Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is warning Republicans against falling into the “trap” of impeachment after Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) signaled earlier this week that the House could move forward with an impeachment inquiry against President Biden.
“It’s not good for the republic to keep impeaching presidents and indicting presidents,” Paul said in an interview on Fox Business Network's “Mornings with Maria.”
“All this stuff is destructive,” he added.
In an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Monday night, McCarthy said the House GOP’s investigations into the Biden family’s foreign business activities are “rising to the level of impeachment inquiry,” but clarified no decision had been made.
“The other side [Democrats] says, ‘Oh they want to, they’re for preserving democracy.’ They’re pitting everyone against each other and they’re destroying the fabric of our republic, so I think we have to be careful not to fall into the same trap,” Paul said.
Former President Trump was impeached twice by a majority-Democratic House during his four-year term. Republicans in the Senate acquitted Trump in both instances.
Paul is among several Republican lawmakers who have pushed back against McCarthy’s comments. That group also includes Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), who called the remarks “impeachment theater” meant to distract from budget negotiations, and Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who told reporters, “No one is seriously talking about impeachment.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) speaks to a reporters as he arrives to the Capitol for a procedural vote regarding a nomination on Tuesday, June 13, 2023. (Greg Nash)
In a statement exclusively obtained by The Hill, the White House said McCarthy’s suggestion is “a ridiculous, baseless stunt, intended to attack the President at a time when House Republicans should instead be joining the President to focus on the important issues facing the American people.”
In his interview with Hannity, McCarthy accused Biden of using the “weaponization of government to benefit his family and deny Congress the ability to have oversight.”
Republican skepticism over the Biden family’s foreign business activities was boosted last week when Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) released an FBI form containing unverified allegations of corruption connected to Hunter Biden’s business with Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
The White House has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in the matter, and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre reiterated Monday that Biden was never in business with his son.
A Morning Consult poll conducted June 22-24 found 30 percent of register voters believe it should be a “top priority” for Congress to investigate whether Biden should be impeached, including 11 percent of Democrats, 24 percent of independents and 55 percent of Republicans.
House Republican leaders punted plans to pass an appropriations bill to fund agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to September amid internal discord about funding levels and policy gripes, canceling Friday floor votes and starting August recess a day early.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) announced on the House floor that votes would no longer be expected Friday.
“We will be finished for the August work period” after last votes Thursday afternoon, Scalise said.
The move to punt the bill comes as House conservatives have pressured GOP leaders to further slash the funding levels in the bill — and in other funding bills. Moderate lawmakers, meanwhile, have taken issue with a provision in the ag-FDA legislation that would limit access to an abortion pill.
Punting a bill sets up a September scramble to fund the government after the House returns from a six-week recess. The House is scheduled to be in session for just 12 days before a Sept. 30 funding deadline.
Senate appropriators are also marking up spending bills at levels higher than the House GOP is, laying the foundation for a clash between the two chambers in the fall.
Indications that the ag-FDA bill would be punted emerged Wednesday, when the House Rules Committee — which had been preparing the bill to come to the floor — did not come back to finish considering legislation Wednesday evening as negotiations between conservatives and leadership continued.
Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House GOP appropriators had already agreed to set overall top-line spending levels lower than the caps set out in the debt limit bill that McCarthy negotiated with President Biden. That infuriated Democrats, who pledge to vote against the House funding bills — leaving McCarthy in the difficult position of getting the slim GOP majority on board with the bills to pass them alone.
The House on Thursday passed its first appropriations bill to fund military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs largely along party lines.
Another point of contention in the ag-FDA bill is a provision that would nullify a Biden administration rule allowing the abortion pill mifepristone to be sold in retail pharmacies and by mail with prescriptions from a certified health care provider.
Moderate Republicans have been vocal in their opposition to the provision, warning that they will not support the bill unless it is stripped.
But one GOP lawmaker suggested those who object to the mifepristone measure are in no hurry to take it out because it gives them a reason to “delay the whole damn thing” amid disagreement with the Freedom Caucus members and other conservatives pushing for cuts.
“Freedom Caucus wants deeper cuts, we can’t possibly accept that,” the GOP lawmaker told The Hill.
House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (Mass.) tore into Republicans for delaying the vote and piling up spending bill votes in September, arguing that lawmakers should stay in Washington to strip out the "divisive" measures in the bills.
"Extremists are holding your conference hostage," Clark said.
"This is a reckless march to a MAGA shutdown," she added.
House Republicans on Thursday passed their first government funding bill, overcoming an initial hurdle in Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) attempts to wrangle the GOP conference to approve all 12 appropriations bills amid intense pressure from conservatives to lower spending levels.
The bill — which allocates funding for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and related agencies — passed in a 219-211 vote. Two Republicans — Reps. Tim Burchett (Tenn.) and Ken Buck (Colo.) — voted with every Democrat against the measure.
The package now heads to the Senate, where it is dead on arrival. Senate appropriators are marking up their spending bills at levels different from the House GOP measures, setting the scene for a chamber vs. chamber showdown in the fall.
Lawmakers have until Sept. 30 to send President Biden legislation to fund the government or risk a shutdown.
In an effort to appease conservatives, House GOP appropriations marked up their spending bills at fiscal 2022 levels, below the caps set in the debt ceiling deal struck by President Biden and McCarthy. The Senate, on the other hand, is considering its appropriations measures at levels in line with the debt limit agreement.
Republicans have also pursued amendments Democrats have blasted as “poison pills” in the military construction bill and the other 12 annual funding bills, including policies targeting the Biden administration's orders on diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as restricting abortion access.
While Republican leaders saw success Thursday in mustering enough support to pass the Milcon-VA bill, they were also forced to punt consideration of another appropriations bill amid internal divisions over spending and a controversial provision.
The chamber was scheduled to vote on funding legislation for agriculture, rural development and the Food and Drug Administration this week, but party leaders scrapped those plans Thursday afternoon as disagreements continued to plague the measure’s passage.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) announced on the floor Thursday that the final votes this week would be in the afternoon.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., joined at right by Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., arrives for a news conference after a meeting of the Republican Conference at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, June 6, 2023. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Conservatives are pushing for steeper funding cuts in the legislation, and moderates are opposed to a provision that would nullify a Biden administration rule allowing the abortion pill mifepristone to be sold in retail pharmacies and by mail with prescriptions from a certified health care provider.
On the Milcon-VA bill, GOP negotiatorsproposed more than $317 billion in funding, which includes increases for the VA above current levels. The bill also calls for more than $130 billion for veterans’ medical care and a boost for Department of Defense military construction projects.
In a statement earlier this week, the White House said it appreciates the $121 billion in funding that appropriators proposed for VA medical care. The Biden administration said the funding would help support its priorities to end veteran homelessness and expand access to mental health care, among other measures.
But the administration did not hold back its criticism of policies in the bill it said would prevent VA medical centers from being able to perform abortions or “provide hormone therapies for the purpose of gender-affirming care.”
Other measures the White House criticized include sections Democrats say would prevent the VA from displaying LGBTQ pride flags and language that would limit administration efforts to advance equity and diversity.
Burchett, one of the two Republicans to vote against the Milcon-VA appropriations bill, pointed to the ballooning debt in the U.S. in explaining his opposition to the legislation.
“Love the veterans: daddy fought for his country, my momma lost a brother fighting the Nazis, dad fought the Japanese, my momma flew an airplane during the Second World War, but we are $32 trillion in debt,” he said.
Republicans are expected to ramp up efforts to pass the remaining funding bills when they return from recess in September. But the House faces a serious time crunch, with the chamber scheduled to have just 12 legislative days on the calendar before a shutdown deadline at the end of September.
Scalise suggested Tuesday that bicameral negotiations could take place over the long August recess, but negotiators haven’t signaled any bipartisan talks are scheduled to happen before lawmakers are set to come back.
Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said on Tuesday that the Four Corners — the top leaders of both chambers’ respective appropriations committees — haven’t recently had formal talks, but her “goal is to have conferences.”
She told reporters she’s hopeful the Senate will begin bringing its appropriations bills to the floor “at the very first week in September.”
“I believe we should do everything to avoid a shutdown,” she said.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is calling on House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) to "publicly reprimand" Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) after the congresswoman during a hearing showed explicit photos of Hunter Biden engaged in sex acts — a display that was sharply rebuked by Democrats.
In a letter to Comer on Wednesday, Raskin — the top Democrat on the Oversight panel — said Greene's display at last week's hearing "clearly violated House rules,” pointing to congressional decorum.
"I therefore urge you to publicly reprimand Rep. Greene by issuing a statement condemning her actions as an affront to the dignity, propriety, and decorum of the Committee," he added.
Raskin also asked Comer to announce that "explicit pornographic images of people engaging in sex acts" like the ones Greene displayed will not be allowed to be shown during congressional proceedings without "clear legislative relevance, prior approval from both the Majority and Minority, and written consent from any individual featured in the exhibit."
Greene displayed the images during an Oversight Committee hearing last week that featured testimony from two IRS whistleblowers who allege prosecutors slow-walked the investigation into Hunter Biden, President Biden's son.
During her allotted time for questions, the congresswoman held up posters that showed graphic sexual photos from the laptop hard drive that allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden’s face was visible in the photos, but others in the images involved in the sex acts had their faces censored with black boxes.
Greene alleged Hunter Biden improperly utilized his company to write off payments made to prostitutes. IRS special agent Joseph Ziegler, one of the whistleblowers testifying, would not confirm the claim. But he said deductions were made that were believed to be for escorts, and a payment that was made out to be for a golf membership was actually for a “sex club.”
Comer has not publicly condemned or criticized Greene for the photos. And on Tuesday, he and Greene sent a letter to Justice Department (DOJ) officials expressing concern that “DOJ disregarded the victims who were sexually exploited by Hunter Biden,” pointing to testimony from last week’s hearing.
“Congressional testimony indicates that Hunter Biden paid prostitutes — victims — and used such payments as tax expenses for one of his companies,” the letter reads.
The pair went on to ask to “analyze legislation that penalizes federal prosecutors who do not uphold victims’ rights — regardless of the defendant’s last name or political affiliation — and ensures that funds designed for victim related programs are used appropriately by DOJ.”
In a statement responding to Raskin’s letter, Comer cited “the young women” Hunter Biden “involved in his illegal activities.”
“It speaks to Ranking Member Raskin’s priorities that he is more concerned about Hunter Biden’s embarrassment than the young women he involved in his illegal activities. I hope Ranking Member Raskin will join me in asking the Justice Department about Hunter Biden’s Mann Act violations and why the victims’ rights have been ignored,” Comer said in a statement.
Raskin on Wednesday criticized Comer for failing to condemn Greene for her display.
“Your failure to halt Rep. Greene’s display of pornographic photography during Committee proceedings undermines the integrity of this Committee and the House of Representatives,” he wrote.
“During an interview, you had an opportunity to disavow her lewd display, but instead you further undermined the integrity of this Committee by dismissing its significance and expressing only support for her actions,” he later added. “Just today, when asked about a picture of Rep. Greene’s graphic posters that showed you in the background, you glibly told a Politico journalist you ‘wished that it had been taken from the opposite angle and gotten Glen[n] Grothman in the background instead of me.’”
The Maryland Democrat warned that if Comer does not condemn Greene for her actions, he would be setting a poor precedent.
“It is incumbent upon you to make clear that Rep. Greene’s use of pornographic images at a public hearing clearly violated House rules and to ensure that we are not subject to repeated incidents or similarly unacceptable actions in future hearings,” Raskin wrote. “If this was acceptable for Rep. Greene, you are establishing it as acceptable for all Members.”
Adding to the criticism, Hunter Biden’s lawyer last week filed an ethics complaint against Greene, requesting that the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) “immediately” initiate a review of the Georgia Republican’s conduct.
The OCE is a nonpartisan, independent entity that was established by the House. It reviews allegations of misconduct involving lawmakers, officers and House staffers and, if warranted, refers matters to the Ethics Committee.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are teaming up on legislation to create a new agency that would have the power to regulate tech giants.
The bipartisan Digital Consumer Protection Commission Act, unveiled Thursday, would create an agency charged with oversight of Meta, Google, Amazon and other large tech companies and seek to promote industry competition and consumer privacy online.
The commission would work alongside the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ), the agencies that currently operate as antitrust enforcers, according to the bill.
The legislation would also set regulations in place requiring “dominant platforms” to be licensed and allow for licenses to be removed for repeated anticompetitive and anti-consumer conduct violations.
The bill is the latest effort from Congress to rein in the power of tech giants.
Last year, two bipartisan antitrust reform bills advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee — the American Innovation and Choice Online Act and the Open App Markets Act — but failed to make it to the floor for a vote. Companion bills that advanced out of the House Judiciary Committee also failed to advance to a full floor vote.
Warren and Graham’s proposal seeks to target tech regulation more broadly by creating a commission specifically tasked with oversight of the booming industry.
The legislation would also grant the new commission with oversight over how to respond to emerging risks, including from artificial intelligence (AI) — an area where lawmakers and regulators have been scrambling to understand and put rules in place.
“Enough is enough. It’s time to rein in Big Tech. And we can’t do it with a law that only nibbles around the edges of the problem,” the senators wrote in a joint op-ed published in The New York Times on Thursday.
“Piecemeal efforts to stop abusive and dangerous practices have failed. Congress is too slow, it lacks the tech expertise, and the army of Big Tech lobbyists can pick off individual efforts easier than shooting fish in a barrel. Meaningful change — the change worth engaging every member of Congress to fight for — is structural,” they added.
Lawmakers have long faced an uphill climb when pursuing tech reforms, with the industry launching massive lobbying campaigns targeting congressional legislation.
At the same time, Republicans leading the House have focused their tech agenda on content moderation battles rather than advancing bills aimed at reining in the market power of Big Tech.
For Warren, her proposal with Graham is the second time the progressive firebrand has recently joined forces with a colleague across the aisle. Last month, Warren joined Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) to put forward a bill that targets failed bank executives with harsher penalties.
Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) flirtation with impeaching President Biden is pleasing the right wing of his conference while not scaring moderates, keeping his fractious conference together while setting up the real possibility of a third presidential impeachment in less than five years.
The increased talk of impeachment comes as the GOP dives further into investigations of Hunter Biden, who on Wednesday saw his plea agreement get placed on hold after a federal judge questioned the scope of the deal.
The drive also has heavy political implications, with attacks on Biden and his family being fertile ground ahead of the 2024 election, especially with the economy rebounding in a way that could help the White House.
But going too far poses the risk of turning off swing-district voters and endangering moderates in McCarthy’s conference. Those members back investigating Biden, but they might not support an impeachment vote.
McCarthy’s efforts so far have threaded this needle as he insists that he will never pursue impeachment for “political purposes.”
“The Speaker has said that there may be an impeachment inquiry. That is not impeachment,” said Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who represents a district Biden won in 2020. “That is Congress continuing its responsibilities to look into the issues that have been raised.”
“Are they producing enough facts and evidence that warrant taking it to the next step? I don't think it's there at the moment. But these committees are doing their job,” Lawler said.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), another swing district Republican, said an impeachment inquiry effort poses an electoral risk “if it looks like it's rushed and we're not doing due process and due diligence.”
“But if we're very thorough about it. … I think the voters will feel differently,” Bacon said.
In a closed-door conference meeting Wednesday, McCarthy put no timeline on starting an impeachment probe and urged members not to overstate the evidence obtained so far, according to several GOP members.
Conservatives who have been pushing for the impeachment of Biden administration officials generally offered support for McCarthy’s approach as they try to pull the Speaker to the right on a host of other policy and spending matters.
“I don’t think there’s any question that him speaking to that has caused a paradigm shift,” said Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said of McCarthy floating an impeachment inquiry.
McCarthy and other Republicans point to numerous issues they see stemming from information compiled from IRS whistleblowers who allege prosecutors slow-walked the Hunter Biden tax crime investigation, and from financial records they obtained that show President Biden falsely denied his family made money from China.
“Let's just say there's a whole hell of a lot of smoke, and our job is to present the fire,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), adding he would support an impeachment inquiry against Biden.
Not all conservatives are pleased, though. Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) sees impeachment talk as a distraction from the right flank’s push to get McCarthy to agree to lower spending levels in appropriations bills.
“This is impeachment theater,” Buck said on CNN Wednesday. “I don’t think it’s responsible for us to talk about impeachment. When you start raising the 'I' word, it starts sending a message to the public, and it sets expectations.”
Republicans have not proven President Biden was part of any of Hunter Biden’s business activities, interfered in his criminal case, or directly financially benefited from his son’s foreign business dealings.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has repeatedly said the president “was never in business with his son.
And Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, tweeted on Monday night that McCarthy was focusing on impeachment inquiry “instead of focusing on the real issues Americans want us to address like continuing to lower inflation or create jobs.”
McCarthy suggested a potential impeachment inquiry could not center directly on those issues, but instead on the Biden administration’s cooperation with the House GOP probes.
“If the departments in government, just like Richard Nixon used, deny us the ability to get the information we’re asking, that would rise to an impeachment inquiry,” McCarthy said on Tuesday.
Republicans also argue the weight of a formal impeachment inquiry would give the House more power to get the information it seeks from its various investigations.
“If we don't have access to the information, then you do have to escalate the oversight of the House,” Rep. Marc Molinaro (R-N.Y.), another Biden-district Republican, echoed after a GOP conference meeting on Wednesday.
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said that when he was chairman of the House Judiciary Committee setting up impeachment of former President Donald Trump four years ago, his theory that an impeachment inquiry would give more weight to enforcing subpoenas did not pan out.
“We thought that it puts the weight of the House behind the request, not just the weight of a committee,” Nadler said. “It didn’t work.”
Democrats are scoffing at the GOP impeachment effort. Democratic National Committee Chairman Jaime Harrison suggested McCarthy’s interest in impeaching Biden was a way for him to do the “bidding” of Trump — though McCarthy told reporters Tuesday he had not talked to the former president about a potential impeachment inquiry.
“I don't think that they've been prevented from getting information that they want. I think the biggest problem they have is all of the information that they've gotten does not support their overreaching and unsubstantiated conclusions and allegations,” said Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.). “He is using that as an excuse to start an impeachment inquiry without any evidence of wrongdoing.”
And while the House GOP conference is largely lining up behind McCarthy as he floats impeachment for now, there is potential for frustrations to flare if members resist efforts to move forward on an actual inquiry in the future.
“At this point, I don't know how there can’t be support for it. Any Republican that can't move forward on impeachment with all the information and overwhelming evidence that we have — I really don't know why they're here, to be honest with you,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).
The Senate on Wednesday inched closer to wrapping up work on its version of the annual defense policy package as lawmakers push to complete their work by Thursday night and leave for their month-long recess.
Senators voted on three amendments on Wednesday evening to close in on finishing work on the National Defense Authorization Act. They are also expecting a late night on Thursday, with eight additional amendment votes slated as they rush towards the recess finish line.
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) told The Hill that lawmakers “could be” needed to stick around until Friday to officially finish up, pointing to a number of “odds and ends.” Those include a second manager’s package of amendments that members are trying to put to bed and a “handful of outstanding requests we have from members.”
“It’s just a lot of moving parts,” Thune said, adding that the intelligence authorization package is also an item senators have to pass. He added to reporters later on that the process is “trending well.”
The Senate opened consideration of the NDAA last week and has tried to keep the package on the bipartisan rails that did not exist in the House. House Republicans passed an NDAA bill on their own that included a number of provisions related to the “culture war.”
“I’ve said repeatedly that the NDAA is an opportunity for the Senate to show we can work on the biggest issues facing our country through bipartisanship, cooperation, honest debate,” Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the Senate floor. “That’s what we have seen play out so far here on the floor: bipartisanship.”
“The NDAA process in this chamber is a welcome departure from the contentious, chaotic, and partisan race-to-the-bottom we saw in the House,” he added.
The end-of-the-week process is not expected to be completely smooth sailing though. One stumbling block could come in the form of a push by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) for an amendment vote on a measure to give permanent residency to roughly 80,000 Afghans who’ve come to the U.S. following the country’s fall two years ago.
According to three Senate Republicans, the bill could potentially create issues completing the NDAA process as Klobuchar demands a vote. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) a supporter of her bill, told The Hill that he has heard Klobuchar is prepared to hold up the NDAA in the absence of a vote. However, it is considered an uphill climb for her to get a vote.
“It looks difficult to me,” Moran said. “It could be [a stumbling block.]”
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a Senate Armed Services Committee member, added that colleagues are attempting to find a resolution later on and are committed to working with her to tailor the legislation as detractors believe its current language is too broad.
“Sen. Klobuchar has worked hard at it, but so far the language she has presented is challenging for a number of reasons,” Rounds said. “We just don’t think the legislation as it’s currently written is going to get the job done.”
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has held up her bill as he has competing legislation that is more limited in scope.
Overall, senators have passed 16 amendments to the NDAA.
Lawmakers earlier in the week overwhelmingly passed a couple of bipartisan amendments aimed at increasing U.S. competitiveness with China. Two votes held on Tuesday won 91 votes each: one to boost transparency of investments by American entities in sensitive technologies in adversarial nations, and another blacklisting China from purchasing U.S. farmland
Those overwhelming votes earned praise from Schumer, who hailed the ability for members to “unite” to take on the Chinese.
“It’s not often that 91 Senators can unite on a single measure, let alone two measures,” Schumer added.
Another amendment voted on early on Wednesday pushed by Sens. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) aimed at halting the harassment of our military members by debt collectors passed 95 to 4.
None of the three amendments considered on Wednesday night won the needed 60 votes to get attached to the bill. Headlining that group was one by Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) that would have greenlit $10 million for an office to provide full-time Ukraine oversight. It failed 50 to 49.
A side-by-side amendment pushed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that was related to the Ukraine bill failed by a wide margin. In addition, Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas) amendment that would have reinstated service members who were booted from the military because they did not get the COVID-19 vaccine also was not adopted.
Once the Senate passes its NDAA version, the upper and lower chambers will have to meet to come up with a compromise bill. That legislation is highly likely not to include any of the partisan provisions or will include watered down versions of them in order to win support of at least 60 senators.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is helped by Senators and staff after McConnell unexpectedly pauses while speaking to reporters after the weekly policy luncheon on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) froze in front of television cameras for about 20 seconds Wednesday as he battled a bout of lightheadedness that forced him to walk away briefly from a press conference.
The scary moment, which prompted members of his leadership team to suggest that he take a rest, raises new questions about the 81-year-old Republican leader’s future.
“Are you good, Mitch?” asked Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairwoman Joni Ernst (Iowa), putting her hand on the back of his arm.
Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Barrasso (Wyo.), who is a doctor, ushered McConnell away from the podium after the leader was unable to get more than a couple of sentences into his opening statement.
“Let’s go back to your office,” Barrasso suggested. “Do you want to say anything else to the press? Let’s go back.”
Barrasso later revealed that he walked “down the hall” with McConnell toward his office after they both walked away from the podium and that the leader didn’t say anything to him to indicate distress.
An aide to McConnell later said, “He felt lightheaded and stepped away for a moment.” The aide pointed out that McConnell “was sharp” in answering reporters’ questions after he returned to the event.
McConnell’s term runs through the end of 2026, and he previously said that he expects to stay on as leader.
Senate Republican Conference Vice Chairwoman Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.) told reporters after the troubling moment in front of the cameras that McConnell should stay in his leadership role.
“And hopefully he gets a good rest over the [August] break,” she said.
McConnell has helped recruit top-flight Republican candidates in West Virginia and Montana to maximize the chances of reclaiming his old title of Senate majority leader in January 2025.
And two outside fundraising groups aligned with McConnell, the Senate Leadership Fund and One Nation, this week reported record-breaking fundraising hauls over the first six months of a nonelection year.
The groups raised a combined $38 million, with the Senate Leadership Fund collecting $10.1 million and One Nation bringing in $28.2 million.
But Senate Republican colleagues say McConnell seems to be still suffering the effects of a nasty spill he took in early March, which sent him to the hospital with a concussion and led to weeks of rehabilitation.
One Republican senator who requested anonymity to discuss McConnell’s health observed that the GOP leader has been more reticent at Republican lunch meetings. The lawmaker speculated that McConnell may be having troubling hearing the conversations at the lunch, just as he sometimes has trouble hearing reporters’ questions at press conferences.
A second Republican senator said McConnell does not appear fully recovered from his fall.
“I love Mitch McConnell, he is one of the most strategic political thinkers that we have. I have such admiration and respect for him but I do fear that — you can call it low energy — he is not himself,” the lawmaker said.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who is the oldest member of the Senate GOP conference at age 89, said he planned to call McConnell’s office to check up on his health.
“If I want to know what went wrong, yes,” he said.
FILE - Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, testifies during a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Capitol Hill, Thursday, Feb. 9, 2023, in Washington. A U.S. Senate committee has accused the embattled Swiss bank Credit Suisse of limiting the scope of an internal probe into Nazi clients and Nazi-linked accounts. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)
McConnell waved aside questions about his health when he returned to the podium Wednesday afternoon.
Asked at Wednesday’s press conference why he was unable to complete his statement and whether it was related to the concussion, McConnell responded: “No, I’m fine.”
“You’re fine, you’re fully able to do your job?” the reporter pressed.
“Yeah,” McConnell answered.
McConnell returned to the press conference in time to take the first question from reporters, as he usually does after the weekly Senate Republican policy lunch.
He made a point of staying at the podium longer than usual to answer questions and appeared calm and confident while providing detailed answers.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) addresses reporters after the weekly policy luncheon on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)
When a reporter asked Wednesday if he had “anybody in mind” to replace him when he’s “no longer” the Republican leader, McConnell smiled and walked back to his office while members of his leadership team laughed it off.
Republican senators and aides predict that if McConnell steps down from his leadership job, there would be a three-way race among Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.), Barrasso and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the former Senate GOP whip and a current adviser to the Senate GOP leadership team, to replace him.
Thune and Cornyn, who have both expressed interest in becoming the Senate GOP leader sometime in the future, say the job belongs to McConnell as long as he wants it.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), the former chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee who challenged McConnell unsuccessfully in November, hasn’t ruled out making another run for Senate Republican leader.
McConnell defeated Scott 37-10 in an acrimonious race in which both candidates traded blame for the disappointing results of the 2022 midterm election.
Barrasso said after the press conference that he was “concerned” about McConnell’s health but pointed out that he led the lunch meeting earlier in the day and appeared in good shape while answering questions from the press.
“I was concerned since … he was injured a number of months ago, and I continue to be concerned,” he told a crowd of reporters who pressed him for details about McConnell’s condition.
“I was concerned when he fell and hit his head a number of months ago and was hospitalized, and I think he’s made a remarkable recovery. He’s doing a great job leading our conference and was able to answer every question that the press asked today,” he said.
Barrasso said McConnell didn’t show any signs of impairment at the conference lunch meeting.
“He spoke at lunch, carried on, led the discussion. Everything was fine,” he said.
Three former defense officials on Wednesday gave explosive testimony at a House hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs), warning that the sightings “potentially” pose national security risks.
The witnesses before the House Oversight subcommittee — a former Navy pilot, a retired Navy commander and an ex-Air Force intelligence official — also stressed that the government has been far too secretive in acknowledging such incidents, prompting calls from lawmakers for the intelligence community to be more forthcoming.
“If UAP are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it is an issue for science. In either case, unidentified objects are a concern for flight safety,” said Ryan Graves, a former F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot who founded Americans for Safe Aerospace, a non-profit group meant to encourage pilots to report UAP incidents.
And all three witnesses replied “yes” when asked if the UAPs could be collecting reconnaissance information on the United States or probing the country’s capabilities.
The hearing seemed to unite lawmakers in a push for answers on a topic that has largely been dismissed by politicians, who for decades have been hesitant to touch on UAPs — also known as unidentified flying objects, or UFOs — and other extraterrestrial life lest they become a laughingstock.
A series of reports from The New York Times beginning in 2017 began to change that. The reports — exploring the Pentagon’s secretive Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program and DOD-documented UAP sightings.
Lawmakers also worry that the sightings could be tied to military technology owned by adversaries but unbeknownst to most Americans.
“UAPs, whatever they be, may pose a serious threat to our military and our civilian aircraft, and that must be understood,” said the subpanel's ranking member, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.). “We should encourage more reporting, not less on UAPs. The more we understand, the safer we will be.”
The Pentagon has only given tentative information on UAPs, in 2021 releasing a report which found more than 140 inexplicable encounters.
Videos released by the Defense Department have also shown unexplained happenings, including the now famous “Tic Tac” video, taken in November 2004 on a routine training mission with the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz off the coast of southern California.
During the encounter, Navy ships and planes used sensors to track an oval-shaped flying object that resembled a Tic Tac breath mint, with four pilots visually sighting the apparatus that flew at high speed over the water before abruptly disappearing.
Former Navy pilot David Fravor, the commander of the mission and the individual who filmed the video, on Wednesday told the committee that the object “was far superior to anything that we had at the time, have today or looking to develop in the next 10 years.”
He added that he found it “shocking” that “the incident was never investigated” and said none of his crew were ever questioned.
And fellow witness Graves said during the hearing that he had seen UAPs off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.”
He said the sightings were “not rare or isolated” – noting that UAP objects have been detected “essentially where all Navy operations are being conducted across the world,” and were also seen by military aircrews and commercial pilots.
But Graves also estimated that only 5 percent of sightings are reported, which he attributed to stigma among pilots who feel it will “lead to professional repercussions either through management or through their yearly physical check.”
But the most explosive testimony of the day came from David Grusch, a former member of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency whose previous allegations on UAPs and the government’s efforts to conceal them sparked Wednesday’s hearing.
Grusch claimed that the Pentagon and other agencies are holding back information about UAPs and hiding a long-running program that is attempting to reverse engineer the objects.
Grusch said that he “absolutely” believes the U.S. government is in possession of non-human technology, adding that he knows “the exact locations” of that material.
He also claimed that he has faced serious reprisals for his statements and had knowledge of those who have been harmed or injured as part of ongoing efforts to cover up extraterrestrial technology.
Grusch in the past has claimed that the U.S. government has for decades recovered nonhuman craft with nonhuman species inside.
He repeated similar assertions at Wednesday’s hearing, though he repeatedly told lawmakers he could not share details in a public setting and that his information was based upon what he had been told by others.
Republicans and Democrats now want to get to the bottom of what these incidents mean for U.S. national security.
“There clearly is a threat to the national security of the United States of America,” Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) said. “As members of Congress, we have a responsibility to maintain oversight and be aware of these activities so that if appropriate we take action.”
He later told reporters that lawmakers have “a responsibility now to move forward aggressively to get to the answers of these questions.”
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) told reporters that a bipartisan group of lawmakers will seek a closed meeting with the witnesses to discuss confidential information in a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF.
And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said Wednesday's hearing was the “first of many” on the government's handling of information related to UAPs, which “is an issue of government transparency.”
“I’m shocked, actually, at just the amount of information that came out because all the roadblocks that we were put up against,” he told reporters.
“I think what’s gonna happen now, the floodgates — other people are gonna say, ‘You know, I’ve got some information, I’d like to come swear in,’ and that’s what we’re going to start doing.”
Former intelligence official David Grusch made far-reaching claims about possible U.S. government cover-ups of contact with UFOs and non-human pilots in a House Oversight subcommittee hearing on Wednesday.
But Grusch could not offer any hard evidence to substantiate his claims — largely due to his fears of prosecution for sharing classified data in a public setting, he told Congress.
“As a former intelligence officer, I go to jail for revealing classified information,” he told the members.
Lawmakers on the national security subcommittee noted that evasion is not the same thing as Grusch admitting he doesn’t have proof.
“We should remind viewers and witnesses — and I think is really important — that we also cannot share classified information in public settings,” Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said.
David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, testifies during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)
Members repeatedly complained that they had been denied access to a secure hearing room (a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF) where they could hold a fully secure interview with Grusch.
“Every person watching this knows that we need to meet with Mr. Grusch in a secure compartmentalized facility so that we can get fulsome answers that do not put him in jeopardy,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) told the committee.
Gaetz's GOP colleagues said after the hearing that they would demand to interview Grusch and the other witnesses in a SCIF to gather additional information.
Here are three specific areas where Grusch said he could share further classified information with Congress to bolster his claims.
Naming his sources
David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, is sworn in during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023.
Grusch said that during his time as co-lead of the Pentagon’s Unexplained Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) task force, fellow intelligence officials leaked to him the existence of the secret program focused on retrieving — and attempting to reverse engineer — non-human craft.
“Do you have direct knowledge — or have you spoken to people with direct knowledge of this imagery of crash sites,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) asked Grusch.
“I can't discuss that in an open session,” Grusch said.
But he promised to offer a list of potential witnesses — both cooperative and “hostile” — who could give the committee more information.
Claims of retaliation
(L-R) US Representatives Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Robert Garcia (D-CA), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) arrive for a House Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs hearing titled "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security Public Safety and Government Transparency," on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on July 26, 2023. (Photo by Brendan SMIALOWSKI / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
While most of his intelligence agency colleagues have been supportive, Grusch told Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-N.Y.), “I do have knowledge of active and planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues,” in what he called “administrative terrorism.”
When Raskin pressed on where these reprisals had come from, Grusch said the source was “certain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with.”
“That’s all I’ll say publicly,” Grusch added, “but I can provide more details in a closed environment.”
Asked if anyone had been killed over potential leaks, Grusch told Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) that "I have to be careful asking that question, I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.”
By contrast, former Navy pilot Commander David Fravor, sitting next to Grusch, said that he and other pilots who had witnessed UAP had been treated “very well.”
Misappropriation of funds
David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Officer Representative, testifies during a House National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing to discuss Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena on Wednesday, July 26, 2023. (Greg Nash)
Grusch alleged that aerospace and weapons manufacturers were siphoning money off of government contracts — and plowing it into unsanctioned research projects in advanced technology.
The Secretary of Defense does have the authority to deny congressional oversight of particularly sensitive “special access programs,” or SAPs. But the group of high-powered congressional leaders known as the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be informed — which Grusch said didn’t happen in this case.
Asked how such a secret program gets funded, he said: “I will give generalities — I can get very specific in a closed session — but misappropriation of funds.”
“Do you think US corporations are overcharging for certain tech they're selling to the US government and that additional money is going to programs?” Rep. Moskowitz asked.
“Correct, through something called IREN,” Grusch said, referring to the INFOSEC Research and Engineering Network, a joint research and development venture between several corporate weapons contractors.
Pressed for details, Grusch said he could reveal more in a closed session and offered Rep. Alexia Ocaio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) a list of corporations and sites to begin targeting.
“I'd be happy to give you that in a closed environment, I can tell you specifically,” Grusch responded.
