Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The coronavirus response coordinator for President Donald Trump’s COVID task force, Dr. Deborah Birx, told ABC News in an exclusive interview that she became “paralyzed” when Trump raised the possibility of injecting disinfectant into people to treat the virus – and revealed how she thinks data meant to keep New York City playgrounds open led the president to make that ill-advised jump.

Birx, who spoke with Dr. Jennifer Ashton, ABC News’ chief medical correspondent, before the Tuesday release of her new book, also said she had a pact with other doctors on Trump’s team – including Anthony Fauci – that if one of them was fired, then they would all resign.

From the start, she wrote in the book, “Silent Invasion: The Untold Story of the Trump Administration, COVID-19, and Preventing the Next Pandemic Before It’s Too Late,” she was unequipped to deal with the toxic political atmosphere that was the Trump White House.

MORE: Birx on Trump’s disinfectant ‘injection’ moment: ‘I still think about it every day’
And even though she was the only one on Trump’s team with on-the-ground experience dealing with a deadly pandemic, she was constantly sidelined, she said.

’I wanted it to be “The Twilight Zone”’

But many Americans have come to associate Birx with her failure to more forcefully correct Trump during that White House press briefing on April 23, 2020.

New York City had recently closed its playgrounds and, according to Birx, a Department of Homeland Security scientist had just briefed Trump on how it appeared sunlight made them safe.

“So supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just a very powerful light — and I think you said that hasn’t been checked because of the testing,” Trump said. “And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that, too.”

“I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? As you see, it gets in the lungs, it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that,” the president continued.

“I wanted to be able to reassure the parents that the natural disinfection activity of the sun, with its ability to produce those free radicals that eat these viruses and bacteria and fungi, their membranes, that that would work,” Birx told Ashton. “And that they could get their children outside to play on the playground.”

But when Birx said she saw Trump and the government scientist informally continue their conversation before cameras – and the president make the leap to publicly question whether humans could be treated with disinfectant – she shifted uncomfortably in her seat.

“I just wanted it to be ‘The Twilight Zone’ and all go away,” Birx said. “I mean, I just– I could just see everything unraveling in that moment.”

Birx also addressed that moment in a Monday interview with “Good Morning America.”

“This was a tragedy on many levels,” she told co-anchor George Stephanopoulos.

“I immediately went to his most senior staff, and to Olivia Troye, and said this has to be reversed immediately,” she said; Troye was an adviser to then-Vice President Mike Pence.

“And by the next morning, the president was saying that was a joke,” Birx said. “But I think he knew by that evening, clearly, that this was dangerous.”

Birx said she was concerned Americans thought Trump had been speaking directly to her, when in reality he was mainly speaking with the Homeland Security scientist. Trump did at one point, though, ask her: “Deborah, have you ever heard of that? The heat and the light, relative to certain viruses, yes, but relative to this virus?”

“Not as a treatment,” she replied. “I mean, certainly fever is a good thing. When you have a fever, it helps your body respond. But not as — I’ve not seen heat or (inaudible).”

Birx now says she regretted not saying more.

“We had spent so much time getting everyone to take the virus seriously, and we had these whole series of actions that were critical to saving American lives in that moment,” Birx said. “And I could see everything would be unraveled after that moment

Birx: Doctors had pact to resign

Birx also wrote in her book about how she had a pact with other doctors on Trump’s coronavirus task force that if one of them was removed from the task force, then all of them would resign from it.

She said the doctors included Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and Stephen Hahn, the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.

“I actually wasn’t worried about myself being fired because I was dual-hatted, and I would go back to the State Department and my PEPFAR job, full time,” Birx told Ashton, referring to her role as the coordinator of the U.S. government’s program to combat HIV/AIDS, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

“I was very worried about Bob and Steve– because you can hear in the hallways how people were talking about them,” she said, referring to Redfield and Hahn. “And so, I went to the vice president multiple times to call Bob and Steve because I was worried about them feeling like they were–at that risk. And I was very clear to the chief of staff that if anything happened to Bob or Steve, we would all leave.”

Asked if that ever came close to happening, Birx said “there were times that I felt like Steve particularly was under a lot of pressure” over vaccine development.

“I wanted him to know that I had his back, no matter what,” she said. “And I think all of us knew– all of us knew what it was like to be there and in the trenches. Although, they got to go home after the task force and back to their agencies. I was still in the White House.

“But,” she continued, “they had enough understanding about what was happening in the White House to understand that all of us were at risk at one time or another.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In the quiet weekend morning hours Saturday, two of President Joe Biden’s top advisers boarded their flights — the start of a long journey shrouded in secrecy.

It was a secret — until Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy spilled just hours after they were wheels up. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin were coming to visit Kyiv, the war-time president announced.

While the Biden administration refused to comment all weekend, it was a hiccup that could have derailed the secret visit, amid intense security concerns about sending two Cabinet officials to an active war zone.

In the end, Blinken, Austin, and a small delegation arrived in Kyiv Sunday for a three-hour meeting with Zelenskyy, carrying with them a number of major announcements to make — millions more in U.S. security assistance, increased U.S. training for Ukrainian troops, the return of U.S. diplomats to Ukraine, and after three years of vacancy, a nominee for a new U.S. ambassador.

Senior State and Defense Department officials dismissed any concerns that Zelenskyy’s announcement imperiled the trip: “We plan for any number of contingencies. … It didn’t change anything about our commitment to go there today and to share what we have to say,” a senior State Department official told reporters Sunday.

But the administration refused to confirm the troop took place until the early morning hours Monday — only when the U.S. team returned across the border in Poland.

“We don’t know how the rest of this war will unfold, but we do know that a sovereign, independent Ukraine will be around a lot longer than Vladimir Putin is on the scene, and our support for Ukraine going forward will continue,” Blinken told reporters Monday morning in Poland.

The visit was the first by senior U.S. officials since Russia’s invasion started 60 days ago — “part symbolism but also very substantive,” Blinken said across the table from Zelenskyy.

That substance was in what he and Austin carried with them, including $165 million for Ukraine to purchase ammunition for its Soviet-era weaponry and $322 million for Ukraine to purchase from defense firms — what’s known as foreign military financing. In total, the Biden administration intends to obligate more than $713 million in foreign military financing for Ukraine and 15 other European countries, virtually all of whom have supported Ukraine’s military from their own stockpiles.

Blinken also announced Biden would formally nominate Bridget Brink, a career diplomat currently serving as U.S. ambassador to Slovakia, to serve as envoy in Kyiv. U.S. diplomats will eventually return to the capital too, Blinken said, as they start this week by making the journey across the border from Poland to Lviv on a daily basis.

It’s a journey Blinken and Austin now know personally. They arrived in southeastern Poland Saturday evening near the border with Ukraine — riding the train to Kyiv in the opposite direction from the nearly three million Ukrainian refugees who’ve arrived in Poland.

As passengers, they saw little of the war-torn country, according to a senior State Department official, who said shades on the windows blacked out much of the view.

Once in the capital, no longer under Russian siege, Blinken said there were signs that normal life was returning.

“We certainly saw people on the streets in Kyiv — evidence of that fact that the battle for Kyiv was won, and there is what looks from the surface at least to be normal life,” he told reporters afterwards. “But that’s in stark contrast to what’s going on in other parts of Ukraine — in the south and the east — where the Russian brutality is doing horrific things to people every single day.”

From the train, they traveled straight to the presidential palace for three hours of meetings with Zelenskyy and his team, according to a senior State Department official, including Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov, and Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the President.

“We had a really good, detailed, substantive, focused conversation for the better part of three hours that really went into every aspect of this campaign and next steps,” the senior State Department official said.

It was the first time senior U.S. officials had seen Zelenskyy since Russia invaded — a chance to check in on the TV star, who won a surprising presidential election, and who’s become a war-time leader and world figure.

When a U.S. delegation visited Zelenskyy last May — the first meeting between Biden officials and a Ukrainian president already bruised by American politics — Zelenskyy was “constantly energized, moving from one thing to another,” the senior State Department official said.

“Now, there’s a deliberateness and a kind of gravitas,” they said, describing him as “very focused, very detail-oriented on different aspects of this, whether the security, the economic, the humanitarian, the sanctions. He went into real detail on each, but in a very deliberate way.”

Even physically he “looked remarkably well,” the official added.

When the U.S. delegation asked about his family, Zelenskyy said they were doing ok, but “‘the hard part is we just don’t see each other. We miss each other,'” the official recounted him saying.

“It was just a kind of human moment. Everyone in this thing is an individual with their own individual lives and family lives,” they added. “He’s going from being a TV celebrity to maybe the most recognized leader — other than the president of the United States and Vladimir Putin — in the world. He’s borne that remarkably well.”

An in-person conversation makes working through any differences easier, officials said — including Zelenskyy’s push for the U.S. to designate Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. The designation, made by the State Department, carries the strictest U.S. sanctions, although Russia is already under many of them.

Zelenskyy personally asked Biden to designate Russia during a phone call earlier this month, a U.S. official confirmed to ABC News.

The designation is for governments that support terrorist groups, not ones that terrorize, per the senior State Department official, who said during their talks, they explained State Department lawyers are reviewing the possibility, “but it’s a statute. It’s a legal determination.”

“Look, the Russians are terrorizing the Ukrainians. But that’s different than saying they meet the criteria of the SST [state sponsor of terrorism designation].”

But if face-to-face interactions are that important, it begs the question why didn’t Biden himself go. Another senior State Department official pointed to security concerns.

“The president of the United States is somewhat singular in terms of what travel would require, so it goes well beyond what a cabinet secretary would – or what virtually any other world leader – would require.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A Tennessee bill that would require convicted drunk drivers to pay child support to minors is headed to the governor’s desk.

Drivers convicted of vehicular homicide, intoxication or aggravated vehicular homicide would be ordered by a court to pay “child maintenance,” or child support, if the victim was a parent, according to the bill.

The payments would continue until the child reaches the age of 18 and or has graduated from high school, according to the bill.

A spokesperson for Gov. Bill Lee told ABC News he will review the legislation when it reaches his desk. The bill passed unanimously in the State House and Senate.

“As I promised, I will do what it takes to protect the future of our most valuable resources, our children. I am proud of our leadership, in both the House and the Senate, to get this bill pushed forward to the point that it is heading to our Governor Bill Lee for his signature,” representative Mike Hall, who sponsored the bill, said in a post on Facebook.

He added, “Tennesseans care for each other and we will will do everything in our power to hold people accountable who chose to do harm.”

The bill leaves it to the court to determine the appropriate amount of money convicted drunk drivers would have to pay while taking into account the financial needs and resources of the child, the resources and needs of the child’s surviving parent or guardian and the standard of living to which the child is accustomed.

Drivers who are in incarcerated and unable to make payments have up to one year after their release to begin payment.

The bill also states that if the child’s surviving parent or guardian sues the defendant and obtains a judgment before the sentencing court, no child support payments will be ordered.

If a decision in a civil lawsuit comes after the sentencing court assigns child support, then the amount of judgment awarded in the civil action will be deducted from the child maintenance order.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on Friday became the first member of Congress to publicly testify under oath about the events surrounding the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Monday night, a federal judge allowed a legal challenge by a group of Georgia voters to move forward as they seek to disqualify Greene from running for reelection, citing her alleged role in supporting the attack.

The voters argue a provision of the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment known as the “disqualification clause” prevents Greene from holding federal office.

Passed after the Civil War, the disqualification clause bars any person from holding federal office who has previously taken an oath to protect the Constitution — including a member of Congress — who has “engaged in insurrection” against the United States or “given aid or comfort” to its “enemies.”

An avid supporter of former President Donald Trump, Greene has denied any involvement in the attack and said she is appealing.

Judge Charles Beaudrot presided over Friday’s hearing and expert witnesses were called to testify.

In his opening statement, Ron Fein, a lawyer representing five voters who made the complaint against Greene and the legal director of Free Speech For People, argued why Jan. 6 should be considered an insurrection.

“This was not the type of insurrection where the leaders were standing in Richmond, Virginia, giving long-winded speeches,” Fein said. “Rather, the leaders of this insurrection, of whom there were a number, were among us — on Facebook, Twitter and corners of social media that would make your stomach hurt. The evidence will show that Marjorie Taylor Greene was one of them.”

“The most powerful witness against Marjorie Taylor Greene’s candidacy, the most powerful witness in establishing that she crossed the line into engagement of insurrection is Marjorie Taylor Greene herself,” he said.

Fein told ABC News in an email that the Georgia “voters who filed this lawsuit have a right to have their challenge heard” and that he looked forward to questioning Greene under oath.

Inside the courtroom, he pressed the congresswoman on her oath of office.

“If you were aware that somebody was going to unlawfully interfere with the constitutional process of counting electoral votes, you would be obliged to have them arrested or stopped, right?” Fein asked.

She responded, “I had no knowledge of any examples, and so that’s the question I can’t answer.”

The time frame for the judge to render his decision on whether Greene should remain on the ballot is tight. Early voting for the Georgia primary begins May 2 and the primary itself is on May 17.

James Bopp, Greene’s attorney, told ABC News this week that the challenge to Greene is “absurd” and that it shouldn’t be up to judges to decide who represents Georgia’s 14th Congressional District.

“Those voters have a right to vote for the candidate of their choosing. And they have a right to have their vote counted,” he told the court in his opening statement Friday, adding that Greene was not a perpetrator but a “victim” of the attack, which he argued was “despicable” but not an insurrection.

“Her life was in danger, she thought,” Bopp said. “She was scared and confused.”

Bopp also represents GOP Rep. Madison Cawthorn, who is facing a similar challenge against his reelection from a group of voters in North Carolina.

Cawthorn’s lawsuit to dismiss the challenge to his reelection is set for oral arguments on May 3 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia.

In an interview Tuesday with ABC News affiliate WTVC-TV, Greene called the legal challenge a “scam.”

“All I did was what I’m legally and allowed to do by the Constitution as a member of Congress, and that was I objected to Joe Biden’s Electoral College votes from a few states,” Greene said.

Greene also said she was a “victim” on Jan. 6.

Mike Rasbury, one of the voters challenging Greene’s eligibility to run for reelection, said in a statement that Greene “took an oath of office to protect democracy from all enemies foreign and domestic … However, she has flippantly ignored this oath and, based on her role in the January 6 insurrection, is disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution from holding any future public office.”

Rasbury was in the courtroom while Greene testified.

GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida was also present in the courtroom Friday, in an apparent show of solidarity with his fellow firebrand Republican.

Speaking on Fox News Monday night, Greene told host Tucker Carlson that Democrats are trying to keep her name off the ballot, maintaining she had nothing to do with the attack on the Capitol.

“I have to go to court on Friday and actually be questioned about something I’ve never been charged with and something I was completely against,” Greene said.

The challenges against Greene and Cawthorn are part of a larger legal effort to prevent anyone allegedly involved in the events surrounding Jan. 6 — or who supported it — from running for reelection.

Similar challenges are being brought against GOP Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona and theoretically could be brought against Trump if he decides to run for office again in 2024.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — As the midterm elections inch closer and political conversations heat up, one organization is hoping to bring people together despite their differences.

America Talks, in partnership with Gannett and USA Today, launched in 2021 aiming to connect Americans of varying political ideologies. Participants in the online event answer a short survey and the questions ask how they feel about political topics so that they can be paired with someone who has different perspectives than their own. Then, they are matched with someone from across the country and given a guide to help foster the conversation. The idea is based on contact theory, a sociological concept that person-to-person contact can help reduce friction.

The second annual America Talks takes place on Saturday.

Brian Roy, an Independent from Benton, Kentucky, and Brian Webb, a Libertarian from Sheridan, Wyoming, found common ground and friendship during their America Talks conversation last year.

“We began to talk about the differences in Wyoming and in Kentucky. We talked about real everyday things that were not divisive and mean-spirited. And so we’ve continued that dialogue, and he sends me pictures and we talk and we talk about the weather, how cold it is in Wyoming versus how wet it is,” Roy told ABC News, adding that “he checked on us during the aftermath of the tornado back in December.”

“We just had a real genuine conversation, and you know what, we don’t enter into politics. So it’s been good and it’s refreshing, and I wish it would happen here more at home where I live, but it’s still very difficult to communicate with some people,” Roy said.

Mizell Stewart III, vice president of news performance, talent, and partnerships for Gannett told ABC News the program is about “elements of what Americans agree on rather than what divides Americans.”

“In other words, let’s engage people in conversation that is really person to person, not through a social media filter,” Stewart said.

Half of Americans who voted for Joe Biden and almost 60% who voted for Donald Trump view the opposing party as “presenting a clear and present danger to American democracy,” according to the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

And the divisions date back to before the Trump era. Since at least 2012, Americans are more likely to say conflicts between Democrats and Republicans are stronger than between other groups, according to a Pew Research Center study out of 17 countries. Americans also say the country is more divided now than it was before the pandemic.

“I am someone that enjoys politics,” said Roy. “I enjoyed talking about politics up until about two or three years ago, and then it got so contentious, and it got so unfriendly, even among family and very close friends that it got to where it was just no longer a discussion that I wanted to join in.”

While divisions run high, the Pew Research Center also found both Republicans and Democrats when questioned had certain things in common, like wanting their preferred candidates to address the needs of all Americans “even if it means disappointing some of his supporters.”

According to Mizell, those kinds of commonalities are what America Talks is all about.

“…As we begin to peel away layers of expectations, if you will, in conversations like this and really engage in dialogue, what we find is that we have much more in common than we realize,” he said.

That is the lesson Roy has taken away.

“We’re all Americans. We all care about our local communities. We care about our state, we care about our country,” he said. “And when we get down into the weeds of partisan politics, everybody… is attracted to a sound bite, most of them negative, and that’s the sad part.”

“There’s no two-way conversation and I just wish people would relax, calm down,” he added. “When they look at the flag…I wish people would look at that and try to remember that we’re all in this together. And we can agree to disagree.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Russian Foreign Ministry on Thursday indefinitely barred 29 more Americans from entering Russia, including Vice President Kamala Harris, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in what it said was retaliation for “ever-expanding anti-Russian sanctions” by the United States.

Addressing the latest Russian sanctions at Thursday’s press briefing, State Department spokesperson Ned Price — who was also targeted — said it was “nothing less than an accolade to have earned the ire of a government that lies to its own people, brutalizes its neighbors, and seeks to create a world where freedom and liberty are put on the run — and if they had their way, extinguished.”

“Similarly, it is a great honor to share that enmity with other truth-tellers,” Price added, naming his counterparts, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby and White House press secretary Jen Psaki, “as well as a number of journalists who have done incredible work, sharing the jarring, bloody truth of Russia’s actions in Ukraine.”

In a release, the Russian Foreign Ministry cited the 29 individuals sanctioned Thursday as people who “form the Russophobic agenda.”

Second gentlemen Doug Emhoff, White House chief of staff Ron Klain, ABC News Anchor George Stephanopoulos, LinkedIn CEO Ryan Roslansky and Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan were also included on the so-called “stop list.”

Last month, Russia also sanctioned President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and all 398 members of Congress from entering the country.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The United States Army has announced new policies to expand soldiers’ and their family’s health.

The 12-part directive expands previous policies such as allowing paid medical leave for pregnancies and pregnancy losses for soldiers and/or their spouses. It also creates new policies such as ones addressing soldiers and spouses going through fertilization treatment.

Army Secretary Christine Wormuth signed the Army’s Parenthood, Pregnancy and Postpartum directive 2022-06 on Thursday.

“It’s recognizing that in 2022, we have all different kinds of families going through all different kinds of life issues, and we can really take care of our families so we can retain our soldiers,” Maj. Sam Winkler said during a roundtable at the Pentagon on Thursday.

These changes stemmed from a grassroots movement within the Army and a Facebook group called The Army Mom Life, which has 8.2 thousand members.

One of those members is Staff Sgt. Nicole Pierce. Pierce worked with a committee at the Army headquarters to review the branch’s policies on pregnancy, parenthood and postpartum.

Pierce pushed for the Army to acknowledge the need for soldiers to have medical leave for parents who may have a miscarriage or a stillbirth.

Pierce had her first pregnancy in 2016. Unfortunately, it ended in a miscarriage. Pierce was expected to return to work two days later.

“I actually ended up asking my doctor, ‘hey, can I get a little bit more time. I just lost my child. My whole life just changed before my eyes. Can I get a little bit more time?’ And my doctor actually came back and said there were no complications with your surgery, so no you can’t have more time,” Pierce said during a roundtable.

She ended up using her vacation days to take two weeks off “to be able to process and mourn the loss of my family and the future I thought I was going to have,” Pierce explained.

Now, soldiers are allowed paid medical leave when either themselves or their spouse have a baby, a miscarriage or a stillbirth. The Army is the first U.S. branch to allow male soldiers the time to grieve after a pregnancy loss. Soldiers in the Reserve Components are also now given paid parental leave.

In addition, the Army is allowing parents to be excused up to a year after a birth, adoption or long-term foster care placement from working more than a regular shift. This includes deployment, field training, temporary duty assignments, etc.

Pierce also pushed to remove a rule that did not allow expecting soldiers to attend or complete the necessary class to be promoted. Now, the new directive will help prevent soldiers who have children from falling behind in their careers due to pregnancy.

She had her first child in 2019, but it set her back in her classes to be promoted since she was not allowed to be in them. She was back in the field working four months postpartum, and that was when she found out she was pregnant again. She had her second child in 2020 but was not able to get a spot in the class required to get a promotion until March 2021.

“I’m very excited that I can sleep better at night knowing that other moms will not have to go through the same things that I had to go through,” Pierce said.

Some other new policies coming from the directive include pregnant soldiers are now eligible to apply and compete for Active-Duty Operational Support tours (domestic tours). Soldiers also cannot be immediately released from active duty (REFRAD) after becoming pregnant.

Previous policies are being expanded to include allowing lactation breaks for lactating soldiers every 2-3 hours for at least 30 minutes in specific spaces that are not just restrooms. This policy is in place for as long as a soldier is lactating, for up to two years.

Right now, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends babies drink exclusively breast milk for the first six months and then a mix of breast milk and other foods for at least the first year. The directive takes these new guidelines into consideration.

The directive also extends Postpartum Body Composition (height/weight requirements) Exemptions from 6 months to a year, extends Physical Fitness Testing Exemptions for during and a year after their pregnancy.

Soldiers are also now excused from wearing service uniforms during pregnancy and up to one year postpartum. Before, soldiers had to have their uniforms altered or buy completely new uniforms. Now, soldiers can wear a combination of Army Combat Uniforms and maternity uniforms.

Another new policy now in place impacts soldiers who either themselves or their spouse is undergoing fertility treatment. Now, a soldier will be able to stay at their current base for one year, with the ability to extend for another year while they or their spouse pursues fertility treatment.

Army leaders will receive additional education and training for the following all of the new procedures, family planning and resources available.

The U.S. Army has more than 400,000 parents. That includes 29,000 single fathers, outnumbering the number of single mother soldiers by three-to-one.

To help these families, the Army will now require soldiers with children to be given at least three weeks’ notice ahead of time for duty requirements outside of normal duty hours when they have a Family Care Plan.

“We want to normalize parenthood,” Winkler said. “We really think that normalizing parenthood will not only retain our best soldiers but also really help us in recruiting the best talent out there that is available to the force.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on Friday will become the first member of Congress to publicly testify under oath about the events surrounding the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Monday night, a federal judge allowed a legal challenge by a group of Georgia voters to move forward as they seek to disqualify Greene from running for reelection, citing her alleged role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

The voters argue a provision of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment known as the “disqualification clause” prevents Greene from holding federal office.

Passed shortly after the Civil War, the Disqualification Clause bars any person from holding federal office who has previously taken an oath to protect the Constitution — including a member of Congress — who has “engaged in insurrection” against the United States or “given aid or comfort” to its “enemies.”

An avid supporter of former President Donald Trump, Greene has denied any involvement in the attack and said she is appealing.

Judge Charles Beaudrot will preside over Friday’s hearing and witnesses will also be called to testify.

The time frame for the judge to render his decision on whether or not Greene should remain on the ballot is tight. Early voting for the Georgia primary begins May 2 and the primary itself is on May 17.

In an interview Tuesday with ABC News affiliate WTVC, Greene called the legal challenge a “scam.”

“All I did was what I’m legally and allowed to do by the Constitution as a member of Congress, and that was I objected to Joe Biden’s Electoral College votes from a few states,” Greene said.

Greene also said she was a “victim” on Jan. 6.

Mike Rasbury, one of the voters challenging Greene’s eligibility to run for reelection, said in a statement that Greene “took an oath of office to protect democracy from all enemies foreign and domestic … However, she has flippantly ignored this oath and, based on her role in the January 6 insurrection, is disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution from holding any future public office.”

Rasbury will be in the courtroom when Greene testifies.

Ron Fein, a lawyer representing the voters and legal director of Free Speech For People, told ABC News in an email that the Georgia “voters who filed this lawsuit have a right to have their challenge heard” and that he looks forward to questioning Greene under oath.

James Bopp, Greene’s attorney, told ABC News Tuesday that the challenge to Greene is “absurd” and that it shouldn’t be up to judges to decide who represents Georgia’s 14th Congressional District.

Bopp also represents GOP Rep. Madison Cawthorn, who is facing a similar challenge against his reelection from a group of voters in North Carolina.

Cawthorn’s lawsuit to dismiss the challenge to his reelection is set for oral arguments May 3 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia.

Speaking on Fox News Monday night, Greene told host Tucker Carlson that Democrats are trying to keep her name off the ballot, maintaining she had nothing to do with the attack on the Capitol.

“I have to go to court on Friday and actually be questioned about something I’ve never been charged with and something I was completely against,” Greene said.

The challenges against Greene and Cawthorn are part of a larger legal effort to prevent anyone allegedly involved in the events surrounding Jan. 6 — or who supported it — from running for reelection.

Similar challenges are being brought against GOP Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona and theoretically could be brought against Trump if he decides to run for office again in 2024.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(GRAND RAPIDS, Mich.) — Thousands of Michigan GOP leaders are gathering in Grand Rapids on Saturday to decide which candidates will make it onto November’s ballot in what will be a major test of former President Donald Trump’s hold over the state party.

Trump has made his presence known in the state, endorsing candidates up and down the ballot, mainly focusing on whether or not they believe his baseless claim that the 2020 election was stolen.

In two of the most closely watched races of the weekend, Trump has endorsed Kristina Karamo for secretary of state and Matt DePerno for attorney general. Both have become sounding boards for his unfounded election claims.

DePerno, a lawyer, filed suit seeking to audit the 2020 election results in Antrim County; however, those efforts were dismissed by a Michigan court Thursday. Karamo was part of the Supreme Court lawsuit that was eventually rejected seeking to overturn the 2020 results after claiming she personally witnessed election fraud in Detroit.

DePerno is facing state Rep. Ryan Berman and former Michigan House Speaker Tom Leonard, who is seeking a rematch against incumbent Dana Nessel after losing in 2018. Karamo is running against state Rep. Beau LaFave and Cindy Berry, a Chesterfield Township clerk.

“It’s true that any past party president, you know, would be a very influential endorsement,” Matt Grossmann, a political science professor at Michigan State University, told ABC News. “What is not routine at all is that the president is making a decision on the basis of people’s views of whether the last election was stolen or not.”

In Michigan, party delegates nominate candidates for most statewide offices at party conventions rather than holding primaries. The party will formally nominate those candidates in August.

This is the earliest Michigan Republicans have ever held the convention as the party looks to maximize its chances of flipping seats in the battleground state. Trump lost Michigan in 2020 by about 150,000 votes.

“These candidates need the time really to make the case as to why you should be elected,” Gustavo Portela, communications director for the Michigan Republican Party, told ABC News. “It also gives the party an opportunity to back them financially.”

The former president’s particular focus on the state sets up a showdown between the two Trump-endorsed candidates and their opponents this weekend. Trump has also endorsed 10 candidates for seats in the state legislature.

Some in the party have signaled they want to shift away from focusing on 2020. On April 11, Michigan counties held conventions to choose the delegates who will represent them at this week’s state convention. In Macomb County, people were seen on video shouting over each other and trading insults. The night ended with a vote removing the county party chairman and staunch supporter of the former president, Mark Forton.

Amid the infighting among the two wings of the party, Portela says Saturday’s decision will ultimately be determined by who has the best chances of winning in the midterms.

“I understand the president is always going to be involved, but ultimately it comes down to the delegates and what they have to say,” he said.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden will sign an executive order Friday calling to protect old-growth forests on federal lands, strengthen reforestation initiatives and global partnerships to end deforestation, and take more steps to protect critical forests from wildfires.

Under the order, the Interior Department and the Department of Agriculture will conduct the first inventory of old-growth trees on federal lands and use that information to develop new policies to protect critical forests. Federal agencies will be asked to set reforestation targets for 2030.

The order will also call for the strengthening of partnerships with states, tribes, private landowners and other stakeholders to protect forests from wildfires, including by requesting $6.1 billion for wildfire risk reduction in the president’s 2023 budget.

“We’re talking about additional steps and the administration’s plan to conserve, restore and replant our federal forests with a particular focus on on some of the crown jewels of these federal lands, stands of old-growth trees,” a senior administration official told reporters Thursday night. “These old-growth forests are significant carbon sinks, yet many of them are under really tremendous threat from climate driven droughts and wildfires.”

Another senior administration official added, “America’s forests are among our most important climate solutions. They absorb more than 10% of U.S. annual greenhouse gas emissions, while providing a plethora of additional benefits for wildlife flood control and clean water, clean air.”

The first step, however, will be to decide what is considered “old-growth,” because there is no official definition of which trees or forests fit this category.

Old-growth forests are considered especially important to protect, because older trees and more diverse ecosystems have the potential to capture carbon in the soil and plants. Protecting them from deforestation has been a big international priority with 137 countries pledging at COP26 to end forest loss by 2030.

When asked about how these initiatives would deal with the impact of logging on taking down old trees, a senior administration official said the president is taking “the exact right approach” to define and track down these old-growth trees and then use that information and science to determine the best path forward.

But some organizations, such as Food and Water Watch, have indicated that Biden’s action on forests is not nearly enough. Climate activists are expected to protest outside Biden’s event in Seattle on Friday.

“President Biden seems to think we’re celebrating the first Earth Day in 1970, rather than in depths of the climate crisis in 2022,” Thomas Meyer, the national organizing manager of Food and Water Watch, said in a statement. “Protecting forests without addressing the root cause of the climate crisis, namely the continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels, will do very little to slow global warming.”

“The president has many effective tools at his disposal to address the climate and public health impacts of fossil fuels in a serious way,” Meyer added. “He should start by following through on his pledge to end fracking on public lands and stop offshore drilling, and directing his agencies to reject all new fossil fuel infrastructure.”

Good Morning America will have more Friday morning with National Geographic and the importance of protecting endangered trees.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.