(ORLANDO, Fla.) — Former Vice President Mike Pence on Friday went further than he has before in publicly and directly criticizing former President Donald Trump, rebuking him as “wrong” in his criticism of Pence’s actions on Jan. 6.
His comments came after Trump earlier this week repeated the false claim that Pence had the power to hand the election to Trump in his role counting the electoral votes from the November election before Congress.
“Unfortunately, he didn’t exercise that power, he could have overturned the Election!” Trump said about Pence in a statement.
“There are those in our party who believe that as the presiding officer over the joint session of Congress that I possessed unilateral authority to reject Electoral College votes. And I heard this week that former President Trump said I had the right to ‘overturn the election,’ Pence said in a speech Friday to a local chapter of the Federalist Society in Florida.
“President Trump is wrong…I had no right to overturn the election,” he said. “The presidency belongs to the American people, and the American people alone. And frankly there is almost no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American President.
“Under the Constitution, I had no right to change the outcome of our election And Kamala Harris will have no right to overturn the election when we beat them in 2024,” Pence continued.
He earlier told the audience of conservative lawyers, “As Constitutional Conservatives, The American people must know that we will always keep our oath to the Constitution, even when it would be politically expedient to do otherwise; theymust know, as the Bible says, that we will “keep our oath even when it hurts.”
“Under Article II Section One, elections are conducted at the state level, not by the Congress. The only role Congress has with respect to the Electoral College is to open and count votes submitted and certified by the states. No more no less,” he said.
“Men and women, if we lose faith in the Constitution, we won’t just lose elections, we will lose our country,” Pence said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — A bipartisan group of senators is within striking distance of a deal on a bill that would impose crippling sanctions on Russia for its hostilities against Ukraine.
“We are finding the path forward very clearly,” said Sen. Jim Risch, top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, indicating that the White House and other key agencies were involved in the negotiations to agree on a deal ahead of any potential invasion by Russia, which has amassed more than 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s border.
Asked if a deal could be announced as early as Thursday, Risch said, “I’d have to say that’s possible,” though aides to three senators involved said it was unlikely.
Top Biden administration officials briefed members of Congress on Thursday about the escalating tensions in and around the former Soviet Republic. Lawmakers leaving the more than hourlong briefing in the Congressional Visitor Center said the gravity of the message from those top officials, including Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and CIA Director Avril Haines, added urgency to their efforts.
“Collectively, what I heard made the case that this is more pressing, more timely, and that time in this regard, if we want to be preventative, is of the essence,” said Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, D-N.J. Menendez, who is the chief architect of the sanctions bill along with Risch, added that he is “cautiously optimistic that we are going to get there.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is involved in the bipartisan Senate talks, agreed, saying, “The briefing, I think, will accelerate the bipartisan sanctions package.”
Despite the closeness of a deal, differences remained among negotiators on the appropriate triggers for sanctions and when and how to penalize those developing the controversial, but as-yet-inoperable Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a project that would bypass Ukraine, taking with it crucial revenue.
“I am hopeful in the next coming days we can introduce a sanctions package that imposes sanctions now for the (Russian) provocation with post-invasion sanctions that will destroy the Russian economy as we know it,” said Graham, who like many Republicans after the briefing, said he thought a Russian invasion of Ukraine was now a matter of “when” not “if.”
Some Democrats and the Biden administration want to hold back sanctions, arguing that they are more powerful as a deterrent against Russian aggression.
“Deterrence is the idea that if you do X, we will do Y. If you put penalties in place in advance, at least significant penalties, you obviously take away the stick of deterrence,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.
“I think it’s very important that (the) United States put a very strong sanctions package in place,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told CNN, adding that any sanctions need to be announced in advance “to have a deterrent effect.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said sanctions against Russia must be “much more forceful than they have been” but also insisted that any sanctions be imposed after an invasion.
“I think it’s really important for us to use the sanctions if the Russians strike,” Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters Thursday. “It is important because it’s where leverage is at maximum. If they do this, then we strike.”
Pelosi said that thinking is also in line with most U.S. allies.
“This is deadly serious,” Pelosi said. “So, they have to feel the pain, and it has to be felt right up to the richest man in the world: Vladimir Putin. Nobody knows what he’s going to do except for him.”
Indeed, lawmakers have said the legislation, a bill Menendez said puts in place “the mother of all sanctions,” would contain a strong recommendation that Russia be kicked out of the global financial consortium known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications. Based in Belgium, it connects more than 11,000 financial institutions and is used as a messaging platform for the transfer of funds around the world.
If that recommendation is included in the bill, the Biden administration would still have to take action to have Russia removed, an extreme action lawmakers have said is on the table.
The White House confirmed Thursday that it is in close consultation with senators but stopped short of endorsing any deal.
“We are in very close touch with members of Congress about this legislation, which I don’t think has been formally even proposed yet,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters en route to New York aboard Air Force One. “So we are in close contact and in conversations with them.”
Psaki, however, continued to express the administration’s support for post-invasion sanctions, saying that the “deterrent” approach of “the crippling economic sanctions package” and noting that the impact is already being felt in the Russian financial markets.
Still, a number of Democrats were moving closer to the GOP position that pre-invasion sanctions were a must even if the most serious sanctions are reserved in the event of an invasion.
“I think Putin and Putin’s Russia have already committed sufficient aggression against Ukraine justifying some sanctions,” said top Biden ally Chris Coons, D-Del. “I think we should hold back the most aggressive and most punishing sanctions for now as a deterrent because the whole goal here is to keep open some space for diplomacy and to deter aggression.”
Menendez and Risch have been briefing members of their panel this week. One member — Mitt Romney, R-Utah — told ABC News he met with Risch on Wednesday night and the smaller group negotiating the package is “making good progress.”
The legislation would include a measure authored by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Ben Cardin, D-Md., modeled on the World War II-era “lend-lease” program, which would use existing presidential authorities to allow the administration to provide lethal military equipment to Ukraine to protect the population from a Russian invasion.
Members hope to move any sanctions deal — which, according to two aides involved in the matter, is still in the legislative drafting stage — to the Senate floor quickly, and Sen Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who recently returned from Ukraine and is part of the talks, told ABC News he had spoken earlier in the week with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who committed to bringing any bipartisan deal to the floor for a vote quickly.
And after Thursday’s high-level briefing, it is clear that members are ready to act swiftly.
Coons said he’s “very” concerned about the situation on the ground in and around Ukraine, adding, “It’s really hard to listen to all of that and not conclude that we need to do more.”
ABC News’ Mariam Khan and Ben Gittleson contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Days after two police officers were killed by a suspect using an illegal gun, President Joe Biden headed to New York City Thursday to meet with Mayor Eric Adams and Gov. Kathy Hochul and to announce new actions targeting gun violence that the White House says builds on his “comprehensive strategy” unveiled last June.
“Enough is enough because we know we can do things about this,” Biden said in afternoon remarks from NYPD headquarters. “But for the resistance we’re getting from some sectors of the government and the Congress and the state legislatures and the organizational structures out there — you know, Mayor Adams, you and I agree, the answer is not to abandon our streets, that’s not the answer.”
“The answer is to come together, the police and the communities, building trust and making us all safer. The answer is not to defund the police, it’s to give you the tools, the training, the funding to be partners, to be protectors and community needs you,” Biden said to applause. “Police need to treat everyone with respect and dignity.”
Senior administration officials said on a call with reporters Wednesday evening that Biden is visiting New York City “because it is a community where they continue, like many other cities across the country, to experience a spike in gun violence.”
Traveling with Attorney General Merrick Garland, Biden’s trip intends to highlight a set of new actions from the Justice Department which includes directing all U.S. Attorney’s Offices to increase resources dedicated to district-specific violent crime strategies, and increasing personnel and other resources to strengthen task forces that target the illegal flow of guns up the East Coast, similar to the one that was used in the recent fatal shooting of two NYPD officers.
Biden said the Department of Justice will also take steps “today” to prioritize federal prosecutions of those who “criminally sell or transfer firearms that are used in violent crimes” and launch a National Ghost Gun Enforcement Initiative to help bring cases against those who use so-called “ghost guns” to commit crimes.
“If you commit a crime with a ghost gun, not only are state and local prosecutors gonna come after you, but expect federal charges and federal prosecution as well,” Biden said Thursday.
The president introduced the new initiatives at a meeting on gun violence prevention before of heading to Queens with Garland, Adams and Hochul to discuss community violence intervention programs with local leaders.
“I’ll keep doing everything in my power to make sure that communities are safer, but Congress needs to do its part, too,” Biden said in prepared remarks. “Pass universal background checks, ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines, close loopholes to keep out of the hands of domestic abusers weapons, repeal the liability shield for gun manufacturers.”
He also offered a word for the families of the fallen NYPD officers to begin the meeting.
“Detective Wilmer Mora and Jason Rivera are the who and what law enforcement ought to be,” Biden said, calling the stolen glock the suspect allegedly used “really a weapon of war.” “I’ve spoken to their families, and their loss for the city is also a loss for the nation.”
After a series of mass shootings at the start of his presidency last year and facing pressure to act, Biden issued a half dozen limited gun control executive actions in April, which included actions on “ghost guns” and pistol-stabilizing braces.
The president is limited in his authority to act alone on gun control reforms and is continuing to call on Congress to act legislatively, though after months of negotiations, the most recent talks on gun reforms failed in September.
On Thursday, Biden will ask them to reach a bipartisan agreement on an appropriations bill that includes $300 million to expand community policing and $200 million for evidence-based community violence interventions.
(NEW YORK) — Michigan, one of the nation’s hottest political battlegrounds, is being hailed for a citizen-led effort to transform its famously gerrymandered election maps into some of the fairest and most competitive ahead of the fall midterm elections.
“This is just one small step to start taking power back and even the playing field for voters to be able to actually control our elections and get the results we want,” said Katie Fahey, the 32-year-old independent from Grand Rapids who sparked the grassroots redistricting reform movement with a 2016 Facebook post.
The state’s closely watched experiment in redistricting by independent commission — rather than by partisan state legislators — could provide a model for other communities gripped by political polarization, experts say. Only eight other states limit direct participation of elected officials in the drawing of state and federal districts.
“People, when they go to the polls, they want to think that their vote matters. Whereas a lot of the time, when seats are gerrymandered to favor one party or the other, basically no matter what, those elections won’t be competitive,” said Nathaniel Rakich, a FiveThirtyEight senior elections analyst.
“The [new Michigan] map just does a really good job of making sure that neither Democrats’, nor Republicans’ votes are wasted,” Rakich said.
But six months before Michigan’s voters can put the new maps to the test, a barrage of partisan legal challenges threatens to blunt an achievement praised by the likes of former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Democratic President Barack Obama.
“Are these maps better for partisan fairness? Yes. Could they be better? Absolutely,” said state Sen. Adam Hollier, a Democrat who represents historically majority Black neighborhoods in metro Detroit.
Hollier is among a group of Detroit Democrats who allege in a state lawsuit that the maps “dilute” the power of Black voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act. African American voters are “almost completely politically silenced,” the complaint claims.
Republicans, who have controlled both chambers of the state legislature for years, allege in a separate federal lawsuit that the newly drawn political districts aren’t of equal population size as legally required and unlawfully split up several cities and counties.
“I think we did a very good job of sort of putting our individual feelings on the shelf and making sure we were doing what was best for the people of Michigan,” said Rebecca Szetela, a lawyer, mother of four and political independent who chairs the state’s first 13-member Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission.
“I think that the maps should be fair and balanced moving forward, and I think that people will feel once again that their vote is their voice and that they have the ability to elect someone that represents them,” Szetela said.
Michigan’s old state and federal political districts — in place for the past decade — have been considered some of the most unfair and unbalanced in the country — drawn by Republicans, to favor Republicans. Just two of the state’s 14 congressional districts are rated as competitive by FiveThirtyEight.
“Michigan’s a super purple state. About 50% of us vote for Democrats; about 50% of us vote for Republicans,” said Fahey. “But depending on what party had gerrymandered, that party would have like a supermajority and be able to pass whatever kind of legislation they want, even though theoretically, we should have compromise on almost every single bill.”
The new maps are cleaner, fairer and more competitive for both parties, according to FiveThirtyEight’s nonpartisan Redistricting Tracker. It achieves this by unpacking the gerrymandered majority Black and heavily Democratic districts around Detroit, spreading those voters across new districts creating a blend of urban and suburban voters.
Yvette McElroy Anderson, a longtime community advocate and field director of the Fannie Lou Hamer Political Action Committee, said the disappearance of majority Black districts will make it harder for minority candidates to get on the ballot.
“It’s hurting the ability of Black candidates as well as hurting African Americans to have people that will represent the interests that needs to be represented on their behalf,” Anderson said. “Fifty-one percent or better is what the Voting Rights Act says. So if we don’t do that, then we are doing a disservice to the African American population.”
Hollier, who is challenging the commission to go back to the drawing board before the state’s August primary election, argued that it’s possible to achieve districts that are both majority Black and more competitive.
“Black candidates, particularly from urban communities, and from across our state, have typically raised less money because there’s less money in their districts,” Hollier said, “and we talk about how much money has impacted politics. It changes who can run for things, and where the elected officials come out of.”
Szetela argued that the new maps will enhance the power and influence of Black voters in more races and create more opportunities for representation. The two new congressional districts in metro Detroit would have roughly 44% African American voter representation.
“The data that we were looking at showed that even with lower percentages, that Black voters will be able to elect their candidates of choice,” she said. “And because we divided up some of those districts that were historically 80 to 90% African American into more districts, there should be better representation.”
Rakich said the debate doesn’t have an easy answer.
“On one hand, [the critics] do have a point because certainly a district that is 44% Black is less likely to elect a Black representative,” he said. “But at the same time, because of our system of elections, it’s also very likely that even a 44% Black district would elect a candidate preferred by Black voters.”
State and federal courts will likely decide the fate of Michigan’s new maps, and it’s the voters in November’s midterm elections who will put them to their first big test.
“As a lawyer, I’m never confident on what’s going to happen in a court because courts can rule any way that they want to,” said Szetela. “At the end of the day, we did our good faith effort to come up with very good maps for the people in the state of Michigan.”
Fahey, who is now counseling at least 13 other states on redistricting reform, said she’s confident that no matter where the lines are drawn, the commission’s impact will be a positive change over the old maps.
“It means that we’ll have more competitive elections; it means that we’ll probably have some more moderate candidates who are actually listening to both Democrats and Republicans,” she said.
(WASHINGTON) — Three of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump have tapped out early to announce they are not seeking reelection in 2022 — but the remaining seven appear to be running strong races, judging by fundraising numbers disclosed in the latest campaign finance filings.
As 2022 candidates were gearing up for the upcoming midterm election none of the Trump-endorsed challengers vying to unseat those seven House Republicans managed to outraise the sitting lawmakers in the last quarter of 2021, filings released this week show.
It’s not uncommon for incumbents to have a big cash advantage over their challengers, but the large fundraising gaps hint at the long way Trump-backed challengers have to go to — despite the former president’s support.
Most notably, Rep. Liz Cheney — with backing from both establishment Republicans and moderate Democrats — has broken her own fundraising records, despite being the most high-profile Republican on Trump’s 2022 hit list.
The Wyoming Republican reported raising more than $2 million in just the final three months of last year, bringing her 2021 fundraising total to $7.2 million. Her Trump-endorsed primary challenger, Harriet Hageman, raised less than half of Cheney’s fourth-quarter haul during the same period, reporting just over $745,000.
As the 2022 election year ramps up, Hageman’s cash on hand is just $381,000 compared to Cheney’s $4.7 million war chest, according to filings.
Cheney, one of two Republicans on the nine-member House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, has also received support from some major liberal donors who typically give only to Democrats, including investor and billionaire John Pritzker of the Pritzker family, who maxed out on his contribution to Cheney by giving $10,800 to her joint fundraising committee earlier last year.
Also among those rallying behind Cheney are Trump critics within the Republican Party, including former Rep. Francis Rooney, R-Fla., who is among several Republican lawmakers who announced their retirement after clashing with pro-Trump GOP forces.
“My wife and I maxed out for Liz and then we held a fundraiser for her because we wanted to speak up,” Rooney, who gave Cheney’s joint fundraising committee $10,800 back in May, told ABC News.
Rooney, who had previously given upwards of $1 million to various GOP candidates groups over the years, told ABC News that he’s no longer giving to the RNC and Republicans except for Cheney and a handful of others, because he’s tired of Trump-dominated narratives within the Republican Party.
Among Cheney’s other donors in the final months of last year was former President George W. Bush, who maxed out on his donation to her campaign by giving $5,800 in October.
Bush also gave $2,800 to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who has been targeted by Trump for being one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict him in his impeachment trial last year, and the only one of them up for reelection this year. Similar to Cheney, Murkowski outraised her Trump-endorsed challenger, Kelly Tshibaka, by more than double in the final three months of 2021, and entered the 2022 election year with $4.3 million on hand.
Reps. Fred Upton and Peter Meijer, both representing Michigan, also boasted major fundraising advantages over their respective Trump-endorsed challengers, Steve Carra and John Gibbs, both bringing in five times the amount their challengers took in last quarter.
In Washington’s 3rd District, Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler held a narrower fundraising gap over Trump-backed challenger Joe Kent, but still entered 2022 with a much larger war chest than his rival.
South Carolina Republican Russell Fry, who Trump endorsed just this week, managed to raise close to the amount raised by incumbent Rep. Tom Rice, but still faces Rice’s big war chest of nearly $2 million.
Former Trump aide Max Miller, who’s running to fill retiring GOP Rep. Anthony Gonzalez’s seat in Ohio, continued to report the strongest fundraising figures among contenders vying for Gonzalez’s open seat. Although his fundraising showed signs of slowing down in the final quarter of 2021, with contributions of $181,000 compared to the nearly $700,000 he raised in the previous quarter, he nonetheless entered 2022 with nearly $1 million in cash on hand.
Miller was one of several big-name Trump-aligned GOP candidates who failed to maintain their massive fundraising momentum from the earlier part of 2021.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had boasted $3.5 million in donations in the first quarter of 2021, reported a relatively small $1.2 million haul in the final quarter, while Reps. Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert’s fundraising both gradually slowed down throughout the year.
In Senate races, Sen. Tim Scott, who is endorsed by Trump and is also considered a possible 2024 presidential election contender, continued to bring in large sums, raising $7 million in the fourth quarter.
Rep. Mo Brooks, who is running for a Senate seat, was significantly outraised in the fourth quarter by his GOP primary challenger Katie Britt, who raised $1.2 million compared to Brooks’ $385,000 — a huge drop from what he raised in the previous quarter.
In North Carolina, no GOP Senate candidate raised more than a million dollars in the final quarter amid a competitive primary. Trump-endorsed Senate candidate Ted Budd brought in $968,360 while former North Carolina Republican Gov. Patrick McCory raised $748,072 and Rep. Mark Walker brought in only $146,053. The split among Republican donors could make Trump’s endorsement all the more important for Budd, the current leading fundraiser.
In Pennsylvania, the Senate primary field was upended when the Trump-endorsed candidate dropped out in November, leading two relative newcomers to emerge on the campaign trail. TV doctor Mehmet Oz and former hedge fund CEO Dave McCormick are reportedly dropping millions in advertising, but it remains to be seen whether they’re getting any return on their investment. Trump has yet to make an endorsement in the race.
The candidate who appears to have raised the most money of any GOP challenger is Georgia Senate candidate and former football star Herschel Walker, who raised $5.4 million in the fourth quarter to lift his fundraising total to $10 million since the start of his campaign — signaling what could be an expensive general election race between him and Democratic incumbent Raphael Warnock, who has nearly $23 million in cash on hand.
“This massive fundraising haul, likely the largest in the country for a non-incumbent, shows that Georgia Republicans are clearly united behind Herschel Walker and are ready to take on Senator Warnock,” Scott Paradise, campaign manager for Team Herschel, said in a press release last week.
On the Democratic side, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly joins Warnock as the party’s top two fundraisers, with Kelly holding $19 million in cash on hand as both men seek reelection.
In what could be a tight Senate primary race in Pennsylvania, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman held a strong lead in fundraising over the course of last year, but fellow Western Pennsylvanian Rep. Conor Lamb appears to be gaining traction, bringing in $1.35 million in the fourth quarter of 2021.
In North Carolina, leading Senate candidate Cheri Beasley took in $2.1 million in the final quarter of 2021, with 90% of her donations being $100 or less, according to her campaign. Beasley’s campaign manager, Travis Brimm, said in a press release that they are “committed to building a strong, grassroots campaign that touches every corner of the state and helps lead to victory in November.”
And nationally, the Democratic Party and Republican Party fared about even with their national party committees’ fundraising in 2021.
In total, the RNC outraised the DNC by $8 million, but the DNC entered the election year with a bigger war chest, reporting $67 million in cash on hand compared to $56 million for the RNC.
The Senate and House arms of the Republican Party also slightly outraised their Democratic counterparts, and entered the year with a slightly bigger war chest of $111 million compared to the Democratic committees’ $106 million.
(WASHINGTON) — A bill introduced in Congress Wednesday by Democratic lawmakers seeks to end legacy admissions at many U.S. colleges and universities.
The so-called Fair College Admissions for Students Act would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to bar institutions of higher education that participate in federal student aid programs from giving admissions preference to applicants with legacy or donor status, a common practice at elite institutions.
The bill was introduced by Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) in an attempt to address what they said is an unfair and inequitable admissions process that disproportionately benefits wealthy, white and connected students.
“All students deserve an equitable opportunity to gain admission to institutions of higher education, but students whose parents didn’t attend or donate to a university are often overlooked in the admissions process due to the historically classist and racist legacy and donor admissions practices at many schools across the country,” Bowman said in a statement.
Merkley said the bill would seek to level the playing field for minority and first-generation students especially.
“Children of donors and alumni may be excellent students and well-qualified, but the last people who need extra help in the complicated and competitive college admissions process are those who start with the advantages of family education and money,” he said in a statement.
The bill would allow the education secretary to waive the legacy preference ban for institutions like historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges and minority-serving institutions, which admit high levels of underrepresented students already.
Legacy preferences are common among selective colleges; according to the progressive think tank The Century Foundation, three-quarters of the nation’s top 100 national universities in U.S. News & World Report employ them, and nearly all the 100 liberal arts colleges do.
The legacy preference is worth an extra 160 points for children of alumni, researchers from Princeton University found.
Supporters of legacy preferences argue that legacies can help boost an institution’s ability to award financial assistance to low-income students.
Several institutions, including Johns Hopkins University and Amherst College, have ended their practice of legacy admissions in recent years.
Last year, Colorado became the first state to enact a law banning legacy admissions at public colleges and universities. In the wake of the “Varsity Blues” scandal, California didn’t ban legacy admissions but did require institutions whose students receive state financial aid to disclose how many applicants are accepted through the practice.
The Fair College Admissions for Students Act is introduced as the Supreme Court is poised to hear challenges to affirmative action, which also could have implications for many colleges and universities’ admissions policies.
(ARLINGTON COUNTY, Va.) — Former Senate Republican Leader Bob Dole — a decorated World War II veteran and presidential candidate who served in Congress for 36 years — will be laid to rest with military honors on Wednesday at historic Arlington National Cemetery.
Dole died on Dec. 5, 2021, after announcing last February that he’d been diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer and was starting treatment.
Dole’s wife of 46 years, former Cabinet secretary and North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole, and daughter, Robin, are expected to attend the invitation-only, graveside funeral with family members, close friends and former colleagues. Dole was given the rare honor to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda late last year before his body was taken to his home state of Kansas for memorials and then back to Washington, where he’ll be laid to rest Wednesday afternoon alongside American war heroes.
Dole, a native of Russell, Kansas, served as an army officer in World War II and was severely wounded in action at age 21, left with permanent limited mobility in his right arm. Overcoming adversity, Dole went on to graduate law school, serve in the Kansas legislature, and represent his home state for four terms in the House of Representatives and five terms in the Senate, where he led the Republican Conference for more than a decade.
In Congress, he was an advocate for the rights of veterans and Americans with disabilities, spearheading the inclusion of protections against discrimination in employment, education and public services in the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990. Dole also served as national chairman of the World War II Memorial Campaign which raised funds for the World War II Memorial to be built on the National Mall.
He ran three times for president, ultimately winning the Republican party nomination in 1996 but losing the general election to Bill Clinton, who was seeking a second term. Months later, Clinton presented Dole with the Presidential Medal of Freedom at the White House.
In a USA Today op-ed he finished on pen and paper less than two weeks before his death, Dole wrote Congress needs teamwork now more than ever, writing, “Those who suggest that compromise is a sign of weakness misunderstand the fundamental strength of our democracy.”
(WASHINGTON) — As the federal investigation into possible sex trafficking allegations against Rep. Matt Gaetz continues, his campaign’s fundraising has been dwindling.
In its latest campaign finance disclosure filed on Monday, the Gaetz campaign reported raising $534,000 in the final three months of last year — a major drop from the $1.8 million he raised in the first three months of the year, fresh off the 2020 election.
Overall, Gaetz’s fundraising has been gradually slowing down, dropping to $1.4 million in the second quarter and then to $527,000 in the third quarter.
A dip in fundraising between election years isn’t uncommon, and some of Gaetz’s GOP colleagues, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, saw a similar slowdown in fundraising from their earlier hauls. A joint fundraising operation between Gaetz and Greene also reported bringing in only $19,000 in the final quarter of 2021, compared to the nearly $360,000 it raised in the second quarter.
Meanwhile, as the sex trafficking investigation unfolded over the past year, disclosure records show that the Gaetz campaign’s legal bills rose significantly.
In total, from July 2020 through the end of December 2021, the Gaetz campaign reported spending nearly $200,000 on legal bills, minus $25,000 that was returned by a firm named Zuckerman Spaeder LLP two months after the Gaetz campaign paid that amount to the firm.
In the first few months of 2021, as news of the investigation into Gaetz and his associates emerged, the campaign also spent more than $800,000 on strategic consulting by PR firm Logan Circle Group — but the campaign’s payments to the firm dropped to under $3,000 in the final three months of 2021.
The latest financial disclosure filing also shows the Gaetz campaign has continued to pay the office of New York criminal defense attorney Marc Fernich, who lists on his website “notable clients” that include convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Among Fernich’s other clients are Mexican drug lord El Chapo, former mobster John “Junior” Gotti, and “alleged propagandist in Nazi Hungary” Ferenc Koreh, according to his firm’s website.
The Gaetz campaign made a $50,000 payment to Fernich’s firm in October, according to the latest filing — its second payment to the firm after a payment of $25,000 in June of last year.
As his fundraising slowed down last year, Gaetz’s campaign spending also dropped significantly, with disclosures showing most of his money going to direct mail messaging and fundraising.
“I’m the only Republican in Congress who doesn’t take lobbyist or PAC money. I rely exclusively on donations that average around $38,” Gaetz said in a statement to ABC News. “HBO made a movie about it called The Swamp.”
The financial disclosures come as the federal probe into possible sex trafficking allegations against Gaetz continues.
Earlier this month Gaetz’s ex-girlfriend, a one-time Capitol Hill staffer, testified in front of a federal grand jury that’s hearing evidence in the investigation, according to multiple sources. The ex-girlfriend, who ABC News is not naming, was one of the women allegedly on a 2018 trip to the Bahamas with Gaetz and others that prosecutors are investigating.
Sources familiar with the grand jury proceedings said the woman provided information regarding a phone call that prosecutors say occurred between her, Gaetz, and another woman who is also a witness in the sex-crimes probe and who met the congressman through his one-time friend, former Florida tax collector Joel Greenberg.
A week after Gaetz’s ex-girlfriend testified in front of the grand jury, Joe Ellicott, a close friend of Greenberg — who himself pled guilty last year to multiple charges including sex trafficking a minor — also agreed to plead guilty to fraud and drug charges. Ellicott, like Greenberg, allegedly attended multiple gatherings that involved drugs and young women who were paid for sex, sources told ABC News.
Ellicott also allegedly knows the one-time minor at the center of the sex trafficking investigation into Gaetz, as well as another woman who is involved, sources said. ABC News previously reported that in a private text exchange over the encrypted messaging app Signal, Ellicott allegedly told Greenberg in August 2020 that a mutual friend was worried she could be implicated in the investigation into the sex ring involving a minor.
The attorney for Gaetz’s ex-girlfriend, Tim Jansen, declined to comment when reached by ABC News.
The latest developments come after Greenberg, as part of a plea deal, had been steadily providing prosecutors with information that allegedly included years of Venmo and Cash App transactions and thousands of photos and videos, as well as access to personal social media accounts, ABC News previously reported.
Gaetz has denied all wrongdoing and has not been charged with any crimes. In a statement to ABC News responding to Ellicott’s guilty plea agreement, Gaetz’s chief of staff Jillian Lane Wyant, said, “After nearly a year of false rumors, not a shred of evidence has implicated Congressman Gaetz in wrongdoing. We remain focused on our work representing Floridians.”
Ellicott’s guilty plea hearing is set for Feb. 9, while Greenberg’s sentencing is slated for the end of March after being pushed back multiple times amid the ongoing investigation.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden began what he has said would be a bipartisan process to pick his Supreme Court nominee, hosting meetings at the White House on Tuesday amid Republican criticism of his history-making move to nominate the first Black woman to the bench.
Biden met with Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and the committee’s top Republican Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, on Tuesday afternoon to consult with them on the nomination and confirmation process. Vice President Kamala Harris, who Biden has said will advise him on his selection, was also on hand for the Oval Office event.
“The Constitution says ‘advise and consent, advise and consent,’ and I’m serious when I say I want the advice of the Senate as well as the consent,” Biden told reporters at the top of the meeting.
“I’m looking for a candidate with character, with the qualities of … a judge in terms of being courteous to the folks before them and treating people with respect. As well as a judicial philosophy that is more one that suggests that there are unenumerated rights to the Constitution and all new members mean something including the Ninth Amendment,” Biden said.
He also reiterated his intention to announce his nominee by the end of the month.
“I think I’ll be courteous to the president and try to answer his questions,” Grassley told reporters on the Hill earlier Tuesday morning. “I don’t know what those questions are going to be, but I’m going to take the approach that we need somebody that’s going to interpret the law and not make a law because that’s Congress’s job.”
While some in the GOP have criticized Biden’s campaign pledge to nominate the first Black woman to the court, arguing all nominees should be considered for their qualifications, Grassley said he wouldn’t enter that debate until he sees the nominee.
“The president makes a nomination. That’s his privilege,” Grassley said.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, meanwhile, doubled down on his belief to reporters that Biden’s pledge is “offensive” to Black women and claimed Tuesday that Democrats are “very comfortable discriminating based on race.”
“When Joe Biden throws out a quota that the only people he will consider for this nomination are African American women. He is number one rejecting regardless of merits everybody else, whether they are white or Black or Hispanic or Native American,” Cruz said.
Despite some Republican opposition, the White House has dug into the commitment, pushing back on the idea of Biden choosing a candidate just to get bipartisan support.
“The president is going to select a woman, a Black woman, who is qualified, who is prepared, who has impeccable experience to serve on the court,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Monday. He’s going to do that based on her credentials, of course having a discussion with her and not through gaming out the system.”
Psaki said Biden will also begin consulting with legal experts and scholars on the decision this week.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer applauded the president for his commitment to nominating a Black woman to the high court in an earlier floor speech and called on members from both sides of the aisle to embrace his efforts to diversify the court.
“Every single member of this chamber regardless of party should embrace the president’s commitment to make sure that our courts and especially the Supreme Court better reflect our countries diversity. And nominating a Black woman as justice is a long-overdue step to achieving that goal,” Schumer said.
“The more our judges reflect our nation’s vibrancy and diversity, the more effectively they will be able to administer equal justice,” he added.
Biden has not yet named a nominee but said he anticipates making a formal nomination before the end of February. Supreme Court nominees only require a simple majority of senators to vote for confirmation, which means there is little Republicans can do to block a Biden nominee if all Democrats — holding 50 seats in the Senate, and Vice President Kamala Harris acting as a tie-breaking vote — stick together.
No Black woman has ever been nominated or served on the U.S. Supreme Court. Two Black men and five women, in total, have served on the bench. There have been 115 justices.
ABC News’ Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Former President Donald Trump announced Monday night that his political committees raised more than $51 million over the second half of last year, to buttress what is now a massive $122 million war chest.
Trump’s latest fundraising haul is a drop from the first half of last year, when his various committees together raised a total of $82 million from January through June of 2021.
It is possible that the $82 million sum Trump’s team announced for the first half of last year included transferred money raised in the final weeks of 2020, though the exact amount transferred from the previous year is unclear.
Trump’s war chest puts him in a uniquely strong position heading into the 2022 midterms and ahead of a potential 2024 presidential run.
The Republican National Committee also reported having $56.3 million cash in hand at the end of December 2021.
In a press release Monday, Trump’s Save America political action committee said that the $51 million was raised by the former president’s multiple committees from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2021.
The average donation Trump received between his committees was $31, with a total of 1,631,648 donations, the release said.
Notably, Trump doesn’t appear to be sharing many of his donations yet. With over $122 million in cash on hand, Trump says his PACs have only donated $1.35 million to “to like-minded causes and endorsed candidates.”
Save America’s filing shows that $1 million of that contribution went to the nonprofit Conservative Partnership Institute, which is led by a slew of Trump’s close allies, including Mark Meadows, Jim DeMint and Ed Corrigan.
Much of Save America’s money in the latter half of 2021 was spent on Facebook ads, payroll, and consulting fees for various firms, including $1.5 million paid to Tim Unes’ firm Event Strategies and $60,000 paid to former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale’s firm Parscale Strategy, according to the filing. More than $240,000 also went to legal spending, the filing shows.
Over the past year, Trump has been fundraising with numerous allies through various vehicles, including his Save America PAC and his presidential campaign committee-turned PAC, Make America Great Again PAC.
Save America, in particular, was set up as a leadership PAC, which is designed to allow former and current lawmakers or prominent political figures to raise money and boost their allies, often with the purpose of advancing their political influence.
Last year, Save America raised $700,000 in a joint fundraising operation with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. More recently, the PAC raised roughly $202,000 with Trump-endorsed Florida House hopeful Anna Paulina Luna, new disclosure filings show.
Save America had also raised massive sums with the Republican National Committee in the weeks following the 2020 election, but the two have since stopped officially fundraising together. The RNC and other GOP party committees, however, continue to frequently appeal to donors by using Trump’s name in fundraising emails and messages.
The RNC has also continued to help cover Trump’s legal bills over the past few months. As previously reported by ABC News, the national party committee has paid at least $720,000 to law firms representing the former president in various legal challenges, including criminal investigations into his businesses in New York, according to campaign finance records.
In the past few months the RNC’s fundraising has dipped in comparison to the substantially larger amounts it used to report every month while it was fundraising with Trump during the 2020 election cycle. However, the RNC’s fundraising still topped the DNC’s in the second half of 2021.
Between July and December 2021, the GOP national committee reported raising a total of $74 million, while the Democratic National Committee reported raising $65 million during the same period, disclosure filings show.
In all of 2021, the RNC raised $159 million while the DNC raised $151 million.
