Archer testimony demonstrates Hunter’s foiled plea deal was ‘designed to cover up' Biden corruption: Donalds

Heather Hamilton

August 01, 12:48 AM August 01, 12:48 AM

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) said Devon Archer’s testimony can make the situation that Hunter Biden’s plea offer was “designed to address up the corruption bordering Joe Biden and his household.”

Archer testified in advance of the Dwelling Oversight and Accountability Committee's workers on Monday that the Biden relatives, precisely then-Vice President Joe Biden, was crucial to Burisma keeping afloat. Through his testimony, Archer famous that President Joe Biden after attended dinners with the more youthful Biden's organization associates as very well as spoke to them around the phone.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT Former HUNTER BIDEN Business Husband or wife DEVON ARCHER

“That plea offer was intended to deal with up the corruption encompassing Joe Biden and his family,” Donalds told The Ingraham Angle. “Especially when you look at the points that the [Foreign Agents Registration Act] violations ended up buried into this gun charge. And now what Devon Archer has occur ahead and claimed, he confirms the point that not only was Hunter Biden working as an unregistered international agent but that his daddy Joe Biden was always on simply call.”

“This stinks to high heaven. It is affect peddling. It is community corruption,” he added.

Donalds blasted Democrats for heading just after previous President Donald Trump when Republicans “have way additional [on Biden] than they desire they had on Donald Trump, and they’re heading immediately after him making use of the Division of Justice, which is corrupt, in my see.”

As supplemental costs and indictments against Trump are anticipated, Donalds claimed they will only guidance general public belief relating to “two-tiered justice.”

“The American persons are now there,” Donalds stated. “They see this for what it is. This is the Biden administration and his strike adult males — Merrick Garland and Jack Smith — heading following their political rival, and they never like it mainly because it stinks of two-tiered justice. This is un-American, in my check out. We do not do this in our country. This takes place in third-planet international locations. It’s erroneous for our state.”

Joe Biden's fundraising trip calls attention to vulnerable New York Republicans amid debt ceiling battle

Ryan King

May 08, 10:44 AM May 08, 10:48 AM

President Joe Biden's New York fundraising trip is bringing attention to vulnerable congressional Republicans this week as the debt ceiling deadline nears.

His visit is slated for Wednesday, the day after his long-awaited meeting with congressional leaders to discuss the debt limit, and it will take place in Rep. Mike Lawler's (R-NY) congressional district. Lawler was one of four key Republican New York pickups in the 2022 midterm elections, and he has backed the GOP's Limit, Save, Grow Act.

GOP RUNS UNITY PLAYBOOK TO WIN DEBT CEILING FIGHT

Lawler fired back at Biden ahead of the visit.

"On Wed @JoeBiden comes to the Hudson Valley to lie about the debt ceiling debate and do nothing to address our migrant crisis, while NYers struggle under record inflation, skyrocketing energy costs, & high taxes — he’ll then hold a fundraiser where tickets run up to $100,000," the congressman tweeted.

The $100,000 figure referenced by Lawler comes from a Puck News report that says tickets could go for that price to lead an event hosted by the Biden Action Fund. The Washington Examiner has reached out to the Biden Action Fund for comment.

Biden's trip will take place in the Hudson Valley region in New York. During the visit, Biden is expected to attend two lucrative fundraiser events, including one hosted by former Blackstone executive Tony James and another by George Logothetis, the executive chairman of Libra Group, CNBC reported.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is expected to accompany Biden on the venture.

Lawler is widely considered to be one of the most vulnerable House Republicans, having won last cycle by less than a percentage point. Last November, he managed to defeat former Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY), the former chief of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is the House Democrats' campaign arm.

His victory was a major breakthrough for Republicans in a traditionally Democratic stronghold state and came against the backdrop of redistricting upheaval. The Democrats have since been gearing up to reclaim his district and other lost seats via redistricting court battles and various campaigns.

Democrats have backed a court battle to overturn the state's congressional maps, and the DCCC has targeted the state's vulnerable Republicans.

“President Biden can back this legislation or engage in good-faith, bipartisan negotiations to find common ground to avoid a default and bend the unsustainable rate of federal spending. So far, he has done neither. Instead, President Biden plans to leave negotiators behind in Washington and travel to the Hudson Valley to make a political speech," Marc Molinaro (R-NY) said about Biden's visit in a statement.

Like Lawler, New York congressional Republicans have backed the party's debt limit plan, which calls for a suite of spending rollbacks such as a return to fiscal 2022 levels for most discretionary spending measures outside of the military, a cap on most spending increases to about 1% annually, scrapping Biden's student loan forgiveness bill, curtailing several green energy tax credits, and more.

In total, according to the Congressional Budget Office, one version of the legislation was projected to slash the deficit by $4.8 trillion over 10 years. The White House has panned Republicans over the measure, highlighting some of the cuts and accusing the GOP of slashing funding for veterans, something party leadership has adamantly denied.

“House Republicans that brand themselves as moderate lined up with the most extreme MAGA members on this vote, and we are making sure their constituents are aware of the true nature of their priorities,” Ben LaBolt, the White House communications director, said, per NBC.

Biden is poised to meet with all four congressional leaders, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), on Tuesday to discuss the debt ceiling standoff. Both sides remain at an impasse over how to address the crisis, and neither side has shown signs of relenting.

McCarthy has demanded any increase be paired with a reduction in spending, while Biden has insisted on a clean stand-alone bill with no strings attached. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen recently warned that the government could hit the limit as soon as June 1.

If that were to happen and Congress declined to lift the nation's borrowing authority, the country would run the risk of default. Biden and McCarthy last met in February.

Top lawmakers voice opposition to short-term debt limit deal

Ryan King

May 07, 03:14 PM May 07, 03:14 PM

Top lawmakers are giving the prospect of a short-term debt limit deal a cold reception, while largely refraining from ruling it out entirely.

Under a short-term plan, Congress would effectively push back the debt ceiling in order to buy time from the June deadline to figure out a longer-term agreement. Many lawmakers appear skeptical that more time could solve the impasse, but are simultaneously adamant that the United States can't default on its obligations.

MAYORKAS SAYS TITLE 42 BORDER SITUATION IS 'VERY SERIOUS' AND 'VERY DIFFICULT'

"I don't think the responsible thing to do is to kick the can down the road," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told NBC's Meet the Press. "We have to avoid default period. Full stop."

Although unhappy with a short-term arrangement, Jeffries declined to rule out backing one when asked. Some Biden administration officials are deliberating over such a proposal as an avenue out of the debt ceiling standoff, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Some analysts have suggested that punting on the debt limit, for now, would avert default, which Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen forecasted could come as soon as June 1. From there, Congress could pair the debt limit with the upcoming battle over government funding for the next fiscal year.

Both Jeffries and the White House conveyed that Democrats are open to talking about spending priorities with the GOP. They remain adamant, however, that Republicans must give them a stand-alone bill to lift the nation's borrowing authority.

"We want to do the right thing for the American people. And that means paying our bills and simultaneously having this discussion about the future and what spending can look like anchored in President Biden's budget proposal," Jeffries added.

A short-term debt limit measure could breach House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-CA) vow to "never" move a bill that just lifts the debt limit. A handful of Republicans have already criticized a short-term deal.

“I would prefer that we get this done the first time. That always gets dicey. And, frankly, I don’t even know if there’d be the votes for that,” Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SC) said, per NBC. “I think there’s going to have to be a really earnest effort made to try and negotiate something that can get passed by the deadline.”

"We all work around deadlines here. If we do a short-term extension, it means we won’t get into negotiations in earnest until three or four weeks before whatever the new extension is. That’s how this place works," Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) argued, according to the outlet.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) initially signaled openness, but later clarified that he is not supportive of such a measure, according to Semafor.

Another Republican, Rep. Patrick McHenry (NC), argued that everything should be left on the table as the country stares down a potential economic crisis.

“I think everything’s on the table at this point. The key thing that has to be in this equation is addressing our fiscal house, short term, and long term,” he told CBS's Face the Nation.

The clock is ticking for lawmakers to break the deadlock. Biden is set to meet with the four congressional leaders Tuesday to discuss the standoff.

If the U.S. runs out of cash to fund its operations and defaults, unemployment could skyrocket, and inflation could accelerate dramatically, according to some estimates.

Alejandro Mayorkas downplays fears of immigrants surge after Title 42 ends

Ryan King

May 07, 02:20 PM May 07, 02:22 PM

The United States has been gearing up for a massive surge at the border over Title 42's expiration for over a "year and a half," according to a top official.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas tempered expectations Sunday while underscoring the complexity of the situation.

MAYORKAS SAYS TITLE 42 BORDER SITUATION IS 'VERY SERIOUS' AND 'VERY DIFFICULT'

"We've been preparing for this for more than a year and a half," Mayoraks told CBS's Face the Nation. "We are working closely with many countries to the South. It's going to take our plan a while to really take hold — for people to understand that they can access lawful, safe, orderly pathways before they reach the border."

"If they come to the border, they will receive a consequence under our enforcement authorities," he added.

Title 42 is a pandemic-era policy enacted under the Trump administration that allows U.S. Border Patrol to expel migrants back to their home country without having an asylum hearing. Initially, the policy was set to expire on May 23, 2022. That was ultimately delayed due to court challenges. It is now slated to be lifted on May 11, 2023.

With Title 42's expiration, fears have increased that a flood of migrants will pour across the U.S.-Mexico border, believing they can get in and remain. In response to the looming lifting of the policy, the Biden administration has announced it will dispatch 1,500 active-duty troops near the El Paso region to assist with the situation.

Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) proposed legislation last week to grant the DHS similar authority under Title 42 over a two-year period without using emergency health powers.

"Title 42 When the expulsion authority is a public health authority, it is not an immigration authority. We will be using our immigration authorities, which call for a consequence regime, which is why we have to correct the lies that smugglers tell vulnerable migrants they think they're coming and they'll be able to stay," Mayorkas replied to a question about the proposal.

In April of last year, the Biden administration unveiled a suite of steps it was taking in anticipation of Title 42 going away. It included a multitude of steps such as surging personnel and resources; bolstering immigrant processing capacity; deterring illegal migration through deportations and prosecutions; and working to counter migration in the Western Hemisphere.

But Mayokas believes that Congress needs to step in and enact broader changes to immigration.

“Everything that the Department of Homeland Security is doing, everything that our partners across the federal government are doing, is within a broken immigration system,” Mayokas contended. “The president passed to Congress a proposal to fix our broken immigration system on the first day in office.”

A number of Democrats, such as Henry Cuellar (D-TX), have dinged the Biden administration over its response to the anticipated crisis. Cuellar specifically commended Mayorkas and suggested that the president was holding him back.

"Untrue. One team, one mission, and we are prepared to execute it," Mayorkas said in response.

Yellen says using 14th Amendment to scrap debt limit would cause a 'constitutional crisis'

Ryan King

May 07, 11:14 AM May 07, 11:14 AM

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen repeatedly declined to rule out the possibility of declaring the debt ceiling unconstitutional if Congress fails to resolve its standoff, but said doing so would be a "not-good" option.

Amid the brinkmanship, some have suggested that President Joe Biden could invoke the 14th Amendment to scrap the debt limit and avert a default. Yellen warned that such action would trigger a constitutional crisis and also stressed that Congress must act quickly to forestall an economic calamity.

REPUBLICANS WORRY THESE THREE CHANGES TO DEBT CEILING BILL WILL SINK FUTURE PLANS

"There is no way to protect our financial system in our economy other than Congress doing its job and raising the debt ceiling and enabling us to pay our bills. And we should not get to the point where we need to consider whether the president can go on issuing debt. This would be a constitutional crisis," Yellen said on ABC's This Week.

The 14th Amendment stipulates that the “validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” However, the Constitution also grants Congress the power of the purse.

Yellen avoided a direct answer about whether such action was off the table.

"If Congress fails to meet its responsibility, there are simply no good options. And the ones that you've listed are among the not-good options," Yellen added.

Biden downplayed the potential use of the 14th Amendment during a recent MSNBC interview.

"I've not gotten there yet," he said.

Yellen also re-upped her well-worn warnings that if Congress fails to up the debt limit, "economic chaos would ensue" that would unleash havoc on both the domestic and global economy. She insisted that there are no more tricks in the department's reserve to buy additional time.

Biden is set to meet with congressional leaders, including House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), on May 9. McCarthy and Biden last met back in February. The United States rammed up against its $31.4 trillion debt limit back in January, but the Treasury Department has deployed "extraordinary measures" to keep funds flowing in the time since.

Yellen recently estimated that those steps will run dry by June 1, giving Congress less than a month to resolve its differences. So far, neither side has shown signs of blinking, with Biden demanding a clean bill with no strings attached and McCarthy adamant that spending cuts be part of any deal.

Bowman defends counter-demonstration to MTG's protest outside Trump arraignment

Emily Jacobs

April 16, 07:25 PM April 16, 07:25 PM

Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) defended his role in counter-demonstrations outside former President Donald Trump's Manhattan arraignment earlier this month that clashed with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's (R-GA) rally protesting the indictment.

Greene, an ardent Trump supporter, made headlines when she announced her plans to protest outside the Manhattan courthouse where the former president was being arraigned on hush money charges. The news prompted GOP detractors, including progressive New Yorkers like Bowman and other progressive local lawmakers, to hold a counter-protest in the same area. Greene was only able to speak to the crowd for under 10 minutes before being escorted away by police over security concerns.

DONALD TRUMP ARREST: MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE LIKENS INDICTMENT TO ARRESTS OF JESUS AND NELSON MANDELA

Bowman was seen shouting, "Get out of here, get the hell out of here," at Greene's car as she was driven away from the chaotic scene before turning to reporters and saying, "Now, let's talk about the truth."

"We will never accept hateful rhetoric in our city," Bowman told the packed crowd of police, media, and demonstrators. "Any rhetoric that is divisive, any rhetoric that uplifts white supremacy, we are pushing back against that in all its forms."

“Marjorie Taylor Greene, she should take her a** back to Washington and do something about gun violence, do something about affordable health care, do something about childhood poverty, do something about climate change," he continued. "Do your freaking job, Marjorie Taylor Greene. You don’t need to be in New York City talking that nonsense. Go back to your district. What are you doing here? You’re here for politics, you’re here because you want to be VP, you’re here for your own fundraising, you’re here for your own nonsense."

Asked about the incident during a Saturday appearance on MSNBC, specifically what was going through his head when he told her to go back home, Bowman replied, "First of all, I was angry that she would even come, because she's coming for political theater and to help with her fundraising."

"It was the day of the Trump arraignment so for her it's about theater," he added. "It’s about going viral. It’s about fundraising, and I’ve heard she wants to be the VP nominee."

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicted Trump this month on charges related to the hush money matter, marking the first time a former U.S. president has been criminally charged.

Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer, testified before Congress in 2019 that he paid Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, $130,000 during the 2016 campaign to prevent her from going public about an affair she claimed to have with Trump in 2005. Cohen, who pleaded guilty and served time over the alleged payment, told lawmakers Trump reimbursed him in monthly installments.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing and vowed to fight the charges. He has also made targets of Bragg and the judge overseeing the case on social media while condemning the charges as unserious and politically motivated.

Greene has repeatedly decried the investigation and charges as an "unconstitutional witch hunt."

Biden re-ups calls for gun safety reforms after Alabama and Louisville shootings

Ryan King

April 16, 05:37 PM April 16, 05:37 PM

President Joe Biden once again dusted off his entreaties for gun safety reforms in the wake of the Alabama birthday and Kentucky park shootings.

"Jill and I are praying for their families, and for the many others injured and fighting for their lives in the wake of this weekend’s gun violence," Biden said in a statement. "Guns are the leading killer of children in America, and the numbers are rising – not declining. This is outrageous and unacceptable."

NANCY MACE BLASTS GOP FOR 'NOT OFFERING ANY TYPE OF SOLUTION TO REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE'

On Saturday evening, four individuals were killed and roughly 15 were injured at a Sweet 16 birthday party in Dadeville, Alabama. Many of the victims are undergoing treatment for their injuries and an investigation remains ongoing, police said.

Meanwhile, in Louisville, Kentucky, two were killed and four others were injured at near Chickasaw Park after a gunman opened fire into a crowd Saturday evening. Police indicated the suspect remains at large. That shooting came on the heels of an Old National Bank shooting last week that left five dead.

"What has our nation come to when children cannot attend a birthday party without fear? When parents have to worry every time their kids walk out the door to school, to the movie theater, or to the park?" Biden asked.

Late last month, a gunman killed three children and three adults at the Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee. Following that attack, which killed a friend of his wife, Gov. Bill Lee (R-TN) signed an executive order to bolster background checks. Biden made sure to praise him for taking that action.

"I commend Tennessee Governor Bill Lee for signing an Executive Order to expand background checks and calling on the Tennessee statehouse to pass a red flag law. I hope more Republican officials will follow suit and take action," Biden said.

Biden also chastised Republican leaders for standing "alongside the NRA in a race to the bottom on dangerous laws that further erode gun safety." Top Republicans attended the recent National Rifle Association conference in Indianapolis. Biden then quickly outlines some of the specific reforms he'd like Congress to take up.

"It is within Congress’ power to require safe storage of firearms, require background checks for all gun sales, eliminate gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability, and ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines – and this should happen without delay," Biden said.

Nancy Mace blasts GOP for 'not offering any type of solution to reduce gun violence'

Ryan King

April 16, 12:02 PM April 16, 12:02 PM

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) took on her own party for failing to propose solutions for curtailing the epidemic of gun violence occurring throughout the nation.

"We've not learned anything from the midterm elections if we're going to sit here on our hands silently, not offering any type of solution to reduce gun violence in our country. And it's not about gun control," Mace said on WHD News Sunday.

NANCY MACE URGES BIDEN TO IGNORE RULING TO SUSPEND ABORTION PILL'S FDA APPROVAL

Over recent weeks, there have been multiple mass shootings, including one that left five dead at a Louisville bank, the Covenant school shooting, which left three children and three adults dead, and most recently, a shooting in which four people were killed at a birthday party in Alabama.

The congresswoman argued that there are plenty of solutions "besides offering prayers and silence." She cited efforts to bolster background checks as an example.

"We have all these databases at the federal and state level that are all over the place. There's not one piece of software where you can merge all that information together to know in 60 seconds whether or not this is a bad guy trying to buy a gun," Mace suggested. "It doesn't have to be complicated, but we need to show leadership."

Mace also recalled how she and her children were a "mile away down the road" from a mass shooting in South Carolina that transpired on Good Friday.

"I'm a constitutional conservative, but I'll tell you, Shannon, about a week ago, my kids and I were a mile away from a mass shooting in South Carolina where six people were shot. We saw the immediate aftermath," Mace recalled. "They said, 'Hey, Mommy, where is the Amber Alert to let us know that we're near a mass shooting and maybe we should have taken cover.'"

Mace is no stranger to bucking her party, particularly on hot-button social matters. She recently joined some progressives in urging the Biden administration to ignore a Texas court ruling freezing approval for a pill used to induce abortions.

During the interview, Mace described herself as a "pro-life legislator" who favors "15 to 20 weeks" of gestational restrictions on abortion.

"Republicans haven't won the majority — the popular vote — in years when it comes to the presidency, and that's something we need to work on and do better. And this is an issue that we can win on," Mace added, referring to firearms.

Schumer leads legislative effort to regulate AI

Christopher Hutton

April 13, 10:07 AM April 13, 10:10 AM

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is reportedly moving to craft legislation to regulate artificial intelligence.

Schumer has been circulating a framework for AI legislation among experts in recent weeks, according to Axios. The effort is a response to the rise of chatbots such as ChatGPT and Bard, which have become more commonly used in the workplace. It follows the Biden administration requesting public comment on AI-related regulation.

BIDEN TESTED BY ABORTION ACCESS FIGHT WITH UNCERTAIN GOP

The listed regulations mandate transparency about the identity of an algorithm's trainer and its audience, its data sources, and details about how it makes its responses, along with other transparency and ethical guidelines.

Schumer will spend the next few weeks refining his guidelines with academic, industry, and government leaders, according to people familiar with the matter. He will also be the one to determine when the vote will go to the floor as majority leader.

Schumer argued during a 2019 appearance at the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence that the United States needs to make a major investment into AI to compete with China.

The Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration requested public comment on Tuesday regarding regulatory measures for AI. "Responsible AI systems could bring enormous benefits, but only if we address their potential consequences and harms. For these systems to reach their full potential, companies and consumers need to be able to trust them," NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson said in a statement.

The White House also released an "AI Bill of Rights" in December that asked AI developers to consider several priorities and guardrails. This includes ensuring information collected by AI products is not misused, designers account for algorithmic bias concerning race or gender, all data collected are protected with appropriate privacy measures, and users know when algorithms affect their experience.

Congress inquires about Chinese spying risks from cargo cranes: Report

Misty Severi

April 03, 09:06 PM April 03, 09:06 PM

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are requesting classified and unclassified documents from the Department of Homeland Security that reveal potential security vulnerabilities from dozens of Chinese-made cranes used at ports nationwide.

House Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green (R-TN) said it was "worrisome" that 80% of U.S. port cranes use Chinese software made by Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries in China, which has ties to the People’s Liberation Army.

CHINA COMPLAINS ABOUT KEVIN MCCARTHY 'SENDING WRONG SIGNALS' TO TAIWAN

“On behalf of the American people, this Committee is demanding answers on the risks these cranes pose to U.S. cybersecurity and the resilience of our critical infrastructure, which is a core aspect of the homeland security mission,” Green said in a statement to the Wall Street Journal.

There is no evidence that the Chinese government has used the cranes to conduct nefarious activity at American ports, U.S. officials said. However, the software could be used to observe or manipulate port operations.

The House committee is hoping to hold public and potentially closed-door hearings on the potential security risks by April 18. The committee is requesting documents that show a risk assessment and DHS's mitigation efforts that were directed by Congress in 2021.

In a letter to DHS officials, Green and Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC), chairman of the subcommittee on oversight, investigations, and accountability, said if another country exploited potential weakness from the ports, it would have "catastrophic" economic and security consequences for the United States.

“If an adversary exploits the operational technology system of these cranes, port operations could completely shut down, suspending all commercial activity which would also disrupt our nation’s military and commercial supply chains,” the lawmakers said.

“Any potential port shutdown could create catastrophic economic and security consequences. ... These vulnerabilities could provide opportunities to near-peer nation-state adversaries, such as China, to cripple our economy from behind a computer screen,” they added.

Ports in the U.S. help facilitate $5.4 trillion worth of commercial and military goods each year.

Chinese officials dismissed the crane concerns as paranoia and claimed it was an attempt to obstruct the trade and economic relationship between the U.S. and China.

Centrist Democrats plotting fallback plan if Biden fails to strike debt deal

Ryan King

April 03, 08:36 AM April 03, 08:36 AM

A cohort of centrist House Democrats is reportedly in the early stages of hatching a contingency plan to muffle fallout from a debt ceiling negotiation breakdown.

For weeks, the band of Democrats has been molding plans for a deal with centrist House Republicans in the event that the country winds up on the precipice of default, riling both their progressive peers and the White House, which has sought a united front against the GOP, Politico reported.

MCCONNELL COULD BE KEY TO BIDEN STRATEGY OF SPLITTING GOP ON DEBT CEILING

“You’ve got party leaders in both houses that don’t want us to talk to one another," one centrist Democrat said.

Specific details of the plan remain sparse, as it is still in its infancy, but the group of Democrats has met with centrist Republicans since February, per the report. They fear that the possible ramifications of blowing past the deadline to resolve the debt ceiling impasse could be dire.

Democratic leadership has sought a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling without making any concessions to Republicans and believes they have the advantage. Earlier this year, the White House was adamant there would be no negotiations with Republicans on the nation's borrowing authority, though President Joe Biden later met with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

In January, the United States hit its $31.4 trillion debt limit, meaning it can no longer borrow additional money. However, Congress approved a budgeting package last year that relies on massive deficit spending. At the moment, the Treasury has been undertaking "extraordinary" measures to keep national payments going by moving money around for various accounts.

But those measures are projected to run out by June, according to the Treasury. The Congressional Budget Office is more optimistic and projects the Treasury will run dry on cash between July and September.

Members of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, a bipartisan group of lawmakers that seeks to find common ground, have long signaled plans to try to concoct a solution to the stalemate. Further complicating these efforts is the fact that Congress has adjourned until April 17.

Biden unveiled a $6.9 trillion budget proposal last month seeking to increase pressure on Republicans. GOP leadership has so far been unable to produce a counterproposal, though members of the Freedom Caucus have outlined demands that the White House has dubbed a "five-alarm fire."

McCarthy, who wrote a letter to Biden last week demanding he step up, has insisted that a GOP budgeting plan is not needed to resolve the debt ceiling impasse. But Democrats see GOP complacency as an advantage.

“We’re gaining ground because of [House Republicans’] inability to put together a plan,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said. “I’m certainly willing to entertain a mix of things on the budget. Not on the debt ceiling.”

In addition to sensing an advantage, Democratic leadership views granting concessions to McCarthy as emboldening him to strong-arm them with the debt ceiling in the future. They want the debt limit off the table.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE IN THE

Should the two sides fail to broker an agreement, the U.S. runs the risk of default, which economists argue would ravage the economy.

Some solutions that have floated around include prioritizing spending so that the interest payment is always met regardless of whether the extraordinary measures run out. However, some Treasury Department officials have cast doubt on the ability to move money that way.

Rand Paul breaks ranks with GOP on TikTok ban: 'Goes against the First Amendment'

Ryan King

March 28, 06:13 PM March 28, 06:13 PM

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is separating himself from the bipartisan push to ban TikTok, a China-affiliated short-form video app, amid fears that it poses national security risks.

At least two bipartisan bills have been floating in the upper chamber to ban the social media app, and the House is mulling similar action. Despite a powerful chorus of Republicans clamoring for the ban, Paul argued that enacting one would trample First Amendment rights.

TIKTOK SQUAD: PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS COME OUT AS ALLIES FOR CHINA-AFFILIATED APP

"I think it's a really bad idea. And people need to ask themselves, why does the Chinese government ban TikTok, and do we want to emulate the Chinese government? So I think it's a mistake," Paul told WHD News. "If you ban a social media platform, you know, I don't know if you get any clearer that that goes against the First Amendment."

One of the bills proposed by Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) would grant President Joe Biden authority to prohibit the app. Another measure from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) would outright ban it.

"I'm for the First Amendment to the Constitution, which says that companies that operate in the United States, we shouldn't limit their speech, or people who try to broadcast speech on those platforms," Paul told the outlet.

Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing on TikTok. In it, members of Congress took turns grilling the company's CEO, Shou Zi Chew. He downplayed the company's ties to Beijing. TikTok's parent company is the Chinese firm ByteDance.

China maintains civil-military practices, raising concerns the Chinese Community Party could harvest U.S. data from TikTok.

Chew conceded that ByteDance might have some access to U.S. data, but he underscored that the company is implementing a mitigation plan called Project Texas. Lawmakers appeared unsatisfied with his assurances, as committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) subsequently re-upped calls for banning the application.

Democrats have publicly splintered on TikTok, with progressive members such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) coming out against a ban. But Republicans have largely appeared united.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has voiced support for taking up similar legislation in the House. The Biden administration has been coy about its position on banning the app, but it has sounded the alarms about the national security risks TikTok poses.

Regardless of if a ban gets through Congress, Paul contends that the courts could intervene. In 2020, a federal judge halted then-President Donald Trump's efforts to ban the app.

"The courts have already struck that down when the Trump administration tried to ban TikTok," Paul added. "It was struck down."

Bipartisan representatives reintroduce bill to ban stock trading or ownership for members of Congress

Brady Knox

March 21, 11:17 PM March 21, 11:17 PM

A group of bipartisan representatives introduced a bill to ban members of Congress and their spouses from owning or trading stocks.

The bill from Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Matt Rosendale (R-MT), and Ken Buck (R-CO) would ban members from owning individual stocks, commodities, futures, and other securities, derivatives, options, or another “complex investment vehicle,” the Hill reported.

However, members would still be able to hold “common, widely held funds, such as mutual funds and ETFs, as long as those funds do not present a conflict of interest and are diversified,” the trio wrote.

BIDEN OFFICIALS WOULD BE BANNED FROM OWNING OR TRADING STOCK UNDER HAWLEY BILL

“Only two in ten Americans trust that our government is working in their best interest,” Jayapal is quoted as saying on her website.

“Members of Congress are elected to serve the people, not our own financial interests. As long as members and their spouses are allowed to trade individual stocks – the door to corruption remains open. This legislation is a long overdue, necessary step to raise the ethical standards of Congress and restore the people’s trust in our work,” the representative's quote continues.

“We’ve made strides to ensure that Congress returned to an honest and properly functioning legislative body – ending insider trading by Members is another crucial step that will restore public confidence in our institutions,” Rosendale said.

“It’s unacceptable that so many career politicians abuse their office to enrich themselves rather than putting the interests of the American people first. I’m proud to introduce the Bipartisan Ban on Congressional Stock Ownership Act with Congresswoman Jayapal and Congressman Buck,” he continued.

The new version of the bill goes further than previous bills, according to the lawmakers, pushing for more severe punishments for violators. It includes a $50,000 fine for each individual violation and clarifies what kinds of investments are allowed and banned.

The bill was previously introduced in February of last year, albeit with different sponsors.

The newest push comes after an unsuccessful initiative late last year, which was shot down by Democrat leadership at the last moment. It follows two similar bills proposed earlier this year. Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) and Chip Roy (R-TX) reintroduced the Trust in Congress Act in January, which would require members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children to put all stock investments into a blind trust until they leave office. That bill never went beyond the introduction stage.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act, or PELOSI Act, in February, but it also never went beyond its introduction.

Hawley also introduced a similar bill earlier this month that would apply to the executive branch.

SVB collapse: Biden calls for harsher penalties on banking executives

Haisten Willis

March 17, 12:17 PM March 17, 12:17 PM

President Joe Biden on Friday called for harsher penalties for banking executives in the wake of Silicon Valley Bank's collapse.

While acknowledging he is limited in what he can do under existing law, the president called on Congress to step up punishment for the leaders of failed banks.

THE CLOCK IS TICKING FOR BIDEN ON COVID-19 ORIGINS DECLASSIFICATION BILL

"I'm firmly committed to accountability for those responsible for this mess," the president said in a statement. "No one is above the law — and strengthening accountability is an important deterrent to prevent mismanagement in the future."

But action from the legislative branch will be needed in order for it to happen, and Biden called on Congress to do just that.

"The law limits the administration’s authority to hold executives responsible. When banks fail due to mismanagement and excessive risk taking, it should be easier for regulators to claw back compensation from executives, to impose civil penalties, and to ban executives from working in the banking industry again. Congress must act to impose tougher penalties for senior bank executives whose mismanagement contributed to their institutions failing," he said.

The president and top Democrats have been in favor of new laws and more banking regulations since SVB failed one week ago. The California bank's collapse has the entire banking system teetering, with drastic actions being taken in both the public and private sectors to stabilize the situation.

Biden defended the choice to guarantee bank deposits fully at SVB and stressed that the banking system is stable even while calling for stricter regulations.

"This week, we took decisive action to stabilize the banking system without putting taxpayer dollars at risk," the president said. "That action was necessary to protect jobs and small businesses, and no losses will be borne by the taxpayers. Our banking system is more resilient and stable today because of the actions we took. On Monday morning, I told the American people and American businesses that they should feel confident that their deposits will be there if and when they need them. That continues to be the case."

The clock is ticking for Biden on COVID-19 origins declassification bill

Haisten Willis

March 16, 05:55 AM March 16, 07:42 AM

President Joe Biden has less than a week to decide whether to sign or try to stop a bill declassifying COVID-19 origins intelligence that passed with veto-proof majorities.

Both chambers of Congress unanimously passed legislation that would force the Biden administration to declassify all the information it has gathered on how the virus started as federal agencies are split between whether it began in nature or a lab leak.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ACCUSED OF CREATING 'GAG POLICY' FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

“Transparency is a cornerstone of our democracy,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), the intelligence committee's top Democrat, said during debate. “Because without transparency, the American people can’t make the sounds that they need to make responsibly as citizens of a democracy.”

The House passed the COVID Origins Act by a 419-0 vote and the Senate by unanimous consent, yet the White House has been noncommittal.

"We will continue to use every tool to figure out what happened here while also protecting classified information," press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said. "We're going to take a look at the bill. I just don't have anything to share on how we're going to move forward at this time."

Biden said he hadn't "made that decision yet" when asked whether he'd sign the bill. The White House could have declassified the information on its own and has thus far chosen not to.

The House vote came last Friday, March 10, and presidents have 10 days, excluding Sundays, to sign or veto. That would land Biden's deadline on Wednesday, March 22.

Should the president veto, a two-thirds majority in both chambers would be needed to override, which could come at any point during the 118th Congress.

Only 106 out of 1,484 presidential vetoes from 1789 through 2004 were overridden, according to the Congressional Research Service. However, with a unanimous vote, Biden would likely not be able to sustain a veto.

Dr. Steven Quay hopes the information does come to light.

“I’m cautiously optimistic,” said Quay, who favors the lab leak theory. “I’d like to see records from the fall of 2019 and more communications. The concept that the virus came from a market requires that it started in December. Any evidence that it’s anywhere else in the fall before that is evidence against it beginning in a market in December.”

If signed into law, the bill would require within 90 days the declassification of “any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the Coronavirus Disease," including whether any researchers grew ill.

The legislation's passage marks a striking departure from the early days of the pandemic when the lab leak hypothesis was dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Since then, the nation's 18 intelligence agencies have said both theories are plausible, yet the debate continues to divide the intelligence and scientific communities.

Although the bill garnered overwhelming support on the House floor, Democrats and Republicans engaged in a drawn-out debate before casting their votes. Several Republicans in their speeches sought to blame not only the Chinese government but also some U.S. officials, namely Dr. Anthony Fauci.

"Big government bureaucrats like Anthony Fauci abused their positions of power to disguise and distort the facts and a further tyrannical approach to our country," Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) said of the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. "Fauci knew as early as March of 2020 that coronavirus leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China."

Some Democrats, on the other hand, urged caution.

"We shouldn't be so certain ... that we're willing to impugn the character and motives of other Americans, especially if those Americans are in positions of responsibility that need to be trusted in the next pandemic," said Himes. "We just don't know. And we're entitled to speculate, we're entitled to have a theory, but I would just urge caution about impugning people's motives, impugning their character, based on those theories."

There is a real chance Biden could veto the bill, argues Cato Institute senior fellow Patrick Eddington, at which point the question would be whether GOP leadership can convince enough Democrats to override.

One concern Biden may have is that human sources could be compromised, for example, if a source within the Chinese government is named in the intelligence. However, any information released is subject to redaction.

The smart play, Eddington argues, is to let the bill pass.

"Biden would be wise to just sign the bill and direct [Director of National Intelligence Avril] Haines to comply," he said. "Asking for Democrats in House swing districts to fall on their sword over this issue would be bad political strategy, to say the least."

Biden budget proposes slashing $600 million from DHS amid growing threats

Anna Giaritelli

March 09, 04:34 PM March 09, 04:34 PM

President Joe Biden has proposed slashing funding for the Department of Homeland Security by $600 million as problems of national security mount against the United States, including cyberattacks, irregular immigration, violent crime, and record high border crossings.

The White House budget proposal for fiscal 2024, which will begin in October, suggested $60.4 billion for the DHS, the nation’s third-largest department with 260,000 employees worldwide. Budgets for agencies and departments typically increase year to year, but the DHS's would drop by 1% from the amount enacted this year.

"President Biden’s budget fails to adequately fund the Department of Homeland Security, proposing a 1% DECREASE in funding from FY23 levels," a GOP aide said in a statement Thursday. "As the agency with lead responsibility for protecting our nation’s borders, transportation systems and cyber security, this is an unacceptable proposal."

The Biden administration maintained that it had taken unprecedented action and “secured more resources for border security than any of the presidents who preceded him.”

TWO REASONS BIDEN IS MAKING FOES OUT OF IMMIGRATION ACTIVISTS AND DEMOCRATIC LATINOS

"The President’s Budget includes billions of dollars to keep America’s borders secure and enforce our immigration laws, while expanding legal pathways for migrants seeking asylum," the White House wrote in a statement on the newly released budget.

DHS funding on immigration and border matters will increasingly focus on bringing outdated border facilities up to speed with renovations, adding more technology capabilities to ports of entry and elsewhere that employees work, lowering the 2 million cases before immigration judges nationwide, and changes that improve how immigrants are detained after initially being apprehended at the border or while in longer-term immigration custody within the U.S.

Roughly 40%, or about $25 billion, of the budget is directed toward the DHS agencies Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The White House touted that it would cover the hiring of an additional 350 Border Patrol agents at CBP.

Both agencies would bring on 460 more employees to interview immigrants in custody, a task that has fallen to Border Patrol agents and pulled as many as half of agents from the field on the southern border to document, fingerprint, and fill out the paperwork for every person apprehended. Over two years, agents on the southern border have apprehended and taken into custody more than 2 million people.

The Biden administration also wants $535 million to add more technology to the ports of entry, where pedestrians and vehicles must pass federal inspection to be admitted to the U.S. Fewer than 1 in 5 vehicles are scanned at inspection booths, a number Congress is trying to increase to improve the screening of people and goods entering the country.

Approximately 85% of all fentanyl seized at the nation’s border last year occurred at southern border ports of entry. An additional $40 million would go toward countering fentanyl smuggling and cartels, though the budget does not specify how it would do so.

The DHS would create a massive $4.7 billion fund for immigration-related emergencies at the border. The contingency fund would give the department access to a large pot of cash in the event of a surge of illegal immigrants at one time.

Over the past two years, between 150,000 and 305,000 people have been encountered each month at the nation's borders, far beyond the fewer than 50,000 seen in most months during the Obama and Trump administrations.

Matt Gaetz resolution to pull US troops from Syria fails to clear House

Ryan King

March 08, 06:08 PM March 08, 06:08 PM

A resolution championed by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) calling for the United States to withdraw its troops from Syria failed to clear the House.

The measure was shot down on Wednesday in a 103-321 vote. Forty-seven Republicans and 56 Democrats voted in favor of Gaetz's War Powers Resolution Act, which would have directed President Joe Biden to bring the roughly 900 U.S. troops in Syria home within 180 days unless Congress authorized an extended deployment.

CPAC 2023: MATT GAETZ CALLS TO ABOLISH 'WEAPONIZED' FBI AND DOJ

Gaetz had filed the resolution after a Feb. 17 press release from U.S. Central Command stated that four American service members were wounded in a raid in northeastern Syria to take out a senior ISIS leader.

“If Joe Biden wants to keep us in Syria’s war, then he must explain to the American people why, what the goal is, and what winning looks like. Until then, every member of the House of Representatives will vote on the record on whether they support continuing war in Syria or not," Gaetz said in a statement ahead of the vote.

Due to the fact that war powers resolutions are privileged, Gaetz could force a vote on the measure within 18 days of him unveiling it. Gaetz is a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

"America First means actually putting the people of our country first — not the interests of the Military Industrial Complex," he said.

The House Progressive Caucus encouraged its 100-plus members to back Gaetz's bill. Last year, Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) unveiled a similar proposal that attracted 155 votes in favor, including 25 Republicans. Gaetz was one of them.

Robert Ford, the former ambassador to Syria under the Obama administration, also urged members of Congress to support Gaetz's resolution.

"After more than eight years of military operations in Syria there is no definition of what the ‘enduring’ defeat of ISIS would look like,” he wrote in a letter to Congress obtained by the Intercept. “We owe our soldiers serving there in harm’s way a serious debate about whether their mission is, in fact, achievable.”

On Saturday, Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made a surprise trip to Syria in a Kurdish-controlled controlled region to examine United States operations. He underscored the importance of having a military engagement in the region to curtail terrorist threats.

“Unless you support and devote the correct amount of resources to it, things will get worse,” he told reporters, the New York Times reported. “If you completely ignore and turn your back, then you’re setting the conditions for a resurgence.”

House Republicans face thorny challenges in Afghanistan withdrawal investigations

Mike Brest

March 06, 06:15 AM March 06, 06:21 AM

People long thought of the 2001-2021 Afghanistan conflict as "the good war." U.S. military action in the landlocked central Asian conservative Muslim nation was a direct response to the 9/11 attacks, which claimed nearly 3,000 lives on American soil.

The public largely saw the Afghanistan war as a matter of self-defense since its Taliban government had allowed al Qaeda terrorists to train there and use the country as a base from which to plan the Sept. 11 attacks. Though more than 2,400 Americans died in military efforts fighting terrorists in Afghanistan, its moral authority shone brightly compared to the invasion of Iraq and subsequent war, a conflict of choice, which, according to critics, stood as the worst U.S. foreign policy decision of the modern era after it empowered neighboring Shia Mulsim majority Iran and more broadly destabilized the Middle East.

THE TRUTH ABOUT BIDEN'S UKRAINE FOREIGN POLICY

What the American public wasn't counting on, though, was a chaotic and deadly withdrawal process by American and allied troops, one that harkened back to the U.S. loss in Vietnam, with American helicopters in April 1975 ignominiously taking off from the roof of their country's embassy just before communist troops rolled in.

Worst of all, congressional Republicans said in late summer 2021, problems that plagued the Afghanistan withdrawal were likely foreseeable by President Joe Biden and his military and diplomatic advisers. So, since House Republicans in November won a narrow 222-213 majority, its leaders have been chomping at the bit to investigate the U.S. military's Afghanistan withdrawal.

But GOP lawmakers are finding that simply blaming the Biden administration for the seemingly botched withdrawal isn’t so easy, as they’ve had mixed luck obtaining documents and other materials from the Biden administration. The narrative of the Afghanistan troop withdrawal being Biden’s fault isn’t as simple as they’d make it seem since Biden’s Republican predecessor, former President Donald Trump, laid much of the military and diplomatic groundwork that led to the chaotic withdrawal, completed on Aug. 30, 2021.

A Difficult Investigation

House Republicans have said they want to focus largely on the disastrous end to the war. One main question is how the Taliban's August 2021 offensive easily toppled the U.S.-backed Afghan government despite the Afghan forces having been the recipients of billions of dollars for training and aid since the United States launched operations there on Oct. 7, 2001, upon the orders of then-President George W. Bush.

In the end, Afghan soldiers effectively laid down their weapons. U.S. forces ultimately conducted a chaotic evacuation effort for U.S. citizens and Afghan allies who had worked with American troops and were at risk under the Taliban regime. Thousands of Afghan allies were left behind, and many remain there to this day, under threat as the security situation worsens.

As U.S. forces evacuated more than 120,000 civilians in the final two weeks of August after the Taliban took control, their efforts were marred by a pair of tragic events. On Aug. 26, an ISIS-K operative detonated a suicide vest killing 13 U.S. service members and roughly 170 civilians outside the gates of the airport where the evacuations were occurring. Then, on Aug. 29, U.S. forces launched a strike at what they believed to be another imminent threat to the personnel at the airport, but the target was wrongly identified. Ten civilians were killed, including multiple children, while none of them posed a threat to U.S. forces or those at the airport.

The Biden administration ending the Afghanistan War under such circumstances was an obvious target of GOP investigation once they took power. At the start of the new Congress in early January, the issue got tied to support of Rep. Kevin McCarthy's (R-CA) bid to be House speaker by incoming House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX), Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-AL), and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence lead Republican Mike Turner (R-OH). The trio released a statement in support of McCarthy, saying in part that the California Republican's "Commitment to America agenda outlines ... a plan to investigate the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan."

McCarthy won the speaker's gavel on the 15th ballot, in the wee hours of Saturday, Jan. 7, after three and a half days of voting. The Foreign Affairs Committee became the first panel to get its Afghanistan investigation off the ground and running. McCaul, the new chairman, sent a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Jan. 12 asking for a litany of documents related to the withdrawal. McCaul set a response deadline of Jan. 26, two weeks later.

The State Department met that deadline late on the night of Jan. 26, a House Foreign Affairs Committee majority staffer told the Washington Examiner, but not to the committee's satisfaction.

“We indicated to the State [Department] that we understand we won’t get everything by the 26th, but expect a substantial initial production. They instead responded on the 26th with a meager 218-page production of documents that had already been FOIA’d — and were heavily redacted,” the staffer said, alluding to past Freedom of Information Act document requests. “They told us in our meeting on Jan. 19 that they would send us unredacted documents. Instead, there were extensive redactions.”

The State Department also claimed to the committee that they couldn’t begin compiling the documents until receiving a letter from the chairman, while the staff said they are not aware of any law that would bar the department from internally compiling the documents they knew he’d want because he wrote them as the ranking member.

The agency declined to detail its response to the GOP-led committee.

That kind of back-and-forth was expected once Republican-led House investigations got underway. Biden administration officials suggested what they deemed legitimate issues of public concern would warrant their response to GOP requests, while other requests, like those probing alleged misdeeds by presidential son Hunter Biden, might be ignored. Biden administration officials cited ignored subpoenas by figures from the administration of former President Donald Trump and even Republican House members themselves during the Jan. 6 committee investigation.

A State Department spokesperson directed the Washington Examiner to spokesman Ned Price's recent comments on the topic: "On the various topics and regions of oversight, we are going to continue with the approach that we have exercised with the prior Congress, with the 117th Congress, with the 118th Congress. Congress has important functions: authorization function, appropriation function, and an oversight function."

McCaul, whose 10-page letter included a long list of questions he wants answers to, is planning for public hearings on the Afghanistan withdrawal. The majority staffer called the investigation "a top priority for the committee."

Nor is McCaul the only House committee chairman eager to bring the disastrous end of the Afghanistan War back into the public sphere.

House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY) sent letters in December, before he took the committee gavel, requesting information and documents from Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, Blinken, national security adviser Jake Sullivan, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Majorkas, and U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Samantha Powers.

“The Biden Administration’s botched Afghanistan withdrawal was a humanitarian and national security catastrophe," Comer told the Washington Examiner in a statement. "U.S. servicemen and women lost their lives, thousands of Americans were abandoned, billions of taxpayer dollars are still unaccounted for, military equipment fell into the hands of the Taliban, progress for Afghan women has stalled, and the entire region is now under hostile Taliban control. Nearly two years later, the American people are still without answers and sitting in the dark."

Comer spokesman Austin Hacker told the Washington Examiner that no Biden administration officials have responded to the requests.

Trump Administration Responsibility?

While the end of the war did not go as Joe Biden intended, the situation was more complicated, having bedeviled four presidential administrations. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction found that the Trump administration's agreement with the Taliban in February 2020 to leave within 14 months put the Biden administration in the position of having to uphold it.

That was a "catalyst" and the "single most important near-term factor" in the Afghan military's collapse, in part because it led to a drop in morale, a SIGAR report from last May lays out.

Anthony H. Cordesman, the emeritus chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the best way to learn from the mistakes in the war is to look much further back than just how it ended.

"One of the key issues is, does the committee basically focus on trying to blame the [Biden] administration for the near chaos of the worst phase of the collapse? Or does it look at the overall set of problems that led to the collapse? Historically, I think we can just focus on the most immediate crisis and never really look at the causes, and I think that if we do that again, it simply will not provide any clear guidance for the future," Cordesman told the Washington Examiner.

Cordesman believes that to get a comprehensive understanding of the collapse of the Afghan government, the scope of the investigation should “certainly” go back to “at least 2015,” during the Obama administration, specifically on how the U.S. could have begun the peace process with a date certain — without "having any clear plan for peace or examination of how the sort of negotiating options would occur."

Bradley Bowman, an expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who was a defense adviser for former Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), thinks the national security implications from the withdrawal are too important for committees to get dragged into partisan exercises.

"I get frustrated by Democrats who just want to put it all on Trump, and I get frustrated by Republicans who just want to put it on Biden because I think neither of those approaches is fact-based or accurate. It's just not," Bowman told the Washington Examiner. "And I think the stakes that we confront and the threats that we confront as a country are just too serious for partisan gamesmanship, and I think on Afghanistan and everything else, if we're going to adopt the national security policies we need, we need more serious-minded folks who are more interested in securing our country then winning partisan points."

With the U.S. leaving Afghanistan, Joe Biden and defense officials have said their counterterrorism strategy in the region focuses largely on the U.S.'s over-the-horizon capabilities, or the ability to launch strikes without troops in the country, though it's much harder to collect the necessary intelligence required for such an action without personnel there to gather it. In the roughly 18 months since forces withdrew, the U.S. has conducted one such strike, in July 2022, that successfully targeted Ayman al Zawahiri, the successor of Osama bin Laden in al Qaeda’s leadership.

Al Zawahiri's presence in Kabul’s Shirpur neighborhood, where U.S. officials alleged Taliban leaders not only knew he was there but engaged in a cover-up in an attempt to his presence there, demonstrates the tenuous security situation in Afghanistan.