Archive by Author

GOP divided in rush to impeach Mayorkas

Tensions are rising in the GOP House over how to tackle a topic many back enthusiastically: impeaching Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Republicans are largely unified in opposition to the secretary, but while some want to go full bore right away, others see fast-track impeachment as a mistake, warning that it’s important to build their case before the public.

“We made the argument that impeachment was rushed — the second impeachment — and I think that’s not who we are as a party,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), a former prosecutor, in reference to the second impeachment of former President Trump.

McCaul said it’s the committees of jurisdiction that should be leading the inquiry.

“We need to have hearings on this and we need to gather evidence and facts and, look, do I think the guy has done a terrible job? Yes,“ McCaul said. “Do I think he’s been derelict in his responsibilities? Yes. But we need to get all this together, and do it in a methodical way.”

In some corners, Republicans are lining up at the chance to impeach Mayorkas.

After Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) filed articles of impeachment against the secretary this week, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) quickly pledged his own resolution while suggesting he was the one who had actually taken the impeachment action first.

“I was the first Member of Congress to introduce impeachment articles against DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in 2021,” Biggs wrote on Twitter. “I will reintroduce these articles with even more justification very soon.”

Balancing the different interests will be another challenge for Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who has signaled he supports a deliberate approach.

“House Republicans will investigate every order, every action. And every failure will determine whether we can begin impeachment inquiry,” he said in November, during a trip to the border.

Twenty lawmakers have signed on to Fallon’s resolution. While he said he doesn’t want to preclude any investigation, Fallon wants to prompt his colleagues to start them immediately. 

“I think it’s of vital import to get the ball rolling immediately. Because this is an emergency. This is break glass. This is something that we can’t just sit around any longer and say, ‘Well, we’ll do it in a month, we’ll take it up in four months.’ Let’s take it up right now,” he told The Hill.

Building a case for Mayorkas’s impeachment may not be as easy as some of his critics think.

For example, Fallon argues that Mayorkas lied to Congress in two different appearances, when saying both that the Biden administration has maintained operational control of the border and that the border is secure. 

Both points are largely a matter of opinion; impeachment statutes are typically reserved for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

“Impeachment is a very serious topic, and it’s one where the facts need to lead you to the results, not have a predetermined decision,” said Rep. Tony Gonzales (R), who represents the Texas district with the longest shared border with Mexico.

Homeland Security officials, so far, have not assigned staff to deal with potential impeachment inquiries.

“Secretary Mayorkas is proud to advance the noble mission of this Department, support its extraordinary workforce, and serve the American people.  The Department will continue our work to enforce our laws and secure our border, while building a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system,” said Marsha Espinosa, a spokesperson for DHS.

“Members of Congress can do better than point the finger at someone else; they should come to the table and work on solutions for our broken system and outdated laws, which they have not updated in over 40 years,” she added.

Ultimately, Republicans who support impeachment and those who oppose it will have to make their case to McCarthy and his leadership team, who will weigh the costs and benefits of spending political capital on a historic measure with scant chances in the Senate.

Impeaching Mayorkas in the House would require a majority vote. In the Senate, a two-thirds majority would be necessary to win a conviction — a high bar.

Only one Cabinet member has been impeached in history — former President Grant’s secretary of war, William Belknap, who was accused of taking kickbacks from a contractor he appointed to run the trader post in Fort Sill, Okla. Belknap resigned before facing an almost-certain Senate conviction, a fate that’s unlikely to play out with Mayorkas.

Other Republicans who spoke with The Hill stressed the need to go through the proper oversight channels, rather than leap into impeachment.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green (R-Tenn.), whose panel would be among those with jurisdiction over Mayorkas’s impeachment, was animated when he spoke about the opportunity to remove the DHS chief, pushing their own coming investigation.

“We’re going to hold him accountable. That’s what we’re going to do. We’re going to have hearings and dig into what I would say is dereliction of duty,” he said.

“All I can speak about is what we’re going to do in the committee and that is a five-phased approach of tackling the fight.”

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said the GOP needed to handle the matter in “the appropriate way.”

“I’ve been very public about my belief that he has violated his oath, that he has undermined our ability to defend our country,” he said.

“But I’m on the House Judiciary Committee in the majority now and so I’m going to talk to [Chair] Jim [Jordan] (R-Ohio) and talk to people on that committee to make sure that we’re going through this and looking at it in the appropriate way.” 

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), who was initially by McCarthy’s side for the November border trip as he stressed an eventual inquiry, has signed onto Fallon’s resolution as a co-sponsor, saying he believes Cabinet secretaries can be impeached over their policies.

“People argue about this legally, you can impeach a president because you just don’t like his policies. In theory that could be considered a high crime or misdemeanor according to the current legal analysis,” he said.

“I just decided I agree with Fallon. That’s basically as simple as I can put it.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Youngkin's political brand at risk after GOP losses in Virginia

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s (R) political brand is facing a potential setback after a series of disappointing GOP losses in the commonwealth. 

The latest blow came earlier this week, when Democrat Aaron Rouse flipped a GOP seat in Virginia’s Senate, bringing the Democratic majority to 22-18 in the chamber. Youngkin had thrown his endorsement behind Republican challenger Kevin Adams, who lost the state’s 7th Senate district, previously held by now-Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) by 348 votes.  

That followed the party’s underwhelming performance in the state during November’s midterms. 

“He’s yet to be successful in transferring his popularity around the state,” said veteran Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth. “These last results should focus the Republican mind and have them understand that the Youngkin victory was not necessarily a sign of what was going to come.”  

For Youngkin, considered a potential White House contender, the defeats threaten to put a damper on his prospects and raise questions about whether his conservative positions on issues like abortion will ultimately hurt the party heading into 2024. 

Youngkin’s win over former Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) in 2021 sparked Republican optimism up and down the ticket going into 2022 in Virginia and across the country. Youngkin, a first-time politician, was also branded as a rising star within the GOP.   

In last year’s midterms, Republicans took aim at incumbent Virginia Democratic Reps. Abigail Spanberger, Jennifer Wexton and Elaine Luria. Youngkin played a public role on the midterm campaign trail in Virginia, stumping with GOP candidates in hopes of bolstering them on the ballot.  

But Republicans were only able to oust Luria, even though she outperformed McAuliffe’s 2021 performance in the district. The 2nd Congressional District, which encompasses the 7th state Senate district won by Rouse, was redrawn in a way that favored Republicans.  

“It’s a wakeup call to suggest that the Youngkin election has not been followed by this period of Republican success,” Holsworth said.  

On top of the political setbacks, Youngkin will also have to contend with a Democratic Senate, which will likely block a number of his key policy proposals, including a 15 week ban on abortion in the state.  

“They were going to have trouble in the legislative no matter what. I think this now really complicates Youngkin having many sort of victories that will appeal to a Republican base,” Holsworth said. “The abortion ban is dead. That will go nowhere.” 

Youngkin’s allies argue that Rouse’s win doesn’t have that big of an impact on the governor.  

“Virginia is not Florida; it’s not another red state,” said one Virginia GOP strategist. “The governor was always going to have to get one Democrat vote, now he’s going to have to get two.”  

“His brand has always been bringing people together to get things done,” the strategist continued. “Now you’re going to see him show off, really, what helped him win in 2021.”  

The governor echoed this sentiment in his State of the Commonwealth address on Wednesday and pushed for a number of initiatives, including lowering taxes, combatting learning loss as a result of the coronavirus pandemic and proposing a 15 week ban on abortion.  

“For the commonwealth, accelerating means getting more done and doing it faster, and Virginians don’t have time for political posturing or foot-dragging,” the governor said.  

Youngkin continues to enjoy a decent approval rating in Virginia. A Roanoke College poll released last month showed the governor with a 52 percent approval rating and a 41 percent approval rating.  

“Youngkin’s going to have a lot of money. He’s a very successful fundraiser,” Holsworth said. “He’s going to try to use those resources to flip a few seats in the Senate while keeping the House.”  

However, the loss could signal a tough road ahead of November for Republicans in the purple state. 

“Tuesday night’s result shows that Virginia’s state legislative elections will be incredibly challenging in 2023, but Virginia Republicans are no strangers to defying the odds and winning tough fights,” said Mason Di Palma, deputy communications director at the Republican State Leadership Committee. “We’re confident that the voters will reward Virginia Republicans as they continue to deliver on their campaign promises to cut taxes, strengthen their education system, and protect their communities.”

And despite what is likely to be a halt on his abortion ban, anti-abortion groups remain staunchly behind Youngkin and Republicans, despite Rouse making abortion rights a central issue in his campaign.  

“If the Democrats make a choice to block those bills or not allow a vote on those bills, we’re going to make clear that they were the ones who stopped a protection for a baby that can feel pain from advancing,” said Stephen Billy, vice president of state affairs at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.  

“Republicans didn’t lose on this issue Tuesday, and they didn’t lose on this issue in the midterms,” Billy said. “Gov. Youngkin should take away the fact that pro-life governors who sign strong laws got reelected.”  

But Democrats have telegraphed that they plan to hit Republicans on abortion going into November. The White House even congratulated Rouse on his victory this week, citing his stance on abortion access.  

“He made his campaign clear about the choice Americans across the country have between extreme MAGA Republican policies that will take away women’s ability to make their own health care decisions and Democrats focused on expanding access to reproductive care and lowering costs for American families,” said White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. “It’s not just in Virginia. This was of course a critical issue in the midterm elections.”  

Ultimately, Virginia’s General Assembly elections in November could prove to be a significant test for Youngkin’s political brand.

“This is so important to his future that he has to be out there,” Holsworth said.

Source: TEST FEED1

Why Russia is fighting so hard for Ukraine's Bakhmut

Fierce fighting in eastern Ukraine’s Soledar is ongoing as Russia hopes to take full control of the salt mining town and surround its bigger prize: Bakhmut.

The city of Bakhmut in the Donetsk region of Ukraine is strategically important to the war, but has taken outsized significance as Russia seeks to score a rare military victory, whatever the human cost. 

For Russia, control of the city would likely lay the groundwork for a push northwest, toward the larger cities of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, said Branislav Slantchev, a political science professor at the University of California, San Diego who studies the conduct of war.

Slantchev said taking Bakhmut would be a tremendous “morale booster” for the Russian war effort and would also pose difficulties for Ukraine in settlements across the Donetsk.

“It’s an important transport hub, a lot of supply lines go through there and Russia could use it as a base,” Slantchev said. “It’s fairly well fortified, so it would be difficult to take it back.”

But Russia has been unable to take Bakhmut for months, despite constant shelling and veritable trench warfare with Ukrainian troops. Controlling Soledar, just a few miles away, would help them encircle the city and press in from a new direction in the north.

Since a failed bid to take Kyiv early in the war, Russia has switched gears to focus on the Donbas, made up of the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, including Bakhmut — which for months has seen some of the heaviest fighting in the war. 

Russia does not appear to have the entirety of Soledar within its grasp, although it made significant gains this week through brutal tactics, including leveling the town with artillery strikes and throwing a mass wave of soldiers, many who were taken prisoner at Ukraine’s lines.

The Kremlin on Wednesday said changing tactics helped make advances in Soledar, according to Russian news agency Tass.

John Herbst, the senior director of the Eurasia Center for the Atlantic Council, said the fighting in Bakhmut and Soledar is almost entirely being conducted by the Wagner Group, a mercenary outfit led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

Herbst said Russian fighters gained ground because of a “huge advantage” sustained through artillery strikes and the wall of soldiers that Wagner has thrown at Ukraine.

But any advances are a “costly” victory for Russia, as thousands of lives have reportedly been lost and the town has been decimated, Herbst added.

“Of course, for the Russians, this is the way they do it,” he said. “They send people to die so they can make minimal gains.”

Moscow claims it has seized control of most of Soledar, while Ukraine says fighting is continuing and has called Russian claims of victory propaganda.

Prigozhin, the financier of the Wagner Group, claimed “complete liberation” of the mining town and said 500 Ukrainian troops were killed.

“The whole city is littered with the corpses of Ukrainian soldiers,” Prigozhin said in a Telegram post.

However, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov on Wednesday said Russian troops had blocked the city from the north and south and that fighting was continuing inside the city, Tass reported.

Prigozhin is seen as jockeying for influence with Putin, however the Russian leaders reshuffle of the generals leading the war effort this week was seen as a rebuke to hawks outside of the military establishment. 

On Wednesday, Putin replaced the commander overseeing the war in Ukraine with Valery Gerasimov, the chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, effectively giving his top military man ownership over the war. 

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) assessed that the appointment of Gerasimov was likely part of the Russian Defense Ministry reasserting primacy “in an internal power struggle.”

In his nightly address on Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia is claiming control of Soledar to rally public support. 

Russia is “trying to pretend that some part of our city of Soledar — a city that was almost completely destroyed by the occupiers — is allegedly some kind of Russian achievement,” Zelensky said.

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said at a press briefing on Wednesday that combat is “fluid” in Soledar and that Ukrainians are still putting up a “determined fight.”

“It’s gone back and forth a number of times,” Austin said. “It really is some pretty brutal fighting.”

Even if Russia takes Soledar, it does not mean Bakhmut would immediately fall, nor does it pose an imminent risk to Ukrainian troops in the region. 

Analysts at the ISW said “even taking the most generous Russian claims at face value, the capture of Soledar would not portend an immediate encirclement of Bakhmut.”

Slantchev, the political science professor, doubted that Russian control over Bakhmut would mark a clear victory if forces failed to make further gains in the north.

“A lot of people are criticizing this pressure on Bakhmut and Soledar because even if they take them, if the Ukrainians achieve their goals in the north [Russia] can’t defend them,” Slantchev said.

Source: TEST FEED1

The Memo: Biden’s document woes deepen

Documents discovered at President Biden’s home and former office are now at the heart of a criminal investigation.

This fact alone underscores the speed and severity with which the president’s woes have deepened since the issue first came to light in a CBS News report on Monday

On Thursday, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel, Robert Hur, to look into the matter.

Garland said the appointment was “in the public interest.” He also asserted that his decision was made to bolster confidence in the Department of Justice.

It “underscores for the public the Department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters, and to making decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law,” Garland said.

But Garland’s decision to appoint Hur also creates an extraordinary circumstance in which both a sitting president and his immediate predecessor are under criminal investigation for their handling of classified material.

Former President Trump is also, of course, the only major declared Republican candidate for the White House in 2024. Special counsel Jack Smith is looking into Trump’s conduct in a case that involves far more documents than Biden’s — and, from what is currently known, far more evidence of potential obstruction.

Those differences are important. But they are of cold political comfort to Democrats. Much of the political sting will now go out of critiques of Trump’s behavior, the matter reduced instead to its simplest summary that both men had classified documents in their possession when they shouldn’t have had them.

The White House, which already knew it was in for a tough time in keeping control of the political agenda once Republicans took over the House majority, now faces an instant blizzard of negative attention and hostile questions.

Incoming Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Thursday reacted to the revelation of the second batch of documents by telling Fox News he had “a ton of questions” about the issue. 

“Why did they wait to tell us?” Jordan wondered.

Jordan’s counterpart at the head of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) reacted to the appointment of the special counsel by releasing a statement which, in essence, said Garland’s move would make no difference to the probe Comer is planning.

The Kentucky Republican said his panel would probe behavior that he characterized as “President Biden’s mishandling of classified information and the Swamp’s efforts to hide this information from the American people.”

The House earlier this week also voted, along straight party lines, to create a committee focused upon the supposed “weaponization” of the federal government. Republicans could scarcely have imagined they would be given fresh ammunition so quickly. 

Of course, the argument about double standards runs both ways. While Democrats and liberal media allies try to minimize the significance of the document finds pertaining to Biden, Republicans like Jordan have acquired a zeal on the topic that was notably lacking when it came to Trump and the documents discovered at Mar-a-Lago.

Indeed, efforts by the relevant authorities to retrieve documents from the former president’s Florida resort began at least as early as May 2021, were repeatedly frustrated, and culminated in a court-obtained search warrant and an FBI raid roughly 15 months later.

By contrast, the White House has emphasized that the recently-discovered Biden documents were promptly turned over to the National Archives. This has not been seriously disputed, nor has evidence emerged that casts doubt on that vital part of the story.

Still, that doesn’t get Biden out of the woods by any measure.

Over two successive press briefings on Wednesday and Thursday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has come under heavy pressure by reporters to explain more about the timeline of events.

The first batch of documents was discovered Nov. 2 — just six days before the midterm elections, in which Democrats did unexpectedly well. It seems clear that the prompt disclosure of this information would have resulted, at a minimum, in several bad news cycles for the president’s party at a crucial time.

Similarly, Garland’s Thursday statement alluded to a search of other premises following the discovery of the initial batch of documents, which yielded a second batch in the garage of Biden’s Wilmington home by December 20. But, confusingly, the Justice Department was apparently informed only on Thursday morning about an additional, one-page document also uncovered at the Wilmington address.

Biden has kept his comments about the matter sparse, saying that he was surprised that the documents had shown up and that he does not know what exactly they contain.

A Thursday statement from the president’s counsel, Richard Sauber, cast the whole matter as an innocent error, asserting: “We are confident that a thorough review will show that these documents were inadvertently misplaced, and the President and his lawyers acted promptly upon discovery of this mistake.”

Regardless, the president and his party are now at real risk of being bogged down in a damaging story that has no obvious end in sight.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

Source: TEST FEED1

What we know about the Biden documents so far

The White House this week disclosed that lawyers for President Biden found classified documents from his time as vice president in two different locations, creating a political headache and spawning a fresh Justice Department review.

One batch was found last November at Biden’s old University of Pennsylvania office in Washington, D.C., while more documents were found at his home in Wilmington, Del. The Justice Department is investigating the matter.

The White House has said it believes the review will show the documents were inadvertently misplaced.

Here’s what we know about the Biden documents so far.

A ‘small number’ of documents were found at Biden’s old office and home

The first batch of documents were first discovered on Nov. 2, 2022, at a Washington office Biden used when he worked as an honorary professor for the University of Pennsylvania from 2017-2019.

There were reportedly 10 documents there with classified markings mixed in with other personal materials, such as information about Beau Biden’s funeral, which took place in 2015. The documents reportedly contained briefing material about Ukraine, the United Kingdom and Iran.

A second batch of classified documents were found in a storage space in the garage of Biden’s Wilmington, Del., residence on Dec. 20, 2022, and another one-page document was discovered among stored materials in an adjacent room. The search of Biden’s residence was completed on Wednesday.

The White House would not specify how many documents were found, other than to say it was a “small number.”

Biden, speaking to reporters after the White House disclosed the second discovery, said some of the materials were in a “personal library,” while others were in a locked garage.

“By the way, my Corvette is in a locked garage. OK?” Biden said Thursday in response to a questions about where the documents were reportedly stored. “So, it’s not like they’re sitting out in the street.”

The first batch was found in November, spurring a search for other documents

Biden attorneys were cleaning out his old office at the Penn Biden Center last November when they came across the first batch of documents.

While the discovery was made six days before the midterm elections, the White House did not disclose the findings until after they were reported by CBS News earlier this week. 

“Following the discovery of government documents at the Penn Biden Center in November 2022, and coordinating closely with the Department of Justice, the President’s lawyers have searched the President’s Wilmington and Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, residences – the other locations where files from his Vice-Presidential office might have been shipped in the course of the 2017 transition,” Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president, said in a statement.

That review was completed on Wednesday night, the White House said, and a small number of additional documents were found as part of that search.

But Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Department of Justice was alerted on Dec. 20, 2022, of the documents recovered at Biden’s home. One additional document was found this week at the home, he said.

The White House did not disclose the discoveries until they were reported publicly, and they have not offered details about how the documents ended up in Biden’s office and home, prompting questions from reporters about transparency throughout the process.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Thursday said “you should assume” that the review is done, adding that “the search is complete,” in response to questions about whether any other documents might be discovered.

The Justice Department has appointed a special counsel to handle the matter

U.S. Attorney Robert Hur (pictured on Nov. 21, 2019). (AP Photo/Steve Ruark, File)

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday appointed Robert Hur as special counsel to investigate the discovery of classified documents. 

Hur, a Trump appointee who served as the U.S. attorney in Maryland, will return to the department to conduct the investigation. Hur resigned from his post under Trump in early 2021.

Prior to his appointment, he was an assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland and prosecuted gang violence, drug trafficking, firearm offense, and financial crimes. He was also previously a clerk for former Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

The decision to appoint a special counsel followed the announcement of additional classified documents found at Biden’s Wilmington residence. 

The White House was not given a heads up about a special counsel being appointed, Jean-Pierre said on Thursday. Biden was attending a memorial service in Washington when Garland made his announcement.

The Department of Justice in November appointed special counsel Jack Smith to oversee the investigation into former President Trump’s mishandling of records after classified documents were seized by the FBI from his Mar-a-Lago residence.

Biden said he was surprised by the discoveries

President Joe Biden speaks on Jan. 12, 2023, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Biden said that he is unaware of what documents were found at his former office in Washington, adding that he was surprised to learn that such records were kept there. The president said his lawyers suggested he not ask what was in the documents.

The president confirmed the second batch of documents were found in his garage, but he made it clear that the garage was locked by mentioning that his corvette also sits in the Wilmington houses’ garage. 

“As I said earlier this week, people know I take classified documents and classified material seriously,” Biden said Thursday. “I also said we’re cooperating fully and completely with the Justice Department’s review.”

Biden and the White House has emphasized throughout the week that he takes the handling of classified documents seriously and is cooperating with the review of the documents.

“He was surprised that these records have been found, he does not know what’s in them, and when his team identified that these documents were there, they immediately reached out to the Archives and the Department of Justice,” Jean-Pierre said.

Further details about what the documents contain are currently unknown beyond CNN reporting they were briefing materials about the three countries.

White House says it’s cooperating with DOJ and National Archives

The White House has made a point to emphasize its communication with the Department of Justice and the National Archives throughout the process since the first batch of documents were discovered.

Officials said lawyers immediately alerted the National Archives upon finding the classified materials in Biden’s old office in Washington, D.C., and the documents were turned over to the Department of Justice the next day.

In the case of the documents found in Biden’s Wilmington residence, lawyers again immediately notified the Department of Justice and arranged to have the materials turned over.

The White House has “cooperated closely with the Justice Department throughout its review, and we will continue that cooperation with the Special Counsel,” according to a statement from Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president, on Thursday.

Sauber also said that he is confident that the investigation into the discovery of the documents will find that Biden accidentally misplaced them.

“We are confident that a thorough review will show that these documents were inadvertently misplaced, and the President and his lawyers acted promptly upon discovery of this mistake,” he said.

The case is different from the one involving former President Trump

Former President Donald Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago Friday, Nov. 18, 2022 in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

Republicans have been quick to attack Biden over the discovery of classified materials, particularly given Democrats have hammered former President Trump for months over his handling of sensitive government documents after he left the White House.

But while both Biden and Trump may have failed to properly turn classified materials over to the National Archives before leaving office, the cases bear significant differences.

The sheer number of documents is one major difference. In Biden’s case, roughly a dozen documents were discovered at his Washington office, while a “small number” was found at his Delaware home.

Authorities have recovered hundreds of documents from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate over the past year, including more than 150 taken during a search last January that preceded an August FBI search. The Justice Department recovered materials labeled “secret” and “top secret” in the process.

Biden’s team alerted the National Archives and the Department of Justice about the discovery shortly after the documents were found, according to the White House, while officials had requested documents from Trump multiple times before the FBI search was conducted. 

Jean-Pierre said on Thursday that the Biden team alerted the archives and Department of Justice “the minute” that lawyers found them.

To request the documents, officials subpoenaed Trump and eventually issued a warrant to search his Florida home.

Biden’s team has also stressed that it is cooperating with review of the documents to set a distinction between the situation with Trump, whose attorneys are battling DOJ in court.

National security spokesman John Kirby reiterated that Biden takes the handling of classified documents seriously when asked on Thursday if the discovery of these documents sparks any national security concerns.

“As somebody who’s aware of the process myself, [Biden] did exactly the right thing, which is to have them immediately turned over,” Kirby said.

Source: TEST FEED1

McCarthy amplifies vow to keep Schiff, Swalwell off Intel Committee

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Thursday amplified his pledge to keep a pair of high-profile Democrats — Reps. Adam Schiff (Calif.) and Eric Swalwell (Calif.) — from joining the powerful Intelligence Committee in the new Congress. 

Both Schiff and Swalwell played an outsized role in the impeachments of former President Trump, becoming toxic figures among Republicans in the process.

McCarthy has vowed for months to remove them from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, known as HPSCI, in the wake of the Democrats’ move to strip two Republicans — Reps. Marjorie Taylor Green (Ga.) and Paul Gosar (Ariz.) — of their committee assignments in the last Congress.

On Thursday, McCarthy said he’s not backing down. 

“What I am doing with the Intel Committee [is] bringing it back to the jurisdiction it’s supposed to do. Forward-looking to keep this country safe, keep the politics out of it,” McCarthy told reporters in the Capitol. 

“So yes, I’m doing exactly what we’re supposed to do.”

The reasons Republicans are targeting Schiff and Swalwell are unique to each lawmaker. 

For Schiff, the former chairman of the Intelligence Committee, McCarthy has focused on his role in the investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia, accusing Schiff of lying to the public about the depth of that affiliation. 

He’s also accused Schiff, who was the lead manager in Trump’s first impeachment, of exaggerating the central assertion of that case, which charged Trump with leveraging U.S. military aid to pressure Ukrainian leaders to investigate his political adversaries. 

“He put America — for four years — through an impeachment that he knew was a lie,” McCarthy said Thursday.  

In Swalwell’s case, Republicans have highlighted his ties to a suspected Chinese spy who had helped fundraise for Swalwell’s 2014 reelection campaign — an episode that became public only in 2020, when Axios reported it.

“If you got the briefing I got from the FBI, you wouldn’t have Swalwell on any committee,” McCarthy said.

Swalwell, who had cut ties with the Chinese national when informed of her identity by the FBI, said this week that McCarthy’s decision to remove him from HPSCI was “purely vengeance” for Swalwell’s role as a manager in Trump’s second impeachment, which followed the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.  

“I did what I hope every one of my colleagues would do, which was to help the FBI get this person out of the country,” Swalwell said Wednesday in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. “This is only about vengeance, and there’s no substantive reason to remove us.”

Separately, McCarthy is also vowing to remove Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), one of three Muslim lawmakers in Congress, from her spot on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Omar has been highly critical of the Israeli government and its supporters, particularly on issues related to Palestinian rights, leading to charges of antisemitism. In one 2019 episode, Omar was forced to apologize after suggesting wealthy Jews are buying congressional support for Israel. 

McCarthy did not mention Omar on Thursday, but told the GOP conference earlier in the week that he would follow through on his pledge to block all three Democrats — Omar, Schiff and Swalwell — from their top committees, according to lawmakers in the meeting. 

“Speaker McCarthy confirms that Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, and Ilhan Omar are getting kicked off the Intel and Foreign Affairs Committees,” Rep. Troy Nehls, a Texas Republican, tweeted Tuesday after the closed-door gathering. 

“Promises made. Promises kept!”

The process for removing a lawmaker from a standing committee like Foreign Affairs is different than for kicking representatives off HPSCI, which is a select committee.

McCarthy, as House Speaker, has the power to reject Schiff and Swalwell unilaterally. By contrast, Republicans would have to bring a resolution removing Omar to the House floor, as Democrats did with Greene and Gosar in 2021.

As the parties clash over the legitimacy of stripping committees from the three targeted Democrats, it’s unclear if McCarthy will even be confronted with that option in the case of Schiff and Swalwell. That’s because Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the new Democratic leader, has not yet indicated whether he will seat those two on the Intelligence panel in the new Congress. 

HPSCI has term limits on its members, and Swalwell is at the end of the four-cycle cap, leading to questions of whether Jeffries would supply a waiver to try to keep him aboard. Schiff, as the top Democrat on the panel, is exempt from those limits. 

Jeffries has begun the process of naming Democrats to the various committees, including the Ethics panel, which revealed its roster on Tuesday. But he has not revealed the Democrats he’s putting forward for the Intelligence panel. 

Jeffries’s office did not respond on Thursday to a request for comment.

Meanwhile, other members of the Intelligence Committee are itching to get seated — and secure their security clearances — so they can get to work in the new Congress.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), who is seeking to replace Schiff as Intel’s top Democrat if Schiff falls off the committee, said Thursday that members of the panel are eager to regain access to their classified briefings, not least because of the recent news that President Biden was found to be in private possession of confidential documents.  

“It’s a sensitive moment not to have, you know — you can’t get briefed on whatever the Biden classified documents are, [and] from a party standpoint, you don’t have a very clear spokesman on the issue,” Himes said. 

“So I’m hoping it’s soon.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Timeline of Biden classified document discoveries

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday provided the most detailed timeline yet of the Justice Department’s investigation into the discoveries of classified documents at President Biden’s home and office following his vice presidency.

Garland at a news conference announced he appointed Robert Hur, a former Trump-appointed U.S. attorney, as special counsel to lead the investigation. The announcement came after the Justice Department began looking into a discovery of documents bearing classified markings roughly two months ago. Biden’s team has since made two additional discoveries of classified documents.

The discoveries drew comparisons to the FBI’s search of former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in August, when investigators seized classified documents as part of a broader probe into the potential mishandling of the materials. Garland announced a separate special counsel in that investigation once Trump formally announced his 2024 presidential campaign.

Days prior to that appointment, Garland said a Justice Department prosecutor first learned about Biden’s classified documents on the evening of Nov. 4 from the National Archives’s Office of the Inspector General.

Garland said the Archives informed the prosecutor that the White House had notified the Archives that they found documents bearing classification markings at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, which is located in Washington, D.C.

“That office was not authorized for storage of classified documents,” Garland said, adding that the documents were subsequently secured in an Archives facility.

Biden acknowledged the documents’ existence at the office after it was first reported by CBS News, but the president suggested he was previously unaware of their presence.

“I was briefed about this discovery and surprised to learn that there were any government records that were taken there to that office,” Biden said on Tuesday. “But I don’t know what’s in the documents. My lawyers have not suggested I ask what documents they were.”

Garland said the FBI commenced an assessment on Nov. 9, one day after the midterm elections, to determine whether classified information had been mishandled in violation of federal law. 

Then, on Nov. 14, Garland appointed U.S. Attorney John Lausch to conduct an initial investigation to inform whether Garland should appoint a special counsel in the Biden case. A special counsel has more autonomy to conduct investigations than a regular federal attorney.

“I selected him to conduct the initial investigation because I was confident his experience would ensure that it would be done professionally and expeditiously,” Garland said of Lausch, who stood behind Garland at Thursday’s briefing.

As Lausch proceeded with his investigation, Biden’s personal counsel on Dec. 20 informed Lausch that additional documents with classification markings were found in the garage of Biden’s Wilmington, Del., residence, Garland said.

He indicated those documents were found among other records related to Biden’s tenure as vice president, and the FBI later secured the classified documents.

Garland also on Thursday revealed Lausch ended his initial investigation one week ago and concluded a special counsel appointment was warranted.

Federal regulations provide that the attorney general should appoint a special counsel when an investigation presents a conflict of interest, and if it is in the public interest for a special counsel to take charge of the investigation.

Garland indicated that Justice Department officials subsequently proceeded to identify a special counsel and ultimately landed on Hur, who Trump nominated in 2017 to serve as U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland. The Senate confirmed him by voice vote.

Garland said he signed the order appointing Hur earlier on Thursday, authorizing him to investigate whether any person or entity violated the law in connection with the matter of Biden’s classified documents.

Also on Thursday, Garland said Biden’s personal counsel called Lausch to inform him that an additional document bearing a classification marking was found at Biden’s Wilmington residence.

“We are confident that a thorough review will show that these documents were inadvertently misplaced, and the President and his lawyers acted promptly upon discovery of this mistake,” Richard Sauber, Biden’s special counsel, said after Garland’s news conference.

Updated at 2:40 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Childhood vaccination rates fall again, alarming experts, CDC

The percentage of kindergarten students who have not received routine childhood vaccination rose again during the 2021-2022 school year, federal health officials said Thursday, as the lingering COVID-19 pandemic disrupted efforts to get kids vaccinated.

Overall vaccination rates among kindergartners remain high, but coverage has dropped 2 percentage points from 95 percent in the pre-pandemic 2019-2020 school year to 93 percent in 2021-2022, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“While this might not sound significant, it means nearly 250,000 kindergarteners are potentially not protected against measles alone,” said Georgina Peacock, director of the CDC’s Immunization Services Division.

Coverage for the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine during both the 2020–21 and 2021– 22 school years was the lowest in a decade. CDC recommends children get two doses of MMR vaccine, with the first dose at 12 to 15 months, and the second between 4 and 6 years old.

But there were declines in other routine childhood vaccines as well, such as diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTaP), polio and chickenpox.

“This is alarming and should be a call to action to all of us,” Sean O’Leary, the chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics’s Committee on Infectious Diseases, told reporters Thursday

All states and the District of Columbia require children to be vaccinated against certain diseases, including measles and rubella, in order to attend public schools, though exemptions are allowed in certain circumstances, including for religious or philosophical purposes.

The CDC survey found that although 2.6 percent of kindergartners had an exemption for at least one vaccine, almost 4 percent of students who did not have an exemption were not up to date with their MMR shots.

The decline in childhood vaccine coverage comes on the heels of heated partisan fights over COVID-19 vaccine mandates and a distrust of public health authorities, continuing a trend that’d disturbed health experts and officials.

Pockets of undervaccinated children within larger areas of high vaccination coverage can lead to outbreaks, CDC said. There have been cases of polio reported in New York, and a measles outbreak primarily among unvaccinated children sickened more than 80 kids in Ohio in December, sending 30 of them to the hospital.

According to the CDC, the trend of declining vaccinations is at least partly due to pandemic-related disruptions. Parents missed or skipped visits to the pediatrician and are still trying to catch up.

There were also disparity issues. According to a second CDC report released Thursday, children who are poor, who live in rural areas, who lack health insurance or who are Black or Hispanic are more likely to be unvaccinated by the time they are 2 years old.

The proportion of unvaccinated children was 8 times higher among uninsured kids than kids with private insurance, CDC found.

O’Leary noted that the vast majority of parents are still vaccinating their children. But the controversy and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine has also spilled over to routine childhood shots.

For example, a Kaiser Family Foundation survey last month found 35 percent of parents of children under age 18 oppose school vaccine requirements, up from 23 percent in 2019.

“We have seen some hesitancy in vaccines during the pandemic related mostly, I think to the COVID vaccine. This could in some cases have translated over to routine vaccinations and that’s something that we’re watching very closely,” the CDC’s Peacock said.

“What we know though is that the way to impact that is for families to have conversations with their trusted doctors, health care providers, about the importance of vaccination.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Who is Robert Hur, the special counsel investigating Biden's classified documents?

Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the appointment of Robert Hur as the special counsel that will investigate the discovery of classified materials that may have been mishandled following President Biden’s time as vice president.

Who is Robert Hur?

Hur, a Harvard and Stanford graduate, was nominated in 2017 by then-President Trump to serve as U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland and confirmed the following year, making him the chief federal law enforcement officer in the state. He resigned from the post in early 2021. 

Before the appointment, Hur, 50, was an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland. He prosecuted gang violence, drug trafficking and firearm offenses, as well as financial crimes. 

His history in federal law enforcement extends to his time as a special assistant and counsel for then-Assistant Attorney General Christopher Wray, who was in charge of the Justice Department’s criminal division.

He was also a clerk for former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

His private sector experience includes working as a partner in the Washington office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

‘Extraordinary circumstances’

Garland made the announcement after a second batch of classified documents was found in the garage of Biden’s Wilmington, Del., residence.

“The extraordinary circumstances here require the appointment of a special counsel for this matter,” Garland said.

“This appointment underscores for the public the department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters.”

Classified documents were first discovered in early November at an office Biden used after the Obama administration, with Biden attorneys notifying the National Archives and the Justice Department of the matter on Nov. 4.

“As the President said, he takes classified information and materials seriously, and as we have said, we have cooperated from the moment we informed the Archives that a small number of documents were found, and we will continue to cooperate. We have cooperated closely with the Justice Department throughout its review, and we will continue that cooperation with the Special Counsel,” Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president, said in a statement. 

“We are confident that a thorough review will show that these documents were inadvertently misplaced, and the President and his lawyers acted promptly upon discovery of this mistake.” 

The Justice Department has also appointed a special counsel to oversee the investigation into Trump’s mishandling of records after some 300 records bearing classified markings were discovered at his Mar-a-Lago residence. 

Updated at 2:24 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1