Trump weighs in on Texas AG Ken Paxton impeachment trial, argues ‘establishment RINOs’ want to ‘undo’ election

Former President Trump weighed in on the historic impeachment trial of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton brought by the Republican-controlled state legislature. 

The message from Trump, the only federal official to ever be impeached twice, came as Paxton's attorneys were set to begin presenting their defense Thursday as the trial that will determine whether the Republican is removed from office winds down.

"Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was easily re-elected last November, but now establishment RINOS are trying to undo that Election with a shameful impeachment of him," Trump wrote on TRUTH Social early Thursday. "Who would replace Paxton, one of the TOUGHEST & BEST Attorney Generals in the Country? Could it be a Democrat, or even worse, a RINO? The voters have decided who they want! Democrats are feeling very good right now as they watch, as usual, the Republicans fight & eat away at each other. It’s a SAD day in the Great State of Texas!" 

Attorneys for the bipartisan group of lawmakers prosecuting Paxton’s impeachment rested their case Wednesday after a woman who was expected to testify about an extramarital affair with Paxton made a sudden appearance at the trial, but she never took the stand.

EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR DETAILS SURFACE IN HISTORIC IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF TEXAS AG KEN PAXTON

The affair is central to the proceedings and accusations that Paxton misused his power to help Austin real estate developer Nate Paul, who was under FBI investigation and employed the woman, Laura Olson. One of the articles of impeachment against Paxton alleges that Paul's hiring of Olson amounted to a bribe.

Olson was called to the stand Wednesday morning in the Texas Senate and waited outside the chamber. However, her testimony was delayed for hours before Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who is acting as the trial’s judge, said toward the end of the day that Olson would not testify after all. He provided no further explanation but said both sides had agreed to it.

"She is present but has been deemed unavailable to testify," Patrick said.

Olson had been set to take the stand across from Paxton’s wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, who is required to attend the trial but is not allowed to vote on whether her husband should be removed from office.

ALLEGED MISTRESS OF TEXAS AG KEN PAXTON DEEMED 'UNAVAILABLE' TO TAKE STAND AT HIS IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

Shortly after the announcement, prosecuting attorney Rusty Hardin said he was resting their side of the case. Paxton attorney Tony Buzbee then moved to end the trial on the grounds of insufficient evidence but later withdrew the request without a vote shorty before the trial adjourned for the day.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Paxton, who was suspended from office pending the trial's outcome, is not required to attend the proceedings and has not appeared in the Senate since testimony began last week. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

GOP rep calls for impeachment inquiry into Biden energy secretary Granholm: ‘she lied, under oath’

FIRST ON FOX: Republican Rep. Claudia Tenney of New York called for Congress to launch an impeachment inquiry into Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm on Thursday for giving false testimony to Congress about her family's stock ownership.

Tenney called for the investigation during remarks, shared in advance to Fox News Digital, at a House Science and Technology Committee hearing where Granholm testified about her agency's science and technology priorities. Tenney, who is the first lawmaker to demand an impeachment inquiry into Granholm, cited a series of violations she said Granholm has made since taking office in 2021.

"Since taking office in January of 2021, Secretary Granholm has violated the Hatch Act multiple times," Tenney remarked during the hearing. "She owned Proterra stock while her boss, President Biden, repeatedly promoted the company. Her husband owned Ford stock while she personally promoted the companies’ work with official resources."

"And most critically, she lied, under oath, to Congress, claiming that you did not own any individual stocks when in fact she did. If anyone would like to dispute these charges, all the evidence you need is in the articles I submitted into the record," the New York Republican continued.

BIDEN ENERGY SECRETARY REVEALS STOCK OWNERSHIP OF EV LOBBY GROUP FOUNDING COMPANY

Tenney added that Granholm "chose to ignore the rules and lied to Congress under oath." She cited the Department of Energy's ethics guidelines which state that "public service is a public trust; employees must place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain."

"That's perjury, period," Tenney continued. Why should you not resign or why should we not consider some kind of impeachment inquiry into you for your perjury charges?" Tenney said.

JOSH HAWLEY DEMANDS HEARING AFTER TOP BIDEN OFFICIAL ADMITS FALSE TESTIMONY ABOUT STOCK PURCHASES

In June, Granholm admitted in a letter to lawmakers that she falsely testified under oath during a Senate hearing in April that she didn't own any individual stocks. 

While Granholm divested from a variety of stocks in 2021, she acknowledged in the letter — which was sent to Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee leadership — that she maintained shares of six companies worth up to $120,000. On April 20, however, Granholm testified in response to a question from Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., that she had sold all of her shares of individual companies.

In addition, Granholm said she discovered on May 13 that her husband Daniel Mulhern owned $2,457.89 worth of shares in Ford Motor Company. Those shares were then sold on May 15, a Monday, when the stock market opened.

"As a public servant, I take very seriously the commitment to hold myself to the highest ethical standards, and I regret the accidental omission of my spouse’s interest in Ford," Granholm wrote in the letter. "This is a commitment I made to you, the President, and most importantly the American people."

And in response to Tenney's questions Thursday, Granholm said she had made an honest mistake during the April hearing.

"Of course I do not believe it's okay to violate ethics laws. Nor does anyone else in the Department of Energy," Granholm told Tenney. "I made a mistake when I testified saying that I had sold all stock. I honestly thought we had."

Granholm has also sparked criticism for maintaining shares of electric vehicle maker Proterra after being confirmed to lead the Energy Department and while the White House promoted the company. She also violated the STOCK Act nine times by failing to disclose $240,000 worth of stock sales within the legally-mandated time frame.

And last year, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel found Granholm guilty of violating the Hatch Act during a 2021 interview where she explicitly endorsed Democratic Party candidates in her official capacity as energy secretary.

Hunter Biden sues former WH aid for altering, publishing ‘pornographic’ photos from ‘laptop’ he still denies

Hunter Biden filed a lawsuit against former President Donald Trump aide Garrett Ziegler on Wednesday, alleging that Ziegler had violated federal computer laws by hacking into the now-infamous laptop that was left in a Delaware repair shop in 2019.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles, accuses Ziegler and his company — Marco Polo USA — and 10 unidentified associates of spreading "tens of thousands of emails, thousands of photos, and dozens of videos and recordings" that were considered "pornographic" on the laptop. 

Ziegler’s company website claims to be a nonprofit research group "exposing corruption & blackmail." The website has several sections pertaining to Biden’s laptop, including his emails, text messages, phone calls and financial data that culminates into a massive "online searchable database."

In the 14-page civil complaint, Biden’s attorneys allege that Ziegler is a "zealot" who has unleashed a "sustained, unhinged and obsessed campaign" against the entire Biden family for over two years and "spent countless hours accessing, tampering with, manipulating, altering, copying and damaging computer data" with his associates.

FBI AGENT INVOLVED IN HUNTER BIDEN PROBE DOES NOT BELIEVE POLITICS WERE INVOLVED

"While Defendant Ziegler is entitled to his extremist and counterfactual opinions, he has no right to engage in illegal activities to advance his right-wing agenda," attorneys Abbe Lowell, Bryan Sullivan, Zachary Hansen and Paul Salvaty wrote.

"Defendants not only admit to accessing, tampering with, manipulating and copying Plaintiff’s data from their claimed Plaintiff’s ‘laptop’ computer without Plaintiff’s authorization or consent, they regularly brag about their illegal activities in interviews with members of the media, on social media, and on right-wing podcasts," they wrote.

Attorneys argue data on the laptop — which included bank and credit card records — was backed up on Biden’s iCloud.

Thus, the lawsuit alleges Ziegler and his associates hacked into the storage "by circumventing technical or code-based barriers that were specifically designed and intended to prevent such access" and significantly "tampered with, manipulated, damaged and copied" the data without Biden’s permission.

BIDEN'S NIECE UPDATED HUNTER'S COMPANY ON CHINESE SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND DURING STINT AT TREASURY: EMAILS

Ziegler "required more time and effort than uploading photos from Plaintiff’s data because Defendants needed ‘to use AI tools’ on the data as part of their purported efforts to 'censor' portions of videos that Defendants consider to be ‘pornographic,’" the lawsuit states.

Ziegler said in a statement to Politico that either he nor his company "have been served with any lawsuit."

"But the one I read this morning out of the Central District of California should embarrass Winston & Strawn LLP," he wrote.

"Apart from the numerous state and federal laws and regulations which protect authors like me and the publishing that Marco Polo does, it’s not lost on us that Joe’s son filed this SLAPP one day after an Impeachment inquiry into his father was announced."

According to the court filings, Biden’s team is requesting a jury trial based on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California's Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act.

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE LEAVES DURING A QUESTION ABOUT HUNTER BIDEN

The federal law prohibits various forms of computer-related activities such as hacking, unauthorized access, and the distribution of malicious software, while the state law provides legal protections against unauthorized access, use, or manipulation of computer data within California. Both carry lengthy sentences if convicted. 

Prior to this suit, Biden had already taken steps to punch back in the courtroom over the contested laptop, which some of his attorneys argue may not belong to him.

In March, he initiated a countersuit, asserting that the Wilmington repair shop owner, John Pul Mac Isaac, had unlawfully disseminated Biden's personal information, and leveled six invasion of privacy charges against him. Mac Isaac first filed a lawsuit against the president’s son — as well as CNN, Politico, and Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.— in October 2022 for defamation.

According to Mac Isaac, Biden did not return for the laptop within three months days after dropping it off, and he could not be reached. He then alerted the FBI after seeing emails on the laptop illustrating information about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s purported foreign business dealings and videos of Biden taking drugs and performing sex acts with prostitutes.

Before federal agents picked up the laptop, Mac Isaac made a copy of its hard drive and gave it to Trump’s campaign lawyer Rudy Giuliani the following year.

Biden was expected to plead guilty in July to two misdemeanor tax counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax as part of a plea deal to avoid jail time on a felony gun charge. Instead, he pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and one felony gun charge last month.

McCarthy exasperated with fellow Republicans on funding fight: ‘I’m not quite sure what they want’

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy expressed exasperation with a small group of his fellow Republicans on Thursday, saying he is not sure what they want to get out of ongoing funding negotiations.

House lawmakers are debating funding for the Department of Defense this week, and McCarthy claims he has members who have "no complaint" about the bill but still oppose it. Meanwhile, members of the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) say they have made their demands clear and blame GOP leadership for refusing to go toe-to-toe with Democrats in a government shutdown.

"Yeah, I don't understand how members, they have no complaint about the DOD bill. But they don't want to pass it. I got a small group of members who don't want to vote for CR, don't want to vote for individual bills and don't want to vote for an Omni. I’m not quite sure what they want," McCarthy told Punchbowl News on Thursday.

WHITE HOUSE SENDS LETTER TO MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS DEMANDING ‘SCRUTINY’ OF REPUBLICANS AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

McCarthy made the public comment ahead of a private meeting with fellow Republicans. After the meeting, McCarthy told reporters that he "showed frustration" with his colleagues.

"Nobody wins in a government shutdown. Nobody wins. I've been here. But what we want to do is we want to be able to win the policies that we've been fighting for and telling the American public we want to make sure our border becomes secure. We want to stop the runaway spending," he said.

McCarthy went on to say he is not concerned about threats from a handful of Republicans to file a motion to vacate against him.

"If it takes a fight, I'll have a fight," he said.

HOUSE SPEAKER KEVIN MCCARTHY ANNOUNCES FORMAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AGAINST PRESIDENT BIDEN

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, responded to McCarthy during a radio appearance with Glenn Beck on Thursday just after the closed-door meeting. He referenced demands about border security and President Biden's use of the federal bureaucracy.

"I just came out of a Republican conference meeting, and it wasn't where I wanted it to be," Roy said of the negotiations. "Your Republican conference, all too happy to campaign on border security, won't do a damn thing about it."

"We have to use the power of the purse to force change. So we are trying to force Kevin and the leadership of the Republican conference to understand that now's the time to force Biden to come to the table. They're so afraid of a shutdown that they are unwilling to, you know, stand up and lock arms and tell President Biden, ‘No more,'" he added.

Roy's office has previously pointed to a letter from the HFC last month detailing their demands for the budget battle. It said they will oppose any budget move that does not include the House-passed "Secure the Border Act of 2023," address the "weaponization" of the Justice Department and FBI, as well as end "the Left's cancerous woke policies in the Pentagon."

WAPO COLUMNIST ARGUES BIDEN 'TOO OLD' TO RUN AGAIN, SHOULD HAVE STOPPED HUNTER'S 'ATTEMPTS TO IMPRESS CLIENTS'

McCarthy emerged from Thursday morning's contentious meeting and announced that the House will reconvene next week and will not leave until the government has been funded.

McCarthy's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

The Republican in-fighting comes just days after McCarthy announced an impeachment inquiry against Biden, a long-sought priority for HFC members.

Fox News' Kelly Phares contributed to this report

Comer to pursue Hunter, James Biden personal bank records as next step in impeachment inquiry

FIRST ON FOX: House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer will pursue personal and business bank records belonging to Hunter Biden and James Biden as the next step in the House impeachment inquiry against President Biden, Fox News Digital has learned. 

Comer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, and House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, who are leading the formal House impeachment inquiry, briefed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on the status of their probe into Biden’s alleged corruption. 

COMER DEMANDS STATE DEPT. EXPLAIN 'SUDDEN' DECISIONS LEADING TO FIRING OF UKRAINIAN PROSECUTOR PROBING BURISMA

During the meeting Thursday morning, Comer, R-Ky., laid out House Republicans’ findings since July related to the president’s alleged involvement in his family’s business dealings, and next steps in their investigation. 

A source familiar told Fox News Digital that Comer will now pursue bank records from the personal and business accounts belonging to the president’s son Hunter and his brother, James. 

The source said Comer will also seek additional transcribed interviews with Hunter Biden business associates, including Eric Schwerin and Rob Walker. 

DEVON ARCHER: HUNTER BIDEN, BURISMA EXECS ‘CALLED DC’ TO GET UKRAINIAN PROSECUTOR FIRED

The source also told Fox News Digital that the House Oversight Committee could hold a public hearing related to the investigation in the coming weeks, but a witness for that expected hearing has not yet been decided. 

Since July, the committee took a transcribed interview from Hunter Biden’s business associate Devon Archer, who claimed then-Vice President Joe Biden was "the brand" Hunter sold around the world to foreign business partners. Archer also testified that Biden joined conference calls with Hunter’s business partners and attended business dinners with his son’s foreign associates in Washington D.C. 

HOUSE GOP RELEASE BANK RECORDS ON HUNTER BIDEN PAYMENTS FROM RUSSIAN, KAZAKH OLIGARCHS, TOTAL CLEARS $20M

Also this summer, Comer released the third bank records memo, revealing that the Biden family and their business associates received millions of dollars from oligarchs in Russia, Ukraine and Kazahkstan during the Obama administration. Those records revealed the family received more than $20 million from these business arrangements during that time period. 

Comer has also sought information from the National Archives related to the Biden family’s alleged misuse of Air Force Two, and all unredacted documents in which Biden used a pseudonym—Robin Ware—to communicate with his son Hunter Biden. 

WITNESS SAYS JOE BIDEN TALKED TO HUNTER’S BUSINESS ASSOCIATES; GOP SEES SMOKING GUN, DEMS DOWNPLAY

More broadly, Comer, Jordan and Smith have interviewed whistleblowers who allege politics influenced all prosecutorial decisions throughout the Justice Department’s years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden. Those allegations led to Attorney General Merrick Garland granting U.S. Attorney from Delaware David Weiss—who has been leading the probe—special counsel authority. 

Meanwhile, earlier this week, Comer sought information from Secretary of State Antony Blinken on the "sudden foreign policy decisions" during the Obama administration that led to the dismissal of the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma Holdings while Hunter Biden sat on the board of the company.

The State Department has not yet turned over those records. 

The White House maintains that President Biden was "never in business with his son."

The New York Times gives impeachment the both-sides treatment

House Republicans are engaging in a completely partisan, evidence-free impeachment inquiry—but Peter Baker of The New York Times wants to talk about how the White House is treating this as a political issue. And just to get this out of the way right off the bat, the paragraph count before Baker acknowledges that Republicans have no evidence against Biden is seven.

In paragraph eight, he gets around to, “The Republican investigation so far has not produced concrete evidence of a crime by the president, as even some Republicans have conceded.” Even there, the implication is that the Republican investigation has produced some evidence, and they just need to make it concrete. In reality, the Republican investigation has produced no evidence that the president has engaged in any misconduct, let alone a crime.

Before the reader gets to that halfhearted admission, though, they’ve had to plow through a great deal of fretting about how the White House is treating this as political:

Forget the weighty legal arguments over the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors or the constitutional history of the removal process. Mr. Biden’s defense team has chosen to take on the Republican threat by convincing Americans that it is nothing more than base partisanship driven by a radical opposition.

How exactly would Baker propose the White House make weighty legal arguments when there is no legal case against Biden? When after months of fruitless investigations into Biden, Republicans have simply decided to go ahead with claiming to have found the things they looked for and didn’t find? What would he have the White House or any other Democrats do in response?

Campaign Action

At one point, Baker quotes Julian Epstein, a Clinton-era lawyer for the Democrats of the House Judiciary Committee. “Overall, this has not been handled well by the White House,” Epstein argued. “The team there has violated the cardinal sin of investigations — allowing new information to trickle out continuously and while being stuck in stale Baghdad Bob-like ‘no evidence’ denials.” But if the White House hadn’t allowed new information to come out organically, the Peter Bakers of the world would have said that Biden was suppressing evidence! And how is the White House supposed to characterize the lack of evidence other than to point out that lack? 

As always, Democrats are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If Democrats were to cede the political fight and allow Republicans to beat the crap out of Biden while the Democratic Party was busy making “weighty legal arguments over the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors or the constitutional history of the removal process,” it might satisfy Baker for a minute, but it would be a disastrous course of action. As it is, through sheer repetition and relying on lousy media coverage that doesn’t call a lie a lie, Republicans have convinced a substantial fraction of the public that there must be a there there when it comes to Biden and corruption. Imagine if Democrats voluntarily disarmed.

As entries in the Peter Baker oeuvre go, this one is pretty pedestrian and uninspired, nowhere near as creative as the time he wondered at length if it was a problem for Biden that Donald Trump was getting all the attention by being indicted. You didn’t have to be The New York Times Pitchbot to know that the Times would respond to the White House documenting Republican lies about the basis for impeachment and calling on the media to cover it better by fretting about the White House violating norms. As tired and predictable as it is, though, it’s still harmful to have the Times pretending there’s equivalence between a fraudulent impeachment inquiry and attempts to push back on such an inquiry by pointing out that it is fraudulent.

If it feels more like a political campaign than a serious legal proceeding, that is because at this point it is, at least as the White House sees it and would like others to. In the first 24 hours of their inquiry, the House Republicans made no new requests for documents, issued no new subpoenas, demanded no new testimony and laid out no potential articles of impeachment. Instead, they went to the cameras to call Mr. Biden a liar and a crook, so Mr. Biden’s defenders went to the cameras to return fire.

Note the structure here: The White House wants people to see it as political. There’s strong evidence that it is, yet it is always the White House’s pushback efforts that lead Baker’s coverage, as if they came first. Reality is the reverse.

Top House Republican says 2015 Blinken speech contradicts Biden White House narrative on Shokin: ‘Alarming’

FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., on Wednesday accused President Biden of "corruptly [changing] the United States’ policy towards Ukraine," during the Obama administration, pointing to a 2015 speech from now-Secretary of State Antony Blinken praising Ukraine’s "anti-corruption" efforts when Viktor Shokin was the country’s prosecutor general.

"This is corruption at the highest levels of federal government and one of many reasons why House Republicans have launched a formal impeachment inquiry into President Biden," Stefanik told Fox News Digital.

The timing of Blinken’s praise toward the Ukraine government in March 2015 raises questions about the White House’s insistence that then-Vice President Joe Biden was pushing for Ukraine officials to fire Shokin because he was not fulfilling his duties in prosecuting corruption.

Nearly a year after Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board in April 2014, Shokin was appointed the prosecutor general of Ukraine, inheriting multiple investigations into Burisma and its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. Shokin was fired in March 2016 amid international pressure, including from the Obama administration, over alleged corruption. 

REPUBLICANS ERUPT OVER 2015 EMAIL EXPOSING ‘ULTIMATE PURPOSE’ OF HUNTER'S INVOLVEMENT WITH BURISMA

Republicans claim that Biden’s push for Shokin’s firing was linked to Hunter’s work with Burisma, but the White House has said he was fired because he was not effectively prosecuting corruption.

Just a year before Shokin's firing, when Blinken was serving as deputy secretary of state to John Kerry, he gave a speech in Berlin on March 5, 2015, saying Ukraine had achieved "probably the best government" it had seen "since its independence."

"It’s been working to undertake deep and comprehensive economic and political reforms," Blinken said at the time. "These include laws to enhance transparency in public procurement, to reduce the government inefficiency and corruption. To clean up Ukraine’s energy sector, to make the banking system more transparent, and measures to improve the climate for business and attract foreign investment. To create a new anti-corruption agency. To strengthen the prosecutor general’s office."

Stefanik told Fox News Digital that the video of Blinken's remarks "is further evidence that the Obama-Biden Administration thought the Ukrainian government and Prosecutor General Shokin were indeed successfully combating corruption in Ukraine.

"Yet, Joe Biden corruptly changed the United States’ policy towards Ukraine along with the assessment of Shokin to illegally and corruptly benefit his son’s foreign business partners in Ukraine when he decided to withhold aid to Ukraine until Shokin was fired," she said. "The most alarming part of this video is that Hunter Biden contacted Blinken shortly after this speech while Hunter Biden was serving on the board of a Ukrainian gas company that Shokin was allegedly investigating to have a meeting."

HUNTER BIDEN GUSHED OVER ‘EXTRAVAGANT’ GIFTS FROM BURISMA EXEC WHO WAS FOCUS OF CORRUPTION PROBE

Blinken’s comments in Germany came roughly four months before he held a meeting with Hunter Biden at the State Department on July 22, 2015, Fox News Digital previously reported.

A State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital that Stefanik's claim is "based on dubious allegations" and reiterated the White House position that the international community expressed legitimate concerns about Shokin's inadequate prosecution of corruption.

On Tuesday, House Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., sent a letter to Blinken highlighting comments from multiple Obama administration officials also praising Shokin’s office in 2015.

Comer accused the State Department of taking a "sudden change in disposition towards the Ukrainian Office of the Prosecutor General in late 2015." His letter included past comments from State Department officials revealed through a FOIA lawsuit by Just the News media outlet.

The letter cited then-Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, who wrote a letter to Shokin on Kerry’s behalf, applauding his office’s "ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government" on June 11, 2015.

On Sept. 24, 2015, then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt said at the Odesa Financial Forum, "We want to work with Prosecutor General Shokin so the PGO is leading the fight against corruption. We want the Ukrainian people to have confidence in the Prosecutor General’s Office, and see that the PGO, like the new patrol police, has been reinvented as an institution to serve the citizens of Ukraine."

On Oct. 1, 2015, the National Security Council’s Interagency Policy Committee said in a memo that Ukraine had made "sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee" of a $1 billion loan, and that "it is in our strategic interest to provide one."

Comer’s letter also said that on Nov. 5, 2015, Biden participated in a call with then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and "provided no indication that the United States’ policy regarding Ukraine required the dismissal of Prosecutor General Shokin."

"By late 2015, however, the removal of Prosecutor General Shokin became a condition of the loan guarantee by the United States," Comer wrote. "In March 2016, Shokin was dismissed from his position by the Ukrainian Rada after months of public pressure most adamantly applied by then-Vice President Biden."

Comer pointed to recent statements to Congress made by former Hunter Biden business associate Devon Archer, who said that on Dec. 4, 2015, Hunter "called D.C." in a private meeting with Zlochevsky, Burisma's founder, and Vadim Pozharsky, Burisma’s corporate secretary, in Dubai following Pozharsky’s request.

Biden traveled to Ukraine days three days later, where he threatened to withhold the loan unless Shokin was fired.

On March 29, 2016, Shokin was fired.

A year after leaving the White House, Biden recounted his closed-door conversations with Poroshenko during the 2015 trip. He explained how he told Ukrainian officials the U.S. would withhold up to $1 billion in aid money earmarked for the country if Shokin remained in his position.

"I said, ‘Nah, I’m not going to – we’re not going to give you the billion dollars.’ They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said –.' I said, ‘Call him,’" Biden recounted during a January 2018 event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations. "I said, ‘I’m telling you, you’re not getting the $1 billion.’"

"I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here,'" Biden continued. "I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch, he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."

OBAMA-ERA EMAILS REVEAL HUNTER’S EXTENSIVE TIES TO NEARLY A DOZEN SENIOR-LEVEL BIDEN ADMIN AIDES

During an interview with Fox News' Brian Kilmeade that aired on Aug. 26, Shokin said he was fired by Poroshenko at Biden’s insistence specifically because he was investigating Burisma.

"There were no complaints whatsoever and no problems with how I was performing at my job. But because pressure was repeatedly put on Poroshenko, that is what ended up in him firing me," Shokin said.

The White House has forcefully pushed back on Shokin’s claims.

"Years of independent reporting has found that Shokin was not investigating Burisma or Hunter Biden at the time," the White House told Fox News in a lengthy response to Shokin’s interview. 

The White House listed multiple reports, including one from The New York Times in 2019 that said the probe went "dormant" under Shokin. However, multiple reports, also from the Times, simultaneously suggest Shokin posed a real threat to Burisma, whether through a legitimate investigation or through abusing his office to extort its owners. 

"Among both Ukrainian and American officials, there is considerable debate about whether Mr. Shokin was intent on pursuing a legitimate inquiry into Burisma or whether he was merely using the threat of prosecution to solicit a bribe, as Mr. Zlochevsky’s defenders assert," The Times added in a 2019 report.

"Mr. Zlochevsky’s allies were relieved by the dismissal of Mr. Shokin, the prosecutor whose ouster Mr. Biden had sought, according to people familiar with the situation," The Times reported. "Mr. Shokin was not aggressively pursuing investigations into Mr. Zlochevsky or Burisma. But the oligarch’s allies say Mr. Shokin was using the threat of prosecution to try to solicit bribes from Mr. Zlochevsky and his team, and that left the oligarch’s team leery of dealing with the prosecutor." 

The White House did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Cheney’s jab at ‘Putin wing’ of the Republican Party is an electoral masterstroke … for Democrats

Back in the before times, Democrats loved to hate former Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, partly because of their pointed political disagreements with her but also because she was actually a damn good messenger.

But Cheney’s politics aside, he messaging prowess worked to Democrats' advantage during the Jan. 6 select committee hearings last year: Cheney was always mission-driven, on point, and in command of the facts. The committee she helped lead as vice chair proved to be the most consequential congressional spectacle in decades, arguably helping to deal Republicans a blow at the ballot box last November and spurring a Justice Department inquiry into Donald Trump's role in the insurrection.

Now Cheney is taking up a new role as we barrel toward another election in which Trump appears poised to top the GOP ticket. Instead of littering the Republican primary as another doomed Trump detractor, Cheney is dropping incisive anti-Trump messages into the political ether.

Cheney's latest addition to the political landscape came Tuesday, when she sought to separate old-guard Republican defense hawks from newfangled MAGA isolationists.  

"Putin has now officially endorsed the Putin-wing of the Republican Party," Cheney tweeted over an AP News article about Russian President Vladimir Putin blasting the criminal indictments of Trump as "rotten" politically motivated prosecutions.

"Putin Republicans & their enablers will end up on the ash heap of history," continued Cheney. "Patriotic Americans in both parties who believe in the values of liberal democracy will make sure of it."

Putin has now officially endorsed the Putin-wing of the Republican Party. Putin Republicans & their enablers will end up on the ash heap of history. Patriotic Americans in both parties who believe in the values of liberal democracy will make sure of it. https://t.co/XsJN7b6fPs

— Liz Cheney (@Liz_Cheney) September 12, 2023

Cheney's rallying cry against "Putin Republicans" seeks to make common cause among a politically divergent group of establishment Republicans and Democrats who are united in their support for Ukraine, rejection of Trump, and disdain for Putin.

Campaign Action

Rhetorically speaking, "Putin Republicans" and "Putin wing" of the Republican Party are also sticky phrases that could potentially catch on, helping to create a definitive us (democracy stalwarts) versus them (Trump/Putin backers) dynamic.

MAGA Republicans hate Cheney with a white-hot rage and reveled along with Trump in throwing her out on her ear last year. But her name still holds political sway with a very narrow slice of the Republican Party—perhaps some 5% or so—and that's still a meaningful chunk of voters in a general election, even if it's a pittance in the primary.

Democrats would be smart to take note of Cheney's messaging and even take it up, reinforcing it. She is skillfully helping to create a permission structure for old-guard Republicans to help reelect Joe Biden next year, even if they don't particularly like him.

It's a device Biden loves, as he has routinely shied away from painting Republican voters with such a broad brush that he alienates all of them.

Some of those conventional Republican voters could very well be the difference between a one-term presidency and Biden's successful reelection next year.

Jury awards $100,000 to Kentucky couple denied marriage license by ex-County Clerk Kim Davis

A federal jury has awarded $100,000 to a Kentucky couple who sued former county clerk Kim Davis over her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Davis, the former Rowan County clerk, drew international attention when she was briefly jailed in 2015 over her refusal, which she based on her belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

A jury in Ashland, Kentucky, awarded David Ermold and David Moore each $50,000 after deliberating on Wednesday, according to lawyers for Davis. A second couple who sued, James Yates and Will Smith, were awarded no damages on Wednesday by U.S. District Judge David Bunning.

Bunning sent Davis to jail for five days in 2015 after holding her in contempt of court. She was parodied on Saturday Night Live and embraced by conservative politicians who traveled to Kentucky to support her.

Davis was released only after her staff issued the licenses on her behalf but removed her name from the form. Kentucky's state legislature later enacted a law removing the names of all county clerks from state marriage licenses.

Campaign Action

Bunning ruled last year that Davis violated the constitutional rights of the two couples. In the ruling, Bunning reasoned that Davis “cannot use her own constitutional rights as a shield to violate the constitutional rights of others while performing her duties as an elected official.”

The trials held this week were held to decide damages against Davis. The former clerk had argued that a legal doctrine called qualified immunity protected her from being sued for damages by the couples.

Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, which represented Davis in the case, said in a release Wednesday they “look forward to appealing this decision and taking this case to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Davis’ lawyers in the case in 2020.

Ermold and Moore had a highly publicized showdown with Davis at the Rowan County clerk's office in 2015 after they asked for a marriage license with news cameras surrounding them. When she refused, Moore asked under whose authority was she acting. She replied, “under God's authority.”

Ermold unsuccessfully ran for clerk of Rowan County in 2018, when Davis was defeated by another Democrat. Before running, Ermold and Moore returned to Davis' office to file to run for clerk, and Davis, who handled election filings, helped Ermold during a brief but cordial meeting.

House hardliners brag about ‘chaos’ as government shutdown looms

On its first full day of work following the August recess, the House was supposed to start the floor process to bring up the defense appropriations bill Wednesday. The people in charge of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, however, had other plans. That plan consists of: one, shutting the House down while they come up with more unreasonable demands for slashing government funding and, two, running the clock down toward Oct. 1, when they can shut the whole government down.

One of the hardliners in the House, Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, told Politico that running amok is their master plan. “We have an evolving strategy going right now. This whole place is about chaos, right?” Got that? Chaos is strategy.

McCarthy did not have enough votes to pass the first procedural vote on the military spending bill, and wasn’t going to force a repeat of his resounding defeat in June, when 11 hardliners unexpectedly voted against the motion to proceed on a bill and tied the House up for days, not allowing any legislation to advance to the floor. The ploy then was to force McCarthy to renege on the deal he made with President Joe Biden to avert a debt default, and slash the agreed-upon spending levels by billions. It worked.

Campaign Action

At least McCarthy learned from that experience and counted the votes before he put the defense appropriations bill on the floor, saving himself a modicum of embarrassment. Otherwise, it’s a repeat of the June fiasco, with the added excitement of a pending government shutdown in just 10 legislative days.

The obstructionists aren’t opposing this appropriations bill, just like they weren’t opposed to the legislation back in June—that was a ridiculous bit of political posturing about people’s freedom to have gas stoves. This bill, which Republicans are programmed to love because it contains money for the Pentagon, is chock-full of their culture-war bullshit. They’re blocking it because it’s the best hostage they can take now.

“Nobody’s objecting to what’s in the bill,” said House Rules Committee Chair Tom Cole. “Everybody’s trying to leverage the bill for something now.” What they want isn’t exactly clear beyond, as Politico writes, “a litany of demands from [the] right flank on how to handle federal spending talks with the Senate to avert a funding lapse.”

One thing the House hardliners don’t want is a stopgap funding bill to avert a government shutdown. That would mean continuing to spend at current levels, which they say is too much. They want to go back to the previous funding year, 2022, but that simply can’t be done in a continuing resolution. That’s not how this works. Which means they want to shut the government down.

There are any number of other demands, none of which are impeachment. “[McCarthy] starting an impeachment inquiry gives him no—zero—cushion, relief, brace, as it applies to spending,” Rep. Bob Good of Virginia, one of the revolters, told Politico. So good job on that one, Mr. Speaker.

This is another big blow to McCarthy. If he can’t get the defense bill passed—of all goddamned things—you know how hopeless it all is. There seems to be no possible way the speaker can regain control of the House at this point, and that makes a government shutdown almost inevitable.

RELATED STORIES:

McCarthy caves to rebels for temporary truce

GOP rebels shut the House down

Freedom Caucus bites back