Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is in the political spotlight as Democrats and critics attack him for releasing a lightly-redacted document detailing unfounded allegations of Biden family corruption and bribery and conservatives praise his move in the name of transparency.
The eight-term senator has had a storied career, particularly on investigative matters, where he has long been considered a champion of whistleblower protections.
But critics say his decision late last week to release the tip to the FBI, memorialized in an FD-1023 form, put a chink in that armor. The FBI admonished Grassley and other senators for releasing the form, saying it “risks the safety” of the confidential source, who claims the Bidens “pushed” a Ukrainian oligarch to pay them $10 million.
“I would never have advised him to do that,” said Kris Kolesnik, who spent 19 years as Grassley's senior counselor and director of investigations but has come out as a critic against his work in recent years.
“This is like a new guy,” Kolesnik continued, noting that Grassley, 89, spearheaded the oversight efforts against the Reagan administration. “We left him quite an oversight legacy, and he's put all that in jeopardy. Between back then and now, it's like night and day.”
According to the form released by Grassley and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), the FBI’s informant — known as a CHS, or confidential human source — met in 2016 with Mykola Zlochevsky, the CEO of Ukrainian energy company Burisma, who claimed that he made a pair of $5 million payments to the Bidens. He did not specify who was on the receiving end of those alleged bribes.
The form relays information on the conversation to an FBI agent but does not assess the veracity of the tip.
The informant also claimed that Zlochevsky has 17 audiotapes, including two with then-Vice President Biden and the remaining 15 with Hunter Biden, though a number of Republicans have questioned whether they even exist.
There has not been any evidence linking President Biden to the payments or Hunter Biden’s foreign work, and the White House has strongly denied any improper action.
Grassley said on Thursday that the move was made for the sake of transparency and that Americans “can now read this document for themselves, without the filter of politicians or bureaucrats.” His office added that it was obtained via legal avenues and downplayed claims by the FBI that the safety of the CHS could be at risk.
But that has in no way calmed the waters as Democrats increase their attacks over what they view as unsubstantiated claims that were already dismissed in full by the Trump administration.
Democratic staff on the House Oversight Committee wrote in a memo to House Democrats on Monday that Grassley and Comer’s actions were “in brazen disregard” of the safety of FBI sources and “the integrity of its investigations.”
“Contrary to Republican messaging, the form provides no new or additional support for their corruption allegations against the President or Hunter Biden,” the memo says. “Instead, its release merely seeks to breathe new life into years-old conspiracy theories, initially peddled by Rudy Giuliani, that have been thoroughly debunked.”
Grassley’s work pertaining to whistleblower protections has long legs that extend well into that universe today. Empower Oversight, an organization of lawyers that includes a number of former Grassley investigatory staffers, has become a key group on this front as it helps whistleblowers navigate the treacherous waters to legally report information to Congress lawfully.
However, his recent work has come under the microscope as it has become increasingly politicized.
“He is transgressing all of the oversight principles we learned back in the day, the No. 1 principle of which is ‘Stay the hell away from politics,’” Kolesnik said. “And he’s broken that repeatedly.”
In a statement, a spokesperson for the senator took issue with Kolesnik’s claims and said that Grassley “calls the shots on his investigation” and that “anyone who’s ever worked for” him would know this.
“He maintains an impeccable reputation for shining a light on facts that the bureaucracy would prefer to keep hidden,” said Taylor Foy, a Grassley spokesman. “Grassley’s Biden investigation stems from government employees who are concerned that politics has infected the nation’s premier law enforcement agencies. Ignoring these claims would be a failure of Sen. Grassley’s constitutional oversight responsibility.”
“Shying away from legitimate oversight because of fear of the political implications, as Mr. Kolesnik suggests, is exactly the type of cowardice that results in a runaway, unaccountable bureaucracy,” Foy continued. “That’s no legacy anyone who values oversight should pursue, and Mr. Kolesnik should know better.”
Supporters of the longtime Iowa senator also maintain that he did nothing nefarious by releasing the document. They say that his track record should speak for itself and that if he is harping on a subject, there’s a good reason.
“People willing to analyze his oversight history know that when he says something, you should pay attention because he's not one to shoot from the hip,” said Michael Zona, a former Grassley staffer and a GOP strategist, adding that the senator “usually knows a lot more than what he says.”
“Pay attention to what he's saying or doing because he's probably ahead of the curve,” Zona added.
Politically, Grassley is under little pressure to deviate from his current investigatory course. He won his eighth term last fall by a 12-point margin over Democrat Mike Franken.
Republicans in his home state believe that his legacy is secure no matter what comes of the current push into the finances and actions of the Biden family. They also say that news of the document did not make much of a dent with Iowans in recent days as their focus is on the ongoing special legislative session on abortion in Des Moines and the parade of 2024 Republican presidential candidates to all corners of the state.
"To me, I read this and I'm like, ‘This is classic Chuck Grassley,’” said Craig Robinson, a longtime Iowa-based GOP political strategist. “This is what he does. I don't view any of this as him being hyper partisan in any way. This is on message for who he's been as a United States senator for decades.”
Kevin McCarthy edged back from the brink of an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden on Tuesday, less than a day after suggesting his party was close to announcing one.
The speaker set off a Washington kerfuffle Monday night when he told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he believed the House GOP’s investigations into Hunter Biden’s business dealings were “rising to the level of [an] impeachment inquiry,” presumably into his father.
But during lengthy Tuesday question-and-answer sessions with reporters, McCarthy said his televised remarks were not meant as an announcement of any new steps. Instead, the California Republican clarified that the myriad of allegations he is seeing from Republicans’ investigations “could” eventually merit an impeachment inquiry.
“I wasn't announcing it,” McCarthy said of his Fox News comments. “I simply said that the actions that I’m seeing by this administration — withholding the agencies from being able to work with us, that would rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry.”
“We … still have a number of investigations going forward now. The committees are working in good faith. They’re finding new information all the time,” McCarthy added.
He later took to Twitter with a similar dialing back of the tone he took on Fox, writing: “If evidence continues to rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry, House Republicans will act.”
The speaker’s pullback comes as Republicans face fierce pressure from their right flank to impeach Biden or a Cabinet official — a high bar that would require near-total GOP unity, given their five-seat majority. A swath of McCarthy’s conference remains skeptical of any impeachment effort at the moment, underscoring the hurdle that conservative backers face despite GOP control of the House.
McCarthy said on Tuesday that he has no timeline for when House Republicans might make a call on whether or not to vote to formalize an impeachment inquiry, which he has described as a step that would give Republicans more investigative tools. Even if Republicans voted to take that step, they would still need to decide whether to hold an impeachment vote in committee, before taking the matter to the House floor.
Asked how long Biden’s Cabinet departments have to indicate whether they will cooperate with GOP investigations, McCarthy also declined to give a firm timeline. “Committees are currently bringing people in for interviews,” he noted.
“We’ve got a number of people coming in,” McCarthy said. “They could come … forward with all the information these committees are requesting, and we wouldn’t have to rise to [that].”
McCarthy, in his Fox News interview, stopped short of explicitly saying he would move to formalize an inquiry against Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland or any other administration official.
In addition, he broadly discussed the different threads the House GOP is investigating. Those topics include payments that Biden’s family members received from foreign companies, though Republicans have failed to provide evidence that links the president to those payments; IRS whistleblowers who allege the Justice Department hampered the federal probe of Hunter Biden; and an uncorroborated FBI document that links the president to bribery allegations involving the First Son.
Citing that variety of activity, McCarthy argued Monday night that the Republican investigations are building in the direction of what would be a historic impeachment inquiry. While he has previously opened the door to a potential impeachment inquiry into Garland if Republicans could prove he had lied, those remarks amounted to his strongest statement yet on a Biden impeachment.
Republicans last month punted an impeachment resolution from Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) back to committees for further work.
In the weeks since then, however, Republicans have pushed to escalate their investigation into President Biden, Hunter Biden and the years-long federal investigation of the First Son. The two IRS whistleblowers who allege federal intervention into the Hunter Biden probe testified last week, and negotiations are underway for a follow-up hearing with David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in charge of that probe.
But McCarthy’s remarks fueled new impeachment chatter from some of its most ardent conservative backers on Tuesday — marking a potential headache of the California Republican's own making.
"As we've continued to amass evidence and information, I certainly think, bare minimum, we should be doing an impeachment inquiry,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) told reporters on Tuesday.
Both Garland and Weiss have denied the whistleblower claims that the DOJ meddled in the Hunter Biden probe. DOJ has offered to have Weiss testify on the Hill after the August recess in late September or mid-October. Garland is already scheduled to testify before the House in late September as part of a routine oversight hearing.
“The only way we can investigate that is through an impeachment inquiry so that the committee would have the power to get all the documents,” McCarthy said. “What I said last night, and … I said it before, the more this continues to unravel it reaches to the level of impeachment inquiry.”
Sarah Ferris contributed to this report.
The GOP-led House Judiciary Committee is moving forward with plans to consider recommending that the House hold Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg in contempt of Congress.
GOP members of the panel have accused Meta of not cooperating with its investigation into the company’s content moderation practices.
The committee announced Tuesday that it is slated to consider its report recommending Congress hold Zuckerberg for contempt during a Thursday session.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) launched an investigation in February into how tech companies communicate with the federal government. The vote Thursday comes after a series of hearings on the same topic from the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
A spokesperson for Meta said Tuesday that the company has sent more than 53,000 documents to the committee, a slight uptick from the more than 50,000 documents the company said it shared as of Monday.
"For many months, Meta has operated in good faith with this committee’s sweeping requests for information,” the Meta spokesperson said in a statement to The Hill. “We began sharing documents before the committee’s February subpoena and have continued to do so.”
“To date we have delivered over 53,000 pages of documents — both internal and external — and have made nearly a dozen current and former employees available to discuss external and internal matters, including some scheduled this very week,” the spokesperson said. “Meta will continue to comply, as we have thus far, with good faith requests from the committee."
Jordan subpoenaed executives from Meta, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft about their communications with the federal government starting in February. Since then, the weaponization subcommittee has held numerous hearings about the subject.
House Freedom Caucus members on Tuesday appeared eager for Speaker Kevin McCarthy to make good on his recent veiled impeachment threat against President Biden, and one member of the conservative group of GOP members said the leader’s words marked a "paradigm shift."
"When he does speak to … impeachment, it carries a tremendous amount of weight. And that's why I think the ground shifted on that a little bit when he opened up the door," Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., said after a Freedom Caucus press conference on Tuesday. "I don't think there's any question that him speaking to that has caused a paradigm shift."
After a series of hearings and briefings on alleged misconduct by Biden and his family, McCarthy said on Fox News's "Hannity" Monday night, "This is rising to the level of impeachment inquiry, which provides Congress the strongest power to get the rest of the knowledge and information needed."
It’s the most direct comment yet the speaker has made about impeaching Biden, something the hardliners in his conference have been clamoring for since the House GOP took the majority this year.
IRS WHISTLEBLOWER: 'INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY' NEEDED IN HUNTER BIDEN DELAWARE CASE
Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., suggested there would be "an uprising" against Biden if the House did not move forward with trying to remove him.
"Look, the evidence is mounting against this guy. Look at what he’s done," Norman said. "What Donald Trump’s done with papers pales in comparison."
JORDAN ROASTS DEMS AFTER RFK JR HEARING: PARTY TURNED AGAINST ITS MOST FAMOUS NAME
Norman said there was a "difference of opinion" on whether to take such a severe step but dismissed the idea of risking an impeachment vote that fails.
"Some people think that what he’s done isn’t that bad. A lot of us in general — the public, it’s gonna be an uprising against this guy, I think, at the end of the day."
It's not just Biden that Republicans are looking to target. GOP members have called for impeachment proceedings against some of the president’s top Cabinet officials, including Attorney General Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Norman answered "all of the above" during the press conference when asked about which Biden official should be impeached first.
Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., said Mayorkas would be the "low hanging fruit" to initially consider. "But with the evidence that we've induced in the Oversight Committee and Judiciary Committee with regard to the Biden — I would call it from the crime syndicate, I don't know what else you can call it — the corruption that's there," he said.
"That would certainly be a very interesting and perhaps even necessary step," he said. "I’ll just tell you that the evidence I’ve seen is overwhelming, and it would lead one to believe our president, our sitting president, is corrupted and compromised."
At one point Norman took a jab at Vice President Kamala Harris that earned some nervous laughter by saying, "I realize the replacement for Joe Biden is probably giggling somewhere now, so she’s not an alternative."
Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment but did not immediately hear back.
The Senate Finance Committee announced Tuesday that it is conducting an investigation into billionaire and Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black’s financial ties with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The investigation’s findings allegedly include a “transaction Epstein devised to help Black avoid more than $1 billion in federal taxes raises.” The probe originally began as “part of a broader review of the means by which the ultra-wealthy avoid or evade federal taxes,” according to a statement from the panel.
“The committee’s investigation began in June 2022 and was prompted by inconsistencies in a report by the law firm Dechert LLP that Apollo’s board of directors commissioned to examine Black’s ties to Epstein,” the statement read. “The Dechert report found Black paid Epstein, who was neither a licensed tax attorney nor a certified public accountant, a total of $158 million in several installments between 2012 and 2017.”
According to the committee, Black, the former chairman and CEO of Apollo, has "refused to answer questions or provide any documents that could demonstrate how Epstein’s compensation for tax and estate planning services was determined or justified."
"Unfortunately, the inadequate responses you have provided the Committee only raise more questions than answers, and fail to address a number of tax issues my staff has uncovered over the course of this investigation," committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a letter to Black. "This includes understanding the amount by which you were overpaid income from assets placed in a trust while devising a scheme to ensure that those assets, worth billions of dollars, would remain outside your taxable estate. Additionally, you have refused to answer questions or provide documents related to payments you made to Epstein or substantiate how such payments were calculated or were compensation for services.
A woman filed a lawsuit in November accusing Black of raping her and accusing Epstein of having helped facilitate the attack. Black’s legal team denied the allegations at the time, and he stepped down from his positions at Apollo after they became public.
Epstein was arrested in July 2019 in July 2019 on charges of abusing and trafficking minors but died by suicide in prison before trial. He was 66 at the time of his death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City.
FIRST ON FOX: The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is telling DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to "be prepared" with data for a key House hearing on Wednesday, in which the Homeland Security head is expected to receive another grilling over his handling of the crisis at the southern border by the Republican majority.
Mayorkas will appear Wednesday before the GOP-led committee in a hearing called: "Oversight of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security."
The secretary has clashed repeatedly with Republicans at congressional hearings, who have taken aim at his handling of the border crisis now into its third year and which saw historic migrant numbers in both FY 2021 and FY 2022 -- with some even calling for his impeachment over what they have branded as the administration's "open borders" policies – a label the administration has rejected.
In a letter to Mayorkas on Tuesday, obtained by Fox News Digital, Chairman Jim Jordan says that during his last appearance before the committee last year, "you were unable to provide specific data or information and, to this date, you still have not provided substantive responses to some Members’ questions from that hearing."
"We hope that you will be prepared with specific data and information during your appearance before the Committee this year," they say.
HOUSE HOMELAND GOP REPORT ACCUSES MAYORKAS OF ‘INTENTIONAL’ DERELICTION OF DUTY OVER BORDER CRISIS
The majority says it had in July requested data regarding Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity by Monday, but DHS said it would not be able to meet the deadline, but would try to provide the data "as soon as we are able."
"Accordingly, if the Department is unable or unwilling to provide this data in advance of the hearing, as we requested, we ask that you come to the hearing prepared with this data," Jordan said in the letter to Mayorkas.
The data the committee requests includes the number of migrants who have been released into the U.S. and have remained in DHS detention. It includes those who have claimed a fear of persecution, who have been removed, have been placed in removal proceedings and who have received credible fear determinations. It's a sign that the committee will focus in part on parole and other policies that have allowed for migrants to be released into the U.S. as part of the expansion of legal pathways by the administration.
"We look forward to your upcoming testimony and the opportunity for the Committee to effectively pursue its oversight of the Department’s immigration-related authorities," Jordan writes.
A DHS spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the agency "responds to congressional correspondence directly via official channels, and the Department will continue to respond appropriately to Congressional oversight."
MIGRANT NUMBERS DROP SHARPLY IN JUNE AS BIDEN ADMIN'S POST-TITLE 42 STRATEGY TAKES SHAPE
A DHS official, meanwhile, noted that it has made an "enormous" number of personnel, documents and briefings available to Congress – including 50 witnesses across over 30 hearings in both chambers, as well as over 8,000 pages of documents in responses to over 1,400 congressional letters.
It comes amid a torrent of scrutiny by House Republicans on the administration. Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee recently accused Mayorkas of a "dereliction of duty" as they probe his handling of the border crisis.
Republicans have blamed the administration for the crisis, saying it canceled "effective" Trump-era policies including border wall construction, Title 42 and the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). Separately, they objected to narrowed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) guidance, that coincided with plummeting deportations and increased use of catch-and-release. Recently, they have also scrutinized the widespread use of parole to release migrants into the U.S. via legal asylum pathways.
The Biden administration has pushed back against criticism, pointing to a sharp drop in encounters at the border since the end of the Title 42 public health order in May. Numbers from June, released last week show 144,000 migrant encounters for the month, which is the lowest number since February 2001, although still high compared to pre-2021 numbers.
The administration has tied the drop in encounters to measures it put into place when Title 42 ended in May, including a significant expansion of the use of parole to expand lawful immigration pathways -- combined with an asylum rule which limits migrants from claiming asylum if they enter illegally and fail to claim asylum at a country through which they already passed. However, that rule was dealt a legal blow on Tuesday when it was blocked by a federal judge in response to a lawsuit from left-wing groups.
DHS has said it is working to build a "safe, orderly and humane immigration system" and has called on Republicans in Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform legislation introduced on Day One of the administration – but that was rejected by Republicans due to the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.
"Instead of pointing fingers and pursuing a baseless impeachment, Congress should work with the Department and pass comprehensive legislation to fix our broken immigration system, which has not been updated in decades," a spokesperson said last week.