Politics

(ANNAPOLIS, Md.) — Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan declined on Tuesday to close the door on a third-party presidential bid in 2024 after he said Sunday that he would not seek the Republican nomination.

Hogan clarified in an exclusive interview with ABC News that an independent presidential campaign is not something he’s “actively” mulling, but he would not definitively say he would not wage one depending on who the Democratic and Republican nominees are.

“I have ruled out seeking the Republican nomination. And I haven’t ruled that out [running as an independent]. But it’s not something I’m really working toward or thinking about,” Hogan said, adding that “the question keeps popping up more and more.”

A popular Republican governor in a blue state, Hogan was term-limited out of office earlier this year and had been considering a campaign as an anti-Donald Trump candidate in the 2024 Republican primary.

However, he said over the weekend that he would not contribute to a crowded nominating field in which the former president could emerge as the winner with just a plurality of support, as Trump did in 2016 again Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio and then-Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

“To once again be a successful governing party, we must move on from Donald Trump. There are several competent Republican leaders who have the potential to step up and lead. But the stakes are too high for me to risk being part of another multicar pileup that could potentially help Mr. Trump recapture the nomination,” Hogan said in a statement on Sunday.

Even without him in the race, though, Hogan conceded on Tuesday that any conservative other than Trump — who has criticized Hogan as a RINO, or Republican in name only — or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the only other potential candidate polling in double digits, faces an uphill climb in clinching the GOP nomination.

The potential crowd is still anticipated to include multiple notable lawmakers, with former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley already running alongside Trump, and there’s no significant consolidation in sight.

“We got to find a candidate that can do that. And I don’t know who that is at this point,” Hogan said of the path for a candidate other than Trump and DeSantis to be successful. “But there can only be one.”

“Trump has to stumble, which is hard. And he’s been diminishing. But still, he’s the 800-pound gorilla. And then if he doesn’t make it, it goes to DeSantis, and then DeSantis has to stumble,” Hogan said. “And then you have to consolidate everyone else and overcome that.”

Yet if Trump does win the GOP primary, Hogan said the centrist political group No Labels, of which he is an honorary co-chair, could cobble together a third-party ticket.

Hogan said the group has “raised about $50 million to get access in all 50 states as kind of an insurance policy” for an “in case of ’emergency break glass'” scenario, referencing a general election matchup between Trump and President Joe Biden, who has said he will run in 2024 as well.

“I mean, they’re not trying to start a third party. They’re not committed to doing that. But in case the country is burning down, you may have to have an alternative,” he said.

Hogan insisted such a ticket would be a last-case scenario but could be sparked by a general election matchup between Trump and Biden — two politicians with consistently tepid approval ratings nationally who are nonetheless still seen by many as the likeliest nominees for each of their parties.

“I think that would be the trigger. I think that’s what they’re talking about. I’m not sure we’re gonna get to that point. I don’t know that. Frankly, I’m hopeful that Donald Trump is not going to be the Republican nominee. And I’m going to work toward that goal. And I’m assuming Biden may be the nominee, but who knows? I mean, he’s 80 years old. And we got a long ways to go,” Hogan said.

As for his own future, Hogan appeared open — among other possibilities — to having his name on such a ticket should one be launched.

“I’m not sure if it’s feasible. And it’s also just not something I’m working toward,” he said. “But, I mean, look, if you got to an election when the nominees were Biden and Trump and 70% of America didn’t want that, you wouldn’t rule it out, right?”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(TALLAHASSEE, Fla.) — Florida Republicans filed legislation to impose a six-week abortion ban on Tuesday, during the first moments of the state Legislature’s 2023 session — a bill that Gov. Ron DeSantis has said he would sign should it be sent to his desk.

“We’re for pro-life. I urge the legislature to work, produce good stuff, and we will sign,” DeSantis said during a February briefing when asked if he would approve a so-called heartbeat bill that would ban abortions after six weeks.

The state currently prohibits almost all abortions after 15 weeks, restrictions that were put in place in July as the state appealed after a judge’s ruling that the law violated the state’s constitution.

The new bill would prohibit “physicians from knowingly performing or inducing a termination of pregnancy after the gestational age of the fetus is determined to be more than 6 weeks, rather than 15 weeks,” according to its text, with exceptions for rape and incest or if needed to save the life of the mother — under specific conditions.

For example, two doctors, if available, would have to certify in writing that an abortion is needed to prevent the pregnant woman’s death or “avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”

In the case of a fatal fetal abnormality as attested to two by two physicians, the pregnancy could not be in the third trimester.

For victims of rape and incest, the pregnancy can’t be further than 15 weeks along and the woman has to provide a police report, restraining order, court order or other such documentation.

A six-week abortion ban would bar the procedure before many people identify their pregnancies. Pregnancies are counted based on the first day of a person’s last menstrual period, so by the time they miss their next period and take a test, they can already be four weeks in. And people with irregular cycles, or those uncertain of their cycle dates, might not recognize a missed period that quickly — taking them to six weeks or beyond before they know they’re pregnant.

The bill also prohibits any party other than a physician from inducing a termination of pregnancy, requires that medications intended for use in an abortion be dispensed in person by a physician and prohibits the dispensing of such medication through the U.S. Postal Service or any other courier or shipping service.

The proposal was introduced on the first day of the state’s 60-day legislative session by freshman state Sen. Erin Grall, a Republican who, when she was in the House last session, introduced Florida’s current 15-week ban. State Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka on Tuesday also filed a six-week abortion ban in her chamber.

“I believe that we have a unique opportunity in the fact that the Supreme Court is considering 15 weeks right now, and this would allow Florida to save as many babies as possible as soon as possible after that decision is made,” Grall said during a hearing in January 2022.

The White House quickly responded to the legislation on Tuesday, saying it would have a “devastating impact on women’s health.”

“Republican state legislators in Florida proposed today a bill that would ban abortion before many women know if they are even pregnant, virtually eliminating a woman’s right to make health care decisions about her own body,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said during a briefing on Tuesday.

She said that the ban would also impact women in southern states who rely on Florida as an “option to access care.”

“Like the overwhelming majority of Americans, the president and the vice president believe women should be able to make health care decisions with their own doctors and families, free from political interference. Period,” Jean-Pierre said. “They are committed to protecting access to reproductive care and continuing to call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade [the overruled Supreme Court abortion decision].”

The Florida bill was filed Tuesday just ahead of DeSantis’ State of the State address, though he did not refer to or comment on it during his speech.

The rising-star Republican who has visited various parts of the country — including Iowa, the first presidential nominating state, this week — is expected to energize the state’s GOP majority this session with conservative policy even as he’s quelled any discussion about his own White House ambitions.

ABC News’ Hannah Demissie, Alexandra Hutzler and Jay O’Brien contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Sarah Huckabee Sanders touted her endorsement from former President Donald Trump to help win the Arkansas governor’s mansion, but although Trump reportedly has asked her to return the favor for his 2024 White House bid, Sanders so far has kept publicly silent.

With his reelection bid underway, Trump asked Sanders for her endorsement in a phone call “weeks ago,” according to the New York Times. The Times reported Sanders replied she wouldn’t yet do so and hasn’t weighed in publicly since.

Trump, for his part, denied asking for her endorsement on Sunday on his Truth Social media platform, saying he never asked Sanders for her endorsement, while taking credit for her political success.

“I give endorsements, I don’t generally ask for them,” Trump posted. “With that being said, nobody has done more for her than I have, with the possible exception of her great father, Mike.”

Trump’s spokesperson and Sanders’ office had not responded to ABC News’ requests for comment as of Tuesday afternoon.

Sanders, the longest-serving White House press secretary under Trump, followed in the footsteps of her father, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, to become the first father-daughter governor duo in the nation.

But it was serving in Trump’s White House that propelled Sanders to become a household name herself.

Some of Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters, such as Steve Bannon, are questioning why Trump hadn’t seen more endorsements. Bannon and Sanders worked together in Trump’s White House until he was removed from his position as chief strategist in Aug. 2017.

“Sarah … are you listening?” he said on his podcast “The War Room.”

In an interview in January on “Fox News Sunday,” Sanders declined the opportunity to endorse Trump and said her focus was on serving Arkansas, not 2024.

“My focus right now has been on 2022, winning the election in November, preparing through transition and getting ready to take office, as I did this past week. I love the president. I have a great relationship with him. I know our country will be infinitely better off if he was in office right now instead of Joe Biden,” Sanders said. “My focus isn’t on 2024.”

The Arkansas state legislature on Tuesday is expected to pass Sanders’ landmark legislation, the LEARNS Act, which imitates elements of Florida’s education policy enacted under Gov. Ron DeSantis — thought to be Trump’s closest competitor in 2024. Sanders also tapped DeSantis’ education secretary Jacob Oliva to bring Florida’s plan to Arkansas as it’s unclear if she could be waiting for another candidate to endorse.

According to an Axios report on Tuesday, Sanders is among four women Trump is currently considering as vice presidential pick. The others include South Dakota Kristi Noem, Gov. former U.N. Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, the most high-profile of Trump’s announced challengers, and Kari Lake, who has not conceded the race for Arizona governor.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A bipartisan group of senior senators on Tuesday unveiled plans to introduce a bill they hope will effectively ban TikTok — as well as future apps that they say might jeopardize U.S. national security — joining a growing chorus of lawmakers seeking a nationwide ban of the popular social media platform used by some 100 million Americans, including politicians, every day.

The legislation, authored by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner and No. 2 Senate Republican John Thune, would give new powers to the Commerce Department to scrutinize foreign technology from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba, including applications like TikTok, which is owned by Chinese company ByteDance.

The new powers would include the ability to disband any company deemed a national security threat. Warner also cited the concerns voiced by many lawmakers that the video-sharing app could be used as a propaganda tool of the Chinese Communist Party.

“The Restrict Act is more than about TikTok and will give us that comprehensive approach,” Warner said in unveiling the bill.

“Our legislation says that any foreign communications technology that poses a national security risk — and one of the key things about or bill as well says that it’s incumbent upon the intelligence community to declassify as much information as possible to make that case — that we give the commerce secretary the tools to mitigate to divest up to and including banning these sort of technologies,” he told ABC News.

The Biden administration at the end of February gave federal agencies 30 days to wipe TikTok from all federal government systems and devices, per a congressional ban enacted with sweeping bipartisan support in December.

Many agencies, including the Defense Department and Department of Homeland Security, had already enacted bans. Canada and the European Union have taken similar steps. India has long banned the app.

Warner said he and Thune worked very closely with the White House on the legislation and as they unveiled it, the White House put out a statement supporting the measure and urging Congress to send it to President Joe Biden to sign.

“This legislation would empower the United States government to prevent certain foreign governments from exploiting technology services operating in the United States in a way that poses risks to Americans’ sensitive data and our national security,” White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said in a statement. “We look forward to continue working with both Democrats and Republicans on this bill, and urge Congress to act quickly to send it to the President’s desk.”

All of this is coming at a time of growing strife between the two superpowers particularly in the wake of the China spy balloon that entered U.S. airspace and was shot down on the orders of President Biden and threats that the Asian nation might arm Russia in its war against Ukraine, among numerous examples of conflict.

“The Chinese Communist Party has proven over the last few years that is willing to lie about just about everything. That likely won’t end with TikTok, which is why it’s important to establish a holistic and methodical approach to the challenges that are posed by technology from foreign adversaries. Safe to assume that the CCP is willing to lie about its spy balloon and cover up the origins of the worst pandemic than 100 years, they’ll lie about using Tiktok to spy on American citizens,” Thune told reporters in a news conference Tuesday.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, a co-sponor of the bill, said, “We have to recognize that we face geopolitical adversaries that are serious and threaten our security, our prosperity, and even the peace and freedom that we enjoy.”

Noting criticism that the bill would infringe on the privacy of Americans, Romney said, “One thing a lot worse than having our government infringe on our privacy is having the Chinese Communist Party infringe on our privacy and be able to track us and follow us. And whether it’s with social media or other technologies, communication technologies or hardware that they devise over the coming years, we have to make sure that we have the resources in place and the authorities in place to stop those things before they endanger us.”

TikTok has consistently denied that its China-based parent company is using the app to spy on Americans. And following approval in the House Foreign Affairs Committee of a bipartisan bill that would empower President Biden to ban TikTok, the company fired back, “A US ban on TikTok is a ban on the export of American culture and values to the billion-plus people who use our service worldwide. We’re disappointed to see this rushed piece of legislation move forward, despite its considerable negative impact on the free-speech rights of millions of Americans who use and love TikTok.”

Citing past Congressional efforts to ban the federal government use of products from foreign companies deemed a threat to U.S. national security, like Russian based anti-malware company Kaspersky Lab, and China’s Huawei Technologies and ZTE, Warner said he wants to move beyond the current “whack-a-mole approach that we’ve had with the threats of foreign technology.” Instead, the Virginia Democrat and former tech entrepreneur said it’s time to view national security threats through a modern day lens and not “the old definition…which were planes, tanks, and guns.” The senator said the new field of confrontation is “morphing into who controls and wins the technology battle.”

The Warner-Thune bill, also sponsored by five Democrats and five Republicans, might also withstand court scrutiny with specific legislation empowering a new federal agency within the Commerce Department. Cold War-era laws designed to protect entertainment industries from any retaliation by the president, and later expanded to include First Amendment concerns, were used by TikTok in a suit during the Trump administration which sought to restrict the social media behemoth.

Not all lawmakers are on board with such a ban, either.

Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, told ABC News Live Tuesday, “I think that we have to get all of the evidence first, as opposed to the bill that was produced in the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week, where it basically said that there should be a ban on TikTok almost immediately. I believe that the bill as written, you know, basically ties the Biden administration’s hands,” who pointed to a department within the Treasury Department that analyzes foreign investments in the U.S.

“I think that as opposed to rushing into it, there’s ways that we could make sure that we protect and should sanctions be needed, then the administration has the power to do it as opposed to having mandatory sanctions now, which I think would be–could cause more headaches than others because it could cause headaches with our allies.”

ABC News’ Sarah Kolinovsky and Justin Gomez contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Anthony D’Esposito and several other New York Republicans are pushing to stop embattled GOP colleague George Santos from potentially making money from his fame if he is indicted or convicted of certain crimes, according to legislation introduced Tuesday.

It’s a move that D’Esposito and the others, who have worked to distance themselves from their fellow freshman lawmaker, say is about holding members of Congress accountable — though Santos was “an inspiration” for their proposal.

“No one should be able to profit off lying to the American people and swindling their way into the people’s house,” D’Esposito, who introduced the legislation, said at a Tuesday press conference.

The “No Fortune for Fraud Act” would prevent House members “from receiving compensation for biographies, media appearances, or expressive or creative works” if they have been convicted of financial offenses or campaign finance fraud, according to the bill’s text.

A separate resolution, the “No Fame for Fraud Resolution,” offers a similar proposal that would alter the House rules to prohibit members from being paid for their celebrity status if they are indicted for finance or fraud crimes.

“If you’re defrauding the American people, if you’re making a mockery out of the people’s house or violating campaign finance law, you should not be able to turn it into a payday,” D’Esposito said at the press conference, where he introduced the two pieces of legislation.

The legislation is co-sponsored by New York freshmen Republicans Reps. Nick LaLota, Nick Langworthy, Mike Lawler, Marc Molinaro and Brandon Williams.

“He’s trying to use his new infamy to enrich himself, to further what he set out to do three years ago, to use his persona as a public figure to enrich himself,” LaLota argued to reporters on Tuesday. “And we New York Republicans can smell a scam from a mile away. And George Santos’ scam absolutely stinks.”

D’Esposito said that the group of lawmakers has had conversations with GOP leadership about their legislation and are “confident” that it will make it to the House floor for consideration.

While Santos’ name isn’t specifically mentioned in the text or resolution, a spokesperson for D’Esposito told ABC News that “Santos was certainly an inspiration for it.”

In a statement to ABC News, a spokesperson for Santos said, “It is unfortunate that after two years of abysmal policies that been put forth by House Democrats and the Biden Administration that there is a legislative focus on a specific Member of Congress. As a legislative body, our top priorities should be tackling high inflation as well as reducing high levels of crime.”

D’Esposito took another view. He said Tuesday that he could both fight for his district while also pushing for accountability for controversial members like Santos.

“I gave my word to the people of the 4th Congressional District back in Nassau County that I would fight for them, for their interests and for community values. Now as members of Congress, we’re going to continue to do that. But we’re going to hold those accountable that have violated the trust of not only the American people, but the people of the great state of New York,” he said.

Santos, who has admitted lying about parts of his biography while being challenged about other parts of his life, such as how his mother died, faces multiple probes from prosecutors in New York as well as Congress, amid calls for his resignation.

He has denied criminal wrongdoing and insisted he will continue to serve his constituents.

The House Ethics Committee announced Thursday that it had voted to establish an “Investigative Subcommittee” into Santos to look into numerous allegations against him, including about his campaign finances.

Santos previously told ABC News he would “100%” comply with the Ethics Committee’s investigation.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Chief Thomas Manger sent an internal memo to U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday saying the commentary on Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s program Monday night was “filled with offensive and misleading conclusions about the January 6 attack.”

The memo, obtained by ABC News, said “the opinion program never reached out to the Department to provide accurate context.”

“The program conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video,” Manger wrote. “The commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during the less tense moments.”

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who brokered the deal with Carlson and his producers to view the video and choose which video they wanted to air, refused to take questions from ABC News on Tuesday when Senior Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott pressed him on Carlson’s characterization of Jan. 6. Earlier, House Republicans tweeted out the video of Carlson’s segment, labeling it a “must watch.”

NEW – Capitol Police chief Thomas Manger sends internal memo this am saying Carlson’s report was “filled with offensive and misleading conclusions” about Jan. 6 and says the “opinion program” never reached out with appropriate context. Reporting w/ @rachelvscott pic.twitter.com/BrnD0n4IN1

— Katherine Faulders (@KFaulders) March 7, 2023

But as one Republican leader declined to take questions on his way into the Capitol — another Republican leader wasted no time addressing it.

Even before being asked by reporters, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell held up a printed copy of the Capitol Police internal memo on Tuesday afternoon.

“With regard to the presentation on Fox News last night, I want to associate myself entirely with the opinion of the Capitol Police about what happened on January 6,” McConnell said.

Asked if it were a mistake to give security footage to Carlson, McConnell said, “My concern is how it was depicted, which was a different issue. Clearly the chief of the Capitol Police, in my view, correctly describes what most of us witnessed firsthand on January 6. So, that’s my reaction to it. It was a mistake, in my view, for Fox News to depict this in a way that is completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official here at the Capitol thinks.”

Manger, who was sworn in in July 2021, told Capitol Police in the memo that television programs will not “record the truth for our history books” and added that “the truth and justice are on our side.” He didn’t mention Carlson by name in the letter, but it’s clear he’s referring to his programming.

Carlson on Monday aired what he claimed to be new surveillance videos from the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol in an effort to minimize the Capitol attack as a peaceful gathering and to discredit the work of the Jan. 6 committee and federal investigators.

In contrast to Carlson’s claims now, in the days right after Jan. 6, McCarthy said, “Let me be clear, last week’s violent attack on the Capitol was undemocratic, un-American, and criminal.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland, asked on Tuesday about Carlson’s program, said, “I think it’s very clear what happened on January 6.”

“I think all Americans saw what happened on January 6, and most of it saw most of us, saw it as it was happening,” Garland said at a news conference. “It was a violent attack on a fundamental tenant of American democracy — that power is peacefully transferred from one administration to another. Over 100 officers were assaulted on that day. Five officers died. We have charged more than 1000 people with their crimes on that day and more than 500 have already been convicted. I think it’s very clear what happened on January 6.”

Carlson and some House Republicans have been hyping the report up for weeks, but after viewing 40,000 hours of video given to him by McCarthy, he played on repeat only select scenes of the security camera footage.

Carlson defended “protesters” on Jan. 6, claiming they were “right” to “believe that the election they had just voted in had been unfairly conducted.” Notably, Carlson’s comments come on the heels of new court filings by Dominion Voting Systems in their lawsuit against Fox News that showed in mid-November 2020, Carlson texted one of his producers that “there wasn’t enough fraud to change the outcome” of the election.

Despite what he’s said in private, Carlson said on Monday that “taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6 was an insurrection,” despite also showing familiar footage of rioters violently breaking into the Capitol.

“They were not insurrectionists,” he said. “They were sightseers.”

Carlson also selectively picked footage that showed protesters standing around inside the Capitol and argued it proved, “They’re not destroying the Capitol. They obviously revere the Capitol.” However, Carlson failed to mention that over a million dollars in damage were sustained during the attack on the Capitol.

There are multiple falsehoods, contortions and clear omissions in Carlson’s report.

One of which relates to Jacob Chansley, the self-described “Q-Anon Shaman” who infamously marched through the Capitol with a spear and horned helmet during the riot and who has been sentenced to 41 months in prison for his role in the attack.

Carlson questioned why the video he aired tonight of Chansley — which he said depicted Chansley being led through the Capitol by police — didn’t come out at trial. But the case never went to trial. Chansley pleaded guilty to one felony count of unlawfully obstructing an official proceeding.

“When greatly outnumbered during a violent demonstration, officers are trained to use a variety of techniques to prevent violent and destructive behavior including — when possible — engaging with those behaving non-violently and encouraging them to demonstrate peacefully or depart the location,” said ABC News Contributor John Cohen, a former acting undersecretary for intelligence at the Department of Homeland Security. “Especially if they viewed him as a potential agitator. Walking him away quietly from the crowd thereby reduces the likelihood he will incite violence.”

It’s not immediately clear whether Chansley’s defense attorneys, who were provided hours of footage showing his movements throughout the Capitol and other items of discovery in his case — were not able to access this video before he entered his guilty plea. An attorney for Chansley did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.

ABC News has repeatedly asked for the footage McCarthy gave exclusively to Carlson and reached out to McCarthy’s office for his response to the misleading report after McCarthy condemned the Capitol attack on Jan. 6.

ABC News’ Alexander Mallin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Popular self-help author and speaker Marianne Williamson — the first notable candidate for the 2024 Democratic primary and challenger to President Joe Biden’s presumed reelection bid — issued a pointed rebuttal on Tuesday to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre jokingly dismissing her candidacy.

During a press briefing on Monday, Jean-Pierre was asked about but said she was “just not tracking” Williamson’s campaign, which formally launched Saturday.

“I mean, if I had a — what’s it called — a little, little globe here … a crystal ball, that I could tell you, a Magic 8 Ball or whatever, if I could feel her aura — I just, I just don’t have it. I just don’t have anything to share on that,” Jean-Pierre said to laughter in the briefing room.

“Gosh, you guys are making me laugh now,” she said then.

Williamson, in a response video posted on Twitter, said: “I was so sad to see the commentary of the president’s press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, about me, about crystal balls, which I’ve never spoken or written about, and auras, which I’ve never spoken or written about, and just speaking so derisively and in such mocking terms about someone who is running for president of the United States and as a woman, and this is the Democratic Party.”

“I have a constitutional right to run, and my candidacy is about substantive issues and policies,” she said.

Considered a long-shot candidate after a failed bid for the White House in 2020 and Congress in 2014, Williamson told ABC News’ Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl during an exclusive interview for ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that she doesn’t see her bid as a challenge to Biden — but as “challenging a system.”

She repeated that view on Tuesday.

“I have made it clear in interview after interview that the president is a nice man and that I have no interest in taking personal potshots. But apparently the White House, or at least as expressed by Karine, doesn’t share my commitment to the high ground,” she said.

She then referenced a notable remark from Biden when he first assumed office after unseating former President Donald Trump. At the time, Biden warned his senior aides at a virtual swearing-in ceremony against disrespect while encouraging decency, something he said had been “missing in a big way the last four years.”

“But I am not joking when I say this: If you are ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect … talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot,” Biden said then. “On the spot. No ifs, ands or buts. Everybody … everybody is entitled to be treated with decency and dignity.”

Williamson said in her video on Tuesday that didn’t want Jean-Pierre to lose “her job over this” but that the remarks were indicative of larger attitudes.

“I do hope that from now on this low, derisive, this narrative about me … it just obviously meant to get me out of the conversation,” she said.

“I hope that everyone who is watching realizes this is not just about me. They’re not just telling me to get away — like flick her off like a mosquito. It’s about you. It’s about anyone who, first of all, I think that has faith and takes faith seriously. Or is it just about any woman who speaks out of turn? I don’t know. That’s for you to decide,” she said.

Karl asked Williamson on Sunday about media coverage of her in 2020, noting she was previously labeled as “anti-science, anti-vax [and] a crystal lady” and asking how Democrats should view her candidacy this time around.

She described herself as an “FDR Democrat.”

Her signature 2020 proposals included reparations for slavery and the creation of a Department of Peace and Department of Children and Youth while also supporting progressive policies like universal health care and free college — issues she has again centered in her nascent 2024 run.

“I am a Democrat,” Williamson told Karl. “I’m old enough to remember a time when the Democratic Party more than not, did make an unequivocal stance. … [T]he Democratic Party needs to be a conduit for the healing of this country,” she continued. “But first, the Democratic Party needs to look in the mirror and heal itself.”

ABC News’ Cheyenne Haslett, Meghan Mistry and Brittany Shepherd contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The fight between President Joe Biden and Republicans on Medicare and Social Security continues weeks after their fiery exchange at the State of the Union.

Biden has taken his message that some in the GOP want to implement cuts to the popular programs on the road, highlighting at nearly every opportunity a proposal by Florida Sen. Rick Scott to sunset all federal legislation every five years — which the Republican now claims was not intended for Social Security or Medicare.

Scott, in turn, has accused Biden of cutting billions of dollars from Medicare when he signed the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act into law last year. In an ad released after the State of the Union, Scott said Biden “just cut $280 billion from Medicare.”

The back-and-forth comes as the battle over the nation’s debt limit intensifies on Capitol Hill. With the country heading toward default as soon as July, lawmakers have to reach agreement on the debt ceiling or risk unprecedented economic consequences.

Biden responded at a union event in Pennsylvania in mid-February.

“Here’s Rick Scott’s response to this … He said, ‘I’m cutting prescription drug costs. That means I’m cutting Medicare.’ Where’s he been? I think he’s a little confused,” Biden said.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, too, posted online following the State of the Union that Biden slashed Medicare by $300 billion.

But several experts told ABC News that is not the case.

“The suggestion that the Inflation Reduction Act cuts Medicare is absolutely ludicrous,” said Stacie Dusetzina, a professor in the department of health policy at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

Juliette Cubanski, the deputy director of the program on Medicare Policy at Kaiser Family Foundation, also said “the claim doesn’t hold up.”

Experts explained the Inflation Reduction Act authorizes the federal government to negotiate some drug prices and requires drug companies to pay a rebate to Medicare if they increase prices faster than inflation, which is saving the program money but not costing beneficiaries.

Other drug-pricing provisions in the plan include capping the cost of insulin at $35 per month for seniors on Medicare and capping out-of-pocket spending for certain beneficiaries.

“These changes reduce the prices that Medicare pays, and reduce Medicare spending, but do not cut benefits or coverage for Medicare beneficiaries,” said Gretchen Jacobson, the vice president of the Medicare program at Commonwealth Fund.

According to the final estimate from the Congressional Budget Office, the law’s drug-pricing provisions will reduce the federal deficit by $237 billion over the next decade. A previous estimate by the CBO on an earlier version of the bill that was not signed into law placed the savings at $300 billion.

“So the bottom line is that reducing the amount of money that Medicare spends on prescription drugs to the tune of $237 billion is not the same thing as cutting funding for Medicare by $237 billion,” Cubanksi said.

The ramped up rhetoric between Biden and the GOP comes amid an impending showdown on the debt ceiling. Democrats want a clean raise to the debt limit without cuts, while Republicans want to reign in government spending.

McCarthy has now said Medicare and Social Security should be “off the table” in the debt ceiling talks. A recent CBO report showed the government will default, or run out of money to pay its bills, sometime between July and September unless Congress raises the nation’s $31.4 trillion debt ceiling.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden is out Tuesday with a new plan he says will shore up Medicare’s finances through 2050 by increasing taxes on the wealthy and allowing more negotiation on prescription drug prices.

The plan, unveiled by Biden in a New York Times op-ed on Tuesday, is part of the White House’s overall budget proposal set to be released later this week as a battle brews on Capitol Hill over the debt ceiling.

Lawmakers have until September at the latest to reach an agreement or risk an unprecedented default that could wreak havoc on the economy. Republicans have said they won’t raise the debt ceiling without cuts to federal spending, while Democrats have advocated for a clean increase to fulfill the nation’s obligations.

Amid the showdown, Biden’s sought a stark contrast between his administration and the Republican Party when it comes to Medicare and Social Security. He’s accused some in the GOP of gunning for the popular programs, though House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s said they are off the table in the upcoming negotiations, and has vowed to strengthen the programs as they face financial shortfalls.

To keep Medicare solvent, Biden’s new plan would increase the Medicare tax rate 5% — up from 3.8% — on Americans making more than $400,000 per year.

He’s also proposed allowing Medicare to negotiate the prices of more prescription drugs and investing the savings reaped back into the program. Currently, Medicare is allowed to negotiate only the prices of a small share of covered drugs as outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act passed by Democrats last year.

According to a White House fact sheet, the Medicare proposal will also cap generic drug cost sharing at $2 for medications used to treat chronic illnesses like hypertension or high cholesterol.

“Add all that up, and my budget will extend the Medicare trust fund for more than another generation, an additional 25 years or more of solvency — beyond 2050,” Biden wrote in the New York Times op-ed. “These are common-sense changes that I’m confident an overwhelming majority of Americans support.”

“MAGA Republicans have a different view,” Biden continued, taking aim at Republican criticisms of the Inflation Reduction Act. “If the MAGA Republicans get their way, seniors will pay higher out-of-pocket costs on prescription drugs and insulin, the deficit will be bigger, and Medicare will be weaker.”

Millions of seniors depend on Medicare for health insurance but the program faces a funding shortfall that could see benefits cut starting in 2028 unless action is taken by Congress.

“Drugs make up about 27% of fee-for-service Medicare spending for beneficiaries who are enrolled in prescription drug benefits, so it should not be surprising that doing more to reduce the prices would help to extend solvency until 2050,” Stacie Dusetzina, a health policy professor at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said of Biden’s new plan.

“Will that be enough? Maybe not, but it could help. Medicare is facing substantial spending growth due to the aging population and their health needs, which means we need to do more than minor adjustments if we want to keep the program solvent,” Dusetzina told ABC News in an email.

It remains to be seen how Biden’s budget will address Social Security, which also faces a funding shortfall that could result in scheduled benefits being cut by 23% starting in 2034.

“When I introduce my budget, you’ll see that it’s going to invest in America, lower health costs, and protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare while cutting the deficit more than $2 trillion over the next 10 years,” Biden said as he spoke on health care in Virginia Beach last week.

Biden is scheduled to unveil his broader budget plan in Philadelphia on Thursday.

The GOP has yet to reveal exactly what they want to see cut in the next budget and have not detailed a timeline for their budget plan to be unveiled. Rep. James Comer told This Week last month they in the process of debating their proposal.

“Somebody’s got to be the adult at the table, and House Republicans will hopefully be that,” Comer said.

ABC News’ Sarah Kolinovsky contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — As information from the Dominion Voting Systems’ lawsuit against Fox News reveals more about what allegedly occurred behind the scenes at the cable network in the wake of the 2020 election, below is a look at what some the biggest Fox stars were privately saying about election fraud claims — versus what they said on-air to their viewers around the same time.

The voting machine company, which is suing Fox News for $1.6 billion for allegedly defaming the company in the aftermath of the 2020 election, has filed court documents containing emails, texts, testimony, and other private communications from Fox News personnel appearing to cast doubt on claims that Dominion’s voting machines had somehow rigged the presidential election in Joe Biden’s favor.

The material suggest a stark contrast between concerns the hosts privately raised about fraud claims and the claims that they aired to their viewers, sometimes within the same day.

Fox News has said that Dominion in its filings has “mischaracterized the record” and “cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context.”

“Dominion’s lawsuit has always been more about what will generate headlines than what can withstand legal and factual scrutiny,” network officials said in a statement. “Their efforts to publicly smear FOX for covering and commenting on allegations by a sitting President of the United States should be recognized for what it is: a blatant violation of the First Amendment.”

Dominion, in its filings, claims that it sent more than 3,600 separate communications to Fox News with fact checks intended to correct false information. In one of the entries included in Dominion’s filing, a Fox executive wrote to a colleague that he had received so many of Dominion’s fact checks that “I have it tattooed on my body at this point.”

Below are some examples of Fox hosts’ private communications, as cited in the filing, versus what they said on their broadcasts at around the same time.

Tucker Carlson: ‘The software s–t is absurd’

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 8, Carlson privately texted his producer that the allegations about Dominion were “absurd,” according to the Dominion filing. Also that day, Carlson’s producer texted him about his own doubts.

“I don’t think there is evidence of voter fraud that swung the election,” producer Alex Pfeiffer texted to Carlson, per the lawsuit. “The software s–t is absurd,” Carlson allegedly responded. “Half our viewers have seen the Maria clip.”

ON-AIR: On his show just one night later, Carlson pushed more suggestions of fraud, though he said “we don’t know anything about the software.”

“We don’t know how many votes were stolen on Tuesday night. We don’t know anything about the software that many say was rigged. We don’t know. We ought to find out,” he said. “But here’s what we do know. On a larger level, at the highest levels, actually, our system isn’t what we thought it was. It’s not as fair as it should be. Not even close.”

Carlson during this show also said that “false claims of fraud can be every bit as destructive as the fraud itself,” according to the filing, and that “[T]he fraud that we can confirm does not seem to be enough to alter the election results. We should be honest and tell you that…”

Maria Bartiromo: Powell’s ‘kooky’ email

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 7, host Maria Bartiromo scoffed at an email she received from attorney Sidney Powell forwarding her evidence of fraud, calling it “kooky,” the filing said.

ON AIR: Just one day later, Bartiromo had Powell on her show where she invited her to discuss her claims, saying “I know there were voting irregularities.”

“Sidney, we talked about the Dominion software. I know that there were voting irregularities. Tell me about that,” she said, according to Dominions filing.

Sean Hannity: “Rudy is acting like an insane person”

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 11, according to the filing, Hannity privately commented on Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani.

“Rudy is acting like an insane person,” Hannity said, per the filing.

IN PUBLIC: That same day on his show, Hannity told his viewers that the lawsuits and affidavits being filed allege “serious election misconduct.”

“Investigations continue in multiple key states where hundreds, now, of sworn affidavits are being filed, lawsuits are being filed, alleging serious election misconduct,” he said. “And let’s not forget the software error — we’re going to be focused on this a lot — wrongfully awarded Joe Biden thousands of ballots that were cast for President Trump, until the problem was amazingly fixed. And according to a report, that very same software — it’s called Dominion Voting Systems — that was used in 28 states.”

Tucker Carlson: Allegations against Dominion ‘shockingly reckless’

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 21, Carlson privately texted that claims about Dominion were “shockingly reckless,” according to the filing.

It’s “shockingly reckless” to claim Dominion rigged election “[i]f there’s no one inside the company willing to talk, or internal Dominion documents or copies of the software showing that they did it” — “as you know there isn’t,” he wrote, according to the lawsuit.

ON-AIR: Two nights later, on Nov. 23, Carlson told his viewers during his show that security surrounding electronic voting machines was a “real issue.”

“You’ve heard a lot over the past few days about the security of our electronic voting machines. This is a real issue, no matter who raises it or who tries to dismiss it out of hand as a conspiracy theory. Electronic voting is not as secure as traditional hand counting. Period. It never will be as secure,” he said.

Laura Ingraham: ‘No serious lawyer could believe what they were saying’

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 22, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham privately discussed Sidney Powell, according to the filing, with Tucker calling her a “nut.”

“It totally wrecked my weekend. Wow… I had to try to make the WH disavow her, which they obviously should have done long before,” Carlson told Ingraham, per the filing. “No serious lawyer could believe what they were saying,” she allegedly replied. “But they said nothing in public,” replied Carlson. “Pretty disgusting.”

ON AIR: Just one night later, Ingraham, speaking to her viewers, said that she believed the election was “rife with problems and potential fraud” but that Biden would be nonetheless inaugurated on Jan. 20.

“Now legal challenges continue in a number of states, serious questions about vote counting, poll watcher access, are outstanding — but unless the legal situation changes in a dramatic and frankly an unlikely manner, Joe Biden will be inaugurated on Jan. 20,” she said. “Now, to say this, does not mean I don’t think that this election was rife with problems and potential fraud … and it does not mean that I disagree with the president’s right and obligation at all to pursue legitimate legal challenges to this outcome.”

Tucker Carlson: ‘There wasn’t enough fraud to change the outcome’

PRIVATE: On Nov. 13, Carlson wrote privately that Trump needed to concede, and agreed that “there wasn’t enough fraud to change the outcome” of the election, according to the filing.

PUBLIC: Three nights later, Carlson said on air that there are “legitimate concerns” about election integrity.

“Millions of Americans understandably are asking the questions and questions like it. Those are real questions. Our current system does not inspire confidence,” he said. “People have legitimate concerns about the integrity of our elections and right now a lot of those concerns center on the software that many states use to keep track of ballots.” And while Carlson added that he would not “endorse” Powell’s claims until he saw evidence, he said they were “shocking” and that he didn’t “dismiss it out of hand.”

Laura Ingraham: ‘Sidney is a complete nut’

IN PRIVATE: On Nov. 18, Carlson said privately to Ingraham that he caught Powell “lying” and it was “unbelievably offensive,” according to the filing.

“Sidney Powell is lying by the way. I caught her. It’s insane,” Carlson allegedly said. “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy,” replied Ingraham. “It’s unbelievably offensive to me,” said Carlson. “Our viewers are good people and they believe it.”

ON-AIR: On the air that night, Ingraham criticized those who dismissed Trump’s challenges as conspiracy theories and praised another “great show” that had reviewed affidavits that “cited really disturbing things they had seen.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.