not contest the government’s claimed interest in restricting some of the documents it must produce” such as grand jury related materials — but “the need to protect that information does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government,” the filing says.

Judge Chutkan said in an order on Saturday that she would “determine whether to schedule a hearing to discuss the proposed protective order after reviewing Defendant’s response.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rival Govs. Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom recently agreed to debate one another — but they disagree on the details.

A Friday letter obtained by ABC News from DeSantis campaign manager Generra Peck to Fox News host Sean Hannity, who would moderate the debate, outlines proposed rules to face off with Newsom.

The DeSantis’ campaign debate proposal came after the Newsom camp suggested its own set of rules in late July.

Newsom suggested no audience, while DeSantis suggested having a live audience, where tickets would be distributed evenly between the two governors.

DeSantis proposed the debate should take place in either Georgia or Iowa, while Newsom suggested Georgia, Nevada or North Carolina.

DeSantis also provided a wider range of dates for the debate, either on Sept. 19, Oct. 17, Oct. 18 or Nov. 8, while Newsom only proposed dates in November.

And instead of opening remarks by each governor, DeSantis would provide a video lasting no longer than 120 seconds. Newsom’s team offered that each candidate would give opening remarks no longer than four minutes.

In a statement to Politico about DeSantis’ proposed rules, Newsom spokesperson Nathan Click said, “What a joke,” and he contended DeSantis needed the changes to serve as “crutches” for his performance.

(Click did not respond to a request from ABC News. A DeSantis spokesperson declined to respond to Click’s criticism.)

DeSantis last week agreed to Newsom’s debate challenge while appearing on Hannity’s show.

“I’m game, let’s get it done, just tell me when and where,” DeSantis said, responding to the California governor’s challenge to a televised debate, something Newsom has pressed for since 2022.

DeSantis has blasted donors and supporters with messages about the possible debate, including a memo last week arguing that a showdown with Newsom is “about two very different visions for the future of our country.”

In June, Newsom said he was “all in” when asked about debating DeSantis.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHOENIX) — When President Joe Biden lands Monday in Grand Canyon Village, Arizona, Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., intends to raise with him legislation he has introduced in the U.S. House to tackle extreme heat as the American Southwest struggles with record-breaking temperatures this summer.

“I’m going to drive up and meet him on the tarmac,” Gallego said Sunday with a cacti backdrop in scorching West Sun Valley, Arizona. “That way, I can have a quick conversation with him especially about my heat legislation, which, you know, we are all talking about right now. We need to make sure that these cities have the opportunity to draw down federal funds when we have such drastic heat situations that you have.”

Biden is visiting Arizona to designate a large area around the Grand Canyon as a national monument in an effort to protect the area from potential uranium mining, according to The Washington Post.

Making a tour across the West this week, he’s expected to tout his administration’s efforts to combat climate change in the Inflation Reduction Act. And while the president announced new steps last month to protect workers in extreme heat, such as measures to make drinking water more accessible — saying then, “We’re gonna outline steps we’re taking to help communities who, right this minute … are facing a real crisis in their cities” — Gallego argues it’s not enough.

“I do think he should be doing more,” Gallego told ABC News. “It is a very, very big problem, especially in the Southwest, but also other parts of the country, and helping us pass this legislation, or using any type of executive action to allow FEMA and states to declare emergencies is extremely important, especially for us to get the funds that we need to create the programs to save people from extreme heat.”

Gallego will push legislation he introduced in June to add extreme heat to FEMA’s list of major disaster-qualifying events. He meets with Biden one day after he held a town hall inside a retirement community tucked away in the West Valley of Phoenix to mark one year until Arizona’s primary election. Gallego is running for the Senate seat currently held by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz.

During his town hall, where more than 150 Arizonans retreated from the 108-degree temperatures, Gallego gave the example of the federal government covering the cost of certain cooling centers this summer if his bipartisan bill were to become law.

“The City of Phoenix and other cities have been pulling their money out of their general budget to do that. Instead, what we should be able to do is call FEMA and FEMA be able to reimburse us. That is your taxpayer money, by the way, the federal taxes you pay right now should be able to fund these kinds of programs.”

Barbara Ray of Sun City West, Arizona, retired and a registered Democrat, echoed Gallego’s concerns and said Biden “has done quite a bit, but I think he could do more.” Ray said global warming and its impacts in Arizona, which saw record-breaking heat this summer, is a big concern for her.

“We have to start doing more right now, or it’s just going to get worse. And whereas many of us might not be here when things get worse than this, we have to leave a good place for our children to live and our grandchildren,” Ray said.

There was something else on many minds inside the air-conditioned ballroom: Will Sinema run again?

State of the Senate race

Sinema, who left the Democratic Party last December to become an independent, has not announced whether she’ll run for reelection, but several voters who supported her in the past expressed doubts to ABC News that she could win.

“I feel tricked, really tricked,” said Dianne Blumberg, a registered Democrat from Surprise, Arizona. “I feel like she became a Democrat just to get elected. And I would never vote for her again.”

“We are very disappointed in Kyrsten Sinema,” said Sandy Shocker, an independent voter from Buckeye, Arizona. “She has not lived up to what we were hoping, and Gallego has stepped in to be our Democratic senator and I would love to see him get elected.”

Sinema’s office did not respond to a request for comment by ABC News but told local news outlet Arizona’s Family she is working and “not engaging in campaign politics.”

If she does run, Sinema would ensure a Senate race with three major candidates — an independent, Democrat and Republican — while avoiding a primary race in a state where independent voters now outnumber Republicans, making it difficult to predict a winner come next November. Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb is already running for the Republican nomination, while Donald Trump ally Kari Lake is expected to launch a bid early fall, setting up the potential for an inter-MAGA primary battle. Both Lake and Lamb deny the validity of the 2020 presidential election.

Regardless of who’s running, Democrats’ slim-majority in the Senate leave them exposed to a Republican takeover in 2024. The margin for error is thin: The Senate has 49 Republicans, 48 Democrats and three independents — with all independents often voting with the Democrats.

Gallego said he believes his background makes him a winning candidate in what he called “the most important election that we’ve ever had.”

The son of Mexican and Colombian immigrants, Gallego grew up poor but went on to graduate from Harvard and enlist in the United State Marine Corps. He deployed to Iraq, where his company lost 23 men. He went on to seek public office, serving in the Arizona State House before winning his fifth term to the U.S. House last year. He says all of his experiences have shaped his life, in addition to fatherhood.

“We are in a very dire situation where there is a [candidate] who is probably going to be under four different types of criminal counts by the time the election happens,” Gallego said at the Sunday town hall. “At the same time, the elections are very close, because this world is that polarized. And Arizona can and will be the linchpin in terms of making sure whether we’re going to be able to be a safe democracy and have some sane politics.”

Gallego said staying in his House seat, where he’d continue picking up seniority, is the safe route — but not the one he’s taking.

“I came to Washington D.C., to make sure to fight for everyday Arizonans and that’s why I’m running for the Senate,” Gallego told ABC News Sunday.

The race will be expensive. Sen. Mark Kelly’s reelection in 2022 was the third-most expensive campaign of that cycle with almost $236 million spent in the contest. That number is only expected to rise this time with presidential candidates topping the ticket.

“We’re really a symbolic state for the rest of the country,” Gallego said. “How Arizona goes is really where the country is going. And I think it’s important that Democrats invest here for that.”

Arizona was once a Republican stronghold but has shifted to become a true battleground in American politics. Trump’s slate of endorsed Republican candidates for statewide office, many who denied the results of the 2020 election, lost their midterm races last fall. Biden flipped the state for Democrats in 2020, marking just the second time in more than seven decades that a Democrat carried Arizona in a presidential election.

Gallego pitches himself as ‘the sure thing’

Gallego’s town hall in Buckeye, Arizona, a town in the district represented by Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., marked his first campaign event since taking paternity leave last month to welcome his newborn daughter, Isla. No Democratic Senate candidate has hosted a town hall in Buckeye or Gilbert in the recent past, according to his campaign. It’s part of Ruben’s “go everywhere and talk to everyone” strategy, his campaign said.

“Last year’s election, 2022, was extremely important. The one in 2020 was existential. This one is it,” Gallego said. “I always liken it to the Star Wars movies, right? This is the last one. We have to make sure that we destroyed that death star for real.”

Asked by a voter-submitted question at his town hall how he’ll handle running against Lake — the former Arizona GOP gubernatorial candidate — should she enter the race, Gallego said he’ll talk about the future while she talks about the past.

“She wants to talk about 2020 and 2022. I want to talk about 2024, 2026, 2030, and going on to the future. She wants to talk about what happened back then,” he said. “She wants to talk about division. That’s the only vision she has. I’m not here to divide Arizonans. I’m not here to divide Americans. I’m here to make sure we all come together and succeed. Let her play that game. And we’ll play ours.”

Meanwhile on Sunday, in Marysville, Ohio, Lake spoke at the Union County GOP’s Summer Farm Fest as she continues to make appearances at conservative events across the country.

Asked about her Senate bid, Lake told ABC News she’s giving it “serious consideration” and will make a decision in the next couple of months.

“We don’t want them pulling the same tactics they did in 2020 and 2022 in this next election. We want to protect that vote. We want to protect the voice and vote of the people of Arizona, so I’m working on that. But I’m also giving it some serious thought,” she said.

Gallego, who has called Lake “MAGA’s queen,” calls himself “the sure thing” to a safe democracy.

“I say I’m the sure thing because we’ll make sure that we have sane elected officials that are fighting for everyday Arizonans there,” he said.

ABC News’ Isabella Murray contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Long before he began representing Donald Trump, former president of the United States, defense attorney John Lauro described one aspect of his job as a “subtle dance.”

“I want to be careful in what I say. Most of my clients are accused of white-collar offenses, where oftentimes it’s not clear whether or not they are legally guilty,” he told The New York Times in a 2007 article, when asked if he valued taking on clients who were innocent.

“It makes no difference to me, in terms of my defense, whether they are or not. But it’s a subtle dance,” he said then.

Once thing that did matter to Lauro, he suggested, was working on polarizing — even infamous — legal matters.

“When somebody takes a position that is unpopular, to me, there is nothing more thrilling than doing that. Sometimes the more unpopular the better,” he told The New York Times, “because that really goes to the core of who you are as a lawyer.”

In a separate interview with The Tampa Bay Times in 2007, Lauro said he wasn’t fazed by the response to his work: “I’ve never been swayed by public reaction.”

A former federal prosecutor and New York native, Lauro has for years built his reputation from Tampa, Florida, where he leads an eponymous firm and has “represented everyone from a Wall Street businessman accused of working with the Mafia to an unhappy diner who skipped out on his bill because he was displeased with the amount of seafood on his pasta,” The Tampa Bay Times once wrote.

(The diner was acquitted after a brief jury deliberation.)

“This is my life,” Lauro told the Tampa paper in 2007. “It’s my passion.”

Lauro joined Trump’s defense team earlier this summer, the latest in Trump’s long list of legal representatives, as the former president has struggled to secure attorneys to keep up with the mounting criminal charges he is facing, all of which he denies.

Lauro represented Trump in court last week as Trump was arraigned in the nation’s capital on charges related to allegations that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election in order to remain in power after being defeated.

Trump pleaded not guilty and claimed to reporters afterward that he was being politically persecuted.

Lauro, who has also represented Trump adviser Christina Bobb and lawyer Alina Habba in connection with special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 investigation, has assailed Smith’s case in the press.

“The government will never be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump had corrupt or criminal intent. And that’s what this case is about,” Lauro said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“The defense has no obligation to prove anything. We put the government to its test. The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump had criminal intent,” he said.

That was one of five same-day appearances by Lauro on the major Sunday public news shows, reflecting the bright new spotlight on him.

Smith has defended the Department of Justice’s work.

“My office will seek a speedy trial so that our evidence can be tested in court and judged by a jury of citizens,” he said in a brief statement last week. Smith also urged the public to read the indictment in the case “in full.”

In the federal election interference case in Washington, Trump faces four charges: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights.

“Each of these conspiracies—which built on the widespread mistrust the Defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud—targeted a bedrock function of the United States federal government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election,” prosecutors alleged in the indictment.

According to the biography on his law firm’s website, Lauro is an alumnus of Georgetown University Law Center and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York; before and after that, he worked in private practice.

He told The New York Times in 2007 that he had been inspired to the law by the famous play “Inherit the Wind,” about the 1925 trial of a teacher in Tennessee who was challenging a law against education about human evolution.

As a prosecutor, Lauro worked on a Pentagon corruption case, according to The New York Times.

As a defense attorney, his subsequent work has varied widely among white-collar defendants: The website of his firm, Lauro & Singer, states that the cases they have taken on range from “foreign and domestic bribery” to “money laundering and racketeering, public corruption” and more.

Lauro has been publicly praised by some associates and former clients.

“Mr. Trump is in great hands having John on his side, because he’s going to fight tirelessly on his behalf,” one former client, Tim Donaghy, told The Washington Post.

Donaghy is a disgraced former NBA referee who illegally bet on games. In 2007, he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to transmit wagering information.

In a 2010 book about his legal ordeal and scandal, Donaghy described meeting Lauro for the first time, writing that Lauro seemed “confident and unflappable,” with a “sparkle in his eye [that] betrayed an affection for the high-profile, publicity generating criminal caper” and a “reputation as the man to see when the feds were breathing down your neck.”

“The man had years of experience and tons of talent, and besides, a little recognition is always good for business, not to mention a healthy ego,” Donaghy wrote then.

In a 2022 Netflix documentary looking back at Donaghy’s case, Lauro said he approached his work tenaciously — a view echoed by Christopher Kise, another Trump attorney, who recently told The New York Times that Lauro had “an eye for critical details” and was “masterful at cross-examination.”

“My strategy always coming into a case, instinctually, is to fight,” Lauro said in the Netflix documentary. “I don’t like cooperating. I like fighting. I like going to trial.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.