(WASHINGTON) — After 54 years at the National Institutes of Health and 38 years as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci will be stepping down from public service at the end of the year.
“I have been driving onto that campus every single day, every single weekend for the last 54 years,” Fauci told ABC News’ chief Washington correspondent and “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl in an interview that aired Sunday. “So I don’t even want to think about what it’s going to be like when I drive off the campus for the last time … That idea just gives me chills just thinking about that.”
In an intimate interview at his home, Fauci sat down with ABC News to talk about his tenure in public service, the COVID-19 pandemic during which he became perhaps the country’s most famous doctor and the controversies that have consumed the last two and a half years — and sometimes ensnared him.
Fauci has lived in the same home since 1977. Pictures hang next to the banister stairwell, dozens of framed photos sit atop a bookshelf and the floor is scuffed from years of use, the carpet worn down too. The mismatched red and brown chairs in the living room are cozy; on one sits an overstuffed pillow that has Fauci’s face on one side and, on the other, a quote reading “‘It is what it is.’ – Anthony S. Fauci, M.D.”
“You became an icon,” Karl told him. “It was kind of wild to see. There were Fauci bobbleheads. People had Fauci shirts that said ‘In Fauci We Trust.’ You became somebody the whole country was turning to. What was that like?”
“I was pretty well known among my peers in science, but certainly not to the extent it is now,” Fauci answered. “You know, I actually think both extremes, Jon, are aberrations of a reflection of the divisiveness in our country.”
As much as Fauci — who served under presidents of both parties as a nonpartisan health official — was respected by many amid the pandemic, he was lambasted and even despised by others. Conservatives on Capitol Hill have criticized his recommendations on COIVD, called for investigations into him, he’s received death threats and at a rally just days before the 2020 election, supporters of former President Donald Trump chanted “Fire Fauci! Fire Fauci!”
“When did it all get so political?” Karl asked.
“It got political very, very quickly,” Fauci responded. “Because we had the misfortune of an outbreak, and a double misfortune of an outbreak in a divided society, and the triple misfortune of a divided society in an election year. I mean, you couldn’t get more — getting the cards stacked against you, than right there. It was a triple whammy.”
Fauci said he has remained dedicated to his work, despite the threats of violence against him and his family.
“I look upon the country, in many respects, as my patient,” he went on to say. “And when you — if you’re a really good physician, you are concerned and worry about every element of your patient.”
“Including how your patient is going to react to something you said?” Karl asked.
“Exactly,” Fauci responded. “Exactly. And even if the patient is somebody who’s not the most attractive person in the world in the sense of personality, you still got to treat them the way you would treat anybody else. We learned that in medical school.”
While Fauci said he hasn’t communicated with Trump since Trump left office, he did praise the former administration on Operation Warp Speed, the program that developed the COVID-19 vaccines in record time.
“Just as he takes the blame for things in the administration, he should take the credit for things in the administration,” Fauci said. “That was a positive thing, Operation Warp Speed. And they should take credit for that.”
COVID-19 has killed more than a million Americans, a death toll higher than any war in which the U.S. has fought. And Fauci was one of the faces of the government’s response. For a time, he appeared nearly constantly at White House briefings and in the media to share the government’s latest, sometimes shifting, pandemic guidance.
“There were a lot of dark days, obviously a lot of deaths,” Karl said. “Was there a day that sticks out to you or a time period that sticks out to you as the darkest?”
“It wasn’t a day,” Fauci answered. “It was a period. I’ve trained a lot of Italian scientists in my lab in the arena of infectious diseases, many of whom went back to Italy and were in the epicenter of the northern Italy disaster there.”
“And when I got on the phone and heard them describe what was going on in the ward, where they were having people packed up in the hallways — who they had to decide who to give a ventilator to, or who to take care of,” Fauci later added. “I knew these people. So I knew what effect it would have on them. And then I said, ‘Whoa, we got a real problem here. We have a real, real problem.'”
For months, cities were locked down. Schools in many areas were closed even longer.
“Obviously, these are local decisions. But was it a mistake in so many states, in so many localities, to see schools closed as long as they were?” Karl asked.
“I think in some — I don’t want to use the word ‘mistake,’ Jon, because if I do, it gets taken out of the context that you’re asking me the question on,” Fauci said. “And I don’t want to do that because that’s just happened too many times over the last years with me.”
“Did we pay too high a price?” Karl pressed.
“Yeah, I would say that what we should realize, and have realized, that there will be deleterious collateral consequences when you do something like that,” Fauci answered.
“That’s the reason why I continually would say on any media appearances I’ve had: We’ve got to do everything we can to keep the schools open,” Fauci said. “The most important thing is to protect the children.”
As the evidence on how the virus changed, the medical advice changed, too. At the very beginning of the pandemic, Fauci told the public that there was no need to wear masks. But that guideline was soon reversed.
“If you are true to the data and the evidence, if something is evolving, means it isn’t the same as it was before and therefore the data are going to allow you to upgrade and update — whether it’s a recommendation, whether it’s a guideline, whether it’s the communication to the public,” Fauci explained.
“Would you take back what you said about masks?” Karl later asked.
“Yeah,” Fauci answered. “I mean, sure, if I had to do it over again. Of course. Again, if I tell you why we did it, it would be interpreted as making an excuse, and I don’t want to go there because that creates nothing but backlash. If I had to do it over again, I would have analyzed it a little bit better.”
Fauci has been the national leading expert on infectious diseases longer than many Americans have been alive. And for 38 years, he hasn’t even changed desks, telling Karl with a laugh that he “didn’t want to ruin taxpayers’ money.”
But as he reaches the final months of his tenure as a public servant, he reflected on how he wants to be remembered.
“I want to be remembered as someone who gave everything they had for the public health of the American public and indirectly for the rest of the world, because we’re such a leader in science and public health,” Fauci said. “I mean, I just want people to know that I gave it everything I had and didn’t leave anything on the field. I was all there.”
(PORTLAND, Ore.) — Oregon has had a Democratic governor for 35 years — but this year’s race could very well break that streak thanks to a potent cocktail of local and national issues but, mostly, because of a boisterous third-party candidate drawing double-digit support from voters.
With weeks left until Election Day, race observers and operatives call the contest a jump ball between Democrats and Republicans.
“I’m very concerned,” said Greg Peden, who worked as an aide to former Democratic Gov. John Kitzhaber. “I think this is the tightest race we’ve seen and the most complex race we’ve seen, and I don’t think anybody can really predict even now how exactly this ends up.”
Running to replace term-limited Gov. Kate Brown are former state House Speaker Tina Kotek, the Democratic nominee, and Republican rival Christine Drazan, a former state House minority leader.
But strategists of both parties say that the real twist behind the election’s tightness is the third-party candidacy of former state Sen. Betsy Johnson, who was a Democrat while in office and is now running as an independent.
She was a staunch moderate over her 20 years in the state House and Senate, a reputation that has followed her onto the campaign trail and could be helpful in a state with more non-affiliated voters than registered Democrats.
According to FiveThirtyEight’s polling average, Johnson is earning about 16% support, keeping both Drazan and Kotek in the mid- to high-30s. Kotek had been considered the favorite early in the cycle, given Oregon’s blue hue, but since late September it’s Drazan who has eked out a razor-thin lead.
While Democrats win in Oregon at the federal level with ease, the state has hosted several tight gubernatorial contests, with the past two being decided by about 6 and 7 points, respectively. Still, Republicans have not won the governorship since 1982 and President Joe Biden most recently took the Beaver State by 16 points just two years ago — resulting in Oregon being left out of the core of most prognosticators’ battleground maps this cycle.
In launching her third-party campaign last fall, Johnson acknowledged that “taking on the entrenched two parties will be difficult and expensive” but cast herself as “independent-minded, pro-choice [and] pro-jobs.”
Kotek and Drazan’s campaigns diverge on some priorities — Kotek’s focus includes abortion access and climate change while Drazan highlights resource management and public education — but both of them tout three of the same issues: the economy and the working class; housing and the homeless; and public safety.
Crime and housing have become major concerns in the state at the same time that many in Oregon and elsewhere are grappling with historically high inflation.
Pulling from Democratic and Republican platforms, Johnson has consistently voiced support for abortion access while lambasting crime and homelessness in Portland and describing herself as a “lifelong responsible gun owner and collector.”
Johnson’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment for this story but she told Fox News earlier this month that “people are frightened and they’re mad” and on education said, “Let’s not worry about pronouns. Let’s worry about mathematics.”
Johnson also brings significant personal wealth to the race and has received $3.75 million from Nike co-founder Phil Knight.
“Oh, absolutely,” Oregon Democratic strategist Jake Weigler said when asked if Kotek would have the advantage in a two-person race without Johnson. “It would probably be a more competitive race than the Democrats have had in the past … But I think it would be a completely different conversation.”
Johnson’s estimated appeal among disaffected voters unwilling to back Drazan also dovetails with another challenge for Kotek.
FiveThirtyEight reported earlier this month that Gov. Brown, who has served since 2015, is not widely popular, which some Democrats worry tarnishes the party brand — and Kotek by extension.
“The race is agonizingly tight because Betsy is taking more votes from Tina than from Christine. But it’s also in part because people equate Tina with Gov. Brown, who has a low approval rating. That is unfair because they are completely different people, with different styles of governing,” said one former Democratic state legislator.
Republicans are also bullish that Drazan will be able to go on offense on some policies, seizing on economic worries and the scars over the violence and social justice-related unrest in Portland — which have all taken place while Democrats have complete control in Salem.
Oregon had the seventh-highest homeless population in 2020, according to federal government data, and Portland has experienced an increase in crimes like murder and assault, according to the city’s police. Drazan has blanketed the airwaves with ads featuring tents lining Portland streets and broader questions about Oregonians’ satisfaction with the current state of affairs, all while staying away from thornier issues like her support for Donald Trump or abortion restrictions.
“Oregonians really feel like this just is not being addressed, and the state doesn’t want to be known for that. We don’t want people afraid to come to the state because they’re afraid of crime, but it’s a reality,” said Oregon GOP strategist Rebecca Tweed. She argued that “businesses are leaving, people are stopping visiting, regular day-to-day folks just don’t feel safe anymore. So it’s certainly a much bigger issue.”
Still, Kotek has hefty advantages
Chief among them is Democrats’ inherent edge in the state. Johnson appears to have hit a ceiling in voter surveys, and there are almost 300,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans. And Democrats have decades of institutional knowledge on how to win gubernatorial races.
“On the polling, it looks like a toss-up, but when you look at the advantage in terms of registration numbers and past history, even with close elections, I think that advantage still has to lie with Kotek,” said Pacific University political science professor Jim Moore. “That’s a big hill to climb for the Republicans.”
On policy, Kotek is hammering hard on abortion access, pressing Drazan to take a more definitive stance on how she’d approach the issue as governor. And Kotek is trying to tie her Republican opponent to the most radical flank of the GOP, highlighting Drazan’s expressed support for the entire ticket, which includes a Senate candidate who has talked approvingly about elements of the QAnon conspiracy theory.
That strategy is reflected in an advertising blitz, including in a clip comparing Drazan’s policies on abortion to remarks from Supreme Court justices who indicated during their confirmation hearings that they’d back Roe v. Wade before ultimately voting to overturn it.
“We have a very high-propensity voting population of women, they tend to be more progressive. We have more Democrats just in population alone. And if female Democrat voters show up to vote, it’ll be a very difficult campaign for Drazan,” Tweed, the Republican strategist, conceded. “If I’m Tina Kotek, I’m talking about that issue all day every day until the election’s over … and if I’m Drazan, I’m trying to lean away from it as much as I can.”
“We’re already seeing that shift,” Tweed added. “I think that’ll only increase from here on out.”
Kotek has also not shied away from crime and homelessness, releasing ads and a proposal to increase housing. Drazan, too, leads her platform with a plan for “the crisis in our streets” and to “restore community safety.”
Those dynamics are setting the stage for a combustible finish to the surprisingly tight race.
The Democratic Governors Association has invested about $5 million this cycle, while its Republican counterpart has invested $4.1 million, and each of the three candidates have fearsome war chests. In another sign of broader GOP interest in the race, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin — who last year won in a blue state — is campaigning with Drazan in Aurora on Tuesday, and Knight switched camps from Johnson to give Drazan $1 million.
Biden is set to appear with Kotek on Saturday after attending a “grassroots volunteer event with the Oregon Democrats” on Friday, according to the White House.
Turnout is also anticipated to be high given that every active registered voter is mailed a ballot — starting on Wednesday — and ballots can then be dropped off as late as 8 p.m. local time on Election Day.
“We’re not going to know the outcome of this very close race until maybe Friday of that week or maybe even later,” said Greg Leo, the former executive director of the Oregon GOP. “It’s gonna be a very long couple of days after the polls close.”
(SAVANNAH, Ga.) — Under the Friday night TV lights and locked in a tight political battle, Georgia’s Senate candidates debated for the first, and likely, only time.
Incumbent Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock and former football star and Republican nominee Herschel Walker met in Savannah, Georgia, on Friday, just three days before the start of early in-person voting.
The candidates sparred on the economy, abortion, and Herschel Walker got reprimanded by one of the moderators for using what she described as a “prop.”
It was the first time Walker hit the debate stage after skipping debates during the GOP primary and comes in the wake of allegations, first reported by the Daily Beast, that he paid the cost of a woman’s abortion more than a decade ago. Subsequent reports identified the woman as the mother of one of Walker’s children. ABC News has not independently confirmed the report.
Walker, has denied ever paying for an abortion and in an interview with ABC News’ Linsey Davis, said he knows the identity of the woman making the claims, though he maintains she is lying.
He doubled down on that response on the debate stage tonight, though his position on abortion shifted from the campaign trail.
After previously saying he supports a total abortion ban with no exceptions, Walker said Friday he backs the Georgia heartbeat bill, which allows exceptions, including rape and incest if a police report is filed.
“I support the Georgia heartbeat bill because that’s the bill of the people… I’m a Christian, but I’m also representing the people of Georgia,” Walker said.
Asked if he supports any limits on abortion, Warnock dodged, saying he saying he trusts women to make that decision.
“I have a profound reverence for life and a deep respect for choice.”
Debate moderators questioned both candidates about allegations made against them.
Warnock was asked about claims made against him by his ex-wife that his duties as a senator interfered with his parenting abilities.
“I went through a divorce,” Warnock said. “And while that was a painful period. What came out of that was two amazing children that I just talked to before I came on the stage. And my children know that I am with them and for them, and that I support them.”
Walker argued he’s been transparent while Warnock hasn’t. Walker referred to writing a book which mentioned acts of violence in his past which he claims was a by-product of dissociative identity disorder.
“You can get help. All you got to do is ask, and I’ll always, always be a champion for mental health,” Walker said.
Though, Walker added, he’s “doing well” and is ready to serve in the Senate.
“You don’t have to have treatment for it,” Walker said. “I continue to get help if I need help, but I don’t need any help. I’m doing well.”
Warnock did not attack Walker on the recent abortion allegations. However, he did say, “My opponent has a problem with the truth,” after Walker accused him of not supporting police officers.
“I’ve never pretended to be a police officer,” Warnock fired back.
The comment caused Walker to flash a badge. It was not clear what the badge was.
“I am- work with many police officers,” Walker said, eliciting a testy response from the moderator.
“Mr. Walker, you are very well aware of the rules tonight and you have a prop. That is not allowed, sir,” the moderator said.
“Well it’s not a prop. This is real,” Walker said, doubling down though he eventually put the badge away.
The candidates also answered questions on the issues.
With the economy still at the forefront of voters’ minds, when asked if he takes responsibility for rising prices, Warnock dodged, instead touting his legislative achievements.
“There’s no question that people are feeling pain at the grocery store, at the pump, at pharmacy counters,” Warnock said. “I stood up for ordinary hardworking Georgia families time and time again,” he added before talking about his work to cap the cost of insulin for Medicare recipients.
“He should tell the people of Georgia why he thinks they should have expensive insulin,” Warnock said of Walker.
Trying to emphasize that food prices are still high, Walker said if you’re not, “eatin’ right, insulin is doing you no good.”
It was a blunder Warnock took advantage of.
“I think we’re hearing from my opponent tonight. That it’s their fault. That prices of insulin are being gouged. I don’t think it’s their fault. I think it’s the fault of these pharmaceutical companies.”
The candidates were also asked to look ahead and voice if they would support a possible Biden or Trump run in 2024, which they took very different approaches answering.
Warnock, who has sought to distance himself from Biden while out on the campaign trail, said he has not thought that far ahead.
“You’re asking me whose gonna run in ’24? The people of Georgia get to decide who’s going to be their senator in three days,” Warnock said.
On the other hand, Walker said he would support Trump running in 2024 because “he’s my friend.” Though he broke from the former president, who endorsed him, by saying Joe Biden and Sen. Warnock won the 2020 Election.
In the weeks leading up to the debate, Walker has sought to downplay expectations of how he’ll match up against Warnock, an established orator serving as the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church, where Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once preached. Though Friday, he embraced his lack of political experience as a positive.
“For those of you who are concerned about voting for me- a non-politician- I want you to think about the damage politicians like Joe Biden and Raphael Warnock have done to this country,” Walker said.
Warnock spent the night laying out what he said were “deep differences” between himself and Walker, focusing on the policies he has pushed and passed while serving in the Senate.
“We have nearly 11 million people. And only two people get to represent us in the United States Senate. Just two. And when I think about that, it is an awesome responsibility. One that humbles me and inspires me to work as hard as I can for hardworking families every single day. And I’ve worked with Democrats and Republicans in order to do that work.”
Heading into the final stretch of the campaign, both candidates are set to make their pitch to voters in a race that could determine the balance of power in Congress.
New polling, released from Quinnipiac University Wednesday, shows despite recent allegations against Walker, Georgia’s Senate race is still close. Democratic incumbent Raphael Warnock leads Walker 52% to 45%, an essentially unchanged margin from Quinnipiac’s Sept. 14 poll where Warnock held an advantage over Walker 52% to 46%.
(WASHINGTON) — A “beta test” of the application for student loan relief went live on Friday evening, launching the Biden administration’s sweeping program to cancel student debt for tens of millions of Americans.
The Department of Education’s test application is a long-awaited first step of the policy announced in late August, allowing people with federal student loans to apply for up to $20,000 of debt relief, depending on what kind of financial aid they received and how much money they make.
During the beta testing period, according to a department spokesperson, borrowers will be able to submit applications for the student debt relief program and won’t need to reapply if they submit their application during the beta test.
This period will help the department monitor the application site’s performance through “real-world use” ahead of the official application launch later this month, the department says it can refine processes and uncover any possible bugs.
The highest amount of debt relief — up to $20,000 — will go to people who received Pell Grants for college, a type of aid given to students from low-income families. All other borrowers with federal loans will qualify for up to $10,000 in relief.
The relief covers anyone who made less than $125,000 in the 2020 or 2021 tax year, or less than $250,000 as a couple.
Borrowers should apply before mid-November in order to see their loans canceled by the time the pause on student loan payments lifts on Jan. 1, 2023, the White House has said. That pause has been in place since the beginning of the pandemic. The application for debt relief will also close at the end of the year, sunsetting on Dec. 31, 2023.
But there are a subset of borrowers who were ruled out of the program in a late change by the Biden administration, as it tried to dodge lawsuits. Anyone with a Perkins loan or a Federal Family Education Loan — both loans that are guaranteed by the federal government but handled by private banks — can no longer get aid.
The Biden administration estimated that the rule change, made in late September, disqualified about 700,000 people from the policy.
The administration has pointed out that it was a small minority of people compared to the potential reach this policy could have. As advocates have pointed out, though, the policy’s success depends on how many people hear about it and how easy it is to apply.
The policy is expected to apply to 43 million Americans, and 20 million could have their debt completely wiped out, the White House estimates. It’s expected to cost around $400 billion over 30 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The application rollout comes as the policy has been challenged multiple times in court, largely by conservative organizations and states who argue that the Biden administration doesn’t have the authority to cancel student loan debt.
So far, none of the lawsuits have halted the program, which the Biden administration argues is on firm legal footing under the HEROES Act — an act that provides broader-than-usual authority to the Secretary of Education during emergency periods, such as COVID-19.
And President Joe Biden, though he acknowledged the plan might be controversial, has also defended it as the right thing to do.
“Now, I understand not everything I’m announcing today is gonna make everybody happy,” Biden said in a speech at the White House when the policy was announced.
(NEW YORK) — Billionaire Elon Musk says his space company SpaceX cannot keep funding its Starlink satellite internet service in Ukraine “indefinitely” and has sent a letter to the Pentagon to make that point.
SpaceX’s Starlink terminals have been an important resource for Ukraine’s military on the battlefield and it remains unclear what will happen if the service is stopped.
CNN was first to report that SpaceX had sent a letter to the Pentagon that it reported said “We are not in a position to further donate terminals to Ukraine, or fund the existing terminals for an indefinite period of time.”
Late Friday, Sabrina Singh, the Pentagon’s deputy press secretary, confirmed receipt of the letter that touched on the funding of Starlink.
“We can confirm the Department received correspondence from SpaceX about the funding of Starlink, their satellite communications product in Ukraine,” Singh said in a statement. “We remain in communication with SpaceX about this and other topics.”
Earlier, Singh had indicated to reporters that other commercial satellite options might be looked at.
“There’s not just SpaceX, there are other entities that we can certainly partner with when it comes to providing Ukraine with what they need on the battlefield,” said Singh. “I’m not going to show our hand right now on exactly what those are or who we’re talking to.”
Shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February, Musk offered free terminals that link with Space X satellites to help the beleaguered country maintain internet communications with the rest of the world.
It is estimated that there are now more than 12,000 Starlink internet terminals inside Ukraine providing a vital communications system for front line troops fighting Russian troops throughout Ukraine.
In tweets posted Friday, Musk stated that the maintenance and continued growth of the Starlink system in Ukraine is costing his company as much as much as $20 million a month.
“SpaceX is not asking to recoup past expenses, but also cannot fund the existing system indefinitely *and* send several thousand more terminals that have data usage up to 100X greater than typical households,” Musk tweeted.
In a separate tweet he explained that “In addition to terminals, we have to create, launch, maintain & replenish satellites & ground stations & pay telcos for access to Internet via gateways.”
“We’ve also had to defend against cyberattacks & jamming, which are getting harder,” he added.
In another tweet, Musk suggested that the Starlink row with the Pentagon was due in part to an insulting tweet by Ukraine’s ambassador to Germany who used an expletive to characterize Musk’s proposal to end the war by allowing Russia to keep Crimea.
“We’re just following his recommendation,” Musk tweeted Friday.
(WASHINGTON) — During a trip to Los Angeles Thursday, President Joe Biden told reporters he plans to speak with Saudi Arabia soon, following the OPEC+ decision to slash oil production.
Asked what his message would be to Saudi Arabia on the price of gas, Biden said “We’re, we’re about to talk to them,” but he wouldn’t give more details, simply telling reporters to “stay tuned.”
Meanwhile, the Biden White House and Saudi foreign ministry leveled accusations against each other amid fallout from the OPEC+ move.
The Saudi Foreign Ministry said in a lengthy statement Wednesday that the kingdom had turned down a U.S. request to delay the OPEC decision by a month — in effect, after the midterm elections in the U.S. — and took issue with any characterization that the decision “was politically motived against the United States of America.”
“The Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would first like to express its total rejection of these statements that are not based on facts,” the ministry said, adding: “This decision was taken unanimously by all member states of the OPEC+ group.”
The White House fired back Thursday, with spokesman John Kirby saying in a written statement that other OPEC nations have communicated to the U.S. “privately” that they disagreed with Saudi Arabia’s decision to cut oil production — but felt “coerced” to support it anyway. In a call with reporters, he declined to name the other countries but said “there was more than one.”
Saudi Arabia on Wednesday did vote in favor of a U.S.-backed United Nations resolution condemning Russia’s attempt to annex parts of Ukraine. While Kirby called the vote “welcome,” he said “it doesn’t erase the fact that the decision that OPEC+ made was unnecessary, mathematically speaking.”
That decision, he said, provided not just economic support to Russian President Vladimir Putin, but also moral and military support, “because it allows him to continue to fund his war-making machine and it certainly gave him, Mr. Putin, a sense of comfort here.”
It was a remarkable accusation to make about a longtime U.S. partner, albeit one with whom the U.S. relationship is rapidly fraying.
“The Saudi Foreign Ministry can try to spin or deflect, but the facts are simple,” Kirby said in the statement.
Kirby said the U.S. “presented Saudi Arabia with analysis to show that there was no market basis to cut production targets, and that they could easily wait for the next OPEC meeting to see how things developed.”
He said Saudi Arabia took the “wrong direction” by taking a “they knew would increase Russian revenues and blunt the effectiveness of sanctions” the U.S. and other Western nations had imposed in the wake of Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine.
For its part, the Saudi foreign ministry said it “clarified through its continuous consultation with the US Administration that all economic analyses indicate that postponing the OPEC+ decision for a month, according to what has been suggested, would have had negative economic consequences.”
On Tuesday, Kirby said Biden thinks the United States needs to “reevaluate” its relationship with Saudi Arabia, especially in light of the decision by the OPEC+ oil cartel to cut production.
“I think the president’s been very clear that this is a relationship that we need to continue to reevaluate, that we need to be willing to revisit,” Kirby said in an interview with CNN. “And certainly in light of the OPEC decision, I think that’s where he is.”
Kirby said Biden “is going to be willing to work with Congress as we think about what the right relationship with Saudi Arabia needs to be going forward.”
Sen. Bob Menendez, the New Jersey Democrat who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday called on the U.S. to “immediately freeze all aspects of our cooperation with Saudi Arabia, including any arms sales and security cooperation beyond what is absolutely necessary to defend U.S. personnel and interests.”
Other Democrats, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Ro Khanna of California, on Wednedsay introduced a bill that would pause U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia for one year.
Biden on Wednesday declined to take a position on the legislation. Kirby said Thursday “future arms sales… are certainly going to be on the table.”
“We understand that there are no imminent pending arms sales to Saudi Arabia right now,” Kirby told reporters. “So there’s not– you know, we’re not going to rush to make some kind of judgment here.”
(WASHINGTON) — After more than a year of investigation, the House Jan. 6 committee on Thursday ended what was possibly its last public hearing in historic fashion — voting to subpoena former President Donald Trump.
The hearing featured no live witnesses but did include never-before-seen footage and documents collected by the panel during its two-month hiatus since its last hearing in July.
Videos showed congressional leaders fleeing the Capitol as rioters closed in on the complex, and communication between the Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies revealed the many warnings and tips the agency received about possible violence.
In a dramatic finish, the committee said there’s one more person they — and the American people — need to hear from: Trump himself.
“Our duty today is to our country and our children and our constitution,” vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said in her closing statement. “We are obligated to seek answers directly from the man who set this all in motion. And every American is entitled to those answers, so we can act now to protect our republic.”
Here are the key takeaways from Thursday’s hearing:
Committee unanimous in vote to subpoena Trump
Each committee member — seven Democrats and two Republicans — voted “aye” on a resolution offered by Cheney to compel Trump’s cooperation.
The resolution directs chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., to issue a subpoena for relevant documents and testimony under oath from Trump in connection with the Jan. 6 attack.
Thompson argued there is precedent for Congress to compel the testimony of a president but recognized it was a “serious and extraordinary action.”
“That’s why we want to take this step in full view of the American people, especially because the subject matter at issue is so important to the American people and the stakes are so high to our future and our democracy,” he said.
Trump responded to the committee’s action for the first time in a post to Truth Social, his conservative social media platform.
“Why didn’t the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago?” he wrote while calling the committee a “total BUST.”
“Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting?” he asked again.
Secret Service was concerned leading up to, during the insurrection
New Secret Service communications unearthed by the House committee showed agents were concerned in the days before the insurrection about the threat of violence and during the riot about then-Vice President Mike Pence’s safety.
One tip the agency received before the attack, the committee said, indicated that the Proud Boys, a far-right group, “think[s] that they will have a large enough group to march into DC armed and will outnumber the police so they can’t be stopped.”
“Their plan is to literally kill people. Please please take this tip seriously and investigate further,” the tip showed by the committee read.
On the day of the insurrection, other communications presented showed how agents spotted members of the mob with firearms and other weapons.
“With so many weapons so far, you wonder how many are unknown. Could be sporty after dark,” one agent wrote in a message to a colleague. “No doubt. The people at the Ellipse said they are moving to the Capitol after the POTUS speech,” a second agent responded, referencing the speech Trump was giving before the riot.
As the crowd ransacked the Capitol, committee evidence showed, the agency also grew concerned about the safety for Pence after Trump posted a broadside on Twitter lambasting him for not blocking the certification of the 2020 Electoral College results.
“POTUS just tweeted about Pence, probably not going to be good for Pence,” one agent said in a chat with a colleague. Another colleague responded that the tweet had received over 24,000 likes in under two minutes.
The messages dovetail with videos showing rioters saying Pence “screwed” them and chants of “hang Mike Pence” ringing out around the Capitol.
Former Twitter employee Anika Collier Navaroli, in testimony featured Thursday, said Trump’s tweet helped spark calls for Pence’s “execution.”
New footage shows Pelosi, congressional leaders reacting to the attack
Videos aired Thursday showed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other lawmakers reacting to the events of Jan. 6 in real-time.
Pelosi spoke to or called various officials, including Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam and then-acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen and finally, then-Vice President Mike Pence.
The video was shot by Alexandra Pelosi, a filmmaker and the speaker’s daughter, who had been filming the day’s events as a part of a documentary project.
Pelosi was seen at times engaged in a bipartisan effort, huddling with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, often in discussion about how to move forward to certify the 2020 election results in a timely manner.
“We’ve got … to finish the proceedings or else they will have a complete victory,” Pelosi is heard saying as she is leaving the Capitol complex while rioters gather outside. “There has to be some way we can maintain the sense that people have, that there’s some security or some confidence that the government can function. And that we can elect the president of the United States.”
At one point, after being informed that individuals still on the House floor were putting on tear gas masks in anticipation of a breach, Pelosi said: “Can you believe this?”
The committee also played new footage of Pelosi speaking with Pence as Trump supporters were in the middle of storming the Capitol.
“We’re trying to figure out how we can get this job done today,” she said, noting the “overriding wish is to do it at the Capitol.
(WASHINGTON) — The House Jan. 6 committee on Thursday, after a months-long hiatus, held its ninth public hearing since June, and possibly its last in its investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack.
The panel focused on the role of former President Donald Trump before, alleging he was front and center of a plot to overturn the 2020 election and in a historic development, voted unanimously to subpoena Trump to testify.
Oct 13, 5:35 PM EDT
Trump responds to Jan. 6 subpoena vote
Former President Donald Trump responded to the committee’s action for the first time on Thursday afternoon in a post to Truth Social, his conservative social media platform.
“Why didn’t the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago?” he wrote, calling the committee a “total BUST.”
“Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting?” he asked again.
Oct 13, 4:41 PM EDT
Thompson: Panel will not issue subpoena for Pence testimony
House Jan. 6 committee chair BennieThompson told reporters right after the hearing that the panel would not issue a subpoena for former Vice President Mike Pence.
The committee had been debating how to manifest a meeting with the former vice president, but Thompson’s comments indicate members will not force him to make an appearance.
When asked if he thinks Trump will honor the subpoena for his testimony, Thompson responded “ask Donald Trump.” Thompson did not answer when asked if the committee would vote to hold Trump in contempt of Congress if he chooses not to comply.
Oct 13, 3:41 PM EDT
In historic, unanimous vote, Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Trump
To close out their 10th hearing overall — the ninth since June — the House Jan. 6 committee unanimously voted to subpoena Trump.
Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., offered the historic resolution and requested a voice vote. Each of the nine members, including seven Democrats and two Republicans, voted yes.
“It is our obligation to seek Donald Trump’s testimony,” chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said about the subpoena.
Oct 13, 3:39 PM EDT
Cheney cites need for Trump subpoena
Cheney said a subpoena for Trump is necessary since several witnesses pleaded their Fifth Amendment right when pressed about their conversations with the former president surrounding the 2020 election and the insurrection.
“Mr. Chairman, our committee now has sufficient information to answer many of the critical questions posed by Congress at the outset. We have sufficient information to consider criminal referrals for multiple individuals and to recommend a range of legislative proposals to guard against another January 6. But a key task remains. We must seek the testimony, under oath, of January 6’s central plater,” she said.
“More than 30 witnesses in our investigation have invoked their 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, and several of those did so specifically in response to questions about their dealings with Donald Trump directly.”
Cheney conceded that the Justice Department could reveal more information but indicated that time is of the essence.
“Mr. Chairman, at some point, the Department of Justice may well unearth the fact that these and other witnesses are concealing. But our duty today is to our country and our children and our Constitution. We are obligated to seek answers directly from the man who set this all in motion, and every American is entitled to those answers so we can act now to protect our republic,” she said.
Oct 13, 3:31 PM EDT
Thompson on subpoenaing Trump: ‘We want to hear from him’
Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said the committee needs to hear from the person they say is at the center of the story of what happened on Jan. 6: Trump.
“We want to hear from him,” Thompson said. “The committee needs to do everything in our power to tell the most complete story possible and provide recommendations to help ensure nothing like Jan. 6 ever happens again.”
Thompson said speaking with Trump goes beyond the committee’s “fact-finding” and is a question about accountability to the American people.
“He is required to answer for his actions,” he said.
Thompson said the committee recognizes subpoenaing a former president is an extraordinary step, which is why the panel will “take this step in full view of the American people.”
Oct 13, 3:30 PM EDT
Secret Service worried for Pence after Trump tweet
The committee presented evidence the Secret Service voiced worry for Pence after Trump bashed him in a tweet for not blocking certification of the Electoral College results.
“POTUS just tweeted about Pence, probably not going to be good for Pence,” one agent said in a chat with a colleague released by the committee Thursday.
“POTUS said he lacked courage. Over 24K likes in under 2mins,” the colleague responded.
Former Twitter employee Anika Collier Navaroli, in testimony featured Thursday, said that rioters “were literally calling for [Pence’s] execution,” partially “in response to this tweet.”
Oct 13, 3:27 PM EDT
As the insurrection is ongoing, Pelosi speaks to Pence in new footage
The committee played new footage of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaking to former Vice President Mike Pence as Trump supporters were in the middle of storming the Capitol. The contents of that footage is below, as the two discussed how they would ultimately certify the 2020 election results.
At 4:22 p.m. Pelosi was videotaped saying:
“We’re trying to figure out how we can get this job done today. We talked to Mitch [McConnell] about it earlier. He’s not in the room right now but he was with us earlier and said, “Yeah, we want to expedite this.” And hopefully they could confine it to just one complaint, Arizona. And then we could vote and that would be you know, then just move forward with the rest of the states.
“The overriding wish is to do it at the Capitol,” said Pelosi, as the committee displayed a photo of Pence presumably on the phone with her while watching news footage on a separate cellphone.
“What we are being told very directly is it’s gonna take days for the Capitol to be OK again. We’ve gotten a very bad report about the condition of the House floor. Defecation and all that kind of thing as well. I don’t think that that’s hard to clean up. But I do think it is more from a security standpoint of making sure everybody is out of the building and how long will that take?”
At 4:30 p.m. Pelosi said:
“I just got off the phone with the Vice President and I got off with the Vice President-elect,” Pelosi said after her call with Pence and supposedly Kamala Harris.
“So I’ll tell you what she said, yeah. But what we left the conversation with cause he said, he had the impression from Mitch [McConnell] that Mitch wants to get everybody back to do it there,” Pelosi said.
Oct 13, 3:15 PM EDT
Videos shows Nancy Pelosi reacting to the Capitol attack
In never-before seen footage, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is seen reacting to the events of Jan. 6 in real time. Pelosi spoke to or called various officials, including Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam and then-acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen.
“We’ve got … to finish the proceedings or else they will have a complete victory,” Pelosi is heard saying as she is leaving the Capitol complex while rioters gather outside.
Later, Pelosi was informed that lawmakers still on the floor were putting on tear gas masks in anticipation of a breach.
“Can you believe this?” Pelosi responded.
Oct 13, 3:03 PM EDT
Committee reviewing ‘potential obstruction’ regarding alleged SUV altercation
Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., reiterated testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson about an alleged altercation between Trump and his security detail in the presidential SUV on Jan. 6.
Hutchinson said she was told by Tony Ornato, a senior Secret Service official who was at the time White House deputy chief of staff for operations, that Trump was so angry he couldn’t join supporters at the Capitol after his speech at the Ellipse that he tried to grab the steering wheel and lunged at agent Bobby Engel, who was driving the vehicle.
Aguilar said the altercation was “so widely known” that one former White House employee with national security responsibilities explained the information was “water cooler talk” around the White House complex.
“That professional also testified that they were specifically informed of the president’s irate behavior in the SUV by Mr. Ornato in Mr. Ornato’s office,” Aguilar said.
Aguilar said the committee is reviewing testimony about “potential obstruction” surrounding this testimony about the alleged SUV incident.
“We will address this matter in our report,” Aguilar said.
Oct 13, 2:40 PM EDT
Secret Service sounded alarm about threat of violence before, during insurrection
The committee revealed new evidence it said showed the Secret Service was aware of threats of violence prior to the insurrection, worrying over social media posts prior to Jan. 6 and what it viewed the day of the attack on the Capitol.
One tip received by the agency said that the Proud Boys, a far-right white chauvinist group, “think[s] that they will have a large enough group to march into D.C. armed and will outnumber the police so they can’t be stopped.”
“Their plan is to literally kill people. Please please take this tip seriously and investigate further,” the tip read.
“Right wing groups responding across the nation and establishing ‘quick reaction forces’ in Virginia,” one Jan. 5, 2021, Secret Service email the panel said it uncovered read.
On the day of the attack, just before the pro-Trump mob moved toward the Capitol, agents voiced growing concern over the number of weapons seized or seen.
“With so many weapons so far, you wonder how many are unknown. Could be sporty after dark,” one agent wrote in a message to a colleague.
“No doubt. The people at the Ellipse said they are moving to the Capitol after the POTUS speech,” a second agent responded.
Oct 13, 2:24 PM EDT
Jan. 6 committee will vote on subpoenaing Trump
The committee plans to hold a vote on subpoenaing former President Trump during today’s hearing, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.
Speaker Pelosi was given a heads up about the committee’s decision to vote on the matter, sources familiar with the matter say.
The move comes as the committee has debated for months how to handle a request for his cooperation.
Thompson told me earlier today that a subpoena was not off the table.
It’s not clear whether the committee will formally request former Vice President Mike Pence’s testimony, but committee investigators have been privately negotiating with his counsel for months.
Oct 13, 2:18 PM EDT
Trump was advised Pence didn’t have the right to overturn election
An email exchange dated Jan. 6, 2021, between Pence aide Greg Jacob and attorney John Eastman showed Trump had already been advised that former Vice President Mike Pence could not overturn the 2020 election results.
“Did you advise the President that in your professional judgment the Vice President DOES NOT have the power to decide things unilaterally?” Jacob sent to Eastman.
“He’s been so advised,” Eastman replied.
Oct 13, 2:07 PM EDT
Secret Service message: ‘POTUS is pissed’
A Secret Service message unveiled during the hearing said that Trump was “livid” after the Supreme Court declined to hear a case challenging the election results.
“POTUS is pissed,” the message read. “Supreme Court denied his lawsuit. He is livid now.”
Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, also recounted how frustrated Trump was following the news.
“The president was fired up about the Supreme Court decision,” she told the committee. “The president just raging about the decision and how it’s wrong and ‘why didn’t we make more calls’ and his typical anger outburst at this decision.”
“He said something to the effect of, ‘I don’t want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out,'” she said.
Oct 13, 2:05 PM EDT
Committee repeats highlights of previous hearings
As it wraps up its investigation, with a final report on findings and recommendations expected by the end of this year, the House committee on Thursday spent significant time rehashing points from their previous hearings.
One such finding was Trump’s knowledge ahead of Election Day that mail-in ballots would favor Joe Biden and his plan ahead of time to declare victory that night.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., focused partly on the failed efforts by Trump to litigate his loss in court — a major focus of the June 13 hearing.
“In the past hearings we said the committee identified 62 election lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign and allies between Nov. 4, 2020 and Jan. 6, 2021,” Kinzinger said on Thursday. “Those cases resulted in 61 losses and only a single victory, which did not affect the outcome for any candidate.”
Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., in her remarks about Trump’s direct efforts to overturn the election, replayed previously seen deposition from former Attorney General Bill Barr. Barr told the committee that Trump’s false allegations about voting machines was “crazy stuff” — footage first aired in a June hearing.
Oct 13, 1:48 PM EDT
Stone on claiming victory: ‘Possession is nine-tenths of the law’
Roger Stone, a political provocateur and longtime Trump adviser, voiced support for Trump declaring victory the night of the election regardless of whether he was in the lead.
“Let’s just hope we’re celebrating. I suspect it’ll be, I really do suspect it will still be up in the air. When that happens, the key thing to do is to claim victory. Possession is nine-tenths of the law.
‘No, we won,’ Stone said in footage from a Danish documentarian featured in Thursday’s hearing.
“I said, ‘f*** the voting, let’s get right to the violence,'” Stone said in a separate clip. “We’ll have to start smashing pumpkins, if you know what I mean.”
During testimony for the committee, Stone invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination when asked if he had any role in planning for the violence the day of the insurrection.
Oct 13, 1:44 PM EDT
Steve Bannon video indicates intimate knowledge of Jan. 6
The Jan. 6 committee showed video of President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager, Steve Bannon, which indicates that he had advance knowledge of the former president’s intention to falsely declare victory election night, but also that Bannon knew about the events of Jan. 6 ahead of their occurrence.
Here’s what Bannon said on Jan. 5, the day before the insurrection:
“All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. All converging and now we’re on as they say the point of attack, right the point of attack tomorrow. I’ll tell you this,” Bannon began.
“It’s not going to happen like you think it’s going to happen. Okay, it’s going to be quite extraordinarily different … tomorrow it’s game day. So strap in. Let’s get ready.”
Mr. Bannon refused to testify for the ongoing Jan. 6 investigation, for which he’s been indicted by a federal grand jury on two counts of contempt of Congress.
The committee also played audio that had previously leaked, of Bannon telling a group of associates on Oct. 31, 2020, of Trump’s plan to declare his own victory on election night, regardless of the actual outcome.
“He’s going to declare victory,” Bannon said.
Oct 13, 1:39 PM EDT
Memo shows drafted statement for Trump declaring ‘I won’
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., showed a new memo the committee received from the National Archives showing plans for Trump to declare victory on Election Day regardless of the outcome.
The memo — dated Oct. 31, 2020 — was sent by Tom Fitton, a political activist and head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, to members of Trump’s team.
“We had an Election today — and I won,” the memo read.
“The ballots counted by the Election Day deadline show the American people have bestowed on me the great honor of reelection to President of the United States.”
Lofgren also said Brad Parscale, Trump’s former campaign manager, told the committee Trump planned as early as July to say he won even though he lost.
Oct 13, 1:29 PM EDT
Cheney: Can Jan. 6 occur again?
In her opening statement, Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, the committee’s vice chair, said a key component of the committee’s investigation looks at the vulnerability of American democracy.
“Why would Americans assume that our Constitution and our institutions and our Republic are invulnerable to another attack? Why would we assume that those institutions will not falter next time?” she asked.
Cheney, who has been at the forefront of the Jan. 6 investigation at the expense of her own political future, said the American institutions “only hold” when “men and women of good faith make them hold regardless of the political cost.”
“We have no guarantee that these men and women will be in place next time,” she added.
Oct 13, 1:23 PM EDT
Cheney: Panel will focus on Trump’s ‘state of mind,’ motivations
Rep. Liz Cheney, the Republican vice chair of the committee, said today’s focus will be Trump’s behavior and actions during the time leading up to and during the U.S. Capitol attack.
“Today we will focus on President Trump’s state of mind, his intent, his motivations and how he spurred others to do his bidding and how another Jan. 6 could happen again if we do not take necessary action to prevent it,” Cheney said in her opening statement.
One of the Republican Party’s harshest critics of Trump, Cheney placed the blame squarely on the former president for the violence that unfolded.
“The vast weight of evidence presented so far has shown us the central cause of Jan. 6 was one man: Donald Trump,” she said in her opening remarks.
Oct 13, 1:16 PM EDT
Thompson opens door to vote on ‘further investigative action’ Thursday
Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., hinted that the panel could vote on further efforts by the committee beyond Thursday’s proceedings.
“We are convened today not as a hearing but as a formal committee business meeting so that in addition to presenting evidence, we can potentially hold a committee vote on further investigative action based on that evidence,” Thompson said in his opening statement.
Thompson said earlier in the day that the House committee has not ruled out subpoenaing former President Donald Trump. The panel is also considering possible paths to obtaining testimony from further Vice President Mike Pence.
Oct 13, 1:12 PM EDT
Thompson emphasizes evidence has been ‘almost entirely from Republicans’
Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., gaveled in the hearing just after 1:00 p.m. on Thursday.
In his opening statement, Thompson once again outlined what the committee called a “multi-part plan” by Trump to contest his election loss — one Thompson said has come into focus in large part because of witness testimony.
“The most striking fact is that all this evidence comes almost entirely from Republicans,” Thompson said. “The evidence that has emerged did not come from Democrats or opponents of Donald Trump.”
Thompson continued, “Instead, look at who’s written and testified and produced evidence. Who has that been? Aides who’ve worked loyally for Trump for years, Republican state officials and legislatures, Republican electors, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee.”
Bombshell testimonials so far have come from former Attorney General Bill Barr, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and others.
Thompson said the committee Thursday will play new testimony from additional Republicans that served in the Trump administration, as well as never-before-seen footage of congressional leaders on Jan. 6.
Oct 13, 1:03 PM EDT
Committee hasn’t ruled out a Trump subpoena, Thompson says
Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told ABC News ahead of the hearing that the committee hasn’t ruled out issuing a subpoena to Trump.
The panel has yet to ask Trump for his testimony, but has centered their hearings on what they described as his “sophisticated” plan to carry out an attempted coup.
Thompson also said that “there’s always a possibility” the committee asks for former Vice President Mike Pence’s testimony. But then Thompson said that after this hearing, the committee is unlikely to call any new witnesses they haven’t already spoken with.
–ABC News’ Katherine Faulders and Will Steakin
Oct 13, 12:08 PM EDT
Will Trump, Pence be asked to testify before the investigation ends?
Committee aides, during a background call with reporters on Wednesday, wouldn’t shed any light on whether and when they would call Trump or former Vice President Mike Pence to formally testify before the panel before their investigation is wrapped.
Pence this summer said he would “consider” testifying if invited by the committee but expressed constitutional concerns about such a scenario, citing his “unique role” as the then-vice president.
Vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl in August that she hopes Pence will appear before the committee but declined to weigh in on whether they would ask Trump to testify.
“I don’t want to get in front of committee deliberations about that,” Cheney said. “I do think it’s very important, as I said in the first hearing or the second hearing, you know, his interactions with our committee will be under oath.”
–ABC News’ Katherine Faulders
Oct 13, 10:45 AM EDT
Trump’s ‘state of mind’ to be a key focus, aides say
Lawmakers will focus on Trump’s “state of mind” leading up to, during and after the insurrection during Thursday’s session, committee aides told reporters.
“What you’re going to see is a synthesis of some evidence we’ve already presented with that new, never-before-seen information to, let’s say, illustrate Donald Trump’s centrality from the time prior to the election,” an aide said.
While there won’t be any live witnesses in the hearing room, the panel’s expected to air new documentary evidence and video footage depicting efforts to respond as the violence broke out on Jan. 6, 2021.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected former President Donald Trump’s request for an independent third-party to be able to review the documents marked classified that were taken from Mar-a-Lago amid a federal investigation.
“The application to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on September 21, 2022, presented to Justice [Clarence] Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied,” the court wrote in a brief order.
Trump asked last week for the Supreme Court to intervene in the case. His attorneys requested the justices vacate part of an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling and restore a special master’s access to the 100 or documents bearing classification markings that were seized at Trump’s private club.
Those documents were found by FBI agents in an August search of Mar-a-Lago as part of a Department of Justice probe into Trump’s handling of sensitive materials after he left the White House.
Trump denies wrongdoing.
Trump had requested that the Supreme Court reverse only the portion of the 11th Circuit’s stay that prevented special master Raymond Dearie from accessing the documents during his review over whether any of the thousands of materials taken by the FBI were shielded by privilege.
A three-judge panel for the 11th Circuit previously granted the DOJ’s request for a partial stay which essentially reversed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who had sided with Trump’s motion for a special master and then barred the DOJ from using the seized materials for its investigation pending Dearie’s own review.
Trump’s attorneys said the special master’s intervention was needed “to ensure fairness, transparency, and maintenance of the public trust.”
But the 11th Circuit’s subsequent stay allowed the DOJ to access the documents once again. The government has argued that being limited from accessing the materials from Mar-a-Lago caused harm to national security and its ongoing investigation.
Last week, the appellate court also granted the government’s request to expedite its full appeal of Cannon’s entire order appointing a special master.
The DOJ moved for its expedited appeal after Cannon issued an order overruling a request from special master Dearie to have Trump’s team verify that the government’s inventory log was accurate and independently extended multiple deadlines Dearie had set for his own review.
(WASHINGTON) — The House Jan. 6 committee meets Thursday after a months-long hiatus to hold its ninth public hearing since June, and possibly its last in its investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack. The panel has focused on the role of former President Donald Trump before, alleging he was front and center of a plot to overturn the 2020 election.
Here’s how the story is developing:
Oct 13, 10:45 AM EDT
Trump’s ‘state of mind’ to be a key focus, aides say
Lawmakers will focus on Trump’s “state of mind” leading up to, during and after the insurrection during Thursday’s session, committee aides told reporters.
“What you’re going to see is a synthesis of some evidence we’ve already presented with that new, never-before-seen information to, let’s say, illustrate Donald Trump’s centrality from the time prior to the election,” an aide said.
While there won’t be any live witnesses in the hearing room, the panel’s expected to air new documentary evidence and video footage depicting efforts to respond as the violence broke out on Jan. 6, 2021.
