Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Democrats said they have reached a $3.5 trillion budget agreement. This is the first step in unlocking a process that Democrats plan to use to pass many of President Joe Biden’s American Families Plan priorities with a simple majority of votes.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said this budget package, coupled with the bipartisan infrastructure bill currently being negotiated amongst members, comes “very, very close” to what Biden asked for when he laid out his families plan.

“Every major program that President Biden asked us for is funded in a robust way,” Schumer said. “In addition we are making some additions to that.”

On the heels of this announcement, Schumer said the president will join Senate Democrats for their caucus lunch Wednesday to discuss the plan with lawmakers.

Schumer announced the package alongside members of the Budget Committee, though it’s still not certain that all Democrats will support the measure. Unanimous support will be necessary to pass the bill.

The package will be, according to Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., fully paid for. He did not give details on how the reconciliation bill will be funded, but Democrats have favored a hike in corporate tax rates, not unlike the one Biden originally proposed.

“There are times for really big things, this is one of those times,” Warner said. “The plan we’ve put together, which is fully paid for, will make the investments in American families, will take on the existential threat of climate change in a way that will meet the needs, leading the world on this critical issue.”

The $3.5 trillion topline still falls short of the $6 trillion that Budget Chairman Bernie Sanders had been hoping for, but Schumer announced Tuesday night that the reconciliation instructions include a “robust expansion” of Medicare, something that has been a longstanding priority for Sanders.

“This is in our a view a pivotal moment in American history,” Sanders said. “For a very long time the American people have seen the very rich getting richer and government developing policies which allow them to pay in some cases not a nickel. What this legislation says among many many other things is that those days are gone. The wealthy and large corporations are going to start paying their fair share of taxes so we can protect the working families of this country.”

Senate Democrats have long said they intend to use a process called reconciliation, which allows them to sidestep the usual 60-vote threshold and pass legislation with a simple majority, to pass parts of Biden’s infrastructure agenda that are not addressed in the separate bipartisan infrastructure deal.

The bipartisan infrastructure plan is also at a critical juncture as that group of senators works to publish the text of their $1.2 trillion legislation — something negotiators do not expect will happen this week. But once that bill is made public, there’s a serious potential obstacle — whether the proposed revenue will actually cover the $600 billion in new spending.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, raised a red flag Tuesday saying that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) — which provides lawmakers with a “score,” or price tag, for legislation based on proposed spending and revenue — cannot price out or “score” some of the ways negotiators propose to pay for the bill.

The first way that can’t be scored is the plan to raise money from beefed up IRS enforcement. The bipartisan group of 10 senators, of which Romney is a part, has estimated that for $40 billion of investment in going after those who do not pay taxes, that would net $100 billion in return.

Romney said the CBO has not traditionally issued an official “score” on such matters, which could spell danger for Republicans who are already wary of beefing up a federal agency which has proved politically controversial in the past.

“The CBO won’t score that because they say, ‘Well, the government’s entitled to all of its tax revenue, so you can’t get a score for actually getting more of it,'” Romney told reporters.

“Generally, the CBO’s assessment of tax gaps is that they do not rely on them for scoring purposes and I would presume that would be the case here. But we recognize that there were some things that we saw as a source of revenue that the CBO might not be able to score,” he said.

But Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, who is leading the bipartisan effort along with Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, told ABC News in an interview that the CBO is expected to give an estimate of revenue from the tax-gap proposal, though it would not be an official score.

“They will separately analyze it and they will give us, not the official score, but they’ll give us an analysis, which we’ve relied on in the past,” Portman said.

A group of 22 senators, including the 10 who crafted the original package and 12 other Democrats and Republicans who initially signed on to support it, huddled in the Capitol for two hours on Tuesday evening over dinner, wine and cannoli. Several lawmakers touted significant progress in negotiations toward the final bill text, but there remains disagreement among them on how to pay for the bipartisan package, especially with the CBO score hanging in the balance.

The senators have set a Thursday deadline to work out their remaining differences.

“I think that’s our next real goal is to try to get something done so we can show some positive results,” Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said of the Thursday deadline.

Still, several negotiators left Tuesday’s meeting conceding that the deadline is a “tall order.”

Republican Whip John Thune said that if the CBO returns a score that reflects a bill that is not fully paid for, it could spook some of his members.

“It makes it harder,” the senator from South Dakota said. “I think some of our members would be open to perhaps some amount of debt financing but the majority I think would have to be paid for in a critical way which is a challenge that we’ve had since the beginning of this.”

But for some Republicans, the CBO score is not a deciding factor.

“It’s less crucial for me. I’d like most of it to be paid for,” said Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., part of a separate larger group of 20 negotiators who are part of a consensus-minded group seeking compromises on a number of measures. “I’m willing to accept some things that won’t score, like how much can be done on the private investment side.”

“My test is — is it paid for in my own mind?” Romney said. “Will we be able to –to not add to the deficit? And I know there are some things that we’re relying on as pay for’s that will probably not receive a CBO score, but nonetheless are real. I think my colleagues will know that.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said she agreed that the score should be considered, but is not a be-all-end-all.

“Are we all going to pass out if the score doesn’t come out exactly the way we want? No,” Murkowski said. “What we’ve been looking at is alright, is this something where we really missed or is this something where we can adjust?”

And though many Republicans support private investment in public works projects — so-called public-private partnerships — they could be concerned that the CBO is not expected to be able to put a revenue price tag on that either. It’s something the group has estimated should bring in more than $100 billion.

But for Portman, he sees Republicans understanding that — knowing that private investments provide leverage for public funding and often yield a profit down the road.

“You know there are differences between funding for social programs and funding for fixed assets into the future that are going to create more economic activity and help the economy, and that’s what this is. This is not immediate funding. This is long term funding for fixed assets,” Portman told ABC News.

Some Democrats in the bipartisan group have, throughout negotiations, said they want the infrastructure bill to be credibly paid for. Sen. Angus King, a Maine independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the CBO score presents additional challenges in striking a deal.

“It’s tough. This is — this is tough,” King said. “And part of the problem is that the CBO has some very conservative views about what they’ll score.”

Some dismissed concerns on Tuesday of a lower-than-planned estimate.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., said he still has questions about how CBO will come to its final determination.

“I don’t know what kind of math they use but it isn’t the math that I learned in high school,” Tester said.

And though Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell repeatedly over the recent two-week recess said he would be looking to see that the $1.2 trillion bipartisan plan is “credibly paid for,” Portman, with whom McConnell is close, said he thinks the senator from Kentucky will understand the sparse nature of the eventual CBO analysis.

“He realizes this is infrastructure and is different than other things,” said Portman, who added that he thinks — despite the bumpy road to floor consideration — the group will get the 10 Republicans necessary for final passage of the legislation, if every Democrat supports it.

“Ten? Oh yeah, for sure,” Portman said.

The group of 22 is still projecting a positive outcome for the bipartisan bill.

“I mean, I’m optimistic that we’re going to find a path forward,” Rounds said. “People in there really are trying hard to listen to each other’s concerns and find (a deal).”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHILADELPHIA) — President Joe Biden in a fiery speech on Tuesday decried Republican efforts to limit ballot access across the country as a “21st Century Jim Crow assault,” while warning Americans that the GOP push to restrict voting and “selfish” challenge of the 2020 election results were “the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War.”

His use of the bully pulpit from Philadelphia to invoke the Constitution comes as his administration wades more aggressively into the fight over ballot access at the urging of civil rights groups and Democrats as Republican-led legislatures advance new voting restrictions in places like Texas and Congress remains deadlocked over proposed legislation.

Here are Biden’s full remarks, as released by the White House:

2:46 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) I see an awful lot of good friends out there. Please have a seat if you have one.

I — let me begin by saying I used to be important. (Laughter.) I used to be the chairman of the board of this place. And Jeffrey Rosen allowed me to do that for a while.

But thank you all for being here. I truly appreciate it. Governor, it’s above and beyond the call. Mr. Mayor, I’d compli- — I thought you were a great mayor — still think you are — but your judgment in fiancées is even stronger. And — but — but all of you. And a good friend, Bobby Brady. I see so many friends out. Al Sharpton — Al, how are you, pal? It’s great to see you. (Applause.)

And I’m — I’m going to get in trouble here because I’m going to recognize my congresswoman from the state of Delaware, Lisa Blunt Rochester — (applause) — and her sister who used to run my office. Stand up. (Applause.)

Well, folks, good afternoon. There’s a serious subject I’d like to talk about today. I’m here in Philadelphia at the National Constitution Center — the city and the place where the story of “We the People” — “We the People” began.

It’s a story that’s neither simple nor straightforward. That’s because the story is the sum of our parts, and all those parts are fundamentally human. And being human is to be imperfect, driven by appetite and ambition as much as by goodness and grace.

But some things in America should be simple and straightforward.

Perhaps the most important of those things — the most fundamental of those things — is the right to vote. The right to vote freely. (Applause) The right to vote freely, the right — the right to vote fairly, the right to have your vote counted. The democratic threshold is liberty. With it, anything is possible. Without it, nothing — nothing.

And for our democracy and the work — and to deliver our work and [for] our people, it’s up to all of us to protect that right. This is a test of our time and what I’m here to talk about today.

Just think about the past election.

A 102-year-old woman in Arkansas who voted for the first time on the very spot she once picked cotton.

A 94-year-old woman in Michigan who voted early and in person in her seventy-se- — 72nd consecutive election. You know what she said? She said this election was, quote, “the most important vote that we ever had.”

The daughter who voted in the memory of her dad who died of COVID-19 so others wouldn’t have the experience of pain and darkness and loss that she was going through. Patients out there.

And the parents — the parents who voted for school their children will learn in.

Sons and daughters voted for the planet they’re going to live on.

Young people just turning 18 and everyone who, for the first time in their lives, thought they could truly make a difference.

America — America and Americans of every background voted. They voted for good jobs and higher wages. They voted for racial equity and justice. They voted to make healthcare a right, not a privilege.

And the reason that Americans went to vote and the lengths they went to vote — to be able to vote in this past election were absolutely extraordinary. In fact, the fact that so many election officials across the country made it easier and safer for them to be able to vote in the middle of a pandemic was remarkable.

As a result, in 2020, more people voted in America than ever — ever in the history of America, in the middle of a once-in-a-century pandemic. (Applause.)

All told, more than 150 [million] Americans of every age, of every race, of every background exercised their right to vote.

They voted early. They voted absentee. They voted in person. They voted by mail. They voted by drop box. And then they got their families and friends to go out and vote.

Election officials, the entire electoral system, withstood unrelenting political attacks, physical threats, intimidation, and pressure. They did so with unyielding courage andfaith in our democracy.

With recount after recount after recount, court case after court case, the 2020 election was the most scrutinized election ever in American history. Challenge after challenge brought to local, state, and election officials; state legislatures; state and federal courts — even to the United States Supreme Court not once, but twice.

More than 80 judges, including those appointed by my predecessor, heard the arguments. In every case, neither cause nor evidence was found to undermine the national achievement of administering this historic election in the face of such extraordinary challenges.

Audits, recounts were conducted in Arizona, in Wisconsin. In Georgia, it was recounted three times.

It’s clear. For those who challenge the results and question the integrity of the election: No other election has ever been held under such scrutiny and such high standards.

The Big Lie is just that: a big lie. (Applause.)

The 2020 election — it’s not hyperbole to suggest — the most examined and the fullest expression of the will of the people in the history of this nation. This should be celebrated — the example of America at its best. But instead, we continue to see an example of human nature at its worst — something darker and more sinister.

In America, if you lose, you accept the results. You follow the Constitution. You try again. You don’t call facts “fake” and then try to bring down the American experiment just because you’re unhappy. That’s not statesmanship. (Applause.)

That’s not statesmanship; that’s selfishness. That’s not democracy; it’s the denial of the right to vote. It suppresses. It subjugates.

The denial of full and free and fair elections is the most un-American thing that any of us can imagine, the most undemocratic, the most unpatriotic, and yet, sadly, not unprecedented.

From denying enslaved people fu- — full citizenship until the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments after the Civil War; to denying women the right to vote until the 19th Amendment 100 years ago; to poll taxes and literacy tests, and the Ku Klux Klan campaigns of violence and terror that lasted into the ’50s and ’60s; to the Supreme Court decision in 2013 and then again just two weeks ago –- a decision that weakened the landmark Voting Rights Act; to the willful attacks — election attacks in 2020; and then to a whole other level of threat — the violence and the deadly insurrection on the Capitol on January 6th.

I just got back from Europe, speaking to the G7 and to NATO. They wonder — not a joke — they wonder, Gov — they ask me, “Is it going to be okay?” The citadel of democracy in the world, “Is it o- — going to be okay?”

Time and again, we’ve weathered threats to the right to vote in free and fair elections. And each time, we found a way to overcome. And that’s what we must do today.

Vice President Harris and I have spent our careers doing this work. And I’ve asked her to lead, to bring people together to protect the right to vote and our democracy. And it starts with continuing the fight to pass H.R.1, the For the People Act. (Applause.)

That bill — that bill would help end voter suppression in the states, get dark money out of politics, give voice to the people at the grassroots level, create a fairer district maps, and end partisan political gerrymandering.

Last month, Republicans opposed even debating, even considering For the People Act. Senate Democrats stood united to protect our democracy and the sanctity of the vote. We must pass the For the People Act. It’s a national imperative.

We must also fight for the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and expand — (applause) — to restore and expand voting protections and prevent voter suppression. All the congresswomen and men here — there’s a bunch of you — you knew John, many of you.

Just weeks ago, the Supreme Court yet again weakened the Voting Rights Act and upheld what Justice Kagan called, quote, “a significant race-based disparity in voting opportunities.”

The Court’s decision, as harmful as is, does not limit the — Congress’ ability to repair the damage done. That’s the important point. It puts the burden back on Congress to restore the Voting Rights Act to its intended strength.

As soon as Congress passes the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, I will sign it and let the whole world see it. (Applause.) That will be an important moment.

And the world is wondering — the world is wondering — and Dwight knows what I’m talking about, for real. You know, the world is wondering, “What is America going to do?”

But we also have to clear-eyed about the obstruction we face. Legislation is one tool, but not the only tool. And it’s not the only measure of our obligation to defend democracy today.

For example, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the United States Department of Justice is going to be using its authorities to challenge the onslaught of state laws undermining voting rights in old and new ways. (Applause.)

The focus — the focus will be on dismantling racially discriminatory laws, like the recent challenge to Georgia’s vicious anti-voting law.

The Department of Justice will do so with a voting rights division that — at my request — is doubling its size in enforcement staff. (Applause)

Civil rights groups — civil rights groups and other organizations have announced their plans to stay vigilant and challenge these odious laws in the courts.

In Texas, for example, Republican-led state legislature wants to allow partisan poll watchers to intimidate voters and imperil impartial poll workers. They want voters to dive [drive] farther and be able to be in a position where they wonder who’s watching them and intimidating them; to wait longer to vote. To drive a hell of lot lo- — excuse me — a long way — (laughter) — to get to vote. They want to make it so hard and inconvenient that they hope people don’t vote at all. That’s what this is about.

This year alone, 17 states have enacted — not just proposed, but enacted — 28 new laws to make it harder for Americans to vote, not to mention — and catch this — nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of the state legislatures are trying to pass.

The 21st century Jim Crow assault is real. It’s unrelenting, and we’re going to challenge it vigorously.

While — (applause) — while this broad assault against voting rights is not unprecedented, it’s taking on a new and, literally, pernicious forms.

It’s no longer just about who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible voters to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote — who gets to count whether or not your vote counted at all. It’s about moving from independent election administrators who work for the people to polarized state legislatures and partisan actors who work for political parties.

To me, this is simple: This is election subversion. It’s the most dangerous threat to voting and the integrity of free and fair elections in our history. Never before have they decided who gets to count — count — what votes count.

Some — some legi- — state legislatures want to make it harder for you to vote. And if you vote, they want to be able to tell you your vote doesn’t count for any reason they make up.

They want the ability to reject the final count and ignore the will of the people if their preferred candidate loses.

And they’re trying — not only targeting people of color, they’re targeting voters of all races and backgrounds. It’s with a simple target: who did not vote for them. That’s the target.

It’s unconscionable. I mean, really, I — it’s hard to — it’s hard to declare just how critical this is. It’s simply unconscionable.

We’ve got to shore up our election system and address the threats of election subversion, not just from abroad — which I spent time with Putin talking about — but from home. From home.

We must ask those who represent us at the federal, state, and local levels: Will you deny the will of the people? Will you ignore their voices?

We have to ask: Are you on the side of truth or lies; fact or fiction; justice or injustice; democracy or autocracy? That’s what it’s coming down to.

Which brings me to perhaps the most important thing we have to do: We have to for- — forge a coalition of Americans of every background and political party — the advocates, the students, the faith leaders, the labor leaders, the business executives — and raise the urgency of this moment.

Because as much as people know they’re screwing around with the election process, I don’t think that most people think this is about who gets to count what vote counts — literally, not figuratively. You vote for certain electors to vote for somebody for President. State legislator comes along — under their proposal — and they say, “No, we don’t like those electors. We’re going to appoint other electors who are going to vote for the other guy or other woman.”

Because here’s the deal: In 2020, democracy was put to a test — first by the pandemic; then by a desperate attempt to deny the reality and the results of the election; and then by a violent and deadly insurrection on the Capitol, the citadel of our democracy.

I’ve been around a long time in public life. I thought I’ve seen it all or most of it all. But I never thought I’d see that, for real.

And in spite of what you see on television — and you saw it — you have senators saying it was just a day at the Capitol, just people visiting the Capitol.

Folks — but we met the test. Because of the extraordinary courage of election officials — many of them Republicans; our court system; and those brave Capitol police officers — because of them, democracy held.

Look how close it came. I mean, for real, how close it came. We’re going to face another test in 2022: a new wave of unprecedented voter suppression, and raw and sustained election subversion. We have to prepare now.

As I’ve said time and again: No matter what, you can never stop the American people from voting. They will decide, and the power must always be with the people.

That’s why, just like we did in 2020, we have to prepare for 2022. We’ll engage in an all-out effort to educate voters about the changing laws, register them to vote, and then get the vote out.

We’ll encourage people to run for office themselves at every level.

We will be asking my Republican friends — in Congress, in states, in cities, in counties — to stand up, for God’s sake, and help prevent this concerted effort to undermine our elections and the sacred right to vote. (Applause.) Have you no shame? (Applause.)

Whether it’s stopping foreign interference in our elections or the spread of disinformation from within, we have to work together.

Vice President Harris and I will be making it clear that there’s real peril in making raw power, rather than the idea of liberty, the centerpiece of the common life.

The Founders understood this. The women of Seneca Falls understood this. The brave, heroic foot soldiers of the Civil Rights Movement understood this. So must we.

This isn’t about Democrats and Republicans; it’s literally about who we are as Americans. It’s that basic. It’s about the kind of country we want today, the kind of country we want for our children and grandchildren tomorrow. And quite frankly, the whole world is watching. Folks — (applause).

I’m not being sentimental. I’m not preaching to you. I’m just giving it to you straight, as I promised I would always do — lay things out on the line and honor your trust with trust [truth].

So hear me clearly: There is an unfolding assault taking place in America today — an attempt to suppress and subvert the right to vote in fair and free elections, an assault on democracy, an assault on liberty, an assault on who we are — who we are as Americans.

For, make no mistake, bullies and merchants of fear and peddlers of lies are threatening the very foundation of our country.

It gives me no pleasure to say this. I never thought in my entire career I’d ever have to say it. But I swore an oath to you, to God — to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. And that’s an oath that forms a sacred trust to defend America against all threats both foreign and domestic. (Applause.)

The assault on free and fair elections is just such a threat, literally. I’ve said it before: We’re are facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War. That’s not hyperbole. Since the Civil War. The Confederates back then never breached the Capitol as insurrectionists did on January the 6th.

I’m not saying this to alarm you; I’m saying this because you should be alarmed.

I’m also saying this: There’s good news. It doesn’t have to be this way. It doesn’t have to be, for real. We have the means. We just need to show the will — the will to save and strengthen our democracy.

We did it in 20- — we did it in the 2020. The battle for the soul of America — in that battle, the people voted. Democracy prevailed. Our Constitution held. We have to do it again.

My fellow Americans, it requires fair-mindedness; devotion to justice; corny as it sounds, a love of country. It requires us to unite in common purpose, to declare here and now: We, the people, will never give up. (Applause.) We will not give in. We will overcome. We will do it together. And guaranteeing the right to vote, ensuring every vote is counted has always been the most patriotic thing we can do. (Applause.)

Just remember, our late friend John Lewis said, “Freedom is not a state; it is an act.” “Freedom is not a state; it is an act.” And we must act, and we will act. For our cause is just, our vision is clear, and our hearts are full. (Applause.)

For “We the People,” for our democracy, for America itself, we must act. (Applause.)

God bless you all. And may God protect our troops and all those stand watch over our democracy. (Applause.) But act. We’ve got to act. Thank you. (Applause.)

3:10 P.M. EDT

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Michael Collins, the former chief of staff to the late-Rep. John Lewis, joined ABC’s “Good Morning America” co-anchor Robin Roberts to reflect on the life and legacy of the civil rights icon, chronicled in his new book “Carry On.”

Collins, who worked with Lewis for 21 years, said the inspiration for the book came in the final months of Lewis’ life.

“It was the last months of his life, and we had an opportunity to really think about his legacy, and what he was going to leave. And this was one of the opportunities he wanted to take, and this was to tell a story of just who he was, the simpleness of the man,” Collins said.

“It was difficult because it was during the time that he was sick and he didn’t have a lot of energy. But he made effort to really tell the story. And that’s what’s important. He wanted to always tell the story,” he added.

Collins said “Carry On” will give readers an opportunity to learn more about Lewis’ optimistic spirit.

“He woke up as if it was a brand new day, literally, and he welcomed everybody, he welcomed his thoughts for the day. And he would say, ‘Let’s get ready. Got a new day. Let’s go.’ And it was just an experience that you never forget. And for him, it just allowed him to just keep going on with optimism and fire every day,” Collins said.

Pointing to Lewis’ legacy of advocating for equal rights, Roberts asked Collins how he believed Lewis would respond to the country’s current racial climate.

“He would be disappointed in a lot of ways. The hatred, the racism — it would be very difficult, it will be difficult for him, but he would be optimistic. He would face it head on and he would look at it as it is, but he would be optimistic that there would be a better day,” Collins replied.

He added that, though Lewis was dismayed by the tense racial climate, he found inspiration through the young people at the forefront of the protests.

“He was very sad, but he was inspired by all the young people, all the young people across the country. He didn’t condone the violence, but he’d love to watch the people protest, peacefully, non-violently, because again it reminded him of a time not so long ago when he was young,” Collins explained.

Shifting to the current debate over voting rights, Roberts asked how Lewis would react to the recent DOJ lawsuit brought against Georgia — Lewis’ home state — due to the state legislature’s passing of restrictive voting laws.

“He would champion it. Most definitely. You know, the vote was precious, sacred. And that’s what he would always talk about, and he felt like everybody should have the right to vote. And that was what he fought for his entire life,” Collins said.

Roberts concluded the interview by asking Collins how he was carrying out his own legacy.

“I’m trying to live out his legacy. It’s been a journey, it’s been a journey,” he said. “I’m fortunate enough to now be working for the vice president of the United States. Her leadership is something that I’m looking forward to just embarking on in the world. And this is an extension of the work that I did with him, and I look forward to that tremendously.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Five members of the same Texas family were arrested Tuesday and charged for their alleged participation in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, according to newly-unsealed charging documents.

Kristi Munn, Tom Munn, Dawn Munn, Josh Munn and Kayli Munn — described by prosecutors as a nuclear family from Borger, Texas — are now each facing four federal charges over their alleged illegal entry and alleged disorderly conduct in the Capitol, according to a criminal complaint filed Tuesday afternoon.

A 34-page affidavit for their arrest details their movements while inside the Capitol on Jan. 6, based on surveillance and social media posts.

The affidavit also indicates that the family brought an unidentified minor child into the building with them, who is not being charged.

While there have previously been arrests of family members including fathers and sons, mothers and sons, and husbands and wives, the Munn family is thus far the largest single family unit out of the more than 530 arrests made so far from the Justice Department’s investigation of the Capitol riot.

FBI officials say they first received a tip that Kristi Munn participated in the Capitol riot just three days after the insurrection, from a tipster who captured screenshots of Munn’s Facebook and Snapchat accounts. Investigators then combed through public Facebook posts from Munn’s family members to track their journey from Texas to D.C. as they amplified calls for a march on Congress on Jan. 6.

“We made it to our hotel just outside D.C.,” Tom Munn allegedly wrote in one post on Jan. 5. “1,600 miles in 24 hrs!”

After the riot, investigators found posts from the family where they discussed joining in the insurrection.

“The only damage to the capital building was several windows and sets of doors,” Tom Munn wrote on Facebook. “Nothing inside the capital was damaged. I can tell you, patriots NEVER made it to the chamber. There was no violence in the capital building, the crowd was NOT out of control … they were ANGRY!!!”

Prosecutors have said in recent court filings that the riot caused at least $1.5 million in damage to the U.S. Capitol, including damage from those who made it into the Senate chamber. At least 140 law enforcement officers suffered injuries from the riot and more than 100 people have been charged so far with direct assaults on police, according to the DOJ.

After gathering screenshots showing the five members of the Munn family inside the Capitol, investigators say they further confirmed the family members’ identities through interviews with three people familiar with the family in Texas — including two employees at a local Borger high school “who had taught multiple Munn children,” and an employee at a college who taught two of the Munn children.

None of the members of the family have entered pleas in their case, and attorney information was not immediately available for them as of Tuesday afternoon.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Texas Democrats spent Tuesday in Washington pressuring Congress to pass federal voting rights legislation and calling for an exception to the Senate’s filibuster rule blocking Democrats from moving forward with a measure they say would stop GOP-led efforts to restrict voting in Texas and nationwide.

The state lawmakers were expected to meet with a key Democrat who has resisted changing the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes to advance legislation — West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin. He and Arizona Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema are playing a pivotal role in the ongoing congressional negotiations over a national voting rights bill.

It is unclear if the Texas Democrats will hold meetings with Sinema. If both she and Manchin were to agree to an exception to the rule — Senate Democrats with their 50 votes, along with Vice President Kamala Harris — could pass the bill congressional Democrats and President Joe Biden have made a top priority.

Biden was making his case in a high-profile speech in Philadelphia Tuesday afternoon.

“If you can have a carve-out for a right-wing Supreme Court justice, why can’t you have a carve-out to protect the very fundamentals of our democracy?” State Rep. Chris Turner said at a Capitol Hill news conference, referring to making an exception to the filibuster for voting rights.

“If Mitch McConnell did a carve-out for Amy Coney Barrett, then we ought to do a carve-out for the black and brown people that live in Texas, Georgia, Florida, that live in all these states trying to make it harder for our constituents to exercise their right to vote,” State Rep. Marc Veasey added. “Time is of the essence. We cannot wait. States are going to start to ramp up these efforts.”

More than 50 Texas House Democrats fled the state Monday evening, depriving the state legislature of a quorum, and must now remain out of Texas for the duration of the ongoing special legislative session, which ends on August 6.

In their absence from the Austin state capitol on Tuesday, a majority of Republican House lawmakers passed a procedural measure that allows authorities to go out and find the absent Democrat House members.

Texas law authorities may even utilize arrest warrants in their efforts to compel the lawmakers back, if such action is deemed necessary. However, it remains unclear whether this order can affect the Democrats while they are out of state and outside of the jurisdiction of Texas law enforcement.

The state legislators pointed to the spread of what they called former President Donald Trump’s ‘big lie’ that falsely asserts his claim of winning the 2020 election as a partial catalyst for their decision to leave their home state.

“We are not going to buckle to the ‘big lie’ in the state of Texas — the ‘big lie’ that has resulted in anti-democratic legislation throughout the United States,” Mexican American Legislative Caucus Chair Rafael Anchía said.

Texas House Dean Senfronia Thompson further echoed Anchia’s comments and put a spotlight on the impact revisions to voting access in her state would have on people of color.

“I’m not here to take a vacation in Washington, D.C. When I looked at the African American Museum, I thought about the struggle my people fought in this country to get the right to vote. And that right is sacred to my constituents that I represent in Houston, Texas, and I’m up here because I don’t plan to be a sitting person in that legislature,” Thompson said.

Seventeen states had enacted 28 new laws that restrict access to the vote, as of June 21, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The latest versions of Republican-backed legislation aimed at revising Texas voting and election laws included several provisions that voting rights advocates say would detrimentally affect the abilities of people of color to vote.

Among them are provisions that appear to be aimed at practices utilized by Democrat-leaning Harris County during the 2020 election. Both bills ban 24-hour voting availability, which offered greater ballot access to Houston-area shift workers when implemented in the fall. Each of the proposals coming from the Republican majorities in the Texas House and Senate also aim to end drive-thru voting, another popular voting method in the diverse county.

Additionally, the dual bills included provisions that granted expanded access to partisan poll watchers, which voting rights advocates decried for potentially opening the door to in-person voter intimidation.

On Monday, Texas Democrats did not indicate specific plans for what they aim to do after the special session ends. They also did not directly offer insight into whether they intend to continue breaking quorum going forward, given that GOP Gov. Abbott has the power to call for as many special legislative sessions as he wants.

“We know that’s exactly what he’s going to do, we went in his eyes wide open,” Texas House Democratic Chair Turner told reporters.

“Our intent is to stay out and kill this bill this session, and use the intervening time — I think 24 or 25 days now — before the other session to implore the folks in this building behind us to pass federal voting rights legislation to protect voters in Texas and across the country,” he added.

Vice President Harris will meet sometime this week with the Texas legislators, according to an official in Harris’ office.

ABC News’ Molly Nagle contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — With GOP-led legislatures advancing new voting laws and Congress deadlocked over proposed legislation, President Joe Biden is expected to deliver a major speech on voting rights in Philadelphia on Tuesday as his administration wades more aggressively into the fight over ballot access at the urging of civil rights groups and Democrats.

Previewing his remarks on Monday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Biden would directly call out lies from former President Donald Trump and other Republicans about the integrity of the 2020 presidential election, and “decry efforts to strip the right to vote as authoritarian and anti-American.”

“He’ll call out the greatest irony of the ‘big lie’ is that no election in our history has met such a high standard with over 80 judges, including those appointed by his predecessor, throwing out all challenges,” Psaki said.

National Urban League CEO Marc Morial, who was one of a handful of civil rights leaders to meet with Biden at the White House last Thursday, told ABC News the group asked Biden “to put the full moral prestige and the power of the presidency” behind voting rights, to help frame the debate for the American people.

“As a candidate, he talked about the soul of the nation. And I think this is a soul of the nation issue,” he said.

Along with Biden’s White House meeting last week, Vice President Kamala Harris also announced plans for the Democratic National Committee to spend $25 million to expand its voter outreach campaign and support future litigation.

The Justice Department has also sued the state of Georgia over its new voting law, and Attorney General Merrick Garland has announced plans to beef up the department’s Civil Rights Division to help defend voting rights.

Biden’s speech on Tuesday comes as Democrats in the Texas State Legislature fled the state for Washington, D.C., the second such effort in recent weeks to derail the passage of sweeping GOP-authored voting legislation by trying to prevent Republicans from taking up the proposals in a special legislative session.

Roughly 17 states have enacted 28 laws that would restrict voting access, out of hundreds that have been introduced throughout the country, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

“You can’t disassociate Jan. 6 with what is happening in the states,” Morial said of the Capitol riot that sought to disrupt the Electoral College count. “This is all sour grapes over losing an election.”

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court upheld two GOP-backed voting restrictions in Arizona, imposing new limits on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Liberals on the court argued that the decision would weaken protections against racial discrimination.

That ruling, together with the flurry of state-level actions on voting, has led civil rights advocates to push the White House to more vocally make the case for federal voting rights legislation.

“The Court has put the ball in Congress’ court, and now it’s on Congress and the administration to actually take that up now,” said Wendy Weiser, the director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center.

In March, House Democrats advanced HR 1, the For the People Act, an expansive package that would transform federal elections, voting and congressional redistricting. But it has stalled in the Senate after failing to advance in a procedural vote late last month, over opposition from all Republicans.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., panned the bill and accused Democrats of attempting a “power grab” with the proposal.

A more measured proposal named for the late Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., which would restore pieces of the Voting Rights Act struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013, has also failed to advance through Congress.

In light of the GOP opposition, Democrats have pushed for the Senate to reform the legislative filibuster, with House Democratic Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., a key Biden ally and endorser during the 2020 Democratic primary, suggesting Democrats create an exception to the 60-vote threshold for election reform and other constitutional issues.

When asked about Clyburn’s call for a filibuster exemption for voting rights, and if the president agreed, Psaki punted the issue back to Congress.

“I will say, though, in terms of how this works, the filibuster is a legislative process tool, an important one, that warrants debate but determination about making changes will be made by members of the Senate, not by this president or any president, frankly, moving forward,” Psaki said Monday.

“There are two pathways forward” for voting rights reform,” Morial said. “Either you try to find an agreement with Republicans, so you have a bipartisan bill, or the pathway forward is to create a carve out for the filibuster.”

Asked how Biden responded in their meeting last week, Morial told ABC News the president “simply made a comment that, ‘I know the Senate better than anyone,’ and that’s probably true.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — For the second time since May, Texas House Democrats will break quorum in protest against state Republicans’ push to revise the election and voting laws in the Lone Star State.

The much-speculated move was officially announced by Democrats Monday afternoon, a day before the Texas House was slated to be back in session to continue working through the items set by Gov. Greg Abbott for the ongoing, 30-day special session agenda.

“Today, Texas House Democrats stand united in our decision to break quorum and refuse to let the Republican-led legislature force through dangerous legislation that would trample on Texans’ freedom to vote,” a joint statement from several high-profile Texas House Democrats read.

The group of lawmakers — including Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Chris Turner, Mexican American Legislative Caucus Chair Rafael Anchía, Texas Legislative Black Caucus Chair Nicole Collier, Legislative Study Group Caucus Chair Garnet Coleman and Dean Senfronia Thompson — also announced plans to head to Washington as they break quorum.

“We are now taking the fight to our nation’s Capitol. We are living on borrowed time in Texas. We need Congress to act now to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act to protect Texans — and all Americans — from the Trump Republicans’ nationwide war on democracy,” the group said in a statement.

Vice President Kamala Harris, praised the Democrats’ efforts to break quorum and head to Washington to push Congress to pass election reform.

“I applaud the effort of the Texas legislators who are standing in the way of a blatant attempt to suppress the vote,” she said.

After spending the day in Michigan, the vice president told reporters that her conversations were meant to “remind voters — to remind people that their voice is important and that they are at risk of having legislative bodies impede the right to vote, if we don’t stand up and understand what’s happening, see it for what it is and obviously, be more engaged.”

The move is being met with strong opposition from across the aisle, and it remains unclear what the state’s executive branch will do next. In a statement following the Democrats’ announcement, the Republican governor blasted the legislators, accusing them of engaging in “partisan political games.”

“Texas Democrats’ decision to break a quorum of the Texas Legislature and abandon the Texas State Capitol inflicts harm on the very Texans who elected them to serve. As they fly across the country on cushy private planes, they leave undone issues that can help their districts and our state,” Abbott said in a statement.

One of the issues that remains on the agenda is reinstating government funding, which Abbott vetoed in response to House Democrats last quorum break in May. The issue is already emerging as a focal point for House Republicans, with the Texas House Speaker chiding Democrats over the decision to break quorum.

“These actions put at risk state funding that will deny thousands of hard-working staff members and families a paycheck, health benefits and retirement investment so that legislators who broke quorum can flee to Washington, D.C. on private jets,” Phelan said in a statement.

According to House rules, at least two-thirds of the chamber’s 150 members must be present to conduct business. The rules also outline that if there are absent lawmakers “for whom no sufficient excuse is made,” a vote can be held just among the members in attendance for those absent lawmakers to “be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found.”

For now, Democrats, like Texas Rep. Gene Wu, who represents southwest Houston and is among those heading to the nation’s capital, indicate the potential risk is worth it.

“This is the only tool that Republicans have left Democrats and we intend on it,” Wu said.

ABC News Political Director Rick Klein and Deputy Political Director Averi Harper contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Former Trump attorney Sidney Powell and her legal team clashed repeatedly with a federal judge Monday during a hearing to determine if sanctions are warranted against her and other attorneys who filed a lawsuit in Michigan based on false claims of election fraud in an unsuccessful attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and the City of Detroit have requested that Federal Judge Linda V. Parker sanction Powell, attorney Lin Wood, and other members of the legal team that were involved in the efforts to have Michigan’s presidential election returns decertified due to unsubstantiated claims of voting irregularities.

Monday’s nearly six-hour hearing, at which Powell appeared virtually, quickly spiraled into chaos as attorneys from both sides shouted accusations at each other about the merits of the lawsuit at hand, which sought to block certification of the election and was subsequently denied.

David Fink, a lawyer for the city of Detroit, called the lawsuit “an embarrassment to the legal profession.”

“It was sloppy, it was unreadable, it was mocked in the public … it never should have been filed,” Fink said. “These lawyers should be punished for their behavior.”

Powell, who served on then-President Donald Trump’s legal team before being removed for pushing outlandish conspiracy theories, vigorously defended the lawsuit and the diligence that went into producing it, saying she “would file these same complaints again.”

Her statements came three months after she filed a motion to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by voting machine company Dominion Voting Systems, arguing that “no reasonable person” should have believed her election theories were “truly statements of fact.”

The City of Detroit is also seeking to have the attorneys prohibited from practicing law in the district and wants the various attorneys’ local state bar associations to undertake their own investigation — a process that recently led to attorney Rudy Giuliani’s temporary ban from practicing law in New York.

The effort, if successful, would mark the first financial penalty against those who sought to challenge the 2020 election in court based on false claims of election fraud or other election misconduct. In all, Trump and his supporters filed over 50 lawsuits across the country.

Judge Parker poured over one of those suits during the hearing, peppering Powell and her team with dozens of questions in an effort to determine if sanctions are warranted. The judge expressed skepticism about the legal basis for Powell’s suit, the various claims of fraud, and the evidence submitted to support them.

“The court is concerned these affidavits were submitted in bad faith,” Parker said of the suit, which was filed in in November and was dismissed by a judge after it was found to be riddled with factual errors and inaccuracies.

A number of the affidavits submitted to support allegations of fraud were debunked by local election officials, and questions were raised about credentials of a number of the expert witnesses used in the suit. The lawsuit’s anonymous military intelligence expert, for example, was reportedly a Dallas-based IT consultant who never even worked in military intelligence, according to a Washington Post report.

“How can any of you as officers of the court present this type of affidavit?” Parker asked at one point about a separate affidavit. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen an affidavit with more leaps. This is pure speculation.”

“We did a ton of due diligence,” said Howard Kleinhendler, a lawyer on the Powell team. “We did not submit falsehoods,” said Julia Haller, another attorney on the team.

Several attorneys, however, attempted to distance themselves from the suit. Wood, a staunch supporter of the president who filed multiple suits in the wake of the 2020 election, said he had “nothing to do” with the suit at issue in the hearing.

“My name was placed on there, but I had no involvement whatsoever,” he told the judge, claiming that he had offered general assistance to Powell but was not involved in this suit.

Another attorney said the team had spent no more than five hours total on the suit.

Parker did not issue a decision, or give an expected timeline for one.

ABC News’ Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — As part of his effort to get out in front of a politically sensitive issue, President Joe Biden on Monday convened a meeting with Attorney General Merrick Garland, law enforcement leaders and elected officials to discuss rising crime rates across the country.

Glancing at Garland at the top of the meeting, Biden opened his remarks by acknowledging that he’s been trying to solve this problem for many years.

“We’ve been at this a long time, a long time. Seems like most of my career I’ve been dealing with this issue. While there’s no one-size-fits-all approach, we know there are some things that work. And the first of those that work is stemming the flow of firearms used to commit violent crimes,” Biden said.

“It includes cracking down on holding rogue gun dealers accountable for violating the federal law. It includes the Justice Department creating five new strike forces to crack down on illegal gun trafficking,” Biden said, without directly acknowledging more meaningful gun control is impossible without getting Senate Republicans to go along.

While Biden said he’d be asking the experts he assembled what else they believe should be done on the federal level to address rising crime rates, he did not directly address Congress or put any pressure on lawmakers to act on a national level.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki previewed the meeting at an earlier press briefing and said the group will discuss Biden’s “comprehensive plan to reduce gun violence and violent crime.”

Biden’s plan, unveiled last month, targets law-breaking gun dealers, provides federal resources to police departments for gun-crime enforcement and allows communities to repurpose millions of dollars of federal coronavirus relief funding for programs proven to prevent gun violence.

“During the meeting, the president will discuss his crime reduction strategy — strategy which gives cities and states historic funding through the American Rescue Plan, and a range of tools they can use to improve public safety in their communities including support for community violence intervention programs, summer employment opportunities and other proven methods to reduce crime,” Psaki said.

“I’ll underscore his commitment to ensuring their state and law and local law enforcement have the resources and support they need to hire more police officers and invest in effective and accountable community policing,” Psaki said.

Notably, Biden has not taken the same stance as some progressives who’ve called to “defund the police,” a position that gained traction last year during what many deemed to be a racial reckoning in the country.

Still, Republicans have attacked Biden for being “soft on crime.”

Psaki said Biden is stressing partnerships with local leaders on the effort. Attendees at the White House included Washington Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser and Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, who just won New York’s City Democratic mayoral primary. Unlike other progressive candidates, Adams did not run on a “defund the police” agenda but instead cited “public safety” as his top priority for the city and Democrats in general.

“This president is making it clear,” Adams said following the meeting, “he’s going to redefine the ecosystem of public safety, and that includes identifying the role of police, schools, families, resources, employment.”

“Why did it take so long before we heard the gunshots that families were listening and hearing every night? Other communities are waking up the alarm clock, communities of Black, brown and poor people are waking up to gunshots and this president says this is not the America we’re going to live in,” he continued.

Police chiefs, including David Brown, superintendent of the Chicago Police Department, along with a community-based violence intervention expert, also attended the White House meeting.

Psaki said the group would talk about what the federal government is doing to stem the flow of guns used in crimes, “including the administration’s zero-tolerance policy for dealers who willfully sell guns illegally, the Department of Justice’s gun trafficking strike forces, as well as previous steps the White House has announced like cracking down on ghost guns, which are increasingly used in violent crimes.”

Biden’s session comes as the country faces a rise in violent crime, particularly in those involving firearms.

According to a study released earlier this year by the National Commission on COVID-19 and Criminal Justice, homicides spiked by 30% in 2020 compared to the year before.

And in the first three months of 2021, the number of homicides increased by 24% compared to the same period in 2020 and by 49% compared to the start of 2019, the researchers said.

ABC News’ Ben Gittleson and Sarah Kolinovsky contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The top U.S. military general leading the withdrawal in Afghanistan stepped down during a ceremony in Kabul Monday, a sign that America’s longest war is nearing its end.

Gen. Austin Scott Miller has commanded U.S. Forces−Afghanistan and the NATO-led Resolute Support mission since the summer of 2018. At Monday’s ceremony, Miller handed his responsibilities off to Gen. Frank McKenzie, who leads U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) from its headquarters in Tampa, Florida.

“I need to let you know that command of this coalition has been the highlight of my military career,” Miller told a small audience at Resolute Support headquarters in Kabul.

“The countries that have served here, many have lost service members, civilians; our Afghan partners have lost service members, they’ve lost civilians,” Miller said. “And as we’ve spoken about it previously, on this very ground with this group over time, our job is now just not to forget.”

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin thanked Miller for his leadership in Afghanistan in a Monday afternoon tweet.

“I want to thank Gen. Miller for three years of exceptional leadership in Afghanistan. That we have been able to secure our interests in Afghanistan, as well as those of our allies and Afghan partners, stands as testament to his operational acumen and strategic vision,” he wrote on Twitter. “It’s also worth noting that we have conducted our retrograde safely and orderly, and the transfer in command from Gen. Miller to Gen. McKenzie does not signify the end of our drawdown process, only the next milestone. We remain on track to meet @POTUS’ end of August goal.”

A Pentagon spokesperson said Miller left Afghanistan following the ceremony and was traveling back to the United States.

As the U.S. military finishes its withdrawal from the country, an emboldened Taliban has ramped up attacks and gained ground.

“I’m one of the U.S. military officers who’s had the opportunity to speak with the Taliban,” Miller told the audience in Kabul. “I said, it’s important that the military sides set the conditions for a peaceful and political settlement in Afghanistan, we can all see the violence that’s taking place across the country, but we know that with that violence, that what is very difficult to achieve is a political settlement. So again, what I tell the Taliban is they’re responsible too.”

McKenzie, who traveled to Kabul to attend the handover ceremony, said that while Miller’s departure is a milestone in the U.S. withdrawal, it also signifies “our renewed commitment to our Afghan partners.”

“The most important thing that continues is our support to the people of Afghanistan and to its armed forces,” McKenzie told the audience, which included Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, chief of Afghanistan’s National Council for Reconciliation, and other Afghan officials.

“We are confident in you. We are confident you have what it takes to protect your country,” McKenzie said. “Our support will be different than what it was in the past, but we know how much you love your country, and we know the sacrifices that you have made in the past and that you’re going to be willing to make in the future to do that. You can count on our support in the dangerous and difficult days ahead. We will be with you.”

McKenzie will maintain the ability to launch counter-terrorism operations from bases and ships outside of Afghanistan as needed, but a major post-war concern is maintaining the U.S. diplomatic mission

To that end, a detachment of about 650 U.S. troops will remain in the country indefinitely to protect the U.S. embassy as well as the airport in Kabul, which is critical to keep the mission running.

The embassy announced Sunday that it had resumed in-person interviews for immigrant visas, including those Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for Afghan translators, guides and other contractors who worked for the U.S. military and diplomatic missions.

Interviews are a key part of the visa application process, but they had been halted for a month because of a significant COVID-19 outbreak throughout Afghanistan, including the U.S. embassy there.

There are approximately 18,000 Afghans seeking SIVs: 9,000 who haven’t finished their application and 9,000 who are waiting for the U.S. government to move their case forward, according to a State Department spokesperson.

This resumption does not yet extend to everyone. For now, the embassy is only rescheduling applicants who had their interviews postponed and appointment capacity remains limited, the embassy said Sunday.

In the meantime, the U.S. will relocate a group of SIV applicants and their families out of the country to safe locations to await their cases being processed, President Joe Biden confirmed last week. While he said those relocations will begin before the end of this month, it’s still unclear how many applicants that will involve, where they will go and when.

Despite pressure from lawmakers and activists, the Biden administration has emphasized SIVs as the way to help Afghans whose lives are at risk, instead of evacuations. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has assigned 50 more staffers in Washington to help process paperwork and work through the enormous backlog.

But even with all that, critics said time is running out for the Afghans who risked theirs and their families’ safety by working for the U.S., as American forces draw down and the Taliban gain control of more districts.

ABC News’ Aleem Agha contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.