GOP senators hold back on defending Trump as he faces new indictment 

The revelation that former President Trump faces a possible grand jury indictment connected to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and his efforts to hold on to power has landed like a bombshell on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers saw firsthand the violence unleashed that day. 

Some GOP lawmakers rushed to Trump’s defense, but many Republicans in the Senate held back from defending the former president, who has been accused of stoking the Jan. 6 mob and who waited before calling on protesters to disperse.  

The expected indictment separately poses a tough political problem for many Republicans critical of Trump, who remains wildly popular with the party’s base. 

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), who hasn’t spoken to Trump since December 2020, stayed quiet about the news of yet another indictment against his onetime ally, who is now leading the Republican presidential primary field by 30 points in national polls.  

Minority Leader Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) addresses reporters after the weekly policy luncheon on Wednesday, July 19, 2023. (Greg Nash)

His top deputies, Senate Republican Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), reacted with caution.

Asked whether it would be “legitimate” for special counsel Jack Smith to charge Trump for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Thune said it would depend on the facts and evidence presented.  

“That’s going to depend on whether or not laws were broken," he said. "So clearly, I don’t know what they’re looking at. But I’m sure we’ll know in due time.” 

Cornyn dodged the politically charged topic altogether, arguing the Justice Department has the authority to investigate whether Trump broke the laws in trying to stop the certification of the 2020 election. 

“I think that’s entirely within the purview of the Department of Justice and has nothing to do with the United States Senate,” he said.  

Asked if Smith is a “credible prosecutor,” he said, “I have no knowledge of anything approaching that.” 

Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who called the indictment of Trump last month for violating the Espionage Act “political” and “rotten,” was the only senior member of the Republican leadership to accuse the Justice Department of acting on political motives.  

“It looks like the president is targeting his most popular opponent. Isn't that interesting? Sounds political to me,” he said.  

Asked if he saw any qualitative difference between the 37 felony counts federal prosecutors brought against Trump last month for refusing to turn over classified documents he kept improperly at Mar-a-Lago and new charges related to Jan. 6, Barrasso saw both indictments as political attacks.  


More from The Hill


“The administration is siccing its dogs on the former president of the United States and their most formidable opponent,” he said.  

Senate Republican Conference Vice Chairwoman Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) only said, “It’s a never-ending story, that’s my comment.”  

The generally muted response from Senate Republican leaders posed a stark contrast with House Republican leaders, who rushed to Trump’s defense.  

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) suggested the Justice Department is bringing new charges against Trump because he is leading the Republican presidential field by double digits and pulled ahead of President Biden in a recent poll.  

“Recently, President Trump went up in the polls and was actually surpassing President Biden for reelection. So what do they do now? Weaponize government to go after their No. 1 opponent,” McCarthy said Tuesday. 

“This is not equal justice. They treat people differently and they go after their adversaries,” he said. 

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) speaks to reporters during a media availability in Statuary Hall of the Capitol on Wednesday, July 19, 2023.

McCarthy’s comments reveal how his views of Trump’s culpability for the attack on the Capitol have evolved since January 2021, when he told GOP colleagues that Trump “bears responsibility for his words and actions ­— no if, ands or buts.” 

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) accused the Justice Department of waging a politically motivated prosecution to distract from a whistleblower’s claims that senior administration officials interfered with an Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.

“Now you see the Biden administration going after President Trump once again, and it begs that question, ‘Is there a double standard? Is justice being administered equally?’” Scalise asked at a press conference.  

Other Trump allies in the House joined the attack against the administration.  

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) claimed Biden’s Justice Department did little to prosecute Black Lives Matter protesters who breached a federal courthouse in 2020 or to prosecute threats against conservative Supreme Court justices. 

“But if you’re President Trump and do nothing wrong? PROSECUTE. Americans are tired of the double standard!” he tweeted.  

Another Trump ally, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), attacked Smith on Twitter as a “lousy attorney” and pointed to the Supreme Court overturning his conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R). 

“He only targets Republicans because he’s a weak little bitch for the Democrats,” she tweeted. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) asks a question during a hearing on Wednesday, June 21, 2023 to discuss the report from Special Counsel John Durham about the “Crossfire Hurricane” probe into allegations of contacts between Russia and former President Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Senate Republicans, many of whom have made clear they don’t want to see Trump as the party’s nominee for president in 2024, however, broke with their House GOP colleagues over the claim that the Justice Department is operating a “two-tier” system and holding Trump to a special standard. 

“I think you’ve got to go where the facts lead you and determine whether or not laws are broken. But there shouldn’t be two systems of justice; everybody should be held accountable and there ought to be equal justice under the law,” Thune told reporters. 

“Clearly in these circumstances, it’s a politically charged environment. I think it puts an even higher burden of proof on the Justice Department given the perceptions that people have about that but this has got to be driven by the law and the facts,” he said.  

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) addresses reporters after the weekly policy luncheon on Wednesday, July 19, 2023.

McConnell excoriated Trump on the Senate floor at the end of his 2021 impeachment trial for inciting the mob that stormed the Capitol hallways and ransacked the Senate parliamentarian’s office. 

“There is no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of that day,” he declared, referring to the violence and chaos that resulted in injuries to more than 100 Capitol police officers.  

One officer, Brian Sicknick, died of natural causes while defending the Capitol.  

Thune said just because the Senate Republicans’ top leader called Trump “practically and morally” responsible, that did not necessarily warrant criminal charges.  

“Practically and morally is something very different than legally, and I think that’s what the Justice Department has to look at. They’ve got to look at the law, the facts as they’ve interviewed people, and then make a determination about whether laws were broken,” he said.   

Sign up for the latest from The Hill here

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted twice to convict Trump on impeachment charges — including on the charge of inciting the Jan. 6 riot — warned his House GOP colleagues about relentlessly attacking the Justice Department.

He voiced concern about "the diminution of institutions in which we rely as a society." 

"A democracy works when we have confidence in the justice system, in the legal system, in our prosecutors and so forth. If we constantly attack and diminish them, that weakens the democracy," he said. 

Trump says DOJ is an ‘absolute weapon’ for Democrats; slams special counsel probe as ‘election interference’

Former President Trump said the Justice Department has become "an absolute weapon" for Democrats, while slamming Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation as "election interference."

Trump, who is leading the 2024 Republican presidential primary field, during an exclusive town hall hosted by Fox News’ Sean Hannity Tuesday night, reacted to the news that he is the "target" of Smith’s investigation into the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. 

TRUMP SAYS HE IS DOJ JAN. 6 GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION TARGET

"It bothers me," Trump said, explaining that Smith’s team "sent a letter on Sunday night" notifying him that he had "four days" to report to the grand jury — something, he said, "almost always means an arrest and indictment." 

A government source with direct knowledge of the situation also told Fox News that Smith’s office sent Trump a target letter. 

"They’re in a rush because they want to interfere. It’s interference with the election — it’s election interference," Trump said. "Never been done like this in the history of our country, and it is a disgrace what’s happening to our country — whether it is the borders or the elections or kinds of things like this, where the DOJ has become a weapon for the Democrats."

He added: "An absolute weapon."

Trump, last month, pleaded not guilty to 37 federal charges stemming from Smith’s investigation into his alleged improper retention of classified records at Mar-a-Lago last month. 

The charges include willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice and false statements.

The indictment from Smith's classified records investigation is the first time in United States history that a former president has faced federal criminal charges.

But Trump reminded that President Biden is also under special counsel investigation for alleged improper retention of classified records. Special Counsel Robert Hur is investigating Biden. The status of that probe is unknown.

TRUMP PLEADS NOT GUILTY TO 37 FEDERAL FELONY CHARGES IN CLASSIFIED RECORDS CASE

"They go after me on documents, and I have the Presidential Records Act, which is a big deal," Trump said, adding that Biden is not protected by the Presidential Records Act, as his classified documents were from his time as vice president and in the U.S. Senate.

Trump went on to slam Smith as a "deranged prosecutor" and a "nasty, horrible human being," and said the Department of Justice has been "totally weaponized."

Separately, Trump, in April, pleaded not guilty to state charges in New York stemming from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation. Trump is accused of falsifying business records related to hush-money payments made during the 2016 campaign.

Meanwhile, Trump also reflected on the FBI’s original investigation into whether the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election. Special Counsel Robert Mueller found that there was no evidence of collusion, and Special Counsel John Durham found that the FBI’s investigation never should have been opened in the first place.

DURHAM FINDS DOJ, FBI 'FAILED TO UPHOLD' MISSION OF 'STRICT FIDELITY TO THE LAW' IN TRUMP-RUSSIA PROBE

Trump said that his decision in May 2017 to fire then-FBI Director James Comey was the right one and said "the whole thing collapsed."

"I said, this guy’s bad news. I realized it very early, very early in the administration," Trump said. "I fired him and it was wild. That’s when we found out all of the corruption."

FBI IGNORED 'CLEAR WARNING SIGN' OF CLINTON-LED EFFORT TO 'MANIPULATE' BUREAU FOR 'POLITICAL PURPOSES'

He added: "Had I not fired Comey, you wouldn’t know any of the things…They were trying to take me out—I mean, it was like a coup. It was like a coup."

Trump said as president he "got rid of a lot of" dishonest people.

"But we're going to get rid of a lot more because you have some bad people," Trump said.

As for other investigations, the former president said it is "very disappointing" the Secret Service closed its investigation into who brought cocaine to the White House earlier this month, saying he believes they "know who" the illegal substance belonged to. 

Trump said the incident is an embarrassment for the country, telling Fox News that the United States was respected under his presidency. 

"This country was respected and Putin knew he couldn't do it, and President Xi of China knew he couldn't do it," Trump said, seemingly referring to Putin's invasion of Ukraine and Xi's ambitions for Taiwan. 

Shifting to the Biden family's overseas business dealings, Trump said: "We have a compromised president." 

"China gives him millions of dollars, he's compromised," Trump said, pointing to allegations that the president was involved in his son, Hunter Biden's, Chinese business dealings. "He's getting millions of dollars illegally from China, and then you say, hey, they impeached me over a phone call that was perfect." 

"Why aren't they impeaching Biden for receiving tens of millions of dollars? Why isn't he under impeachment?" Trump asked. 

Trump was impeached twice by the House of Representatives, but acquitted both times by the Senate. 

GOP to put IRS Hunter Biden whistleblowers at center stage

House Republicans will put their claims of unequal justice for Republicans and Democrats at center stage Wednesday, bringing IRS whistleblowers before the public to blast the government’s investigation into Hunter Biden, the son of President Biden.

The hearing will serve in part as a way for Republicans to give former President Trump political cover as he faces a likely third indictment over Jan. 6, while also fueling a potential impeachment inquiry against Attorney General Merrick Garland.

IRS investigator Gary Shapley and an unnamed IRS special agent told the House Ways and Means Committee in May that they were displeased with the investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax matters, accusing prosecutors of slow-walking the investigation and allowing the statute of limitations to run out. Hunter Biden in June reached a deal to plead guilty to tax crimes for 2017 and 2018. 

In one point of drama, the identity of the unnamed IRS agent will be revealed at Wednesday’s hearing.

Republicans hope the credibility of the two whistleblowers will rub off on broader investigations of the Biden family’s business dealings. The House Oversight Committee claims it has uncovered financial documents showing that foreign companies funneled more than $10 million to Biden family members and associates, traveling through a web of shell companies.

“This is the A-team with the IRS. These two guys have stellar records,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said Tuesday.

The hearing could also help Republicans distract from Trump’s numerous legal problems after the former president said Tuesday that he expected an imminent indictment in relation to the Justice Department’s probe into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

The hearing fits in with a broader GOP theme that the federal government is “weaponized” against Biden’s political opponents.

“If you notice recently, President Trump went up in the polls and was actually surpassing President Biden for reelection. So what do they do now? Weaponize government to go after their number one opponent,” Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Tuesday. 

McCarthy complained that in Hunter Biden’s case, prosecutors waited until after the statute of limitations was up for some tax years, then brought charges on others. He also referenced Shapley’s complaint that Hunter Biden’s lawyers were alerted to investigators’ interest in a storage unit.

The White House in a statement criticized the attacks on Biden.

“Instead of wasting time on politically-motivated attacks on a Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney, the rule of law, and the independence of our justice system, House Republicans should join President Biden to focus on the issues most important to the American people like continuing to lower inflation, create jobs, and strengthen health care," said Ian Sams, the White House spokesperson for oversight & investigations.

The whistleblower testimony has prompted Republican accusations of corruption at the highest levels and led McCarthy to float a potential impeachment inquiry into Garland.

A key detail for Republicans in Shapley’s testimony is whether David Weiss, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney for Delaware overseeing the Hunter Biden case, had authority to bring charges in other districts.

Shapley alleges that U.S. Attorney for D.C. Matthew Graves “did not support the investigation,” pushing Weiss to request special counsel status in order to be able to bring charges outside of his usual Delaware jurisdiction. According to Shapley, Weiss was denied that status.

Weiss and Garland have both denied this. Each said the Delaware prosecutor was assured he could seek special attorney status if desired, governed under a different statute that likewise would have allowed Weiss to bring charges in any venue. Graves has also said he did not oppose Weiss bringing charges in Washington.

Some lawmakers have argued Shapley’s testimony shows unfamiliarity with the statutes governing prosecutorial power.

“If you want to put the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney’s word up against a disgruntled agent — who clearly doesn't even understand the difference between a special counsel and a specially designated attorney under Section 515 — you’re playing with fire,” said Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), who before being elected to Congress served as a counselor in Trump’s first impeachment. 

But McCarthy said the differing accounts could be fodder for an impeachment inquiry, as Garland told Congress that Weiss had “full authority to make those referrals you're talking about or to bring cases in other districts if he needs to do that.” 

Democrats have also dismissed some of Shapley’s complaints, characterizing them as common differences of opinion between investigators and prosecutors.

Shapley’s testimony points to numerous instances where prosecutors expressed hesitation about taking any action that might influence the 2020 election. They appeared to be wary of repeating past actions that spurred criticism, notably former FBI Director James Comey’s statement about the Hillary Clinton investigation just days before the 2016 election. 

The Oversight hearing also demonstrates how Republican interest in Hunter Biden and the business dealings of Biden’s family has pushed them into multiple different directions — from tracking funds flowing to Biden family members; to alleged interference in the criminal case against Hunter Biden; to an unverified allegation that an executive of Ukrainian energy company Burisma (of which Hunter Biden was a board member) offered a bribe to President Biden. 

“There's really two investigations going on now. There's the investigation of the Biden crime, and there's investigation of a government cover-up,” Comer said.

While Comer said that the Ways and Means Committee and the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government will also investigate any potential cover-up, he said that the Oversight panel is still focused on “following the money.”

Still, Oversight Republicans have gotten pulled into the cover-up allegations.

On Tuesday, Comer said in a statement that committee staff conducted an interview with ​​a former FBI supervisory special agent who confirmed some aspects of the IRS whistleblowers’ testimony — specifically, that the Secret Service and the Biden transition team were alerted to plans for the IRS to show up and seek an in-person interview with Hunter Biden that ultimately never happened.

Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said in a statement that Comer had “cherry-picked and distorted statements of a witness to advance Republicans’ false narrative about political interference in the Hunter Biden investigation.”

He’s also dismissed the GOP for fixating on investigations that Trump-appointed officials chose not to advance, pointing to Comer basing much of his investigation on a confidential tip about President Biden accepting a bribe that the FBI was not able to corroborate.

“There was an assessment opened up, and they decided not to move from the assessment level to either a preliminary investigation or to a full investigation,” Raskin said last week.

“They closed it down.”

This story was updated at 6:54 p.m.

Parnas dismisses Oversight GOP bribery investigation as ‘a wild goose chase’

Lev Parnas, once a right-hand man to Rudy Giuliani, asked the GOP’s top congressional investigator to abandon efforts to uncover wrongdoing by the Biden family in Ukraine, calling the matter “nothing more than a wild goose chase” that has been “debunked again and again.”

Parnas’s Tuesday letter to House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), obtained by The Hill, notes that Parnas and Giuliani's repeated efforts to dig up dirt on President Biden or his son Hunter yielded nothing and confused Ukrainian prosecutors.

It also recaps the efforts taken by the Trump team that resulted in the launching of the first impeachment inquiry into former President Trump. Democrats alleged he withheld aid from Ukraine in an effort to pressure officials there to provide incriminating evidence on the Bidens.

“Throughout all these months of work, the extensive campaigns and networking done by Trump allies and Giuliani associates, including the enormously thorough interviews and assignments that I undertook, there has never been any evidence that Hunter or Joe Biden committed any crimes related to Ukrainian politics,” he said.

He said Giuliani and all others involved in the matter “knew that these allegations against the Bidens were false.”

“Never, during any of my communications with Ukrainian officials or connections to Burisma, did any of them confirm or provide concrete facts linking the Bidens to illegal activities. In fact, they asked me multiple times why our team was so concerned with this idea.” 

Comer dismissed the contents of Parnas’s letter.

“Now there's somebody that Giuliani was running around with and says we should drop investigations because Giuliani and him already looked into it. I mean, I don't think that that's credible,” he said.

“We're starting to see money from Ukraine coming in on some of these bank statements that we're going to release later,” he added, a reference to his investigation into Biden family finances.

Comer has based much of his investigation on an unverified tip to the FBI from a source who heard secondhand allegations Biden accepted a bribe. The bureau was unable to corroborate the tip.

Parnas has also previously provided a transcript of a conversation he says was with Mykola Zlochevsky, the reported source of the information, denying any improper conduct by President Biden or his son Hunter, who was serving on the board of energy company Burisma, which Zlochevsky owns. That information was turned over during the impeachment inquiry.

Parnas was convicted in court of making illegal campaign contributions to Trump.

His letter comes as Comer is under increasing pressure to advance his inquiry into President Biden, who he has alleged accepted a bribe.

Even some in the GOP have criticized his investigation, with former Trump advisor Steve Bannon saying last month Comer needed to “be prepared,” adding, “You are not serious. It’s all performative.” 

Comer acknowledged Monday the difficulties of explaining the financial crimes he has alleged.

“Two things I've learned: People don't know what a shell company is, and they don't know what an LLC is. They don't know what money laundering is. We're going to try to explain in a more simple form ‘this is what they did,’” he told reporters.

Those in Trump’s orbit have alleged President Biden sought to withhold aid from Ukraine because its top prosecutor was threatening to investigate his son. Biden, joined by the international community, actually sought to pressure Ukraine to remove the man, Viktor Shokin, over corruption charges. 

Parnas’s letter spends ample time breaking down the investigative efforts of Giuliani, which included trying to get Shokin’s replacement, Yuriy Lutsenko, to retain him for $200,000. 

It details the repeated dead ends they hit, and the numerous efforts to pressure Ukrainian officials.

“Giuliani’s message to the [then-Ukrainian] president [Petro Poroshenko], who was running for reelection, was that Trump would support him and help him win if he made an official announcement of an investigation against Joe Biden,” Parnas writes.

Parnas ends with a plea to Comer to halt his investigation.

“There is no evidence of Joe or Hunter Biden interfering with Ukrainian politics, and there never has been,” Parnas writes.

“With all due respect, Chairman Comer, the narrative you are seeking for this investigation has been proven false many times over, by a wide array of respected sources. There is simply no merit to investigating this matter any further. I hope my letter has provided you with additional clarity on this point.”

GOP debates impeaching Merrick Garland after McCarthy surprise

House Republicans are debating whether to focus impeachment efforts on Attorney General Merrick Garland after Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) suggested an inquiry against him, taking some members by surprise after much of the GOP impeachment furor had been directed at other Biden officials.

In a year where the GOP has been most steadily focused on possible impeachments of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas or President Biden, McCarthy often has been the voice urging the conference to move patiently and deliberately. 

But he has shown more vigor when eyeing Garland, an official leading an agency often derided by the GOP but a figure less frequently cited by the party’s members who are most keen on impeachment.

McCarthy first elevated the topic with a tweet late last month touting testimony of an IRS whistleblower who has alleged mismanagement of the investigation into Hunter Biden, saying it could serve as “a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry.”

But the conference — though eager to investigate — hasn’t rushed to back the idea, with some questioning whether there is a legal basis for impeaching Garland and others saying different Cabinet secretaries should be reviewed first.

“I don't know of a chargeable crime,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told The Hill. 

Issa said it’s up to the president to remove those who aren’t following orders or properly carrying out their jobs, with Congress only stepping in if a president fails to remove those who have committed crimes.

“It’s very, very popular with people in the hinterlands,” Issa said when asked about members of the Freedom Caucus and others who have backed the rarely used move of impeaching a Cabinet official.

“But the reality is that if someone is faithfully executing the desires and the orders of the president of the United States, then they're within the bounds of what Cabinet officers do," he added. "If they're not faithfully executing the request of the president, then we don't have to impeach him because they serve at the pleasure of the president.”

Some of the Republicans who have authored the more than a dozen impeachment resolutions filed this Congress were surprised the officials those documents had targeted haven’t taken center stage.

“I was one of the original co-sponsors of the Secretary Blinken impeachment,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) said. “We ought to take that up first for the incredibly, horribly done withdrawal from Afghanistan.”

McCarthy doubled down on action against Garland last week in a Fox News op-ed.

“When a prosecutor shields his boss’s son from investigators, it smells like a cover-up. Garland’s DOJ did not aggressively follow the money. Why? Are they afraid where that trail ends?” he said. 

“Clearly, someone is not telling the truth, and Congress has a duty to get answers,” McCarthy continued.

The Justice Department said Garland by design stayed out of the Biden investigation, leaving the inquiry in the hands of David Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware who initiated it during the Trump administration.


More from The Hill

Trump notified he is target in DOJ’s Jan. 6 investigation

Tuberville’s controversies stoke his popularity in Alabama

Air National Guardsman accused of leaking documents wants to be treated like Trump


Among other things, the whistleblower contends Weiss was blocked from getting authority to bring charges outside of Delaware. Every Justice Department official involved in the matter — including Weiss and Garland — has said otherwise, noting the prosecutor was assured he would receive special attorney status if he wished to file charges elsewhere.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee that serves as the clearinghouse for such inquiries, backed the idea, offering stronger support for impeaching Garland than some of the other secretaries floated as targets for his committee.

“I think he sees the facts now,” Jordan said of McCarthy. “So it's quickly [becoming] who are you going to believe? … I'm with the speaker on we need to get to the facts. And if it warrants moving forward with an inquiry we got to do that.”

“That'll be a decision that in the end will be made by the entire conference,” he added.

Until McCarthy’s comments, Mayorkas seemed like the likeliest target of any potential House GOP impeachment of a member of Biden’s Cabinet. Conservative members have been pushing to impeach him for nearly two years over policies at the U.S.-Mexico border, and McCarthy himself had said Mayorkas should resign or face an investigation that could lead to impeachment.

But asked on Fox Business last week about impeaching Mayorkas, McCarthy pointed to a border bill passed by the House GOP and noted the House Homeland Security Committee is investigating the issue, along with taking the lead on investigating Biden following a resolution from Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) seeking to boot the president over his handling of the border. 

The competing interests will be a struggle for McCarthy and Jordan. 

“I think the chairman of Judiciary has a cat-herding issue that he's got to deal with, probably,” said Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), who serves on the panel and the House Homeland Security Committee, which plans to forward its oversight report on Mayorkas for use by Judiciary.

“I will say that I have a less fully formed case in my head in all its particulars about Merrick Garland than I do about the others,” Bishop added.

Some members told The Hill that McCarthy’s embrace of a potential impeachment inquiry against Garland, coming over a two-week Independence Day recess, caught them by surprise when they returned to Washington last week. 

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the highest-ranking member of leadership to say Mayorkas should be impeached if he does not step down, said he has not carefully studied the issues with Garland — but he welcomed investigation of a Department of Justice that “appears to” have “a double standard for how it approaches cases.”

House Republicans held a conference meeting Thursday morning in which Jordan and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) gave updates on their investigatory efforts into the Biden family, the Justice Department and beyond. Lawmakers said McCarthy urged Republicans to follow the evidence.

Some lawmakers are welcoming the probe into Garland even as it threatens to put other potential impeachment probes on the back burner.

Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas), who sponsored the first resolution to be introduced this Congress to impeach Mayorkas, expressed support for a Garland impeachment. 

“I think you can do both,” he said, adding later, “We need to have a vote on the House floor with Mayorkas because the border in and of itself is just a — isn't even a catastrophe. It's cataclysmic.”

Other members likewise said they weren’t concerned about the GOP balancing its many budding impeachment investigations.

“I wouldn’t mind if we had a new one every day,” Boebert said.

Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), however, urged a cautious approach.

“It’s a pretty serious issue. We’re doing a lot now with different Biden investigations. So I think if the committee believes there is a case with any of the executives that rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors then we will do that, but I don't think that is something that we should take lightly,” she said.

Democrats dismissed the idea that there is any case to be made against Garland.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said although Republicans have claimed Garland may have lied to Congress, they’ve yet to offer anything to prove it.

“The Republicans need to recall that the constitutional standard for impeachment is high crimes and misdemeanors not doing stuff that Donald Trump disagrees with,” he said.

“Donald Trump's U.S. Attorney in the Western District of Pennsylvania and [Trump Attorney General] William Barr found that there were no grounds for pursuing an investigation into allegations of corruption against Joe Biden,” he added.

“That would be a very strange reason to impeach Merrick Garland.”

It’s time to celebrate a COVID-19 milestone … with caution

On Jan. 23, 2020, the same day that Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial began, Daily Kos diverted from following that story to cover what was then referred to as the “Wuhan virus,” after the city in China where the first outbreak of the highly infectious disease was reported. At the time of that report, there had been 17 deaths connected to the virus, but with 21 million people under lockdown in China and scientists already working to sequence the virus, that report ended with reassurance that “Restricting the spread of an emerging disease remains a near-impossible task, but health officials around the world are giving it a really extraordinary try.”

That report was the first of more than 500 that would follow. Daily Kos’ coverage included Trump’s promotion of increasingly unlikely outlandish “cures” and Dr. Anthony Fauci becoming a hero to Americans as well as a villain to conspiracy theorists. Seemingly overnight this became a world in which everyone was all too familiar with overflowing hospitals, cheering weary healthcare workers at the end of their shift, and terms like “spike protein” or “variant.”

Since then, there have been another 6,899,724 deaths. Of those, 1,134,710 happened in the United States. At its worst, the level of excess mortalities in the United States rose to an astounding 46%, including not just deaths directly attributed to COVID-19, but those who died because they couldn’t get adequate treatment in a pandemic-driven world.

However, over the first half of this year, the level of excess deaths has hit another very important number. That number is 0%. As far as deaths are concerned, the pandemic may be over.

Right now, a quick look at the CDC data shows that Puerto Rico still attributes 4.5% of deaths to infection by COVID-19. No other state or territory currently has a value above 1.5% and several states are reporting numbers so low that they easily round to 0%.

However, the CDC values also show that many states have quit breaking out COVID-19 deaths into a separate category. That’s a trend that started two years ago, when some Republican governors found it highly inconvenient to admit that people were dying from COVID-19 in their states. But even for those states where COVID deaths are shuffled in among deaths due to “respiratory failure” or “cardiac arrest,” the damage being caused by COVID-19 should show up in the form of excess deaths.

But in the first half of 2023, that signal disappeared.

The chart of excess deaths in the U.S. clearly shows the spike of initial deaths largely centered in the Northeast, where many medical facilities were overrun and life-saving equipment like ventilators became a huge topic of concern. Additional spikes appear as the disease spreads across the country, peaking at the end of 2020 when most states had lowered any restrictions and people traveled to see their families around the holidays. There’s a sharp drop in the rate of deaths in spring of 2021, as vaccines begin a widespread rollout. However, more spikes come in the fall of 2021 with the arrival of the 200% more infectious delta variant, and at the end of the year with still more travel and more family get-togethers. Then rates drop off again before the arrival of the still more infectious omicron variant, which drives a prolonged period of elevated deaths that peaks … with family travel and get-togethers at the end of the year.

Then the rates drop again at the beginning of 2023. And they have stayed down.

However, there’s another way of looking at this, with just a little annotation, that adds a cautionary note to the current celebration.

Looked at this way, it’s easy to see that every year of the pandemic has ended in much the same way, with that travel-related spike in which millions of Americans ran around the country stirring the mix and making sure that the latest variant was spread far and wide. When that spike subsides, each year has seen a big decline in excess deaths. There are two reasons for this. One is probably that following the spike more people have a level of exposure to the latest variant and have gained at least partial immunity. The other factor is that many of the most susceptible died during that holiday spike.

In each of the previous years, that low level of post-holiday deaths continued for some time, but only until a new variant that was either more contagious or more evasive of past infection became dominant. Then the number of deaths rose again.

It’s easy to read into those declining humps the idea that each variant has become weaker than the one before. That’s not the case. Untreated delta in a person with no immunity is actually 3.45 times more likely to be deadly than early variants up to alpha, and untreated omicron is about the same. Contrary to popular belief, there is no evolutionary pressure on viruses to become less deadly. In fact, since the same factors that make a disease more infectious can also make it more likely to result in the death of the host, diseases can easily move from mild to more deadly over time.

What’s different about 2023 so far is that no new variant has appeared that is significantly more contagious, or more evasive, than omicron. Also, the CDC estimates that 96% of Americans have antibodies to at least one variant of COVID-19 through either vaccination or exposure. Put that all together, and you get a season where COVID deaths have just stayed down.

The other big factor is treatment. In 2020, medical workers were in the dark on how to handle a COVID-19 infection. Now, in addition to over 75% of the population being vaccinated at least once, the steps to more effectively treat COVID-19 are better understood. Plus there are new tools like Paxlovid, which can reduce the rate of death even if it doesn’t necessarily help people get over symptoms more quickly. Improved treatment over time is a big factor in why each of those peaks in mortality tends to be smaller than the previous.

That’s fantastic. But it’s also not a guarantee of peachy keen sailing from here on out.

Scientists around the world are still tracking variants of concern, two of which are thought to be more contagious than baseline omicron while maintaining about the same level of severity. Those variants, or others with similar statistics, could become dominant in the United States in coming weeks, creating a new crest in mortality. All of these variants are descended from omicron. Right now, alpha, delta, and all the other variants and subvariants are either essentially extinct or found only at very low levels in the population. Omicron has won the evolution game by simply being more infectious than all the rest—including by being the variant most likely to infect people who have already been infected by past variants.

The good news is that the relative level of change in infectiousness between these latest variants is much lower than the two-times, or even five-times jumps seen earlier. The SARS-CoV-2 virus underwent a period in which the billions of people infected, pouring out quadrillions of new viruses, created a high-speed evolutionary showdown for most infectious virus ever. But having obtained a measles-like rate of contagiousness, the structure of the virus may not offer any other opportunities for big jumps that don’t involve a whole series of changes to the genetic sequence.

So the next big wave may never come—or it may begin next week. But even if the threat still looms out there, the level of deaths at this moment deserves real celebration.

Yes, things could get worse again quickly. Yes, levels of hospitalization haven’t dropped nearly as sharply as deaths, so COVID-19 is still making thousands of people a day very, very sick. Yes, long COVID remains a poorly understood problem that is affecting the lives of millions and will affect both the economy and the stability of health care programs. Yes, COVID-19 probably has more nasty sequelae waiting in the wings that we don’t understand at the moment.

But right now, the number of people dying from COVID-19 in the United States has dropped to a level that is pretty much lost in statistical noise. Numbers that were once going up by thousands a day are now going up by single digits. This is all much better than I expected.

That’s worth celebrating. Just please don’t blow the candles out while they’re on the cake. Because … germs.

GOP senators rattled by radical conservative populism

Republican senators say they’re worried that conservative populism, though always a part of the GOP, is beginning to take over the party, becoming more radical and threatening to cause them significant political problems heading into the 2024 election.  

GOP senators are saying they’re being increasingly confronted by constituents who buy into discredited conspiracy theories such as the claim that Democrats stole the 2020 presidential election or that federal agents incited the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.  

Growing distrust with government institutions, from the FBI, CIA and Department of Justice to the Centers for Disease Control and National Institutes of Health, make it more difficult for Republican lawmakers to govern. 

Republican senators believe their party has a good chance to take back control of the White House and Senate, given President Biden’s low approval ratings and the favorable map of Senate seats up for reelection, but they regularly face political headaches caused by populist members of their party who say the rest of the GOP is out of step with mainstream America. 

“We should be concerned about this as Republicans. I’m having more ‘rational Republicans’ coming up to me and saying, ‘I just don’t know how long I can stay in this party,’” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). “Now our party is becoming known as a group of kind of extremist, populist over-the-top [people] where no one is taking us seriously anymore. 

FILE - Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, asks a question during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee in Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib, File)

“You have people who felt some allegiance to the party that are now really questioning, ‘Why am I [in the party?]” she added. “I think it’s going to get even more interesting as we move closer to the elections and we start going through some of these primary debates. 

“Is it going to be a situation of who can be more outlandish than the other?” she asked.  

Some Senate Republicans worry the populist winds are downgrading their chances of picking up seats in 2024.

“There are an astonishing number of people in my state who believe the election was stolen,” said one Republican senator who requested anonymity to talk about the growing popularity of conservative conspiracy theories at home.  

As an example, some Republicans point to Arizona, where Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), an independent who left the Democratic Party last year, is up for reelection.

Sinema is likely to face a challenge from the left in the likely Democratic nominee Rep. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.) as well as a GOP nominee. If that nominee is former TV anchor Kari Lake, who has embraced conspiracy theories about elections and lost a gubernatorial race last year, many in the GOP think they’re in trouble.

One senior Senate Republican strategist, assessing the race, lamented that “the Republican Party in Arizona is a mess.” 

Republican senators say they are alarmed at how many Republicans, including those with higher levels of education and income, buy the unsubstantiated claims that the last presidential election was stolen.  

A second Republican senator who spoke with The Hill said the growing strength of radical populism “makes it a lot more difficult to govern, it makes it difficult to talk to constituents.” 

“There are people who surprise me — I’m surprised they have those views. It’s amazing to me the number of people, the kind of people who think the election was stolen,” the lawmaker said. “I don’t want to use this word but it’s not just a ‘red-neck’ thing. It’s people in business, the president of a bank, a doctor.”  

The lawmaker, who requested anonymity to discuss the political challenge posted by surging conservative populism, accused some fellow Republicans of trying to exploit voter discontent to gain local or national prominence.  

“In my state there are a lot of folks who see Washington as disconnected, they see their way of life threatened. There’s something that generates discontent that elected officials take advantage of,” the senator said.  

Tuberville’s controversies

Some of the biggest populist-linked headaches recently have come from Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R), a staunch ally of former President Trump who is now holding up more than 260 nonpolitical military promotions to protest the Defense Department’s abortion policy.  

Tuberville caused an uproar early last week by defending the idea of letting white nationalists serve in the military and disputing the idea that white nationalism is an inherently racist ideology.  

Tuberville later reversed himself after Senate Republican colleagues ranging from Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) forcefully denounced white supremacy and white nationalism.  

GOP senators also have to regularly distance themselves from the radical proposals of populist conservatives in the House, such as House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who earlier this year proposed cutting Department of Justice and FBI funding in response to federal investigations of Trump.   


More from The Hill

Here’s where America’s worst drivers are found: study

The Memo: Democrat suspicions grow about RFK Jr., Cornel West, No Labels

Top House Democrat supports end to Senate ‘blue slip’ practice


Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) pushed back on calls to defund the Justice Department, telling reporters: “Are we going to get rid of the Justice Department? No. I think defunding is a really bad idea.” 

Thune later explained to The Hill: “There are seasons, swings back and forth in politics and we’re in one now where the dominant political thinking is more populist with respect to national security, foreign policy, some domestic issues.” 

But he said “that stuff comes and goes and it’s built around personalities,” alluding to the broadly held view that Trump’s election to the presidency in 2016 and his lasting influence over the party has put his brand of populism at the forefront.  

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), an advisor to the Senate Republican leadership, said bread-and-butter conservative economic ideas still resonated with voters, but he acknowledged “the cable news shows” continue to keep attention on themes that Trump likes to emphasize, such as election fraud and the “deep-state” control of the federal government.  

“So there are some people paying attention to that but most people are trying to just get on with their lives,” he said. “There’s a lot of distrust of Washington, and who can blame people.” 

“It concerns me that people lose faith in their institutions, but this has been a long story throughout our history. It’s nothing new although it’s troubling,” he said. 

Waving off impeachment

Senate Republicans tried to wave off their House colleagues from advancing articles of impeachment authored by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) against President Biden and rolled their eyes at Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) attempt to expunge Trump’s impeachment record.  

Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) warned, “I fear that snap impeachments will become the norm, and they mustn't.” 

Asked about efforts to erase Trump’s impeachment record, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) quoted the popular show “Succession”: “Logan Roy made a good point. These are not serious people.”

Romney, who was the GOP nominee for president in 2012 before Trump took over the party four years later, last year called Greene and Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) “morons” for speaking at a white nationalist event in Florida. 

Asked this week about Tuberville’s defense of white nationalism and how it reflected on the GOP, Romney said: “Our party has lots of problems, add that to the list.”  

The party of Reagan has transformed into the party of Trump, and to the dismay of some veteran Republican lawmakers, it doesn’t look like it’s going back to what it was anytime soon.  

One ascendent young conservative leader, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who supported objecting to certifying Biden’s victory on Jan. 6, 2021, thinks the Republican Party’s embrace of populism is more than a passing fad.  

He says the new era of politics is more than a battle between Trump allies and Trump haters, or even between Republicans and Democrats. 

Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference two years ago, he declared: “We have been governed by a political consensus forged by a political class that has lost touch with what binds us together as Americans. And it has lost sight of the basic requirements of liberty.” 

“The great divide of our time is not between Trump supporters and Trump opponents, or between suburban voters and rural ones, or between Red America and Blue America,” he said. “No, the great divide of our time is between the political agenda of the leadership elite and the great and broad middle of our society. And to answer the discontent of our time, we must end that divide.”  

NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week

A roundup of some of the most popular but completely untrue stories and visuals of the week. None of these are legit, even though they were shared widely on social media. The Associated Press checked them out. Here are the facts:

___

Lauren Boebert filed articles of impeachment against Biden. That doesn’t mean he was impeached

CLAIM: President Joe Biden was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors in June 2023.

THE FACTS: Biden has not been impeached. The House voted last month to send articles of impeachment introduced by Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert to its Judiciary Committee and its Homeland Security Committee for review. Articles of impeachment, issued solely in the House, detail the charges against an elected official, but impeachment only occurs if the articles are approved by the chambers’ members. Some on social media are misrepresenting the House’s June vote to send the articles of impeachment to the committees, falsely suggesting it means Biden has already been impeached. One Instagram post features a Forbes video of Boebert introducing the articles to the House on June 20. A chyron on the video reads: “Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) introduces articles of impeachment against President Biden on House.” Despite the inclusion of real House footage with an accurate chyron, the post, which had received more than 94,700 likes by Friday, claims: “Biden is Impeached!!! Finally! For High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” But the introduction of the articles of impeachment, which accuse Biden of “high crimes and misdemeanors” related to his handling of the U.S. border with Mexico, are only the first step in the impeachment process. The constitutional equivalent of an indictment, they detail charges against an elected official. Impeachment occurs if the House approves the articles. If approved, the Senate then votes whether to acquit or convict the official. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, also a Republican, negotiated a deal with Boebert to send her articles of impeachment for review by the two House committees after she used a House rule called a privileged resolution in an attempt to force a snap vote, the AP has reported. A related resolution introduced by Republican Rep. Chip Roy on June 21 referred Boebert’s articles of impeachment for possible consideration by the aforementioned congressional committees, like any other bill. The House voted 219-208 along party lines the next day on this resolution. Neither committee is under any obligation to take further action on Boebert’s articles of impeachment.

— Associated Press writer Melissa Goldin in New York contribute this report.

___

No, Ron DeSantis’ high school yearbook quote does not mention ‘Sir-Mixes-a-Lot’

CLAIM: The quote below Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ high school yearbook photo reads: “My Mount Rushmore is Jesus, Sir-Mixes-a-Lot, and Nintendo 64.”

THE FACTS: An image of DeSantis’ entry in his yearbook was edited to add the quote. A spokesperson for the school district that oversees DeSantis’ alma mater confirmed to The Associated Press that the yearbook photo is authentic, but that there is no quote beneath it. Social media users shared the fabricated image, suggesting it shows the Republican presidential candidate was out-of-touch in his teen years. The image shows a black-and-white image of DeSantis as a youth with the “Mount Rushmore” quote below it. The misspelled “Sir-Mixes-a-Lot” is a reference to Sir-Mix-a-Lot, the rapper known for his 1992 hit “Baby Got Back.” “‘Sir-Mixes-a-Lot’ should automatically disqualify you from running for office,” reads one tweet that had received more than 32,000 likes by Friday. Sean Clark, a spokesperson for Pinellas County Schools, told the AP that DeSantis graduated from the district’s Dunedin High School in 1997. "This is a photo from the Dunedin High School yearbook; however, there is no quote within the yearbook photo beneath Governor DeSantis’ photo nor any other student within the yearbook,” he wrote in an email. Neither DeSantis’ office nor his campaign returned requests for comment.

— Melissa Goldin

___

Social media posts falsely suggest Australian birth-rate drop was caused by COVID vaccines

CLAIM: New data on the numbers of births in the Australian state of New South Wales shows that coronavirus vaccines “destroyed” human fertility.

THE FACTS: The data being cited doesn’t mention vaccines at all and doesn’t draw any link to their impact on birth rates. Demographic experts in Australia say a drop in the number of babies born in New South Wales hospitals, which is the focus of the chart, is explained by social and economic factors such as high housing prices, job insecurity and pandemic-era lockdowns. They also note that birth rates in Australia and other developed nations were already trending downwards years before COVID-19 vaccines were even created. Social media users are claiming new data shows birth rates are plummeting as a result of vaccines developed against the coronavirus. Many are sharing a screenshot of a post featuring a line chart titled, “Babies born in NSW hospitals.” The chart, which is partly cut off in the screenshot, purports to show the number of babies born per quarter in New South Wales hospitals from March 2010 to March 2023. The numbers fluctuate within a relatively narrow range over the years shown on the chart before plummeting dramatically. “The world is about to discover the COVID vaccines destroyed fertility,” wrote one user on Instagram who shared the screenshot. But the chart comes from an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald last month that makes no mention of COVID vaccines. Drawing from publicly available data published by the Australian state’s Bureau of Health Information, the story examines declining births at New South Wales public hospitals during the first three months of 2023. It found that the number of babies born at the hospitals was 15,868, down from a peak of 19,081 in 2021 and the lowest of any quarter since 2010. The article quotes a range of experts who argue that socio-economic factors are driving the birth declines. Liz Allen, a demographer at the Australian National University in Canberra who is quoted in the story, confirmed to The Associated Press that “cost-of-living pressures, housing affordability, insecure employment, gender inequality” are among things forcing young Australians to hold off having children. “The story of declining births in NSW is a complex social one, not a reductionist anti-vax fear mongering horror story,” Allen wrote in an email. Udoy Saikia, a social demographer at Flinders University in Adelaide who is also cited in The Sydney Morning Herald story, noted that during the 2020 pandemic lockdowns, some couples moved up plans to have children while working from home and having their movements restricted. “As a result, there was a significant increase in the number of births during the subsequent 2021 period, followed by a decline in birth rates in the latter half of 2022 and the first quarter of 2023,” he wrote in an email.

— Associated Press writer Philip Marcelo in New York contributed this report.

___

Parody tweet about the Titanic submersible falsely attributed to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

CLAIM: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene published a Twitter post reading, “How can the Titanic submersible run out of air if you breathe both in and out? I feel like this is more fake news BS.”

THE FACTS: Greene did not tweet this statement and there is no evidence she ever made such a comment. A spokesperson for the Republican congresswoman from Georgia also confirmed to The Associated Press that the quote is fake. The fabricated quote originated on a parody Twitter account that impersonates Greene. The quote was shared on social media on accounts claiming it was authentic. “How can the Titanic submersible run out of air if you breathe both in and out? I feel like this is more fake news BS,” reads a quote overlaying a photo of Greene, referencing the Titanic-bound craft that recently imploded, killing five. The image was shared by an Instagram account. That same account shared a screenshot of a tweet with the same quote, which included the handle @RepMTG_Press. The bio and title of @RepMTG_Press on Twitter say it’s a parody account. There is no record of the real Greene ever tweeting this statement from her account. Nick Dyer, a spokesperson for Greene, confirmed in an email to the AP that the tweet was not from her account.