Ambassador Philip Reeker is expected to appear in closed session before three Democrat-led House committees conducting an impeachment investigation into President Trump on Saturday, a congressional source told Fox News.
Acting Assistant Secretary of State Philip Reeker is expected to appear in a closed session Saturday.
(State Department)
Reeker’s testimony was
originally scheduled for Thursday but members did not want to question
the witness during a ceremony where the late Rep. Elijah Cummings,
D-Md., will lie in state at the Capitol. Cummings’ funeral will be in
Baltimore on Friday.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who is the
top-ranking Republican on the House Oversight Committee, wrote a letter
to Reeker, the acting assistant secretary of state, demanding that the
deposition be rescheduled to a business day to allow more GOP lawmakers
to attend.
Jordan called on Reeker to explain the reasoning
behind the rare Saturday deposition. He said he regrettably had to ask
Reeker directly for the information because he has "no confidence" that
Rep. Adam Schiff, as the leader of the impeachment inquiry, is
"operating fairly or in good faith."
Former
Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Charles
Kupperman is expected to appear in a closed session on Monday
and Timothy Morrison, a special assistant to the president, is expected
to appear in a closed session next Thursday. The Committees are in
ongoing discussions with other witnesses. Fox News’ Chad Pergram contributed to this report.
Laura Ingraham made the case for yet another Hillary Clinton presidential run Wednesday saying the Democratic field has proven its weakness and that she might be a "stronger candidate."
"Just
a few months ago, I dismissed the idea of Hillary 2.0 kind of out of
hand. She wouldn't be that arrogant and ungracious toward the current
field. No way," Ingraham said on "The Ingraham Angle." But then the weakness of the Democrats sleep surprised even me. Nothing's working."
Clinton
in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020
presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times
reported Tuesday.
Ingraham spoke of the weakness among the Democratic frontrunners, in particular former Vice President Joe Biden.
"The
walking, talking gaffe-a-matic machine known as Joe Biden may have
dropped in the polls for a few weeks, but now he's back on top. And what
seems to be the grudging recognition that the other top candidates,
Warren and Sanders, are just not going to cut it in key battleground
states where common sense still means something," Ingraham said. "I
mean, who doesn't think that Hillary is a stronger candidate than that
goofball Biden."
The host made the case for why Clinton may be a possibility.
"She
has instant name recognition, a massive fundraising apparatus that
could be reactivated, and her old campaign team would quickly
reconstitute," Ingraham said.
Ingraham laid out what could be pushing Clinton to run and what could also be stopping her.
"A
combination of Hillary's pride, her desire for revenge, a weak
Democratic field and a consultancy class that can sell sand in the
desert may be pointing us toward another Trump-Clinton face off,"
Ingraham said. "Of course, Hillary is smart enough to know that the only
thing worse than losing once to Donald Trump would be losing twice to
him. And that, too, is a distinct possibility."
Just hours after dozens of House Republicans stormed a closed-door deposition in a secure area and
disrupted Democrats' impeachment inquiry, House Oversight Committee
ranking member Jim Jordan kept the pressure on Democrats by pushing for
more transparency -- including public testimony from the whistleblower
at the center of the probe.
In an initial letter to
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff on Wednesday, Jordan
-- joined by House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes and
Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Michael McCaul -- called for
the whistleblower to come out of hiding, so that his or her "sources and
credibility" can be "fully assessed."
The committee chairs noted
that Schiff had previously promised that the whistleblower would provide
"unfiltered" testimony "very soon" concerning an Aug. 12 complaint.
But, the Republicans charged, Schiff abruptly "reversed course" after reports of the whistleblower's potential political bias emerged, along with evidence that Democratic congressional committee staff had spoken to the whistleblower before the complaint was filed.
The
Republicans asserted that evidence has also emerged that "contradicts"
the claims in the whistleblower's initial complaint, including that the
Ukrainian president has said he felt no "pressure" during a July call
with President Trump to investigate 2020 Dem front-runner Joe Biden, his
son Hunter and Biden business interests in Ukraine.
Multiple apparent inconsistencies
in the whistleblower's complaint, including the whistleblower's
erroneous claim that Trump had asked Ukrainians to hand over a
server, have previously prompted Republicans to demand more information
on the person's sources.
The lawmakers further demanded testimony
from any sources the whistleblower relied upon to draft the complaint,
which contained only secondhand information.
The Republicans emphasized that they lack co-equal subpoena power with majority Democrats -- a key one-sided limitation that the White House has cited in explaining why it will not cooperate with the Democrats' probe.
House
Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., claimed that Schiff "fled with
the testifying witness" when roughly 50 Republicans, including several
not on one of those three committees, went "face-to-face and demand
access to ongoing impeachment proceedings."
Some Republicans asked
to be arrested by Capitol police officers, Fox News has learned, hoping
that it would help them make their case that Democrats are abusing the
impeachment process.
The whistleblower has acknowledged to
the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) that bias against
Trump might be alleged against him or her for a third, previously
unreported reason, sources familiar with the ICIG investigation told Fox News on Wednesday.
Fox News has previously reported the whistleblower is a registered Democrat and had a prior work history with a senior Democrat.
Though Fox News has learned that an additional element of possible
bias was identified by the whistleblower, its nature remains unclear.
Separately, Fox News has obtained a letter from Jordan to Acting Assistant Secretary of State Philip Reeker, who
was slated to come to Capitol Hill on Wednesday for a deposition. Fox
News reported Monday night that the deposition was rescheduled for
Saturday, when the House would not be in session, ostensibly because
House members did not want to conduct interviews during the ceremony
Thursday in which the late Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., who'd headed the
House Oversight committee, will lie in state at the Capitol before his
funeral in Baltimore on Friday.
In the letter, Jordan
asserted that many members won't be able to attend the unusual Saturday
session, and pushed Reeker to explain why the deposition was moved.
Jordan asked Reeker “to testify on a business day to allow robust member
attendance and participation," and suggested Schiff was hoping to
continue to shroud the impeachment proceedings in unhealthy secrecy.
Jordan
said he regrettably had to ask Reeker directly for the information,
because he had he has "no confidence" that Schiff, as the leader of the
impeachment inquiry, is "operating fairly or in good faith."
Jordan
also asked Reeker about his "announced participation in a panel
discussion sponsored by the Atlantic Council," which in 2018 received
between $100,000 and $249,000 from Burisma -- the Ukraine natural gas
company where Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, obtained a lucrative role
despite not having any relevant expertise. The Atlantic Council, Jordan
noted, recently removed Reeker's name as a panelist at the event.
Specifically,
Jordan asked Reeker why he was removed as a panelist, and who proposed
rescheduling his testimony -- and why they picked a Saturday. Fox News' Chad Pergram and Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.
A federal court on Tuesday blocked new rules established by the Trump administration that would have allowed employers with religious or moral objections to opt out of an Obamacare requirement that includes birth control coverage in employee health insurance plans.
Two
out of the three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th
Circuit concluded that a birth control exemption violated the Affordable
Care Act’s contraception mandate, which requires all employers to
provide birth control coverage with no co-payment.
The
Health and Human Services Department, Labor Department, and Treasury
Department in 2017, started adopting new rules that allowed religious
groups, including the Little Sisters of the Poor, to opt out of the
requirement to provide birth control coverage for employees, the National Review reported. The rules were finalized in 2018 but have not been enforced.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra spearheaded a lawsuit with 13 other states against the religious exemption rules.
“It’s
a simple concept: a woman and her doctor are the only people qualified
to decide what’s best for her health. Today will serve as a reminder to
the Trump Administration that politicians and employers certainly have
no business interfering with women’s reproductive healthcare,” Becerra
said in a statement, according to the Washington Times.
Tuesday's
decision blocked the new rules from going into effect in California,
Delaware, Virginia, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Washington, Minnesota,
Connecticut, North Carolina, Vermont, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and the
District of Columbia, Bloomberg Law News reported.
Judge
J. Clifford Wallace, who was nominated by President Nixon, wrote in the
majority decision that “the religious exemption contradicts
congressional intent that all women have access to appropriate
preventative care and the exemption operates in a manner fully at odds
with the careful, individualized, and searching review mandated by the
Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”
Judge
Andrew J. Kleinfeld, who was nominated by President George H. W.
Bush, dissented, writing that the 14-state lawsuit was brought before
the court in an effort to save states money, not to protect
women's reproductive rights. He also wrote that a ruling in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which blocked the implementation
of the Trump administration rules nationwide, renders this case moot.
“The
casual reader may imagine that the dispute is about provision of
contraception and abortion services to women. It is not.” Kleinfeld
wrote. “No woman sued for an injunction in this case, and no affidavits
have been submitted from any women establishing any question in this
case about whether they will be deprived of reproductive services or
harmed in any way by the modification of the regulation. This case is a
claim by several states to prevent a modification of a regulation from
going into effect, claiming that it will cost them money.”
Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.
But
those Democrats already running said Clinton is doing more harm than
good for the party by taking aim at Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, in
recent remarks.
Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times
reported Tuesday. The story, titled “Anxious Democratic Establishment
Asks, ‘Is There Anybody Else?’,” said about a half-dozen Democratic
donors gathered in New York City questioned whether former front-runner
Joe Biden could stand strong against Trump, citing Biden’s lackluster
debate performance in Ohio last week.
hey also raised concerns
about Biden's fundraising struggles and his need to defend his family’s
business dealings in Ukraine amid the ongoing Trump impeachment inquiry.
They also said Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were likely too liberal to win the general election.
Meanwhile, The Washington Post,
citing unnamed sources, reported that Clinton was considering a 2020
rematch against Trump after the State Department concluded this week
there was "no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of
classified information" regarding Clinton's use of a private email
server while serving as secretary of state.
The same State
Department report, however, dozens of individuals were at fault for
mishandling classified information and found hundreds of security
violations during her 2009-2013 tenure.
Clinton,
the first woman to win a major party presidential nomination — and the
national popular vote leader with almost 3 million more votes than Trump
— remains a popular figure in her party, even after enduring criticism
for losing key Midwestern states in 2016. For Republicans, she's
perennial target -- currently in the Mississippi governor's race, where
Democratic nominee Jim Hood, a longtime attorney general, is being
attacked for acknowledging he voted for her over Trump.
Clinton’s supporters within the Democratic establishment have also passed around an op-ed published earlier this month in the San Francisco Chronicle by former Mayor Willie Brown titled: “Who should run against Trump? How about Hillary Clinton?” the Washington Post reported.
Both
the Post and the Times reported that Clinton was not the only possible
last-minute candidate on Democrats’ minds. Also being considered
were: former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Disney chief executive
Bob Iger, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and former first lady Michelle
Obama. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Former Vice President Joe Biden
offered an apology late on Tuesday for previously referring to the
Clinton impeachment as a "partisan lynching" just hours after he
condemned President Trump for referring to his own impeachment with the same term.
Trump
was widely criticized for claiming on Twitter that Republicans are
witnessing a "lynching." Several 2020 Democrats piled on the president,
including the 2020 frontrunner.
"Impeachment is not 'lynching,' it
is part of our Constitution," Biden reacted. "Our country has a dark,
shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this
comparison is abhorrent. It's despicable."
However, CNN unearthed an interview Biden did on the network in 1998, where he used the term he blasted Trump for.
"Even
if the president should be impeached, history will question whether or
not this was a partisan lynching or whether or not it was something that
in fact met the standard," then-Sen. Biden told CNN's Wolf Blitzer,
"the very high bar that was set by the founders as to what constituted
an impeachable offense."
As his unearthed remarks went viral,
Biden offered an apology... but continued to hammer Trump by insisting
he "chose his words deliberately."
"This wasn’t the right word to
use and I’m sorry about that," Biden tweeted. "Trump on the other
hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching
and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily."
Biden was one of several Democratic lawmakers
who used the term "lynching" in the past, including now-Judiciary
Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y, and Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., on Tuesday said a fellow Republican lawmaker deconstructed a key part of the latest Trump impeachment inquiry witness testimony in Tuesday's closed-door session.
"In 90 seconds, we had John Ratcliffe destroy Taylor's whole argument," McCarthy said.
The questioning by Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican and member of both the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, was an important moment in the hearing, McCarthy claimed.
"We can't really talk about it," he said.
Ratcliffe
appeared on Fox News after the testimony and said there were new
details brought to light, but said nothing "worthy of impeachment."
McCarthy added House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is not allowing lawmakers to speak too specifically about the proceedings, in an interview Tuesday on "The Ingraham Angle."
"Adam
Schiff won't let us talk about what happened," he said regarding U.S.
diplomat to Ukraine Bill Taylor's closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill.
"There is no quid pro quo."
The
California lawmaker also claimed the impeachment inquiry process
continues to be based largely on testimony from those without first-hand
knowledge of the Trump-Ukraine situation.
"The
one thing that you find out in this process is all this information
is just like that whistleblower... everything is second-, third-,
and fourth-hand information," he said.
He criticized Schiff for
how he is conducting the proceedings, claiming the relevant Republican
lawmakers are unable to view information from the hearings unless they
are accompanied by the chairman's staff members.
"What they are doing [is] they are changing every rule we ever had," he said.
A new report has alleged that Hunter Biden received tens of thousands
of dollars over a year and a half period from Ukrainian energy company
Burisma Holdings. Biden reportedly used his position at the company to
defer $3.4 million to a company run by his business associate Devon
Archer.
Between April 2014 and November 2015, Biden and Archer were each paid
$83,000 monthly for “consulting services” between the two firms. The
report went on to claim Burisma’s founder hired Biden to protect the
company from persecution.
This comes after a former State Department official told Congress
this week he raised concerns about Biden’s business dealings in the
past. George Kent said he warned White House officials in 2015 about how
Hunter Biden’s position could look like a conflict of interest. Vice
President Joe Biden was overseeing cancer treatments for his son Beau at
the time and Kent’s warning fell by the wayside.
President Trump responded to Kent’s testimony on Friday.
“They brought (Kent) him in as a witness against me…and he
excoriated, from what they reported on the news,” said the president.
“He excoriated the Obama administration…, saying that has tremendous
problems with Joe Biden’s son and the Ukraine.”
Hunter Biden has since admitted that his decision to be a part of
Burisma while his father was in office was “poor judgement.” Going into
the 2020 election season, both Bidens have sworn to avoid further
business dealings and associations with foreign firms. They both deny
allegations of any wrongdoing.
Acting Assistant Secretary of State Philip Reeker is expected to appear in a closed session Saturday.
(State Department)
