Politics

(WASHINGTON) — Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., seems to have sealed the fate of President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill on “Fox News Sunday,” when he announced that he is a “no” on the legislation.

“I’ve always said if I can’t go home and explain it to the people of West Virginia, I can’t vote for it. I cannot vote to continue with this piece of legislation. I just can’t. I’ve tried everything humanly possible. I can’t get there,” Manchin said.

Despite working “every day” for five months with different members of the party to get there on the legislation, Manchin said his concerns about inflation and the cost of the program still stand.

“You’re done? This is a no?” host Bret Baier asked.

“This is a no on this piece of legislation. I have tried everything I know to do,” Manchin replied, adding that Biden worked “diligently” and was “wonderful to work with” but knew he had concerns.

Manchin’s comments effectively end Democrats’ hopes of passing Biden’s $1.75 trillion social spending plan, which passed the House last month, with Democratic votes alone. Manchin is the crucial 50th vote needed to get the bill across the line.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki has issued a lengthy statement that Manchin’s bombshell announcement Sunday is “at odds” with what he indicated in private negotiations earlier this week — confirming the White House was caught off guard by Manchin’s news, and unleashing on the senator for the “sudden and inexplicable reversal of his position.”

“On Tuesday of this week, Senator Manchin came to the White House and submitted—to the President, in person, directly—a written outline for a Build Back Better bill that was the same size and scope as the President’s framework, and covered many of the same priorities,” Psaki said Sunday. ” If his comments on FOX and written statement indicate an end to that effort, they represent a sudden and inexplicable reversal in his position, and a breach of his commitments to the President and the Senator’s colleagues in the House and Senate.”

While Manchin recognized that the party had negotiated down from Sen. Bernie Sanders’ initial proposal of $6 trillion, he felt shortening the timelines of the “aspirational goals” included in the bill was not a genuine answer to the issue.

“The thing that never changed Bret, was basically the same amount of things that they’re trying to accomplish by just changing, if you will, the amount of time that we can depend on it,” Manchin said Sunday on Fox. “So if you’re going to do something and do it, pick what we’re apprised priorities are like most people do in their families, or their businesses, and you fund them for 10 years and you make sure they deliver the services for 10 years,” Manchin argued.

Manchin argued COVID-19 and inflation should be where the country is focusing its fire, rather than dragging out the negotiations further.

“I’ve tried. I mean, I really did and the President was trying as hard as he could. He has an awful lot –A lot of irons in the fire right now — more on his plate than he needs for this to continue when I’m having the difficulties I’m having and basically the challenges we have from different parts of our party basically pushing in different ways,” Manchin said.

Manchin also said it was “not right” that he was getting all the attention for his concerns over the bill, but said he wasn’t going to speak for other Senators who also might have concerns with the mammoth legislation.

It was just Thursday that Biden put out a statement that the negotiations with Manchin would continue this week.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who has been one of the senators leading the charge on the Build Back Better bill in Senate, responded to Manchin’s no vote on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“Well, I think he’s gonna have a lot of explaining to do to the people of West Virginia,” Sanders said, ticking through the benefits the bill would provide like lowering prescription drug costs, expanding Medicaid and helping to pay for childcare.

“I would have hoped that we could have had at least 50 Democrats on board who have the guts to stand up for working families and take on the lobbyists and the powerful special interests,” Sanders said on CNN. “We have no Republicans, not one Republican in the United States Senate or the House for that matter is prepared to stand up to the drug companies or the insurance companies or wealthy.”

Sanders was not shy about telling Americans who are concerned about losing their monthly Child Tax Credit payments to blame Sen. Manchin.

“If Mr. Manchin Votes no, those $300 tax credits that have gone a long way to reduce childhood poverty in America- they’re gone. That’s over. We cut childhood poverty by over 40%, an extraordinary accomplishment. Manchin doesn’t want to do that, tell that to the struggling families of West Virginia and America,” Sanders said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Adam Kinzinger said Sunday “it’s possible” some of his GOP colleagues in Congress are responsible for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol but added he’s not ready to “go to that point” yet, because he wants to “let the facts dictate it.”

The Illinois Republican also revealed that the committee investigating the insurrection is not ruling out issuing subpoenas for sitting members of Congress.

“Nobody — member of Congress, former president, nobody — in America is above the law,” Kinzinger told ABC “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl.

Kinzinger, who announced in October he will not seek reelection to Congress, was one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump following the events at the Capitol on Jan. 6 and is one of two Republicans serving on the committee. He said the committee would subpoena Trump if they determine it’s necessary.

“Nobody should be above the law, but we also recognize we can get the information without him at this point, and, obviously, when you subpoena the former president, that comes with a whole kind of, you know, circus environment,” Kinzinger said. “But if we need him, we’ll do it.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger tells @jonkarl “it’s possible” some of his GOP colleagues in Congress are responsible for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

“I will tell you, yes, there are more texts out there we haven’t released.” https://t.co/DrxF56htoo pic.twitter.com/mIwF0Z9VOE

— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) December 19, 2021

Kinzinger and Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., on Tuesday night joined Democrats in the House in voting to hold Trump’s former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, in contempt of Congress. Meadows defied a subpoena to appear for a deposition before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Prior to the vote, members of the committee unveiled text messages sent to Meadows during the attack on the Capitol, reading aloud texts from Republican lawmakers, Fox News personalities and the former president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., that implored Meadows to get Trump to denounce the rioters. Rep Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, was one of the GOP lawmakers whose texts to Meadows were revealed, his office confirmed.

The new messages were part of the approximately 9,000 documents Meadows turned over to the committee, before he reversed course and decided to not cooperate with the investigation. The House previously voted to hold Trump ally Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena by the Jan. 6 committee.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger tells @jonkarl that he “absolutely” thinks his colleagues should be subpoenaed to testify before the House committee on Jan. 6 if necessary.

“Nobody—member of Congress, former president—nobody in America is above the law.” https://t.co/MfsZEjNKU8 pic.twitter.com/rHpGf5aoAZ

— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) December 19, 2021

Kinzinger said he’s “not sure” whether Meadows knew how damaging the text messages would be, but emphasized he had no choice given the committee’s legal authority.

“I will tell you, yes, there are more texts out there we haven’t released,” he added.

During debate on the House floor before the vote, Cheney emphasized the importance of Meadows’ testimony. “Mr. Meadows’ testimony will bear on another key question before this committee. Did Donald Trump through action or inaction corruptly seek to obstruct or impede Congress’ official proceedings to count electoral votes?” Cheney said.

Karl pressed Kinzinger on the possibility of the Justice Department filing criminal charges based on what the committee finds, given that it is a crime to obstruct the official proceedings of Congress.

“Are you sending a message that the Justice Department should be prosecuting not just those that broke into the building on Jan. 6, but should be prosecuting Donald Trump himself or at least investigating that possibility?” Karl asked.

“I think investigating that possibility, for sure,” Kinzinger responded. “Our committee is getting more information than law enforcement agencies and DOJ, because we’ve had the power and the ability to get that done.”

“Whatever information we get will be public record, and the DOJ should take a look, particularly if there’s criminal charges to be filed, because again, the big thing is as bad as it was on Jan. 6, there’s really nothing in place to stop another one from happening again,” he added. “If somebody broke the law, it is so essential that we send the message that you are not untouchable as president — you’re not untouchable as a former president.”

House committee on Jan. 6 “is getting more information than law enforcement agencies and DOJ,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger tells @jonkarl.

“And if somebody broke the law, it is so essential that we send the message that you are not untouchable as president.” https://t.co/MfsZEjNKU8 pic.twitter.com/fIZ8gg1RRd

— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) December 19, 2021

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Thursday in an interview with Spectrum News he looks forward to seeing what the Jan. 6 committee finds in its probe, effectively endorsing the work of the commission after he had opposed its creation. “I think that what they’re seeking to find out is something that public needs to know,” McConnell said.

“That’s not exactly what Kevin McCarthy, the leader over there in the House, is saying,” Karl pointed out, alluding to the fact that the two GOP leaders in the House and Senate have juxtaposing views toward the investigation.

“Right,” Kinzinger replied, laughing. “Look, I mean — I got to tell you, so, you know, say what you want about Mitch McConnell. He obviously holds his cards very close. I think that was a very powerful statement and I appreciate it.”

“I don’t think history books are going to be kind to him.”

GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger knocks House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, says he brought former Pres. Trump “back to political life” after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. https://t.co/PNZ2yryejT pic.twitter.com/8OhvwR7AN7

— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) December 19, 2021

Kinzinger, who along with Cheney has faced harsh backlash for sitting on the committee, criticized McCarthy for not doing something similar.

“Kevin McCarthy, on the other hand, has not said a word about anything, except for that Donald Trump is probably the greatest president to ever exist,” Kinzinger said. “Kevin McCarthy himself I think made Donald Trump relevant again when two weeks after Jan. 6 or so, he went back down to Mar-a-Lago and brought him back to political life by putting his arm around him and taking that picture and basically sending the signal to the rest of the Republicans that were pretty quiet at this moment, that we got to get back on the Trump train.”

“He bears responsibility for that,” he added. “I don’t think history books are going to be kind to him.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A hunger strike that started in Phoenix has made its way to the nation’s capital. Students from different parts of the U.S. have gathered outside the White House participating in a hunger strike which they say is to help get the Freedom to Vote Act passed.

The bill addresses voter registration and voting access, election integrity and security, redistricting, and campaign finance.

The students are part of UN-PAC, a nonpartisan, pro-democracy youth organization.

“For many months, we’ve been knocking on doors, we’ve been making phone calls, we’ve been meeting with senators, and it hasn’t been enough,” Shana Gallagher, co-founder and executive director of UN-PAC said. “We really feel an existential urgency around passing the Freedom to Vote Act, the federal democracy reform package that the Senate has landed on before the end of the year.”

The hunger strike began in Phoenix on Dec. 6. On the fourth day of the strike, protesters met with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz to discuss the legislation.

“She reiterated her support for the Freedom to Vote Act, and we hope desperately that when the time comes, she will do whatever it takes to pass the bill,” Gallagher said. “But the meeting did go well enough that we decided we should move our hunger strike to D.C. because the person who needs to be prioritizing the passage of this bill now is President Biden.”

As the group is about to enter the third week of their hunger strike, they say that many are feeling the impact of not eating.

“Every morning, I feel like I’ve been hit by a bus of exhaustion,” Joseline Garcia, co-founder and the national organizing director of UN-PAC said. “My stomach feels like it’s been twisted and tied up into knots, and there are sharp pains as if knives are poking it.”

Before taking part in the hunger strike, the group discussed the risks, Garcia said.

“We considered the risks soon after we started considering this as a serious tactic,” Garcia said. “We do have a team of medical professionals that check on us twice a day, to see where everyone is at.”

The group has received online support from celebrities including Kerry Washington and Mark Ruffalo.

Our freedom to vote is on the line, and so are their futures. Thank you to the brave young people of @LetsUnPAC on Day 11 of a #HungerStrike4Democracy. @POTUS, please help make sure the #FreedomToVoteAct passes this year!

👉🏾 https://t.co/UsfKgGeQcK pic.twitter.com/DdMidMHXKC

— kerry washington (@kerrywashington) December 16, 2021

“When we are able to get access to platforms that are willing to amplify our message, it helps spread the word which will be necessary to move the Senate and President Joe Biden,” Garcia said.

Even though members of Congress have left Washington, D.C., for the holidays and the Senate is not scheduled to return until Jan. 3, some strikers including Callynn Johnson, a student at the University of Central Florida who flew to participate in the strike, say they remain committed to seeing this hunger strike through until they see movement on the Freedom to Vote Act.

“The current plan is that this is an indefinite hunger strike until we do see this bill passed. And as much as I would love to go home for the holidays and see my family, this very much depends on whether the Senate prioritizes this issue,” Johnson said.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Ali Alexander, the conservative activist behind the “Stop the Steal” movement, recently told congressional investigators that he had communicated with several House Republican lawmakers ahead of the Jan. 6 rally and Capitol riot, along with at least one member of the Trump family’s inner circle.

Alexander disclosed his communications — and the relevant materials turned over to the Jan. 6 House select committee — in a new lawsuit challenging the panel from obtaining his phone records from Verizon.

“Alexander received a notice from Verizon that the Select Committee had subpoenaed Verizon for nine categories of information associated with Alexander’s personal cell phone number, including IP addresses, devices, billing addresses, account changes, a list of contacts, call session times, and dozens to hundreds of other data points or metadata from November 1, 2020 … to January 31, 2021,” according to a Friday complaint filed against lawmakers on the committee and Verizon.

Alexander had challenged the grounds for obtaining his cellphone communication, saying in the complaint the data is “not pertinent to the investigation and sweeps up privileged communications between Alexander and clergy, Alexander and people he spiritually counsels, and Alexander and his respective attorneys.”

According to the complaint, Alexander testified to the committee on Dec. 9 that he “had a few phone conversations” with Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., potentially texted Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., and spoke in person to Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.

All three GOP lawmakers were involved in the efforts to challenge the electoral results on Jan. 6, and participated in meetings at the White House and on Capitol Hill on the subject.

Brooks released Saturday night what he said was the text he received from Alexander, showing the activist introducing himself on Dec. 16, 2020, and calling Jan. 6 “a big moment for our republic.” Brooks said he did not recognize the number at the time and called the contents “benign” anyway.

“The insinuation that this single text to Congressman Brooks from an unknown number by someone claiming to be ‘Ali Alexander’ somehow suggests Congressman Brooks in any way helped plan the Capitol attack is absurd, outrageous and defamatory,” Brooks wrote in a statement.

Alexander had boasted in a social media video in January that he had worked with the GOP lawmakers to challenge the election results. He did not take part in storming the Capitol.

“In January, Mr. Alexander held an organizing call where Members of Congress might have been present, and some were invited. He doesn’t recall who was in attendance because there was no roll call of attendees because the call was so large,” the complaint reads.

Alexander also spoke over the phone with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Donald Trump Jr.’s partner and a Trump campaign fundraiser, and told investigators it was a “short and pleasant” conversation about the Georgia Senate runoffs and GOP primaries in 2022, according to the complaint.

In January, after the Capitol riot, Biggs’s office told ABC News the congressman was “not aware of hearing of or meeting Mr. Alexander at any point — let alone working with him to organize some part of a planned protest on January 6.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democrats are leaving Washington for the holidays having fallen short on a slew of President Joe Biden’s top domestic priorities and staring down the barrel of a politically-contentious 2022 in which the balance of power in Congress is up for grabs and trending red.

After months of intra-party gridlock, the Senate is closing out its first session without voting on the president’s cornerstone social spending package with no clear path forward on how the bill might progress to the floor in the new year.

“The president requested more time to continue his negotiations. So we will keep working with him, hand in hand,” Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor amid a rare Friday session, acknowledging for the first time that Biden’s Build Back Better bill will not come to the floor before the holidays.

West Virginia moderate Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin has proven to be the most intransigent of obstacles for Democrats who hoped to quickly expedite the social spending bill, which includes funding for in-home care, universal pre-K, an extension of the Child Tax Credit and Medicare expansion.

Manchin has for months opposed the cost of the $1.75 trillion bill, citing concerns that the real cost of the programs over time would plunge the nation trillions further in debt and spike inflation rates at a time when the cost of consumer goods is skyrocketing.

In particular, Manchin has insisted on extending the expanded Child Tax Credit for the full 10 years of the overall plan — a $1 trillion proposal — while also demanding that the price tag remain under $2 trillion, a dilemma that could only result in deeper cuts elsewhere among prized programs.

Despite ongoing negotiations with Schumer and Biden, Manchin hasn’t been persuaded to come off his position. His vote, and that of every Democrat in the Senate, is necessary to both start debate on and pass the final package.

Biden acknowledged as much in a separate statement released Thursday evening.

“My team and I are having ongoing discussions with Senator Manchin; that work will continue next week. It takes time to finalize these agreements, prepare the legislative changes, and finish all the parliamentary and procedural steps needed to enable a Senate vote. We will advance this work together over the days and weeks ahead; Leader Schumer and I are determined to see the bill successfully on the floor as early as possible,” Biden said.

Immigration reform, another key Biden campaign promise, has also hit snag. Democrats had hoped to work a pathway to citizenship into the proposal, but the Senate parliamentarian, who must assess whether certain items are admissible under the rules governing passage of the package, has ruled against multiple efforts.

On Thursday, the parliamentarian dealt Democrats yet another blow, ruling against their latest effort that sought to provide five-year work permits and deportation protection to undocumented immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for at least a decade.

Other December priorities also fell by the wayside as the Senate spent the month grappling with government funding, a must-pass defense authorization bill and a hike to the federal debt limit. All of these issues had to be attended to before the Senate left, and stalls on each priority ate valuable floor time.

Lawmakers will leave Washington this week also failing to address election reform after Republicans mounted a near-unanimous blockade on multiple legislative efforts. Under the current Senate filibuster rules, at least 60 lawmakers must consent to passage of federal voting rights legislation, and GOP opposition has all but doomed the reform efforts.

Democrats made a last-minute push for voting rights earlier this week, convening calls with Biden aimed at pushing moderate holdouts to consider reforming Senate rules to bust the GOP filibuster.

But Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., aren’t prepared to make exceptions to the Senate rules, even for voting rights.

Sinema “continues to support the Senate’s 60-vote threshold, to protect the country from repeated radical reversals in federal policy which would cement uncertainty, deepen divisions, and further erode Americans’ confidence in our government,” her office said in a statement Wednesday.

During Friday’s policy lunch, Democrats drilled down on the Senate rules, hearing from two former Senate rules experts. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said that there are somewhere “between five and nine different plans or permutations of plans, some extremely complex, some pretty straightforward and simple” on getting voting rights passed through the chamber. But so far, there’s no obvious path forward.

“We’re talking about 50 very strong-minded, extremely independent elected officials, each with a separate constituency who are really looking into their consciences,” Blumenthal told reporters. “I think we’re very close, because I think that voting rights is so absolutely critical. I’m hopeful that the New Year will bring us closer together.”

Many Democratic lawmakers see substantive action before the November midterms as necessary to shore up their razor-thin majorities in both chambers of Congress. But Republicans are using the intraparty squabbling among Democrats as an opportunity.

They’ve painted Biden’s social spending agenda as an all but certain increase in inflation.

“I think the big story of the year is inflation,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell Thursday. “The single biggest thing we could do for the American people is to kill the reckless tax and spending spree.”

McConnell said he thought 2022 would be “a good environment” for Republicans looking to retake the majority, adding, “The places that will be making this decision are Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri, Nevada and Arizona, and we’ll be out there doing battle. And I think we’ll have the wind at our back.”

Asked about the wildest of wild cards for Republicans — former President Donald Trump, who has consistently attacked McConnell’s leadership — the Kentucky Republican dodged. “Good try,” he told ABC News.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Friday dug into Republican opposition to advancing federal voting rights legislation during a commencement address at South Carolina State University.

His remarks came ahead of a renewed push on voting rights, even as he acknowledged Thursday night that another major legislative priority of his administration, the Build Back Better social spending bill, will need to wait until 2022.

“I’ve never seen anything like the unrelenting assault on the right to vote. Never,” Biden said Friday during his address to the graduates.

Showing some clear frustration, Biden said, “We have to protect that sacred right to vote, for God’s sake.”

The president mentioned his key role in getting an extension of the original Voting Rights Act passed with bipartisan support in 1982, saying that at the time he thought the nation was “finally beginning to move.”

“But this new sinister combination of voter suppression and election subversion, it’s un-American, it’s undemocratic, and sadly, it is unprecedented since Reconstruction,” he said.

He said his administration has supported Democratic efforts to reform voting rights since “day one” and that there is “unanimous support” within the party, but with the filibuster in Congress blocking its efforts, Biden again criticized Republicans for not even wanting to debate voting rights legislation.

“But each and every time it gets to be brought up, that other team blocks the ability even to start to discuss it. That other team — it used to be called the Republican Party. But this battle is not over. We must pass the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. We must!” Biden said.

Earlier this year, Biden expressed support for altering filibuster rules to pass voting rights legislation, but he did not make the same call Friday.

The president also focused on “hate and racism” in his remarks.

There is currently a “reckoning on race not seen since the 50s and 60s,” he said, adding that the graduates are entering a “tumultuous and consequential moment in modern American history.”

He pointed to the Orangeburg, South Carolina, massacre of 1968 and the mass shooting at Mother Emmanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015. He said there was a “through-line” of hate and racism that extended to the 2017 white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Those marchers were “carrying torches and Nazi banners, screeching [the] most antisemitic and anti-Black rhetoric in history,” Biden said.

Referencing former President Donald Trump, he said that “when asked what he thought about it, Trump said, ‘well there’s some very good people there.'”

“Hell very good people! They’re racist, they’re fascist,” Biden said.

Biden also invoked the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol, saying that he gets asked by world leaders, “Is America going to be alright” after witnessing those scenes play out.

After his speech, Biden was presented with an honorary doctorate from the university.

The university also gave a degree to Rep. Jim Clyburn, a Democrat representing South Carolina. Clyburn graduated from South Carolina State University in December 1961 but only received his diploma by mail and did not walk across the aisle until Friday’s ceremony.

In remarks before Biden spoke, Clyburn told the audience about how his late wife, Emily Clyburn, who he met after they were both jailed for civil rights demonstrations while students at the university, encouraged him to support President Joe Biden in the 2016 Democratic primary.

“Not long before she passed away a little over two years ago, she said to me: If we want to succeed in this upcoming election, we’d better nominate Joe Biden,” Clyburn said.

“She passed away before the South Carolina primary, but what she said to me in that night stayed on my mind… And I followed her directions, just I had for the fifty-eight years that we were married.”

Clyburn’s endorsement of Biden in 2020 is credited as a deciding factor in helping him clinch the presidency.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Roger Stone, longtime adviser to former President Donald Trump, appeared Friday before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, where he said he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to every question asked of him.

“I did invoke my Fifth Amendment rights to every question, not because I have done anything wrong, but because I am fully aware of the House Democrats’ long history of fabricating perjury charges on the basis of comments that are innocuous, immaterial, or irrelevant,” Stone said after emerging from his hour-long session with the committee.

The committee on Nov. 22 subpoenaed Stone for records and testimony, along with four other people linked to the planning of pro-Trump rallies in Washington on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6, prior to the Capitol attack.

Investigators are interested in Stone’s involvement planning and attending the events, as well as his soliciting of donations to pay for security at the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally, the committee said.

Stone was also seen outside Washington’s Willard Hotel on the morning of Jan. 6 with members of the Oath Keepers militia group, including some members who were later at the riot on Capitol Hill.

Stone has denied any involvement in the attack on the Capitol and has said he had no “advance knowledge” of the march on the Capitol or efforts to disrupt the counting of electoral votes.

“I stress yet again that I was not on the Ellipse [at the rally preceding the Capital attack],” Stone said following his appearance Friday. “I did not march to the Capitol. I was not at the Capitol, and any claims, assertion or even implication that I knew about or was involved in any way whatsoever, with the illegal and politically counterproductive activities of Jan. 6 is categorically false.”

Stone also criticized the committee’s probe into the Jan. 5 rally where he spoke.

“What disturbed me is an investigation into my activities on Jan. 5, which is constitutionally protected free speech, the constitutional right of free assembly, and the constitutional right to redress the government regarding grievances,” he said. “I don’t like to see the criminalization of constitutionally protected political activity. I think it is a slippery slope.”

In February 2020, Stone was sentenced to 40 months in prison after he was found guilty of obstructing justice, witness tampering and five counts of lying to Congress in connection with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. However his sentence was commuted in July of 2020 by then-President Trump.

Also questioned this week by the Jan. 6 committee were Dustin Stockton and Jennifer Lawrence, two activists involved in planning the rallies in Washington ahead of the riot.

In an interview with CNN, Stockton said “the buck’s got to stop at President Trump” and that he “knew better” than to rally supporters about the election results and encourage them to march on the Capitol.

Other witnesses, including Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and Trump spokesperson Taylor Budowich had their sessions postponed as they “engage” with the committee over subpoenas for records and testimony, the committee said.

On Thursday, the committee subpoenaed Phil Waldron, a retired colonel linked to a controversial 36-page PowerPoint presentation titled “Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 Jan,” that was prepared prior to Jan. 6.

A 38-page presentation with the same title that is available online includes several proposals for challenging and overturning the election results, including recommendations to declare a “national security emergency” or declare all electronic ballots “invalid.”

The document also recommends that Vice President Mike Pence, who presided over the certification of electoral votes on Jan. 6, reject electors from states “where fraud occurred,” and that he recognize alternate electors sent to Washington by GOP legislators, or that he delay the certification of the election.

A committee aide declined to comment on the document, which the committee obtained from former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, including whether it resembled the presentation with the same name available online.

The committee has issued more than 50 subpoenas and conducted more than 300 interviews as part of its inquiry, and is expected to begin “weeks” of hearings in the new year, according to committee members.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Intelligence dispatches, memoranda, and cables between U.S. government agencies in the years leading up to and after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination nearly 60 years ago have been released by the National Archives.

Fifty-eight years ago in Dallas, Texas, Kennedy was shot and killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, but since Oswald himself was killed shortly after the assassination, questions lingered about whether anyone else was involved, feeding conspiracy theories.

President Joe Biden ordered the release of the documents in October but it’s being done in stages, with thousands remaining secret amid intelligence agency concerns about what they could reveal.

While there appeared to be no explosive revelations, among the documents released on Wednesday were CIA memos discussing Lee Harvey Oswald’s previously disclosed trips to the Soviet and Cuban embassies in Mexico City months before President Kennedy was killed.

One of those CIA memos — written the day after the assassination — says Oswald communicated with a KGB officer while at the Soviet embassy that September.

“According to an intercepted phone call in Mexico City, Lee Oswald was in the Soviet Embassy there on 23 September and spoke with Consul Valeriy Vladimirovich,” the document said.

“Oswald called the Soviet Embassy in 1 October, identifying himself by name and speaking broken Russian, stating the above and asking the guard who answered the phone whether there was ‘anything concerning the telegram to Washington,'” read the memo from a high-ranking CIA official.

Oswald — who was married to a Russian woman — was trying to get visas to move to the Soviet Union, according to the documents.

Another newly released document shows a tip from a U.S. official in Australia two days after the assassination — an anonymous call to the embassy from a man claiming to be a chauffeur for Soviet diplomats who said the Soviets had “probably” financed the assassination.

That, U.S. officials asserted, was a crank call.

Biden has ordered the review of the remaining 14,000 documents and the National Archives is required to release those by December 2022 — unless intelligence agencies raise issues.

The National Archives says the vast majority of documents related to the assassination have been made publicly available.

ABC News’ Jack Date, Quinn Owen and Lucien Bruggeman contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has dealt another blow to Texas abortion providers waging war against SB8 in order to restore a constitutional right for millions across the state.

After a sharply divided Supreme Court ruled last week that a very narrow challenge to the law, which is a near-total ban on abortion, could proceed, the providers asked the justices to expeditiously return the case to a lower court so the litigation could get underway.

Normally, there’s a 25-day delay between when the Court issues a decision and it’s formally registered.

Gorsuch, who authored the majority opinion in the case, granted the request on Thursday. But instead of directing the matter to a U.S. District Court where the proceedings began, he returned the case to the highly conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals — a move that could both slow things down and make it even more difficult for providers to prevail.

Texas has said it will ask the Appeals Court to seek clarification on SB8 from the Texas Supreme Court before moving the case forward. The abortion providers opposed that move as an unnecessary delay.

The Gorsuch decision is also striking in that it breaks with what appears to be Chief Justice John Roberts’ expectation that the case would have returned to the U.S. District Court for immediate relief. Roberts, in his opinion in the case, said that “the District Court should resolve this litigation and enter appropriate relief without delay.”

The federal judge who would have picked up the case was Robert Pittman, the same judge who ruled against SB8 in a sweeping opinion earlier this year.

Marc Hearron, senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a comment, “The Supreme Court left only a small sliver of our case intact, and it’s clear that this part of the case will not block vigilante lawsuits from being filed. It’s also clear that Texas is determined to stop the plaintiffs from getting any relief in even the sliver of the case that is left.”

“Meanwhile,” he continued, “Texans have been without abortion access for more than 100 days, and there is no end in sight. The Supreme Court has let Texas nullify constitutional rights and upend our system of justice.”

The Texas law, which was allowed to go into effect this fall, bans physicians from providing abortions “if the physician detects a fetal heartbeat,” including embryonic cardiac activity, which can be as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.

While this has reportedly banned a majority of abortions that would’ve previously been performed, doctors in Texas are still providing abortions in accordance with the law.

Whole Woman’s Health, the independent provider organization with several locations in Texas that is fighting SB8, is now providing abortion care — in accordance with the law — for free. The clinic is able to do so because of grant funding, Whole Woman’s Health confirmed to ABC News.

ABC News’ Alexandra Svokos contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday permanently lifted its restriction on the abortion pill mifepristone that required providers to dispense the drug in person, allowing it to be delivered by mail.

The decision is subject to state laws that can criminalize the practice. But the FDA move could still have significant consequences for women, particularly in rural areas where it might be harder for women to find a clinic or doctor that will administer the drug in person.

In its updated guidance online, the FDA cited the need to “reduce burden on patient access and the health care delivery system.”

Abortion rights groups cheered the move but said more needs to be done to ease access.

“While the action today will go a long way for people seeking care, other barriers remain and must be lifted once and for all,” said Destiny Lopez, co-president of All* Above All.

Mifepristone, which blocks the hormone progesterone needed to support a pregnancy, is given to women within the first 10 weeks. The pill is taken with another drug called misoprostol, which causes cramping and bleeding to empty the uterus.

The FDA had stopped enforcing the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone last spring, citing the risks of COVID and noting the drug’s strong safety record since it hit the market more than two decades ago.

Women still must obtain the pill through a certified health care provider.

While abortion-rights advocates say the decision protects a woman’s right to privacy in obtaining a legal abortion, opponents insist the practice is dangerous and puts women’s lives at risk.

“The Biden administration’s reckless move puts countless women and unborn children in danger. Abortion activists’ longtime wish has been to turn every post office and pharmacy into an abortion center,” said Sue Liebel, state policy director for the antiabortion group Susan B. Anthony List.

Thursday’s decision doesn’t mean that every woman will be able to get the pill through the mail.

According to The Guttmacher Institute, which tracks state policies on the abortion pill, 19 states already require a provider to be physically present when administering the pill and prohibit telemedicine when prescribing it.

ABC News’ Alexandra Svokos contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.