(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden said the U.S. “acted out of an abundance of caution” when shooting down three unidentified aerial objects flying over North American airspace this past weekend.
While officials are still working to recover the objects and assess them, Biden said nothing currently suggests they were related to China’s surveillance program or that they were surveillance objects from other countries.
“But make no mistake, if any object presents a threat to the safety and security of the American people, I will take it down,” Biden said.
On the Chinese surveillance balloon, Biden added: “I make no apologies for taking down that balloon.”
The president’s remarks on Thursday were the first time he’s commented extensively on the issue, coming more than two weeks after the Chinese spy balloon was spotted over Montana.
The balloon that traversed the continental U.S. between Jan. 28 and Feb. 4 added tension to the already fraught U.S.-China relationship. Biden was criticized by Republicans for not taking action to shoot the balloon down earlier, though he said he ordered it be taken down as soon as possible but his military advisers said it was too risky to do over land.
Since then, three unidentified aerial objects were downed by the U.S. military over three successive days — one over Alaska, one over Canada and the third over Lake Huron in Michigan.
The administration has yet to confirm what those objects were or where they came from, though White House spokesperson John Kirby said earlier this week a “leading explanation” within the intelligence community is that the objects may have been for commercial or benign use.
Biden echoed that sentiment Thursday, saying while they still don’t know for sure the objects were “most likely balloons tied to private companies, recreation or research institutions” for weather purposes or scientific research.
An interagency review has been underway to study broader policy implications for detecting and analyzing unidentified aerial objects that pose either safety or security risks.
“They are continuing to work intensively to put forward parameters … that work is continuing but you will hear from the president and he will give an update on what has occurred over the last several days,” White House press secretary Jean-Pierre said Thursday of the interagency review. She had previously said their work was expected to be done by the end of the week.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden will speak at 2 p.m. ET on Thursday about the country’s “response” to four aerial objects that have been shot down in recent weeks, according to the White House.
Biden has faced growing pressure from Republicans and Democrats to address the nation on the suspected Chinese spy balloon and the three other unidentified objects that were shot down in North American airspace beginning earlier this month.
His remarks on Thursday will be the first time he’s commented extensively on the issue.
According to the White House, Biden will address “the United States’ response to recent aerial objects” in a formal speech from the South Court Auditorium.
“That includes our decisive response to China’s high-altitude surveillance balloon and the president putting the safety and security of the American people always first,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters at the daily briefing.
The balloon that traversed the continental U.S. between Jan. 28 and Feb. 4 added tension to the already fraught U.S.-China relationship. Biden was criticized by Republicans for not taking action to shoot the balloon down earlier, though he said he ordered it be taken down as soon as possible but his military advisers said it was too risky to do over land.
Since then, three unidentified aerial objects were downed by the U.S. military over three successive days — one over Alaska, one over Canada and the third over Lake Huron in Michigan.
The administration has yet to confirm what those objects were or where they came from, though White House spokesperson John Kirby said earlier this week a “leading explanation” within the intelligence community is that the objects may have been for commercial or benign use.
An interagency review has been underway “to study the broader policy implications for detection, analysis, and disposition of unidentified aerial objects that pose either safety or security risks,” Kirby said Monday.
“They are continuing to work intensively to put forward parameters … that work is continuing but you will hear from the president and he will give an update on what has occurred over the last several days,” Jean-Pierre said Thursday of the interagency review. She had previously said their work was expected to be done by the end of the week.
(ATLANTA) — The Fulton County, Georgia, grand jury investigating efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election has recommended to prosecutors that they seek indictments against witnesses who they believe may have lied during their testimony, according to excerpts of the grand jury’s report released Thursday.
“A majority of the grand jury believes that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses testifying before it,” the grand jury wrote in the report. “The Grand Jury recommends that the District Attorney seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.”
The report does not list any names of those who grand jury members believe may have committed perjury.
Separately, the grand jury also found “by a unanimous vote that no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2020 presidential election that could result in overturning that election.”
Outside of this, in the few paragraphs that were released of the report’s introduction, conclusion, and section on perjury, there were no details revealed regarding whether or not the grand jury recommended changes for anyone related to efforts to overturn the election.
The report does not name any potential targets for indictment, nor does it offer any rationale for its allegations of perjury. It does not mention Trump by name, nor any of the 75 witnesses interviewed as part of their probe.
Excerpts from the report were released following an order earlier this week from a Georgia judge overseeing the case. The majority of the long-anticipated report — the final product of a monthslong grand jury investigation into potential 2020 election interference in the state — remains sealed on order of Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney.
McBurney’s ruling came after he heard arguments last month over whether or not to publicly release the report. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis argued for the report to remain sealed, saying that it was important to “be mindful of protecting future defendants’ rights.”
Willis also said during the hearing that charging decisions were “imminent.”
Thomas Clyde, a lawyer representing a coalition of media outlets that includes ABC News, urged McBurney to order the release of the report based on existing case law and “a genuine public interest in what these jurors found.”
Though the special grand jury does not have the power to bring indictments, it has the power to make recommendations regarding potential charges. It would then be up to the district attorney to determine whether or not to pursue them.
According to the order from the judge, the full report provided just that: “a roster of who should (or should not) be indicted, and for what, in relation to the conduct (and aftermath) of the 2020 general election in Georgia,” McBurney wrote.
Those recommendations, however, are “for the District Attorney’s eyes only — for now,” McBurney ordered.
Willis on Monday told Atlanta ABC News affiliate WSB that she was “very pleased” with the order.
Ambassador Norman Eisen (ret.), a senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institute who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee from 2019 to 2020, told ABC News that despite the judge shielding most of the report, “it’s clear from the judge’s order that the grand jury recommended charges.”
“The question is: I don’t think that if people are being charged, Trump can logically be left out, because he was the ringleader,” Eisen told ABC News. “He was the mastermind of the plots.”
Eisen pointed to McBurney’s note that the report gave recommendations regarding “who should (or should not) be indicted, and for what.”
“Really, if no one was being indicted, there would be no need to say, ‘for what,'” Eisen said. “That second clause only makes sense if someone is getting indicted.”
In a statement before last month’s hearing to determine the report’s release, attorneys representing Trump in the matter said they did not expect to see charges recommended for the former president.
“The grand jury compelled the testimony of dozens of other, often high-ranking, officials during the investigation, but never found it important to speak with the President,” Trump’s attorneys said in a statement. “He was never subpoenaed nor asked to come in voluntarily by this grand jury or anyone in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office.”
Therefore, the attorneys said, they “assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump” — although there’s no indication if that’s true or not.
Attorneys representing Trump did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment ahead of the report’s release.
Regarding the grand jury’s concerns that some witnesses may have lied under oath during their testimony, Eisen said the district attorney could further pursue those witnesses.
“I don’t think Fani Willis is going to let witnesses get away with perjury before her grand jury,” Eisen said. “She can use that to coerce the liars to tell the truth and cooperate. By lying they’ve given her leverage over them.”
The special grand jury, which was seated in May 2022, was composed of 26 members of the public who heard testimony from over 75 witnesses, prosecutors said.
Those who were subpoenaed and appeared before the grand jury included some of Trump’s closest allies and supporters, including attorneys Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, who unsuccessfully fought his subpoena up to the United State Supreme Court.
Giuliani, along with 16 so-called “fake electors” who allegedly participated in a scheme to overturn the state’s election results, were notified last year that they were considered “targets” of the investigation.
Responding to the notification of his status as a target of the probe, Giuliani said, “I appeared in Georgia as attorney for Donald J. Trump — so I’m going to be prosecuted for what I did as an attorney?”
The Justice Department is also examining the allegations involving fake electors as part of its own separate investigation, sources have told ABC News.
Attorneys for the electors have denied any wrongdoing in their actions.
“They cannot have and did not commit any crime as a matter of fact and law,” attorney Holly Pierson, who represents 11 of the alleged fake electors, wrote in a court filing.
The jury was seated last May as part of Willis’ criminal probe into allegations of election interference, which was launched in February 2021. The investigation was sparked in part by the now-infamous Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump pleaded with Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the exact number Trump needed to win Georgia.
Trump has repeatedly defended his call to Raffensperger, calling it “perfect.”
(ATLANTA) — Portions of a report submitted by the Georgia grand jury investigating efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election are set to be released Thursday, following an order earlier this week from a Georgia judge overseeing the case.
The majority of the long-anticipated report — the final product of a months-long grand jury investigation into potential 2020 election interference in the state — will remain sealed, according to Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney’s order. This includes the jury’s ultimate recommendations on whether or not anyone should face criminal charges.
But the sections that McBurney said are “ripe for release” on Thursday will include the report’s introduction, its conclusion, and a section “in which the special purpose grand jury discusses its concern that some witnesses may have lied under oath during their testimony to the grand jury,” the judge said.
That section “does not identify those witnesses,” according to the court order.
McBurney’s ruling came after he heard arguments last month over whether or not to publicly release the report. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis argued for the report to remain sealed, saying that it was important to “be mindful of protecting future defendants’ rights.”
Willis also said during the hearing that charging decisions were “imminent.”
Thomas Clyde, a lawyer representing a coalition of media outlets that includes ABC News, urged McBurney to order the release of the report based on existing case law and “a genuine public interest in what these jurors found.”
Though the special grand jury does not have the power to bring indictments, it has the power to make recommendations regarding potential charges. It would then be up to the district attorney to determine whether or not to pursue them.
According to the order from the judge, the report provided just that: “a roster of who should (or should not) be indicted, and for what, in relation to the conduct (and aftermath) of the 2020 general election in Georgia,” McBurney wrote.
Those recommendations, however, are “for the District Attorney’s eyes only — for now,” McBurney ordered.
Willis on Monday told Atlanta ABC News affiliate WSB-TV that she was “very pleased” with the order.
Ambassador Norman Eisen (ret.), a senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institute who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee from 2019 to 2020, told ABC News that despite the judge shielding most of the report, “it’s clear from the judge’s order that the grand jury recommended charges.”
“The question is: I don’t think that if people are being charged, Trump can logically be left out, because he was the ringleader,” Eisen told ABC News. “He was the mastermind of the plots.”
Eisen pointed to McBurney’s note that the report gave recommendations regarding “who should (or should not) be indicted, and for what.”
“Really, if no one was being indicted, there would be no need to say, ‘for what,'” Eisen said. “That second clause only makes sense if someone is getting indicted.”
In a statement before last month’s hearing to determine the report’s release, attorneys representing Trump in the matter said they did not expect to see charges recommended for the former president.
“The grand jury compelled the testimony of dozens of other, often high-ranking, officials during the investigation, but never found it important to speak with the President,” Trump’s attorneys said in a statement. “He was never subpoenaed nor asked to come in voluntarily by this grand jury or anyone in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office.”
Therefore, the attorneys said, they “assume that the grand jury did their job and looked at the facts and the law, as we have, and concluded there were no violations of the law by President Trump” — although there’s no indication if that’s true or not.
Attorneys representing Trump did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment ahead of the report’s release.
Regarding the grand jury’s concerns that some witnesses may have lied under oath during their testimony, Eisen said the district attorney could further pursue those witnesses.
“I don’t think Fani Willis is going to let witnesses get away with perjury before her grand jury,” Eisen said. “She can use that to coerce the liars to tell the truth and cooperate. By lying they’ve given her leverage over them.”
The special grand jury, which was seated in May 2022, was composed of 26 members of the public who heard testimony from over 75 witnesses, prosecutors said.
Those who were subpoenaed and appeared before the grand jury included some of Trump’s closest allies and supporters, including attorneys Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, who unsuccessfully fought his subpoena up to the United State Supreme Court.
Giuliani, along with 16 so-called “fake electors” who allegedly participated in a scheme to overturn the state’s election results, were notified last year that they were considered “targets” of the investigation.
Responding to the notification of his status as a target of the probe, Giuliani said, “I appeared in Georgia as attorney for Donald J. Trump — so I’m going to be prosecuted for what I did as an attorney?”
The Justice Department is also examining the allegations involving fake electors as part of its own separate investigation, sources have told ABC News.
Attorneys for the electors have denied any wrongdoing in their actions.
“They cannot have and did not commit any crime as a matter of fact and law,” attorney Holly Pierson, who represents 11 of the alleged fake electors, wrote in a court filing.
The jury was seated last May as part of Willis’ criminal probe into allegations of election interference, which was launched in February 2021. The investigation was sparked in part by the now-infamous Jan. 2, 2021, phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Trump pleaded with Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes,” the exact number Trump needed to win Georgia.
Trump has repeatedly defended his call to Raffensperger, calling it “perfect.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden is set to undergo his second physical as president Thursday at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, more than a year after his first physical since taking the White House.
Biden, who is 80 years old, says he is weighing whether to seek a second term, and his physical fitness and mental acuity will likely be top of mind for voters if he does run again.
He has largely brushed off those age questions amid speculation about his 2024 plans.
“Look, I’m a great respecter of fate. I would be completely, thoroughly honest with the American people if I thought there was any health problem, anything that would keep me from being able to do the job. And and, so we’ll see. But, you know, I just — I think people have to just watch me,” Biden said in an interview with PBS NewsHour earlier this month.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday “you can expect a memo from the physician will be released publicly in the same manner as it was in 2021.”
It’s unclear how long the exam will take, as Biden indicated some portions of the physical had already been completed back in November.
“I’ve gotten my — I will get — part of my physical is already done, and I’ll be getting it before the end of the year,” Biden told reporters on Thanksgiving.
Biden’s first physical as president took place Nov. 19, 2021 — one day before his 79th birthday.
The president’s physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, wrote following the exam that Biden was a “healthy, vigorous 78-year-old man,” who is “fit for duty” and “fully executes all of his responsibilities without exemptions or accommodations.”
O’Connor said Biden has been under treatment for four different conditions: non-valvular atrial fibrillation, a type of irregular heart rhythm; hyperlipidemia, involving higher concentrations of fats or lipids in the blood; gastroesophageal reflux and seasonal allergies.
While Biden got a mostly clean bill of health, O’Connor — who has been Biden’s doctor since 2009 — noted two specific observations: his frequent throat clearing, and a stiffened gate, compared to previous exams.
“The president has exhibited increasing frequency and severity of ‘throat clearing’ and coughing during speaking engagements,” O’Connor wrote.
“He has exhibited such symptoms for as long as I have known him, but they certainly seem more frequent and more pronounced over the last few months,” he added, noting he ascribed this to his gastroesophageal reflux.
Biden also underwent a routine colonoscopy as part of his first physical, requiring him to undergo anesthesia, and briefly transfer power to Vice President Kamala Harris.
Notably since his first physical, the president had COVID-19, and a rebound case of COVID following his Paxlovid treatment in July 2022.
Biden also took a spill while riding his bike in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, in June 2022, though he required no medical attention for the fall.
Before he came to the White House, his most recent physical and medical report was one his campaign released in December 2019. That was a three-page summary that declared Biden “a healthy, vigorous, 77-year-old male, who is fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency.”
Biden also suffered a fractured foot just before taking office in November 2020, after he fell while chasing his dog Major at his Wilmington, Delaware, home.
The most notable health incidents in Biden’s past were the two cranial aneurysms he suffered in 1988.
Physicals typically include measures of height, weight, blood pressure, heart rate and cholesterol, although Biden’s 2021 exam also included an exam of his eyes, skin, ears, nose and throat, neurological and pulmonary system, thyroid and even his teeth.
Biden was initially slated to complete his physical by the end of January, though it was delayed due to a busy period of presidential travel, per a White House official.
(WASHINGTON) — Dual investigations into Hunter Biden’s financial dealings could enter crucial but divergent phases in the coming weeks as congressional scrutiny of the president’s son ramps up and federal prosecutors press forward in their years-long probe of his tax affairs and overseas business endeavors.
The status of the two probes, one rapidly expanding as another enters its fifth year, marks a precarious and pivotal moment for the younger Biden, 52, whose legal challenges and personal life have made him a target for his father’s political foes.
After years of largely avoiding public confrontations about his business dealings, Hunter Biden has recently engaged a new legal team and undertaken a more aggressive legal tack, making private citizen criminal referrals and sending cease-and-desist letters involving some of his most vocal critics.
Here is the latest on the various investigations into the president’s son:
Justice Department probe
Federal authorities with the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware, led by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, a Trump-era appointee, have been investigating Hunter Biden since 2018, ABC News has previously reported, but the probe was temporarily paused for several months ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
Various news outlets have reported for months that prosecutors were nearing a conclusion, but no charges have been filed to this point.
The investigation spilled into public view in December of 2020, shortly after Joe Biden secured the presidency, when Hunter Biden confirmed the probe into his “tax affairs.” Prosecutors have examined whether he paid adequate taxes on millions of dollars of his income, including money he made from multiple overseas business ventures.
Prosecutors have also explored allegations that Hunter Biden lied about his drug use on a gun application form in 2018, despite later acknowledging that he was addicted to drugs around that time, ABC News previously reported.
ABC News has previously reported that the younger Biden borrowed $2 million from his lawyer and confidant, Kevin Morris, to pay the IRS for back taxes, penalties, and liens that he owed.
A grand jury empaneled in Delaware has reportedly heard testimony from multiple witnesses over the course of their probe, including some of Hunter Biden’s business partners and a woman who had a child by Hunter Biden out of wedlock.
The younger Biden, a Yale-trained lawyer, has said he is cooperating with investigators and remained “100% certain” that he would be cleared of any wrongdoing. President Biden has said he and his son never discussed his foreign business dealings and there are no indications that the federal investigation involves the president in any way. The White House has repeatedly sought to distance the president from the probe.
Congressional oversight
Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, newly empowered House Republicans have already taken their first investigative steps in a long-expected investigation of Hunter Biden.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James and Rep. Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, have pledged to “pursue all avenues” of wrongdoing and have called investigations into the president’s family a “top priority.”
To handle any congressional queries, Hunter Biden recently retained high-powered defense lawyer Abbe Lowell, who has represented a number of high-profile political figures including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and former Sen. John Edwards.
Earlier this month, the Oversight committee sent letters requesting “documents, records, and communications” from Hunter Biden as well as from Eric Schwerin, his former business partner, and from James Biden, the president’s brother.
Lowell rebuffed the overture, arguing that the committee “lacks a legitimate legislative purpose and oversight basis for requesting such records from Mr. Biden, who is a private citizen.”
The exchange came just a day after former Twitter executives testified before the Oversight Committee that the social media company made a mistake in blocking users from sharing a controversial 2020 New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s laptop.
President Joe Biden subsequently dismissed the Oversight Committee’s probe in an interview with PBS NewsHour.
“[The] public’s not going to pay attention to that,” he said. “If the only thing they can do is make up things about my family, it’s not going to go very far.”
(WASHINGTON) — The FBI conducted searches at two separate locations on two days on the campus of the University of Delaware in recent weeks as part of the special counsel investigation into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified information, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
The searches did not uncover any materials with classified markings, although investigators did retrieve some materials that appeared to be notes for additional review, according to one of the sources.
News of the searches was first reported by CNN.
A spokesperson for the White House counsel’s office declined to comment and referred questions about the matter to the Department of Justice.
A spokesperson for the University of Delaware also referred questions about the matter to the Justice Department.
The university is home to a large collection of documents, photographs, videocassettes and other files from Biden’s 36 years in the Senate — enough to fill 1,874 boxes — according to the University of Delaware website.
A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.
A source familiar with the matter tells ABC News investigators are systematically going through any locations where Biden previously had office space, lived, or spent considerable time — as well as any locations where he may have housed documents — in order to ensure that any government materials that may be improperly stored are returned to the possession of the government and stored appropriately.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden’s pick to head the Internal Revenue Service appeared to quell some GOP criticism at his confirmation hearing Wednesday by promising to restore trust in the troubled agency.
Through three hours of questioning before the Senate Finance Committee for what chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., called “one of the more challenging and least popular jobs in town,” Daniel Werfel confirmed his backing of Biden’s desire to target high income taxpayers and reaffirmed Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s promise to not increase audit rates for small businesses and households making under $400,000.
“If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, the audit and compliance priorities will be focused on enhancing IRS’ capabilities to ensure that America’s highest earners comply with applicable tax law,” Werfel said.
Werfel’s nomination comes amid intense GOP scrutiny of the IRS, which received a significant funding boost through the Inflation Reduction Act, passed by Congress in August. That funding, Treasury Department officials say will be used mostly for improving taxpayer services and modernizing antiquated, paper-based IRS operations.
“Also front and center will be efforts to modernize and dramatically improve taxpayer service. If confirmed, I will lead these efforts in close collaboration with this committee and will be unyielding in following my ‘true north’ — to increase the public trust, unheralded effective implementation of our taxes and do anything necessary to fund critical government services,” he said.
“My understanding is the focus is to hire people with understanding and capacity and talent to unpack very complicated, intricate returns, which is a capacity gap that exists today,” he said.
Werfel, a 51-year-old business consultant who has previously held a number of government jobs in both Republican and Democratic administrations, also committed during the hearing to releasing a plan for spending the IRS’s recent funding increase — about $80 billion over the next 10 years.
The IRS is required to submit a plan, which Werfel has not been involved in writing, to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen by Friday on how it plans to spend the funds.
Werfel said the committee and members of the public would be able to connect the dollars from the IRA to the various activities and investments in the plan.
He also reaffirmed that as IRS commissioner, he’d commit to not increasing tax audit rates on small businesses and households making less than $400,000 per year, something Yellen confirmed in a letter to the former IRS commissioner shared with Congress last year.
GOP opponents of the IRA have claimed funding will be used to hire 87,000 new agents in order to target middle-class Americans and small business
In his first speech to the 118th Congress, newly-elected House Speaker Kevin McCarthy promised: “our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents.” Days later, House Republicans voted to do just that, though Treasury Department officials and documents verify the claim is false.
Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada asked Werfel directly at Wednesday’s hearing if he planned on using 87,000 new agents to audit Americans.
“I am not. I think it’s patently incorrect,” he said, ading that the “notion of armed agents” — another GOP claim debunked by Treasury officials — also is incorrect.
“I certainly would have no intention of making that part of any plan going forward.”
Werfel also spent part of Wednesday’s hearing addressing additional GOP skepticism of the agency, which Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said has been leveled to “silence conservative voices” and engages in unnecessary intrusion of the public.
GOP committee members referenced a ProPublica project called the Secret IRS Files — a series of stories on the tax avoidance techniques of the ultra-wealthy based on tax information provided directly by the IRS.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., asked: “There still hasn’t been any, you know, accountability on the leak … would you take steps to ensure that that kind of confidential tax information, the one that the breaches, there’s accountability there and to that it doesn’t happen again?”
Werfel said that maintaining data security would be a “top priority,” especially in reaching his goal of garnering additional public trust in the agency.
“Data security is a top priority. I don’t know how to build trust with the public when there’s a sense that there’s there’s risk material risk of unauthorized disclosures,” he said.
“So, one of the things that I will absolutely do is work with the inspector general to understand what did they see as the risks any specific action or activity that’s taken place have been investigated–what are the root causes … if there are their corrective actions because if there are, we will make them.”
Nominated to replace Charles Rettig, an IRS commissioner selected by President Donald Trump, Werfel is expected to glide towards a bipartisan confirmation vote.
“I intend to support your confirmation, incidentally” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., during his questioning of Werfel.
Wyden ended the hearing saying he expects to move Werfel’s nomination quickly after the Senate returns from its Presidents Day break.
(WASHINGTON) — With her announcement this week that she is running for president, Nikki Haley has made a bit of history again — becoming the first prominent woman of color to seek the Republican nomination.
With Vice President Kamala Harris presumed to be President Joe Biden’s running mate if he announces a second run, as he has said he will, it’s possible that both major political parties in America could simultaneously have a woman on their ticket for the first time. And both would be South Asian, specifically of Indian descent — which observers called a massive feat considering the community makes up only about 1% of the country’s population and produced two recent political stars.
“This is absolutely a moment,” Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College and co-author of the Indian American Election Survey, told ABC News. “We see South Asians who have largely been on the outskirts of American politics in many ways. This is a moment where we’re seeing South Asians step into the limelight.”
That representation began at the national level more than half a century ago, when Dalip Singh Saund led a push to change immigration laws so he and other Indians could become citizens. He then became the first Asian American, first South Asian and first Sikh in Congress, in 1956.
There are now five South Asians in Congress, often referred to as “the Samosa Caucus.”
“Since 2016, we’ve quintupled our representation in Congress and gone from 12 to 43 in state legislatures. Over that same period of time, our population has not multiplied the same way,” said Neil Makhija, the executive director of the Indian American Impact, an organization that helps South Asians run for elected office. “Once people start running, it shows that it’s possible.”
When it comes to world leaders, University of California, Riverside, public policy professor Karthick Ramakrishnan points to Rishi Sunak, whose parents are of Indian descent, as someone who represents how fast a community can advance — considering the British ruled India until 1947. “One generation,” Ramakrishnan said, “Someone who is the child of the empire is now the prime minister of Britain.”
Nearly one-fourth of the world’s population lives in South Asia and many of the countries within it — India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka — have all already had women prime ministers or presidents.
“[Women leading countries] is not something that’s necessarily out of the norm of the cultures from which a lot of these people are coming from,” said Maneesh Arora, an assistant professor of political science at Wellesley College.
Harris’ maternal grandfather, P.V. Gopalan, worked to fight for the country’s independence from Britain and she’s spoken about her parents taking her in a stroller to political protests in the ’60s. Haley wrote in her autobiography that her mom, Raj Randhawa, studied law and was offered the first female judgeship in India, although Haley said her own family blocked it because she was a woman.
“They grew up in households where public service was not looked down upon. … Plenty of Indian Americans grew up in households where it was about becoming a doctor or engineer,” Ramakrishnan said.
Harris, who ran for president in 2020 before being selected as Biden’s vice president, and now Haley are testing what it means to pursue success at the highest levels of American politics.
Haley is not the first woman of color to seek the GOP nod: Angel Joy Chavis Rocker, a Black school counselor in Florida, ran in the 2000 campaign. But Haley is the most notable non-white conservative woman to ever enter the race.
Her campaign did not comment for this story.
What Haley has said about her heritage
Haley was born Nimrata Nikki Randhawa to Punjabi Sikh parents who emigrated from India in the 1960s. She has said that early on she adopted her middle name, which means “little one” in Punjabi, as her first name and later took on her husband’s last name as her own.
Haley was raised Sikh and has publicly talked about converting to Christianity, once saying the language barrier was what ultimately led to her decision to convert. “At some point, you have to understand the words …. Christianity spoke to me,” she previously said while adding, “It wasn’t political.” She explained to The New York Times in 2012: “We always said ‘no’ when my mom was trying to teach us Punjabi. Now I wish we had learned, but that is why I think I made the transition.”
She joined a Methodist church with her husband but has said she continues visiting the Sikh temple with family.
But for some South Asians, the conversation about Haley rarely gets past her name or religion.
“Her example would reflect the kind of assimilationism that most Indian Americans — most South Asians — actually don’t do. They don’t change their name and they don’t convert their religion,” Ramakrishnan said.
In 2001, Haley also listed her race as “white” on her voter registration card, according to The Post and Courier. At the time, a spokesman for her declined to comment and state Republicans suggested the issue was a stunt because it had been uncovered by Democrats, who criticized her as disingenuous.
Dr. Hajar Yazhida, a University of Southern California assistant professor in sociology and faculty affiliate at their equity research institution, told ABC News that being able to have racial ambiguity has had a massive impact for both the vice president and Haley — especially on Haley’s journey. (Harris’ father is Black, from Jamaica; her mother was born in Chennai, India.)
“We might look at Kamala Harris on one side and Nikki Haley on the other and wonder how it is that two South Asian women ended up as political front-runners? But we have to remember that neither of the candidates are socially read as South Asian women,” Yazhida argued.
But Ramakrishnan said even being able to “claim” an identity is something unique to living in the United States — and something that most politicians do in some way: “We all have different aspects of our identity that we activate. … Given the context, people code-switch all the time.”
Haley has seen prejudice — even from fellow politicians.
During a runoff election for a state legislative seat in South Carolina, an opponent published ads referring to her as “Nimrata N. Randhawa” and sent out mailers with her standing with her dad in his turban.
When she was running for governor in 2010, a South Carolina state senator called her and then-President Barack Obama a “raghead.”
Haley has touched on some of the struggles her family faced. “I am the proud daughter of Indian immigrants. They came to America and settled in a small southern town. My father wore a turban. My mother wore a sari. I was a brown girl in a black and white world,” she said at the 2020 Republican National Convention. “We faced discrimination and hardship, but my parents never gave into grievance and hate.”
The NAACP also pointed to then-Gov. Haley’s heritage in 2011 when criticizing South Carolina for flying the Confederate flag at the Statehouse for nearly half a century. In 2015, in the wake of the fatal shooting of nine Black people at Charleston’s Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, Haley urged the flag to be removed and state Republicans quickly agreed.
Haley’s politics differ from most in the community
Pomona College professor Sadhwani said South Asians really want to support other South Asians, regardless of party. But the data she has collected on Haley appears to be an exception. “Haley’s unfavorable score is 55% in our sample,” Sadhwani said. This could be in part because many South Asian people identify as Democrats, data shows.
Former President Donald Trump wasn’t able to capture the South Asian vote either — but he tried. In 2019, he held a “Howdy Modi!” rally with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that attracted thousands and filmed an ad where he attempted to speak in Hindi.
That got him ahead with the group — but not by enough. “Trump made inroads among Indian American voters between 2016 and 2020. He still lost the Indian American vote,” said professor Ramakrishnan.
Biden and Harris have focused on South Asians and the Indian community as well, with Biden releasing an agenda for the Indian American community prior to the 2020 election and both him and the vice president including cultural celebrations as part of administration events.
Numbers illustrate how Asian American voters, and Indian voters, can be influential. According to AAPI Data, an organization that publishes demographic data and research, in 2018 there were an estimated 161,000 eligible Indian voters in Texas, 87,000 in Florida, 61,000 in Pennsylvania, 57,000 in Georgia and 45,000 in Michigan.
Major contests in those states, including the 2020 and 2016 presidential elections, have all recently been decided by smaller margins.
And the community is fast growing. In the last two decades, for example, the Indian population in the U.S. has doubled to about 4.6 million in 2019, according to the Pew Research Center.
Roughly 70% of Indian voters in America leaned Democratic as of 2022, according to AAPI Data. That’s more than Latinos but less than African Americans. Some of the reasons include religion, extensive training in science and living in a post-9/11 world.
In one of his most notable — and controversial — promises as a presidential candidate, Trump said he would block Muslims from entering the U.S. At the time, Haley appeared to distance herself from such a policy. Delivering the Republicans’ official 2016 State of the Union response, she said that America should resist following the “angriest voices” and welcome “properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion.”
According to AAPI Data, more than three-fourths of Indians and the majority of Asian voters overall voted for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Trump in 2016, a finding that echoes other exit polling. Haley went on to join Trump’s administration, leaving some in her own community wondering how strongly she felt about what she had said just 12 months before.
Sangay Mishra, an associate professor of political science at Drew University and the author of “Desi’s Divided: The Political Lives of South Asian Americans,” said the vast majority of the South Asian community feels strongly about issues like abortion rights, restricting guns and critical race theory.
“In politics it’s hard to predict how the community will react. But it’s clear it doesn’t align with how she thinks,” Mishra said.
‘An opportunity for Haley’
But can Haley align South Asian donors?
Indian Americans have the highest levels of income in the country, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics, a feat that’s often connected to the 1960s when the U.S. specifically engineered a demographic of highly professional immigrants. (Harris and Haley have something else in common that researchers said is powerful — they are byproducts of this era, with both of their parents coming to America around this time.)
An analysis done by The Los Angeles Times a few months into the 2020 Democratic primary race found that despite Indian Americans being a small demographic, they had donated more than $3 million to presidential campaigns — more than people in Hollywood.
Mishra told ABC News he created a list of major bundlers during the Obama administration and the number of South Asian names was a fairly big list compared to the population. “They were overwhelmingly going for the Democratic Party,” he said.
“What has not been noticed is this growth of a segment of Indian Americans who are affluent, and that goes back to the character of the community,” Mishra said.
Data from FiveThirtyEight details just the donations that South Asians made to other South Asian candidates running for House or Senate seats from 2000-2020. The numbers, especially for Democratic candidates, have exploded.
Haley’s former spokesperson Rob Godfrey said he remembered her being embraced by such donors while running in South Carolina. “Members of the South Asian community, members of the Indian community, have always been traditionally Democratic,” he acknowledged. “But when Nikki ran for governor, there was no shortage of support for her from the South Asian and Indian communities because they had a lot of great pride in her candidacy … she very much enjoyed the support of them within the state and they were very generous contributors to her campaign, from New Jersey to Chicago to California to Texas.”
Sadwani said that when it comes to South Asians though, her research showed that the numbers won’t be enough to tip the scale.
Haley’s announcement video, on Tuesday, highlighted her heritage and her optimistic vision of a society unencumbered by racial division.
“I was the proud daughter of Indian immigrants,” Haley said in her video, adding: “My mom would always say, ‘Your job is not to focus on the differences but the similarities.'”
Sadwani said that message isn’t for the South Asian community — it’s for everyone else.
“We’re talking more conservative-leaning Latinos, other Asian Americans and even plenty of of non-immigrant voters who are completely opposed to the age old story of the United States being a place that welcomes immigrants and might be disenchanted by the overt racial commentary, the negative stereotypes of a Trump administration, even while supporting many of the Trump-based policies,” Sadwani said. “I think this becomes an opportunity for Haley.”
(WASHINGTON) — Under political pressure from Democrats as well as Republicans, President Joe Biden is considering giving a speech in the coming days to address the Chinese spy balloon and the three other shot-down objects, two senior administration officials confirmed ABC News on Wednesday.
The White House is eying the days before Biden departs for his trip to Poland for the potential balloon remarks. He is scheduled to depart for that trip, during which he’ll mark the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, on Monday, Feb. 20.
The deliberations over the speech were first reported by Reuters.
The president has yet to extensively address the Chinese spy balloon shot down on Feb. 4 or the three unidentified objects taken down over North American airspace this past weekend.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have urged Biden to address the matter more thoroughly.
“The American people need and deserve to know more,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told reporters Tuesday upon exiting a classified briefing for all senators.
“There is a lot of information presented to us this morning that could be told to the American people without any harm to sources or methods or our national security and the American people need to know more so they’ll have more confidence in our national security,” Blumenthal added.
Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Ky., also called on Biden to “get in front of America and tell them firsthand that we’re safe.”
“The administration needs to be more transparent and, by the way, that was a bipartisan view down there,” Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, added.
Biden’s first public comment on the Chinese spy balloon came on the day it was shot down, when he told reporters hours before the mission, “We’re going to take care of it.”
After it was taken down over the Atlantic Ocean off South Carolina, Biden told reporters he ordered the Pentagon shoot the balloon as soon as possible and he complimented the aviators that carried out the operation.
He’s since only addressed it briefly a handful of times, including a passing reference at the State of the Union when he said, “Make no mistake about it, as we made clear last week, if China threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country and we did.”
During an interview with Noticias Telemundo anchor Julio Vaqueiro last week, Biden said the balloon “wasn’t a major breach” but was a violation of international law and U.S. airspace.
Biden has tapped national security adviser Jake Sullivan to oversee an interagency review “to study the broader policy implications for detection, analysis, and disposition of unidentified aerial objects that pose either safety or security risks,” White House spokesperson John Kirby said Monday.
That review is expected to be done by the end of this week, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters Tuesday.
When asked whether the shooting down of the three unidentified objects warranted a national address, Jean-Pierre said Biden “takes this very seriously” and noted he’s been briefed multiple times on the incidents.
Kirby also defended the administration Monday amid the silence from Biden on the three successive shootdowns.
“We have been, I think, as transparent as we can be,” Kirby said. “I won’t speak for the president’s personal speaking schedule, but, I mean, he has been deeply engaged in every one of these decisions.”
