Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The chairman of the new Republican-led House Oversight Committee has issued a flurry of letters as part of the panel’s first formal steps toward a long-promised investigation targeting President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, and social media companies that they allege sought to suppress negative stories about the president’s son that they claim could have impacted the 2020 presidential election.

The letters, issued by Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and obtained by ABC News, request testimony from multiple former Twitter executives who were involved in the company’s handling of news reporting that surfaced from leaked data obtained from a laptop reportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.

The panel is also requesting financial information from the Department of Treasury regarding Hunter Biden and his associates.

In a letter sent to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Comer requested records related to potential suspicious activity reports, or SARs, on Hunter Biden and other members of the president’s family, as well as multiple businesses and business partners. SARs are reports filed by financial institutions to flag questionable banking transactions, but do not amount to allegations of crimes.

In response to the letters, a White House spokesperson told ABC News, “In their first week as a governing majority, House Republicans have not taken any meaningful action to address inflation and lower Americans’ costs, yet they’re jumping out of the gate with political stunts driven by the most extreme MAGA members of their caucus in an effort to get attention on Fox News.”

“The President is going to continue focusing on the important issues the American people want their leaders to work together on, and we hope House Republicans will join him,” the statement said.

A representative for the Treasury Department declined to comment when contacted by ABC News, and representatives for Hunter Biden did not immediately return a request for comment.

Beyond their interest in Hunter Biden and his business endeavors, the panel’s primary focus is finding out whether his father, President Biden, was more involved in those dealings than previously known.

“The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating President Biden’s involvement in his family’s foreign business practices and international influence peddling schemes,” Comer wrote in the letter to Yellen.

Comer has previously claimed that the Treasury Department was providing “cover for the Biden family” after the department rejected Comer’s request last year for the same information when Republicans were in the minority.

Noting in his letter to Yellen that the agency previously told him it would only respond to requests from committee chairs, Comer wrote, “I now make these requests pursuant to my authority as Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability.”

Comer sent letters to former top Twitter employees including former Twitter lawyer Vijaya Gadde, former head of trust and safety Yoel Roth, and former deputy general counsel James Baker, requesting that they testify at a public hearing during the week of Feb. 6.

“Your attendance is necessary because of your role in suppressing Americans’ access to information about the Biden family on Twitter shortly before the 2020 election,” Comer wrote to the former employees.

Baker declined to comment when contacted by ABC News, while Gadde and Roth did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Representatives for the White House and Hunter Biden also did not immediately return a request for comment from ABC News.

The letters come about a month after a series of document releases authorized by new Twitter CEO Elon Musk, who has sought to bolster claims that the social media giant, under previous management, suppressed or otherwise aimed to influence discourse around controversial political subjects to advantage of Democrats. Critics, in turn, have accused Musk of employing prominent media figures masquerading as independent journalists in order to advance a narrative that takes many of the private messages out of context.

The Justice Department, meanwhile, has been examining whether Hunter Biden paid adequate taxes on millions of dollars of personal income, including money he made during business pursuits in China and Ukraine.

Hunter Biden has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, ethically or criminally, but has acknowledged that his family ties likely bolstered his career. He has not been charged with any crimes.

Republicans have long signaled that investigating President Biden and his family would be a main priority in the new Congress. The day after clinching the majority in the House, Republicans held a press conference announcing they would be ramping up the probe into the Biden family.

In a statement to ABC News, Comer called the Biden probe a “top priority for House Republicans during the 118th Congress.”

“The American people must know the extent of Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s shady business deals and if these deals threaten national security and his decision-making as president,” Comer said.

The committee also plans to hold a hearing on COVID-19 pandemic spending fraud, according to a source familiar with the panel’s thinking.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The new chair of the House Oversight Committee on Tuesday notified the White House that his panel is investigating President Joe Biden’s handling of classified records from Biden’s time as vice president — some of which were found in November at an office Biden had used in Washington, D.C.

In a letter to White House counsel Stuart Delery, obtained by ABC News, Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky asked the White House to provide all documents that were retrieved from Biden’s personal office.

The Oversight Committee is also seeking a list of those who had access to Biden’s office; all documents related to the handling of classified documents, including by Biden’s lawyers, and the status of their security clearance; and all documents between the White House, the Department of Justice and the National Archives and Record Administration, Comer wrote.

He asked for those documents by Jan. 23.

His letter was not accompanied by a subpoena.

“The Committee is concerned that President Biden has compromised sources and methods with his own mishandling of classified documents,” Comer wrote.

He also wrote to NARA’s acting archivist, Debra Steidel Wall, asking for similar materials.

In his letters, Comer compared Biden’s handling of sensitive documents to former President Donald Trump, whom federal authorities have said took classified records back to his Florida home after leaving the White House in 2021.

Court records show that the government engaged in a lengthy dispute with Trump in order to retrieve the classified and sensitive records he took with him, with FBI agents ultimately searching Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in August. He denies wrongdoing.

Comer told CNN in November that it “will not be a priority” for the Oversight Committee to look at Trump’s handling of documents in that case.

Writing to Wall at NARA on Tuesday, Comer took issue with the delay in learning about the documents found at Biden’s office, suggesting it “raises questions about political bias at the agency.”

ABC News and other outlets reported on Monday that the DOJ has launched a preliminary review of the matter — some two months after Biden’s attorneys say they first discovered the records at his personal office and notified NARA.

Comer requested that his committee staff be able to interview the NARA general counsel, Gary Stern, and its director of congressional affairs, John Hamilton, by Jan. 17.

“The White House is cooperating with the National Archives and the Department of Justice regarding the discovery of what appear to be Obama-Biden Administration records, including a small number of documents with classified markings,” Richard Sauber, a special counsel to Biden, said in a statement on Monday.

Sauber said the documents were found on Nov. 2 and NARA was notified by the White House on the same day, then took possession of them on Nov. 3.

Sauber said the documents were found by Biden’s personal attorneys while they were “packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space” at the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Biden Center in Washington. “The documents were not the subject of any previous request or inquiry by the Archives,” Sauber said.

Biden told reporters on Tuesday in Mexico, while meeting with North American leaders, that he doesn’t know what is in the records and was “surprised to learn” they were found there.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Speaker Kevin McCarthy and leading Republicans are expected to soon make good on a vow to keep three Democrats from seats on influential committees in the new House.

McCarthy’s focus is Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, two California lawmakers who have served on the House Intelligence Committee.

“Speaker McCarthy confirms that Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, and Ilhan Omar are getting kicked off the Intel and Foreign Affairs Committees. Promises made. Promises kept!” Rep. Troy Nehls, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, tweeted on Tuesday.

McCarthy has long pledged to oust the three, citing objections to their behavior and the precedent of the previous House removing committee assignments for Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona.

In those cases, the Democratic majority and some Republicans in the House voted to remove Greene and Gosar over their inflammatory conduct, including Greene spreading conspiracy theories — some of which she has since renounced — and Gosar sharing an animated social media video depicting violence against President Joe Biden and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. (Gosar said amid the controversy, “I do not espouse violence.”)

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise was asked during a press conference on Tuesday what the process would be for stripping members of their assignments and said no one had yet been assigned to committees. But he suggested removals were a new standard first set by Democrats.

“As we see what comes out, the Democrats set a precedent that we urged them strongly not to go down last Congress,” Scalise said.

“They decided that they were going to break the precedent that had been in place for over 200 years and remove members of the opposing party that our party selected to be on committees,” he continued. “And so that was a practice they set and so, obviously, we’re going to be looking very closely at who they appoint. They haven’t appointed anybody yet to committees, but we’re gonna see if they do.”

After Republicans won back the House in November, McCarthy reiterated to Fox News that he planned to keep the three Democrats from their committee posts.

Rep. Pete Aguilar, the chair of the House Democratic caucus, on Tuesday declined to elaborate on next steps should Schiff and Swalwell be blocked or booted by Republicans from the intelligence panel.

“We will send the names of the individuals who this caucus supports and are qualified to serve on committees,” Aguilar told reporters. “What the speaker does beyond that is something that we will handle … but it isn’t anything we’re going to get in today.”

Schiff previously discussed the potential removal of his committee assignment during a November interview with ABC “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl.

“I suspect he will do whatever Marjorie Taylor Greene wants him to do,” Schiff said of McCarthy. “He is a very weak leader of his conference, meaning that he will adhere to the wishes of the lowest common denominator. And if that lowest common denominator wants to remove people from committees, that’s what they’ll do.”

McCarthy has accused Schiff of lying to the public during references to a disputed dossier that claimed to outline links between former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.

McCarthy has also called Swalwell a “national security threat” for Swalwell’s reported run-ins with an alleged Chinese spy, stating there’s no way he should be allowed to serve on the committee.

Swalwell has not been accused of wrongdoing and he has said he stopped contact with the woman after federal authorities briefed him, according to the Associated Press.

Separately, McCarthy’s criticized Omar over what he described as her “repeated antisemitic and anti-American remarks.” Omar has previously apologized for some of her statements, including about lobbyists on behalf of Israel’s government.

Omar has also fired back at McCarthy, accusing him of amplifying rhetoric targeting minorities.

“McCarthy’s effort to repeatedly single me out for scorn and hatred — including threatening to strip me from my committee — does nothing to address the issues our constituents deal with. It does nothing to address inflation, healthcare, or solve the climate crisis,” she said in a statement in November.

“What it does is gin up fear and hate against Somali-Americans and anyone who shares my identity, and further divide us along racial and ethnic lines,” she said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MEXICO CITY) — One day after President Joe Biden’s special counsel confirmed classified documents were discovered in Biden’s former personal office, the president had yet to directly address a key question: Did he knowingly mishandle classified material?

Meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Tuesday morning in Mexico City, Biden ignored reporters’ efforts to shout versions of that question, instead focusing on his goals for the North America Leaders’ Summit.

The Justice Department is currently looking into the matter, scrutinizing the set of documents, which were discovered in early November at the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Biden Center in Washington. Biden worked there in the years following his vice presidency. The existence of the documents was first reported Monday by CBS News, and confirmed by ABC News.

The FBI and DOJ have been conducting a preliminary investigation for weeks to determine how the documents got to the Penn Biden Center, whether Biden was involved in transferring them there or whether he was aware they were there at any point. The goal of the investigation, sources say, is to determine whether there were any significant crimes committed and whether there’s a need for a special counsel to be appointed.

Sources said there were approximately 10 documents discovered by Biden’s personal attorneys including some that were marked “Top Secret” and they were from the timeframe between 2013 and 2016.

Two sources confirmed that the information was turned over to the National Archives which then reached out to DOJ, after which Attorney General Garland moved to task U.S. Attorney John Lausch — an appointee of former President Donald Trump, with leading a review into the matter.

Sources describe the preliminary investigation as “well underway” and that Lausch has briefed Garland, but it’s unclear when exactly his final report will be completed.

Some critics have complained that since the documents were discovered just days before the midterms, suggesting that the Biden administration should have disclosed it. But officials familiar with the case say while the White House could have seen fit to release information, the DOJ typically works in secret on such investigations.

Two sources say this is being handled precisely the way the Trump Mar-a-Lago controversy was handled by DOJ, the officials noting it was many months before it was revealed there was a grand jury subpoena of Trump for documents with classified markings still in his possession and the details of DOJ’s communications with Trump attorneys came out.

One source also told ABC News “it doesn’t appear that Biden personally identified the documents” and asked that they be moved to the private office.

While Biden has yet to comment on the politically explosive matter, he has not been shy to criticize former President Donald Trump’s mishandling of classified information, after the FBI raided Trump’s personal office at the Mar-A-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, in August.

“How that could possibly happen? How one — anyone could be that irresponsible? And I thought, what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods? By that I mean names of people who helped or th– et cetera. And it just — totally irresponsible,” Biden said in an interview on the CBS News program “60 Minutes” in September.

In August, when asked whether it is ever appropriate to take classified documents home, away from the White House, Biden told reporters, “it depends.”

“Depending on the circumstance. For example, I have in my home a, a cabined-off space that is completely secure. I’m taking home with me today, today’s PDB (President’s Daily Brief). It’s locked, I have a person with me, military with me. I read it, I lock it back up, and give it to the military,” Biden said, when asked if it was ever appropriate to take home classified documents.

When pressed whether it would be appropriate to do without a specialized, secured area, Biden once again said, “it depends.”

“Depends on the document and it depends on how secure the room,” Biden said.

According to a statement from Richard Sauber, President Biden’s special counsel, the White House is fully cooperating with the National Archives and the Department of Justice in this matter. The statement claims the documents were immediately handed over for review upon discovery by the president’s personal attorneys, who were packing files in order to vacate the office.

Former President Trump reacted to the discovery of the Biden documents Monday evening on his Truth Social account.

“When is the FBI going to raid the many homes of Joe Biden, perhaps even the White House? These documents were definitely not declassified,” Trump claimed.

On Capitol Hill Tuesday, newly-empowered House Republicans were quick to call for investigation. Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, the top Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee, asked Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines to carry out “an immediate review and damage assessment” pertaining to the storage of the documents.

Other Republicans drew a comparison between the Biden documents, and the ongoing legal fight over the classified documents discovered at Trump’s personal office.

“It’s unprecedented to raid the residence of a former president for something that every president, including the current president, has done accidentally — I’m gonna assume accidentally – pack documents that may be classified,” Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, the GOP chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told ABC News.

“If then Vice President Biden took classified documents with him and held them for years, and criticized former President Trump during the same time that he had those classified documents … I wonder why the press isn’t asking the same questions of him,” Majority Whip Steve Scalise said.

Some Democrats are also expressing concern.

“Obviously if there are classified documents anywhere they shouldn’t be, that’s a problem and a deep concern,” said Rep. Adam Schiff of California, former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

ABC News’s Katherine Faulders, Will Steakin, Lauren Peller and Gabe Ferris contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House voted Tuesday afternoon to establish a new special panel to probe what Republicans call the “weaponization of the federal government.”

The subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee would have extraordinary power to investigate any part of the federal government for perceived wrongdoing against conservatives — the Justice Department and FBI, in particular. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is expected to take over the Judiciary subcommittee as Republicans say they are making final assignments.

At a news conference Tuesday following a closed-door meeting of House Republicans, Majority Leader Steve Scalise outlined the establishment of the “weaponization of the federal government” panel as among the GOP’s first priorities.

“We’re going to set up that Church committee to look at some of these federal agencies that are weaponizing government to go after families across this country based on their political views. That’s not what the government should be doing,” said Scalise, comparing the body to the so-called Church committee of the 1970s, in which a Democratic Sen. Frank Church led an investigation of intelligence abuse by the executive branch.

Scalise said the House will also vote on separate legislation Tuesday to create a new select committee on U.S. competition with China, which won bipartisan support.

But overall, GOP leaders took the chance to tout differences between predecessors and the now-Republican-controlled House.

“Not only did we get rid of proxy voting, we got rid of virtual hearings in committee,” Scalise said. “We’re going to be back in person again, and we’re going to be having field hearings,” he added, promising hearings on the immigration crisis to take place “at the border.”

With new rules changes, here’s some of what House Republicans outlined for their first full week:

What did McCarthy agree to with hard-liners?

Faced with questions about a three-page addendum to the House Rules package passed Monday night, detailing other concessions McCarthy made to critics to win the speakership, Scalise and others downplayed the document they said McCarthy detailed at a closed-door GOP conference meeting earlier Tuesday but did not release publicly.

“There’s no addendum. I wouldn’t call it an addendum. I think our speaker put it up on the screen today…” said GOP Whip Tom Emmer. “He made it very clear that there were no gavels given out. There were no deals like that that were made.”

ABC News reported last Thursday of an offer McCarthy made to GOP hard-liners opposing his bid for House speaker, including making it easier to bring a vote of no confidence to the floor, among other concessions.

‘Weaponization of the federal government’ subcommittee

Despite concerns from Democrats, Scalise said the new select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government will serve “to protect every American’s constitutional rights.”

In a straight party-line vote, the House voted 221-211 to establish the panel.

The panel will have the authority to investigate how the federal government and private companies collect and analyze information on Americans, along with “ongoing criminal investigations” and civil liberties issues, according to the text of the resolution. The mandate could set up new fights with the Justice Department and national security agencies over sensitive records and probes — including those involving former President Donald Trump.

The panel would also get access to highly classified information typically only shared with the House Intelligence Committee.

Democrats charge Republicans could use such broad new powers to disrupt ongoing probes into the Jan. 6 attack and Trump’s handling of classified documents.

“Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy claim to be investigating the weaponization of the federal government when, in fact, this new select committee is the weapon itself,” New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “It is specifically designed to inject extremist politics into our justice system and shield the MAGA movement from the legal consequences of their actions.”

But unlike how Republicans reacted to the Jan. 6 select committee, Democrats don’t plan to boycott the panel and its hearings, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. The committee would be made up of 15 members appointed by McCarthy, as speaker: Nine Republicans and six Democrats.

Competition with China subcommittee

The House also voted Tuesday afternoon 365-65 to create a select committee on the “Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party,” which will aim to end critical economic dependencies on China.

The select committee, which will hold hearings, investigate, and submit policy recommendations, will be run by Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis. The speaker will appoint up to 16 members to serve on the committee. Seven will be Democrats selected in consultation with Minority Rep. Hakeem Jeffries.

In a speech on the floor earlier in the day, Speaker McCarthy said, “I want this committee to last beyond who’s in the majority and never ever be decided that this is a partisan committee.”

“I’ve heard my colleagues on both sides say that the threat posed by Communist China is serious. I fully agree. This is an issue that transcends political parties. And creating the Select Committee on China is our best avenue for addressing it,” McCarthy said.

Notably, House Democrats did not whip members to vote against the new China select committee.

Rescinding IRS funding

Republicans are parading the party-line vote held Monday to rescind IRS funding under the Inflation Reduction Act as an example of the GOP keeping its promises post-midterms, despite the bill being unlikely to pass the Senate.

“Our first bill will repeal funding for 87,000 new IRS agents, because the government should be here to help you, not go after you,” McCarthy said upon taking the gavel early Saturday morning.

Scalise claimed Tuesday the Congressional Budget Office said that the additional IRS agents “would be set up to go after hard-working families across this country” and “people making less than $200,000 a year,” referring to an estimate from last August to swipe at President Joe Biden’s campaign promise.

Republicans also claimed through the midterms that some of the IRS agents would be armed, but both claims are misleading.

The IRS has said it plans over the next decade to use the roughly $80 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act to update its systems after years of under-funding by Congress, and hire and train new agents, only a small fraction of whom — in the Criminal Investigation division — would be armed. Not all of those would be new agents.

A new CBO score also found that the Republican bill passed Monday would add $114 billion to the deficit.

Abortion bills

In addition to the two votes on Tuesday to create new subcommittees, House Republicans teased more votes for later this week taking on abortion rights.

“We’re going to pass the Born-Alive Act,” Scalise said, noting every Republican was a co-sponsor of the bill last Congress but lamenting that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t bring it to the floor. “In our first full week, we’re going to actually bring that bill up for a vote.”

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act legislation, proposed by Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., would force health care providers to care for a child who survives an abortion, which is exceedingly rare.

ABC News’ Trish Turner, Benjamin Siegel and Lauren Peller contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — House Republicans are wasting no time on their pledge to again try to bring articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over Mayorkas’ handling of immigration and the border.

Rep. Pat Fallon, R-Texas, initially filed a resolution on Jan. 3, the first day of the new Congress, to impeach Mayorkas. Fallon then reintroduced the resolution late Monday, once the new chamber rules were adopted.

Republican leadership has not yet commented on whether they’ll take any further action on the resolution. Introducing articles of impeachment is the first step of what can be a lengthy process, including an investigation by the House Judiciary Committee, and does not mean Mayorkas will ultimately be impeached — or formally accused — by the House.

If he were impeached, he would then be tried by the Senate.

Fallon claims Mayorkas has failed to maintain “operational control over the border,” “willfully provided perjurious, false, and misleading testimony to Congress” and “knowingly slandered his own hardworking Border Patrol agents and mislead the general public.”

In a statement to ABC News, DHS spokesperson Marsha Espinosa said: “Secretary Mayorkas is proud to advance the noble mission of this Department, support its extraordinary workforce, and serve the American people.”

“The Department will continue our work to enforce our laws and secure our border, while building a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system,” Espinosa said. “Members of Congress can do better than point the finger at someone else; they should come to the table and work on solutions for our broken system and outdated laws, which they have not updated in over 40 years.”

A DHS official reiterated that the secretary has no plans to resign and that they believe the impeachment articles have no factual grounds.

Mayorkas has repeatedly defended his handling of the border. “I’ve got a lot of work to do,” Mayorkas told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday. “I’m proud to do it alongside 250,000 incredibly dedicated and talented individuals in the Department of Homeland Security, and I’m going to continue to do my work.”

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., previously called on Mayorkas to resign or risk an impeachment inquiry, which is one of the steps ahead of a full House vote on whether to impeach him.

At a news conference at the border in November post-midterms, McCarthy said the incoming GOP House majority would open investigations that could lead to impeachment proceedings.

“If Secretary Mayorkas does not resign, House Republicans will investigate every order, every action and every failure to determine whether we can begin an impeachment inquiry,” McCarthy told reporters in El Paso, Texas.

At the time, he said he wanted Mayorkas’ resignation by Jan. 3 or investigations would begin on day one.

“Enough is enough,” he said.

“Alejandro Mayorkas must resign,” Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., who joined McCarthy at the border said. “And if he doesn’t, we will make him.”

This isn’t the first time Mayorkas has faced an impeachment threat.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., filed articles of impeachment against him in August 2021 but the measure went nowhere in the Democratic-controlled Congress.

In fiscal year 2022, the border saw its highest number of migrants encountered ever, according to data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Mayorkas told Stephanopoulos on “This Week” that he has no intention of resigning and is ready for congressional investigations.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Judges from the D.C. Court of Appeals expressed reluctance Tuesday to find that then-President Donald Trump acted within the scope of his employment in 2019 when he, in the course of denying a rape claim by E. Jean Carroll, allegedly defamed her by calling her a liar and saying she was “not my type.”

The outcome will determine whether Carroll’s defamation case in Manhattan federal court can proceed.

Trump has sought to have the U.S. government substitute for him as the defendant, a position that the Justice Department under President Joe Biden has continued to support. However for that to occur, the D.C. Court of Appeals must decide that Trump was acting within the bounds of his employment as president when he allegedly defamed Carroll.

Carroll, a former Elle columnist, alleged that Trump raped her in the dressing room of Bergdorf Goodman in the 1990s.

On Tuesday, Justice Department lawyer Mark Freeman urged the court to find it was part of Trump’s job to deny Carroll’s claim.

“It is part of the job of elected officials to address matters of public controversy,” Freeman said in an argument echoed by Alina Habba, an attorney for Trump.

“This was thrust upon him and he was responding to press in his job,” Habba said.

Judge Catherine Easterly questioned whether the court, as a matter of law, could decide whether Trump’s conduct was part of the job.

“The court has never done that,” Easterly said.

Carroll’s lawsuit is set for trial in April. The substitution of the United States for Trump would, however, end the case since the federal government cannot be sued for defamation.

“A determine that something is within scope of employment doesn’t normally immunize the individual employee,” Judge Roy McLeese said.

Carroll’s attorney insisted that Trump denied her rape claim for purely personal reasons and in a manner that was outside the norm for a government employee.

“When someone accuses a prominent official of sexually assaulting them and they respond and say ‘Well she’s not my type,’ our position is that is evidence of some degree of motivation that goes beyond job-related, ” Carroll’s attorney, Joshua Matz, said.

Carroll sued Trump for a second time in November, alleging battery under a new law in New York that allows adult sex assault victims to file claims that would otherwise be barred by the passage of time.

Her new lawsuit also alleged a second claim of defamation over statements Trump made in October 2022.

Trump called Carroll’s claim “a Hoax and a lie” in a post on his social media platform Truth Social. “And, while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type!” the post added.

“Trump’s false, insulting, and defamatory October 12 statement about Carroll — and his actual malice in making that statement — is fully consistent with his tried-and-true playbook for responding to credible public reports that he sexually assaulted women,” the lawsuit said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The revelation that classified documents were kept at the Biden Penn Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, a Washington, D.C., think tank, has raised questions about how the situation involving President Joe Biden compares with the classified documents seized at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.

Trump has sought to liken the classified documents at Biden’s office, used after he left as vice president in connection with his being a honorary professor at the University of Pennsylvania, to the documents taken by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago in August.

“When is the FBI going to raid the many homes of Joe Biden, perhaps even the White House,” Trump posted on his social media site Truth Social after the revelation. “These documents were definitely not declassified.”

In an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity in September, Trump maintained that he had declassified the documents at Mar-a-Lago, that he could do so simply by thinking about it, and even said that they were his property.

How did each respond?

When the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago and found a large number of classified documents — some containing top secret markings — it came after a months-long effort by the National Archives and Justice Department to retrieve them.

By contrast, when Biden attorneys found what they said was a small number of documents in November when closing the office, which Biden was said to have used only periodically, they said they immediately notified the National Archives.

“The documents were not the subject of any previous request or inquiry by the archives,” Richard Sauber, a special counsel to Biden, said in a statement.

Number of classified documents

“The White House is cooperating with the National Archives and the Department of Justice regarding the discovery of what appear to be Obama-Biden Administration records, including a small number of documents with classified markings,” Sauber said.

The exact nature of the documents isn’t clear, but the Justice Department has launched a preliminary review into the Biden matter, sources told ABC News.

Meanwhile, Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith has been tasked with figuring out if Trump broke any laws and obstructed the investigation into the hundreds of classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago.

“It is surprising to hear there were classified documents found at the Penn Biden Center, but based on the details that have come out, it appears to be some somewhat of a different context than the much larger number of classified documents that were found at former presidents President Trump’s residence at Mar a Lago,” Javed Ali, the former Senior Counterterrorism Director on the National Security Council said in an interview with ABC News.

Intent and knowledge?

Ali, now a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Policy, said it is concerning that classified documents were found at the Penn Center, but it is not known what damage has been done, if any.

“Was this a case of sloppy record handling or something more intentional? We also don’t yet know the answer to that, but I suspect my colleagues in the intelligence community are doing what is known as a damage assessment to determine what exactly was contained in these documents, who potentially may have had some kind of unauthorized access to them and what if any kind of mitigation measures need to go in place,” he said.

It’s not clear whether Biden, unlike Trump, was aware of the classified documents at the office.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has assigned U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois John Lausch with leading the review into how the documents ended up at the Penn Biden Center, a source familiar confirmed.

Lausch’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The FBI referred comment to DOJ, who declined to comment.

“U.S. Attorney Lausch is a by-the-book prosecutor who was confirmed with bipartisan support during the previous administration,” Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin said in a statement Tuesday. “I trust that he will handle this investigation with the utmost professionalism and without bias.”

In September, Biden was critical of the former president’ handling of classified documents in an interview with the CBC News program “60 Minutes.”

“How that could possibly happen,” Biden said. “How one — anyone could be that irresponsible. And I thought — what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods … And it’s just — totally irresponsible.”

But he has ignored reporter questions about the politically sensitive matter so far during a summit meeting in Mexico.

Reaction from both Republicans and Democrats has been predictably sharply different.

“So, if then Vice President Biden took classified documents with him and held them for years and criticized President former President Trump during that same time that he had those classified documents, and only after it was uncovered, did he turn them back,” Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana said on Capitol Hill Tuesday. “I wonder why the president asking the same questions of him as vice president taking classified documents that they were asking President Trump.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, praised the Biden administration for going through the proper channels.

“I applaud President Biden and Attorney General Garland for their professional, nonpartisan handling of this situation,” Durbin said. “Unlike former President Donald Trump, who allegedly obstructed efforts to recover hundreds of classified documents, the handful of classified documents reportedly found at the Biden Center were immediately sent to the National Archives and President Biden is allowing the Justice Department to operate free of political interference.”

In a letter Tuesday to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, Rep. Mike Turner, the incoming GOP chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, asked for a “damage assessment” to be done about the classified documents found at the Biden Penn Center.

“I write to request an immediate review and damage assessment following numerous reports that then Vice-President Biden removed, and then retained highly classified information at an undisclosed and unsecure non-government office in Washington, D.C., for a period of at least six years,” Turner, an Ohio Republican, wrote in the letter.

“It has been reported that a portion of the materials at issue were marked “sensitive compartmented information,” indicating the highest classification and most sensitive intelligence information in our government,” he said.

“This discovery of classified information would put President Biden in potential violation of laws protecting national security, including the Espionage Act and Presidential Records Act. Those entrusted with access to classified information have a duty and an obligation to protect it. This issue demands a full and thorough review,” Turner said.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MEXICO CITY) — One day after President Joe Biden’s special counsel confirmed classified documents were discovered in Biden’s former personal office, the president had yet to directly address a key question: Did he knowingly mishandle classified material?

Meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Tuesday morning in Mexico City, Biden ignored reporters’ efforts to shout versions of that question, instead focusing on his goals for the North America Leaders’ Summit.

The Justice Department is currently looking into the matter, scrutinizing the set of documents, which were discovered in early November at the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Biden Center in Washington. Biden worked there in the years following his vice presidency. The existence of the documents was first reported Monday by CBS News, and confirmed by ABC News.

While Biden has yet to comment on the politically explosive matter, he has not been shy to criticize former President Donald Trump’s mishandling of classified information, after the FBI raided Trump’s personal office at the Mar-A-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, in August.

“How that could possibly happen? How one — anyone could be that irresponsible? And I thought, what data was in there that may compromise sources and methods? By that I mean names of people who helped or th– et cetera. And it just — totally irresponsible,” Biden said in an interview on the CBS News program “60 Minutes” in September.

In August, when asked whether it is ever appropriate to take classified documents home, away from the White House, Biden told reporters, “it depends.”

“Depending on the circumstance. For example, I have in my home a, a cabined-off space that is completely secure. I’m taking home with me today, today’s PDB (President’s Daily Brief). It’s locked, I have a person with me, military with me. I read it, I lock it back up, and give it to the military,” Biden said, when asked if it was ever appropriate to take home classified documents.

When pressed whether it would be appropriate to do without a specialized, secured area, Biden once again said, “it depends.”

“Depends on the document and it depends on how secure the room,” Biden said.

According to a statement from Richard Sauber, President Biden’s special counsel, the White House is fully cooperating with the National Archives and the Department of Justice in this matter. The statement claims the documents were immediately handed over for review upon discovery by the president’s personal attorneys, who were packing files in order to vacate the office.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has tasked a Trump appointee, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois John Lausch, to look into the handling of the documents.

Former President Trump reacted to the discovery of the Biden documents Monday evening on his Truth Social account.

“When is the FBI going to raid the many homes of Joe Biden, perhaps even the White House? These documents were definitely not declassified,” Trump claimed.

On Capitol Hill Tuesday, newly-empowered House Republicans were quick to call for investigation. Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, the top Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee, asked Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines to carry out “an immediate review and damage assessment” pertaining to the storage of the documents.

Other Republicans drew a comparison between the Biden documents, and the ongoing legal fight over the classified documents discovered at Trump’s personal office.

“It’s unprecedented to raid the residence of a former president for something that every president, including the current president, has done accidentally — I’m gonna assume accidentally – pack documents that may be classified,” Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, the GOP chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told ABC News.

“If then Vice President Biden took classified documents with him and held them for years, and criticized former President Trump during the same time that he had those classified documents … I wonder why the press isn’t asking the same questions of him,” Majority Whip Steve Scalise said.

Some Democrats are also expressing concern.

“Obviously if there are classified documents anywhere they shouldn’t be, that’s a problem and a deep concern,” said Rep. Adam Schiff of California, former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

ABC News’s Katherine Faulders, Will Steakin, Lauren Peller and Gabe Ferris contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democratic Rep. Katie Porter announced on Tuesday morning her candidacy for California’s Senate seat — currently held by fellow Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the longest-serving female senator in history.

In her announcement video posted to Twitter, Porter said it’s time for new leadership in the U.S. Senate.

“I don’t do Congress the way others often do. I use whatever power I have, speak hard truths to the powers that be,” Porter said. “To not just challenge the status quo, but call it out.”

Porter’s video shows images of the Capitol attack, noting the threat of a “constant assault on our democracy,” before she calls out Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell by name and “so-called leaders” for, she says, having made the Senate a place where “rights get revoked, special interests get rewarded, and our democracy gets rigged.”

“Especially in times like these, California needs a warrior in Washington, and that’s exactly why I’m announcing my candidacy for the United States Senate in 2024,” Porter said.

Although Feinstein, who’s 89, has not announced whether she’ll seek reelection, other California Democrats may be eyeing the seat, including Reps. Barbara Lee and Adam Schiff.

California has a jungle primary, which means two Democrats could be pitted against each other during the general election.

Porter, 49, a progressive star in the Democratic party, won reelection this past November in a tight race for California’s 47th Congressional District.

The former middle school math teacher and law professor has served in the House of Representatives since 2019. She holds a closely divided district and has lagged behind California Democrats cycle after cycle.

A mother of three, Porter has gained social media notoriety for her interrogations using whiteboards on the Oversight and Natural Resources Committees, even bringing the props to late-night television appearances. Just last week, she appeared to subtly troll Republicans during marathon speakership votes as she read a carefully-titled book on House the floor.

While it’s speculated that Feinstein will not run again in 2024, the senator has not commented on her political future despite questions regarding her health and age.

Feinstein has been a crusader for female representation in Congress. This past November, she became the longest-serving woman senator, surpassing Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland.

“It has been a great pleasure to watch more and more women walk the halls of the Senate. We went from two women senators when I ran for office in 1992 to 24 today — and I know that number will keep climbing,” Feinstein said.

The term for California’s other senator, Alex Padilla, expires in 2029.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.