Tuberville is holding up approval of senior military officials in protest of a Pentagon policy that reimburses travel costs for service members who must go across state lines to seek an abortion.

The White House and Democrats have slammed Tuberville for the hold, which they say is damaging military readiness. But the Biden administration's public shaming, combined with efforts to directly engage with Tuberville, have so far been fruitless.

The senator said defense officials on Wednesday could not explain how the abortion policy helped military readiness, or define the parameters around when the Pentagon would allow service members or their dependents to receive the procedure.   

“They didn’t explain it very well," he said. "They had no clue about readiness. They had no clue what month they’d do an abortion. We asked them eight or nine months — well they didn’t know.” 

He said he had gone into the meeting with “open mind, to be convinced that this is affecting readiness, and they gave a poor answer – [it’s] affecting recruiting, very poor answer on that.” 

Tuberville since March has held firm on blocking some 300 military promotions over the policy, which was established after the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade last year.  

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has called the senator three times — including once in March, once last week, and again on Tuesday — in an effort to get him to loosen his grip. 

Austin explained to Tuberville “that his blanket holds were increasingly harming U.S. military readiness and national security at a critical geopolitical moment,” a Pentagon official told The Hill. 

Tuberville earlier suggested that he could be convinced to drop his hold should the Senate vote on an amendment to curtail the Pentagon policy in its annual defense policy bill, which lawmakers hope to pass before August. 

The House's version of the $886 billion National Defense Authorization Act, which narrowly passed on Friday, included a provision that would end the policy. 

GOP senators have offered up similar proposals for the upper chamber's NDAA — which it will begin to debate this week — but if included, the amendment would hamper the likelihood the bill passes the Democrat-controlled Senate. 

Tuberville was not the only senator who left Wednesday's briefing unmoved. Armed Services ranking member Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) also complained that the Defense officials failed to give data on how abortion access affects enlistment and readiness. 

“Officials from the Department of Defense could not supply that information, which clearly indicates that this policy was entered into for political reasons and not based on the facts, not based on data,” Wicker told reporters. “So I’m very disappointed, though not surprised, at what we are learning today.” 

But Senate Armed Services Chairman Jack Reed (D-R.I) offered a far different take of the briefing, saying that after today “there can be no doubt in my colleagues’ minds about the legality of the Department’s policy. I am even more convinced of the necessity and appropriateness of this policy, which is critical for the health of our military women, men, and their families.” 

He added: “The Defense Department laid out clear, plain facts to the committee. The Department of Justice has examined the Pentagon’s policy and found it to be entirely legal, consistent with 40 years of precedent through both Republican and Democratic administrations."

And Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) told The Hill that the presentation was “very thorough and answered a lot of questions.” 

King noted that only four to five Republican senators attended the briefing.  

Al Weaver contributed.

“We are hopeful that both sides can negotiate in good faith and reach a consensus agreement that addresses basic human needs and allows workers to do their jobs safely and with dignity,” 28 Democrats said in the letter.   

“However, in the event a fair and equitable collective bargaining agreement cannot be reached, we commit to respect our constituents’ statutory and constitutional rights to withhold their labor and initiate and participate in a strike,” they said.

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) led the letter, along with a host of other senators, including Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.).

Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien drew attention after revealing over the weekend that the union requested that the White House not intervene if UPS workers decided to strike.

The Biden administration previously intervened last year in negotiations to prevent a national railroad strike, helping broker a labor deal between freight rail carriers and unionized workers amid concerns of the economic consequences of such a protest.

“We told the White House — and I used this analogy throughout our negotiations, throughout our rallies and practice pickets that we have taken a strong position with the White House that, you know, my neighborhood where I grew up in Boston, if two people had a disagreement, and you had nothing to do with it, you just kept walking,” O’Brien said.

“And we echoed that to the White House on numerous occasions, and we don’t need anybody getting involved in this fight,” he said.

Talks between UPS and the Teamsters fell apart earlier this month as both sides struggled to reach consensus on the economic portion of a new contract, which covers issues like wages.

However, a spokesperson for the shipping company said on Wednesday that both sides will resume negotiations next week, as the threat of a strike looms in the coming weeks.

“We are pleased to be back at the negotiating table next week to resolve the few remaining open issues,” a company spokesperson said in a statement.

“We are prepared to increase our industry-leading pay and benefits, but need to work quickly to finalize a fair deal that provides certainty for our customers, our employees and businesses across the country.”

The letter comes after more than 170 lawmakers sent a similar letter to O’Brien and UPS CEO Carol Tomé earlier this week. More than handful of Republicans also joined Democrats in signing onto the letter, which was led by Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan (Wis.), Donald Norcross (N.J.), Debbie Dingell (Mich.) and Steven Horsford (Nev.).

“Finally, we understand that Congress has not previously intervened in recent history to implement a collective bargaining agreement between workers and their employer under the National Labor Relations Act,” both letters state, “and we commit to not intervening in the collective bargaining process between Teamsters and UPS.”

According to the National Labor Relations Board, employees of air and rail carriers covered by the Railway Labor Act are among those excluded from coverage under the act, however. 

Updated at 5:27 p.m.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who condemned former President Trump two years ago for inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, declined Wednesday to say whether Trump should now be criminally charged for those actions

McConnell, asked about a possible indictment of Trump, stated that he does not plan to “critique” GOP candidates for president.  

“I’ve said every week out here that I’m not going to comment on the various candidates for the presidency. How I felt about that I expressed at the time, but I’m not going to start getting into sort of critiquing the various candidates for president,” McConnell told reporters when asked whether it would be legitimate for the Justice Department to charge Trump in connection with efforts to stop Congress’s certification of President Biden’s 2020 election victory.  

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

Trump announced Tuesday that special counsel Jack Smith had informed him in a letter that he is the target of a grand jury investigation related to Jan. 6. 

The target letter cites three statutes that Trump may be charged under, including the deprivation of rights, conspiracy to commit an offense against or defraud the United States and tampering with a witness, according to news outlets.  

McConnell excoriated Trump on the Senate floor in February 2021 at the conclusion of his second impeachment trial for provoking a mob of supporters to march to the U.S. Capitol and overrun its security to stop the certification of the 2020 election.  

“There is no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of that day. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president,” McConnell said.  

More from The Hill

• Biden video mocking Marjorie Taylor Greene speech hit more than 30M views in 12 hours
• Gaetz says he’ll offer bill to defund Jack Smith investigations of Trump
• GOP senators rattled by radical conservative populism
• Senate puts NASA on notice over Mars mission

More than 1,060 people have been charged by federal prosecutors because of their actions that day, and more than 600 people have pleaded guilty, according to a database compiled by National Public Radio.  

More than 80 people have been convicted on all charges, while only two people have been acquitted on all charges. 

Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.) said Tuesday that being “practically and morally responsible” didn’t necessarily warrant criminal charges and that prosecutors would have to hew closely to the law and facts of the case.  

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

The bill, introduced by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), would establish firmer stock trading bans and disclosure requirements for lawmakers, senior executive branch officials and their spouses and dependents. 

The Ban Stock Trading for Government Officials Act is the latest bipartisan effort to enact a stock trading ban for members of Congress, an issue that has been pushed for in the past few congressional cycles.

The Wall Street Journal was the first to report the legislation introduced by Gillibrand and Hawley.

“It is critical that the American people know that their elected leaders are putting the public first – not looking for ways to line their own pockets,” Gillibrand said in a statement. 

The bill would ban congressional members, the president, vice president, senior executive branch members, and their spouses and dependents from holding or trading stocks, with no exception to blind trusts. Congressional members who violate this ban would be required to pay at least 10 percent of the banned investments. 

“Politicians and civil servants shouldn’t spend their time day-trading and trying to make a profit at the expense of the American public, but that’s exactly what so many are doing,” Hawley said. 

The legislation also establishes harsh penalties for executive branch stock trading, requiring executive branch officials to give up profits from covered finance interests to the Department of Treasury, while also facing a fine from the Automatic Special Counsel.  

Congressional members, senior congressional staff and senior executive branch employees would also be required to report if they, a spouse or a dependent applies for or receives a “benefit of value” from the federal government, including loans, contracts, grants, agreements and payments. If they fail to file, they will face a $500 penalty. 

The bill aims to increase transparency, requiring public databases of personal financial disclosures and financial transaction filings required by the STOCK Act, which prohibits members of Congress from using insider information when buying and selling stocks. The penalty for the failing to file STOCK Act transaction reports would also increase from $200 to $500. 

In a speech to a joint meeting of Congress marking Israel’s 75th anniversary, Herzog called Israeli protests against Netanyahu and his government “painful, and deeply unnerving, because it highlights the cracks within the whole.” 

President Biden has urged Netanyahu to work with Herzog to reach an agreement with the political opposition to abandon some of the most controversial measures of the government’s judicial overhaul plan, which critics say would neuter the country’s Supreme Court and undermine its democracy. 

“As head of state, I will continue doing everything to reach a broad public consensus, and to preserve, protect and defend the state of Israel’s democracy,” Herzog said to lawmakers.

Herzog’s visit to Washington, and his address to Congress, served as an attempt by the Biden administration to bridge the divides in his party — reinforcing Democratic support for Israel without legitimizing Netanyahu’s controversial government. 

Biden spoke with Netanyahu Monday as the Israeli president arrived in Washington and agreed to meet in the fall in the United States, but has not yet extended an explicit invitation to the White House.

Democratic divisions were apparent Wednesday, when at least seven progressives skipped the Israeli president’s speech. They included Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Jamaal Bowman (N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Cori Bush (Mo.), Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.) and Pramila Jayapal (Wash.). 

Some of those lawmakers have denounced Israel as an apartheid state and condemned Netanyahu’s government as racist — critical of Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians, its settlement activity in the West Bank and saying that the judicial overhaul will worsen the situation. 

Herzog addressed those statements head-on.

“I am not oblivious to criticism among friends, including some expressed by respected members of this House,” he said, adding that while he respects the criticism, “One does not always have to accept it,” which elicited laughs and claps in the chamber.

His remarks came one day after the House overwhelmingly approved a resolution affirming that Israel “is not a racist or apartheid state” and that the U.S. “will always be a staunch partner and supporter of Israel,” while also condemning xenophobia and antisemitism.

The final vote was 412-9-1, with all opposition coming from progressive Democrats — some of whom boycotted Wednesday’s speech.

The resolution was drawn up in reaction to remarks by Jayapal, the chair of the Progressive Caucus, who, during a progressive conference in Chicago over the weekend, said that “Israel is a racist state.” 

The comment drew vocal bipartisan criticism, and Jayapal later apologized, walked back her remarks and focused her criticism on the Netanyahu government.

Jayapal did not attend Herzog’s speech, with a Democratic aide saying in a statement that her absence was due to “scheduling conflicts.” She did, however, support the resolution Tuesday.

One of the loudest applause lines came when Herzog warned that criticism of Israel should not “cross the line into negation of the state of Israel’s right to exist.”

“Questioning the Jewish people’s right to self-determination is not legitimate diplomacy, it is antisemitism,” he added.

While Herzog’s roughly 40-minute remarks were overwhelmingly celebrated by both sides of the chamber, some Republicans stayed seated while other lawmakers stood to applaud the Israeli president describing Israel as hosting “the largest and most impressive LGBTQ pride parades.” 

Still, the chamber was filled with lawmakers proclaiming support for Israel — with the U.S. and Israel working closely together to counter threats from Iran and its nuclear ambitions and to advance efforts to establish ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia. 

“Israel thanks the United States for working towards establishing peaceful relations between Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a leading nation in the region and in the Muslim world,” Herzog said.

“We pray for this moment to come. This would be a huge sea change in the course of history in the Middle East and the world at large.”

The remark received an overwhelming bipartisan standing ovation. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the ranking member on the Judiciary committee who is Jewish, held up Israel’s flag during the Israeli president’s remarks.

Herzog said that his deepest “yearning … is for Israel to one day make peace with our Palestinian neighbors” — comments that drew a bipartisan standing ovation — but called out Palestinian attacks against Israelis as undermining possibilities for a future peace. 

“Notwithstanding the deep political differences, and the numerous challenges that surround Israeli-Palestinian relations — and I do not ignore them — but it should be clear that one cannot talk about peace while condoning or legitimizing terror, implicitly or explicitly. True peace cannot be anchored in violence,” he said. 

Herzog thanked the U.S. for its “commitment to Israel’s security,” but noted that the relationship is a “two-way alliance, in which Israel has been making critical contributions to the national security and interests of the United States in numerous ways.” 

To date, the U.S. has provided $158 billion in bilateral assistance and missile defense, according to the Congressional Research Service, although that number is not adjusted for inflation. 

The Obama administration negotiated two 10-year agreements that provided Israel $30 billion through 2018, and $33.8 billion between 2019 and 2028. 

In 2021, Congress appropriated an additional $1 billion to restock Israel’s missile defense system, Iron Dome, but that was largely delayed over opposition from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

Herzog is only the second Israeli president to address Congress. His father, Chaim Herzog, marked Israel’s 40th anniversary with a joint speech to Congress in 1987. 

He called it “the honor of a lifetime” to follow in his father’s footsteps, and he paid notice to his other deep family roots in his speech, referencing how his grandfather, the chief rabbi of the newly established state of Israel, met with then-President Truman in the White House in 1949. 

The president’s brother, Michael Herzog, is Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S.

“To us, it is clear that America is irreplaceable to Israel, and Israel is irreplaceable to America. It is time to design the next stage of our evolving friendship and our growing partnership together,” Herzog said in his speech. 

“Israel and the United States will inevitably disagree on many matters. But we will always remain family.”

Glynn Neal allegedly stabbed one of Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) staffers as they and a friend were leaving a restaurant.

The staffer was stabbed multiple times in the head and chest, suffering life-threatening injuries, but survived. Neal was charged with assault with intent to kill.

Last week, Judge Anthony Epstein ordered a psychological evaluation. According to police reports, Neal said he “heard voices” encouraging him to commit the attack.

He was released from prison the day before the attack after serving about 12 years for threats to kidnap a person and forcing a person into prostitution.

In last week’s hearing, Neal’s sister told detectives that he “acted different” since being released from prison, including talking to himself.

Neal will undergo further psychological testing and will be evaluated again before his next court appearance on Sept. 8. He will remain in jail in D.C.

The Senate is signaling deep skepticism about NASA's ambitious plans to fetch samples of soil from the red planet, expressing concerns over the mission's cost and viability.  

Senate appropriators are offering just $300 million in funding for fiscal 2024 for the Mars mission — less than a third of the $949 million budget request from NASA.  

Appropriators also say they have deep doubts about whether NASA can complete the mission, known as Mars Sample Return (MSR).  

“The Committee has significant concerns about the technical challenges facing MSR and potential further impacts on confirmed missions, even before MSR has completed preliminary design review," the Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies subcommittee wrote in an appropriations bill outlining the funding for 2024.

It further said it would rescind the $300 million allocated for the mission if the agency cannot guarantee that overall cost will not exceed $5.3 billion. NASA estimates that the mission's development costs, which were originally $4.4 billion, have soared to more than $9 billion. 

Notably, this price tag only represents the cost of developing and testing the mission's components. It does not include launch costs or operating costs for the mission's planned five-year timeframe. It also doesn’t include construction of any new sample-receiving facility that may be required to handle the rock and soil samples. 

The samples in question have been collected by NASA's newest Mars rover — Perseverance —which launched to Mars in 2020. The rover was dispatched to Mars to help find signs of life, and was tasked with scooping up samples of the Martian surface and subsurface. So far, Perseverance has collected 18 of 43 planned samples.  

The ability to collect and study samples could provide scientists with unprecedented data on Mars, helping to fill in the gaps about how the planet changed over time. They could help scientists understand whether Mars was habitable and may even contain definitive signs of life — either past or present. 

NASA has been working with the European Space Agency to develop the MSR mission. As part of this plan, NASA will build a Sample Retriever Lander that is slated to launch in 2028, although the Senate as well as some within the agency doubt this is a viable launch date. 

As NASA has been working on developing the technology needed for the mission, costs have ballooned. First estimates indicated the cost of this mission would be around $4 billion, but according to the committee's report, the space agency has already spent more than $1 billion. The subcommittee also flagged that the planned 2028 launch date is very aggressive and likely to slip, increasing cost overruns.

NASA also convened an Institutional Review Board to review the MRS mission and determine its best path of success. The board is expected to issue its findings in late August or early September.  

A periodic polling of the scientific community designed to flag important NASA missions last year estimated that MSR would cost around $5.3 billion, the limit the Senate is now setting. 

If NASA cannot guarantee it can complete the mission for this amount, the Mars program faces cancellation, and the Senate will transfer the $300 million to other missions, with the bulk of it going to the Artemis lunar program. That mission aims to return astronauts to the surface of the moon and establish a small space station in orbit around the moon.

More from The Hill

• GOP front-runners have little to say on climate change amid record heat
• Schools prepare for Round 2 with AI
• One quarter of adult children estranged from a parent

Scientists in the same survey said the Mars mission was highly critical, and that it was worth asking Congress for more money to complete it. They argued that the request would help to ensure that any extra funding would not be taken away from other science missions.  

But NASA faces significant headwinds in winning more funding, as congressional negotiators feel the pressure to keep overall government spending in line with a budget caps deal worked out between President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) earlier this year.  

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) described himself as a NASA supporter but acknowledged during consideration of NASA funding in the Senate Appropriations Committee last week that the cuts will lead to “significant challenges” in continuing all of the agency's programs.  

“We were able to protect the most important national priority within NASA's budget, which is to return to the moon and maintain our strategic advantage in space,” said Moran, the top Republican on the spending subpanel overseeing NASA funding.  

Costs for the Mars program have risen for a number of reasons.

There were technical flaws in the original mission concept, which involved a single lander and a small rover to retrieve the samples. There were also large errors in the technical requirements of the mission which meant that more hardware was needed, which costs more money.

Staffing issues at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., has also delayed multiple missions, including MSR.

This isn't the first time a mission was massively over budget or the first time a major NASA mission faced cancellation.

The James Webb Space Telescope faced its own possible cancellation in 2011, but went on to launch in 2021 despite a ballooning budget that ended up costing $10 billion. NASA's Artemis lunar program is also massively over its planned budget, and could end up costing an estimated $93 billion by the time astronauts reach the lunar surface.  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More from The Hill

• GOP front-runners have little to say on climate change amid record heat
• Senate puts NASA on notice over Mars mission
• Ohio GOP braces for critical primary in bid to oust Sherrod Brown

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) spoke Tuesday but failed to make any progress on breaking the logjam of nearly 300 military promotions being held up by the senator, Tuberville said.

According to a Tuberville spokesperson, the two officials had “another cordial conversation” and spoke about the planned Senate briefing with Defense officials to discuss the Pentagon’s abortion policy that sparked the fight. The policy allows the department to cover travel expenses for military members to seek abortion care.

The Pentagon and Democrats have been trying to move him off the holds.

“Coach looks forward to the briefing and to further discussions to resolve the situation,” the spokesperson added.

Tuberville told reporters at the Capitol, however, that the talks have yet to yield any progress toward a resolution.

“No, not yet,” Tuberville said. “None. … Just cordial [conversations]. Everybody gives their position and then, ‘Well, let’s talk again.’”

A Defense Department official confirmed the call had happened and said Austin "underscored to Sen. Tuberville the mounting disruption the holds were inflicting on military families, who have already sacrificed so much."

"Secretary Austin has also explained to Sen. Tuberville, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, that his blanket holds were increasingly harming U.S. military readiness and national security at a critical geopolitical moment," the official added.

Tuberville said he was hopeful that the annual National Defense Authorization Act could codify a reversal of the Pentagon’s policy after the House included such language in their version last week, which he said he was pleased with. Senate Democrats are not expected to include that provision in the upper chamber’s version of the bill. 

"I like what the House has in [their version]. I just don't know about ours," Tuberville said.

Ellen Mitchell contributed.

The Senate voted 72-25 to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed, the first procedural vote on its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which authorizes a top-line figure of $886 billion and is expected to include a 5 percent pay raise for troops. The proposal also is unlikely to include many of the hot-button items that House Republicans included in the legislation that passed the lower chamber largely along party lines. 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he is pleased with the legislation's progress and was especially pleased that both sides have kept poison pill provisions out of the bill in a push to win a robust bipartisan vote. He also argued that the NDAA effort should be a "prime example" of how senators on both sides can "work constructively" to help the nation's defense capabilities. 

"I certainly hope we do not see the kind of controversy that severely hindered the NDAA process over in the House," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "Both sides should defeat potentially toxic amendments and refrain from delaying the NDAA’s passage. So far, we have thankfully avoided all of that."

The Democratic leader noted that senators and their staffs worked throughout the weekend to wrap up the first manager's package that includes 21 GOP and Democratic amendments each, and an additional nine bipartisan amendments. 

He added that both sides are also starting work on a second manager's package. 

The Democratic leader also name checked a couple of amendments he is most pleased will be included in the Senate package, including on artificial intelligence, China's role in the U.S.'s fentanyl crisis and American competition with China. 

The traditionally bipartisan legislation passed the House last week 219-210 with only four members of each party breaking rank. Democrats panned amendments including those to block the Pentagon's new policy that covers travel costs for military members who seek abortions, military diversity programs and surgeries and hormone treatments for transgender troops. 

After the Senate passes its bill, members of both chambers will try to reach a compromise package that is expected to be tilted in the Senate's direction in order to win the required 60 votes to win passage. 

In a letter sent Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services, the Democrats called on the White House to strengthen a proposed rule regarding protected personal health data. 

The letter was led in the Senate by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash) and in the House by Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)

The proposal in question would strengthen the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to prevent information about whether an individual sought, obtained, provided, or facilitated an abortion from being used by law enforcement in red states where abortion is banned.

Following the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, the administration said it was more likely that individuals' protected health information (PHI) could be disclosed as part of a red state's investigation and/or prosecution of a health provider or even an individual patient.

The proposed rule, issued in April, was meant to counter those concerns by barring state officials from forcing providers and insurers to turn over information about whether someone sought or provided an abortion. 

A public comment period on the proposal closed last month. 

"The threat that PHI will be obtained and used in such an investigation or proceeding is likely to chill individuals' willingness to seek lawful treatment or to provide full information to their health care providers when obtaining that treatment," the administration said in the proposal. 

Yet the rule as proposed would require officials to obtain an "attestation" that the health information won't be shared for a prohibited purpose. It also would not protect that information from a subpoena, discovery request, or other administrative request. 

Among their demands, the lawmakers said the rule needs a much higher bar to overcome. Law enforcement agencies should be required to obtain a warrant before forcing doctors, pharmacists, and other health care providers to turn over their patients’ health information, they said.

The Democrats also said warrants must prohibit sharing those records with other law enforcement agencies, except to further the particular investigation identified in the relevant warrant application.

"Americans should be able to trust that the information they share in confidence with their doctors when seeking care will receive the highest protections under the law, regardless of the specific medical issue. But current legal protections for PHI are woefully insufficient," the lawmakers wrote. 

They also said HHS should apply the warrant protection broadly.

"Instead of limiting this higher standard to narrow categories of records, HHS should apply this protection across the board, regardless of the illness, disease, or medical issue," the Democrats said. 

Republicans defended former President Trump after he announced Tuesday he was the target of the federal Jan. 6 investigation focusing on his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, criticizing the government for his prosecution.

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) suggested Tuesday that the government was targeting Trump out of fear he could win next November.

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

“This is not equal justice. They treat people differently and they go after their adversaries,” said McCarthy, who after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol said Trump “bears responsibility” for what happened.

Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) walks through Statuary Hall following a vote on Tuesday, July 18, 2023. (Greg Nash)

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) also questioned the timing of the new development in the Jan. 6 investigation and whether there was a double standard being applied to the former president.

He noted that the news comes as the House Oversight Committee is slated to hear testimony from two IRS whistleblowers this week who alleged an investigation into Hunter Biden was slow-walked by prosecutors.

“Now you see the Biden administration going after President Trump once again, it begs that question — is there a double standard? Is justice being administered equally?” he said at the House GOP conference presser.

Trump said in a statement that he received the letter notifying him of the investigation Sunday evening, an indication that the former president could soon face charges in a second federal case.

He pleaded not guilty to 37 federal counts in a separate case in June in connection with his mishandling of classified documents and attempting to keep them from the government.

The Jan. 6 investigation is being spearheaded by special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed last year to determine “whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) also ramped up her attacks on the Justice Department after Trump announced his news, saying that it is “absolute bulls---” to reporters. She said that the charges are “ridiculous” and that Smith is “weaponizing” the Justice Department against Trump.

More from The Hill

• DeSantis says Trump ‘should have come out more forcefully’ on Jan. 6

• US soldier in North Korean custody ‘willfully’ crossed border: Pentagon

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

“If this is the direction America is going — we are worse than Russia, we are worse than China. We are worse than some of the most corrupt third world countries, and this needs to end,” she said in a video captured by CSPAN. “It's an absolute lie.”

She also took to Twitter to call Smith a “weak little b----.”

“Jack Smith is a lousy attorney,” Greene tweeted. “His career is filled with mistrials, overturned cases, and judicial rebukes. He only targets Republicans because he’s a weak little b---- for the Democrats.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) asks questions during a House Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic hearing entitled, ‘Investigating the Proximal Origin of a Cover Up’ on Tuesday, July 11, 2023. (Greg Nash)

Republican Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Mary Miller (Ill.) also echoed their colleagues' sentiments about the news.

“Joe Biden’s DOJ: Attack the Portland Federal Courthouse? No problem. Intimidate #SCOTUS justices to influence a court decision? No big deal. But if you’re President Trump and do nothing wrong? PROSECUTE. Americans are tired of the double standard!” Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a tweet.

“The DOJ has become a political agency, targeting Joe Biden's political opponents while covering up Joe Biden's crimes. The DOJ is attacking our democracy by actively interfering in the 2024 Election,” Miller said in a tweet. “I will join Chairman Jim Jordan in his effort to stop the partisan hacks at DOJ!”

This story was updated at 1:13 p.m.

Emily Brooks contributed.

“Every day, crises pop up all around the world, crises you may never hear about,” the ad from VoteVets said. “And the world’s greatest military is ever on alert, ready to defend us against any threat, with our best and brightest seated in positions of command. But what if they’re not?”

“For months, one lone senator, Tommy Tuberville, who never served in uniform himself, has held hostage hundreds of military assignments, just to force his social agenda on women in the ranks, freezing all promotions for top military posts, to the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, leaving mission-critical positions to go vacant,” the ad continued.

Tuberville has held up more than 250 military promotions and nominations in the Senate since March in protest of the Pentagon’s policy to offer paid leave and reimburse service members who travel across state lines to obtain an abortion.

After the head of the Marine Corps officially retired lack week, the branch has been left without a confirmed leader for the first time in more than a century.

The White House, current and former Defense officials, and congressional lawmakers have warned the hold is impacting military readiness and jeopardizing national security.

“Our enemies are watching, looking for any vulnerabilities to exploit,” the ad continued. “And Sen. Tommy Tuberville is playing right into their hands, playing political games with our national security."

"And not one Republican in Congress will stand up to him and let our troops keep us safe," it said.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-Ala.) battles in Washington have only boosted his political standing in Alabama as he tries to swat away swirling rumors back home that he may not run for a second term in the Senate. 

Tuberville has been a lightning rod in Washington for much of the year. His hold on military promotions recently hit the five-month mark, and he tossed gas on the fire last week when he took issue with the definition of “white nationalist,” which drew bipartisan condemnation and put him in the center of a political storm yet again. 

But Republicans from across the political spectrum told The Hill these battles have done nothing to hurt his standing in Alabama. Rather, his battle with the Pentagon over its abortion policy and newfound position as a foil for President Biden have strengthened his hand.

“I think he's doing better because of it,” said Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.), noting that Alabama is largely anti-abortion and a deep red state. “They love the fact that he's standing [up]. … I think that coach is going to benefit from it.”

The White House and administration officials have tried to up the pressure on the Alabama Republican in an effort to break the logjam of military nominations that is approaching 300, but there is little light at the end of that tunnel. Tuberville and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke about the holds last week, with the senator noting that they will likely do so again this week. 

At the same time, the president has been taking consistent public shots at Tuberville. Biden recently called him a “better coach than he’s a senator,” referring to his 21 years as a college football head coach, and has said his holds are “bizarre.”

Tuberville’s seeming imperviousness to the attacks have garnered comparisons to former Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who was a preeminent conservative voice for decades and who was defeated by Tuberville in the 2020 primary.

“[His standing has] gotten better. His approval is already pretty high, but now he's just Sessions 2.0,” said Jeff Poor, a conservative radio host based in Mobile. “The guy is willing to take a stand.”

“You talk to party chairmen in the counties, and they have nothing bad to say about him. There were a lot of questions about Tommy Tuberville in 2020. What was he going to be like? And what he has done has been kind of remarkable. He's won over the skeptical,” Poor said.

Tuberville told The Hill that he has received “good” feedback from Alabamians throughout the last couple of months, specifically noting support from veterans in the state and elsewhere. 

More from The Hill

• Former Trump aide claims he’s profiting off legal woes: ‘This is simply a grift’
• Republicans defend Trump, criticize DOJ over news he’s target of Jan. 6 investigation 
• US soldier in North Korean custody ‘willfully’ crossed border: Pentagon

That support has not stretched to the upper ranks of the military, however. Air Force Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown Jr., whom Biden has tapped to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, argued last week that the military will “lose talent” due to Tuberville’s ongoing blockade, and that military readiness will be affected. 

The battles Tuberville has been waging in Washington have prompted rumors that he may be planning to exit the Senate after a single term in office. Four GOP sources told The Hill of chatter emanating from Alabama that he might call it quits. 

Poor noted that Tuberville has been “playing too fast and loose” with his recent actions and remarks, a sign he could be on the way out. 

Tuberville shot down that idea. In a brief interview, the former Auburn University football coach said some supporters have pushed for him to run for governor in 2026 instead, but he insisted that he plans on seeking a second term in the upper chamber. 

“Oh yeah, I’m running. I’m running,” Tuberville said. “They want me to run for governor. I ain’t doing that. I like it up here. I like this because you can hit it hard, and you can affect not just your state but all of the country. You got a lot of say-so about different things.”

“I don’t want to do this, and all of the sudden I get my feet on the ground and then not do it. I’m not going to, obviously, stay forever,” he added. 

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) is seen during a Senate Armed Services Committee nomination hearing for U.S. Air Force Gen. Charles Brown to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Tuesday, July 11, 2023.

One Alabama GOP source, however, was quick to note Tuberville’s penchant for pulling about-faces during his college football career, including when he took jobs at Auburn and the University of Cincinnati. 

Despite his reelection plans, Tuberville has notably not made fundraising a priority. As of the end of June, he has $286,000 in the bank — though Republican operatives don’t see it as a major concern, given the difficulty anyone would have in a primary against Tuberville, Alabama’s ruby-red hue and his ability to cut himself a check to fill any shortfall.

Senate Republicans have been searching for an offramp for months to end Tuberville’s hold on military nominations, but have come up empty-handed at every turn. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said he disagrees with the action but has sidestepped Democratic calls to punish Tuberville or pressure him further in a bid to release the holds. 

Tuberville has shown no willingness to back down. 

“Sports is such a great illustration for politics, because everybody in the stadium is smarter than the people in charge, and they express things, and it’s a rough world. … There’s nothing about this pressure cooker that he hasn’t seen probably in spades by comparison,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told The Hill. “When you come here as a celebrity, you’ve already been through a gauntlet that this is almost minor compared to.” 

“He’s undaunted by the pressure that everybody feels like they’re putting on him,” Cramer said. “Some people can fake it pretty well. I don’t think he is the least bit concerned about it.” 

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is keeping his Democratic colleagues guessing about whether he will run for another Senate term or challenge President Biden as a third-party candidate, which Democrats fear would tip the 2024 presidential race to Donald Trump or another Republican and create a tougher road to keeping their Senate majority.  

He stirred new speculation Monday by speaking at a town hall event in New Hampshire sponsored by No Labels, a centrist group that plans to raise $70 million to field a third-party “unity ticket” in next year’s presidential election. 

Manchin argued Monday that the parties have “receded” to the “extreme” edges of the political spectrum. 

“We’re here to make sure that the American people have an option, and the option is can you move the political parties off their respective sides —they’ve gone too far right and too far left,” he said.  

But when asked about his presidential ambitions, he said that’s “putting the cart ahead of the horse.” 

“I’m not here running for president,” he said of his appearance in the presidential battleground state. “I’m here trying basically to save the nation. I’m concerned more now than I’ve ever been concerned in my lifetime. I have three children and 10 grandchildren.” 

He was invited to speak at the event to mark the release of No Labels’s “Common Sense” policy booklet.  

The newly unveiled centrist platform seeks to bridge the divide between the parties on a range of issues, such as immigration, gun violence and abortion rights.   

Manchin on Monday called for policymakers to seek common ground in the spirit of the platform. He endorsed a cap on federal spending but fended off questions about requiring fossil fuel companies to pay for the cleanup of carbon pollution or placing a tax on carbon emissions. 

Manchin’s continued refusal to rule out a third-party presidential bid is stirring alarm among Democrats, who warn it will hurt Biden’s chances of winning a second term.  

Asked Monday if he considered himself an independent or a Democrat, Manchin declared: “I’m the most independent Democrat” you’ve ever seen.  

Democratic strategists are urging Manchin, who is 75, to run for a fourth Senate term, warning he has no realistic path to winning the presidency.  

"I do not think that Donald Trump can beat Joe Biden one-on-one. He needs help, and a third-party candidate, particularly one from the center, would give him the help that he needs," said Jim Kessler, the executive vice president for policy at Third Way and a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). "Ultimately, I don't think Joe Manchin is going to run for president because he has absolutely zero chance of winning one Electoral College vote, let alone 270, and I say that as a fan of Joe Manchin.”  

Manchin says he will decide his political future at the end of the year or early in 2024.  

He raised $1.3 million in the second fundraising quarter, giving him $10.7 million in the bank — a fundraising haul Democratic strategists say is more in line for a Senate campaign than a presidential campaign.  

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who is running for the GOP presidential nomination, by comparison, announced he raised $6.1 million in the second quarter.  

Democratic strategists say flirting with an independent presidential bid is good for Manchin’s brand in West Virginia, a state Trump carried with 68 percent of the vote in 2016 and 69 percent in 2020.  

But they predict at the end of the day, Manchin won’t want to swing the 2024 race to Trump.  

“Sen. Manchin likes to keep people guessing. He will likely take every platform afforded to him to advance his political belief and agenda, but that being said, he’s a lifelong Democrat, and I find it hard to believe that he would do anything to jeopardize President Biden’s chances of winning reelection,” said Rodell Mollineau, a Democratic strategist and former Senate leadership aide. 

“His narrative from the beginning has been that he’s a different kind of Democrat, that he’s a middle-of-the-road Democrat,” he said. “This is an opportunity to further embrace that narrative by appearing at a No Labels event.”  

Manchin on Monday said he was saddened by many Americans’ lack of faith in the political system and widespread belief among Trump supporters that the 2020 election was stolen.  

“It is so sad to be in a situation to live in a great country such as this where people are led astray through either social media [or] in so many different ways they’re receiving their information,” he said, adding it’s troubling when a candidate “believes the only fair election is the one they win,” alluding to Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of widespread election fraud. 

Manchin faces a tough battle if he decides to run for reelection after an East Carolina University Center for Survey Research poll published in May showed him trailing West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice (R) by 22 points — 54 percent to 32 percent — in a hypothetical matchup. 

Democratic strategists and nonpartisan political experts warn Manchin would have no shot at winning the presidency given the unlikelihood of any third-party candidate winning a majority in a battleground state.  

They argue the nation’s largest states, such as California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas, which have the most Electoral College votes, tilt decidedly toward either the Democratic or Republican parties. 

And they point out the $70 million No Labels plans to raise to get its candidate on the ballot in all 50 states is only a small fraction of the amount a third-party challenger would need to raise to defeat Biden or the Republican nominee. Biden and the Democratic National Committee, for example, announced raising $72 billion in the second quarter of this year.  

Former Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said "many Democrats expect Sen. Manchin to run for reelection to save that [Senate] seat." 

"The most important thing to understand about third parties is they don't win, and the only thing they wound up doing is tipping the balance, in this case, to Donald Trump," he said.  

Downey also questioned the sources of No Labels funding to get a third-party line on the ballot in all 50 states.  

"First of all, we don't know where the money is coming from," he said. "The $70 million that No Labels is touting has all been dark money." 

Downey, who was in New Hampshire for the Manchin event, is working with former House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) to oppose the No Labels third-party presidential push. 

Former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R), one of the co-chairmen of No Labels, argued at Monday’s event that polls show voters across the ideological spectrum are unenthusiastic about a Biden-Trump rematch. 

Manchin’s relationship with Biden has been on a roller coaster over the past 2 1/2 years.  

He regularly expressed admiration for Biden during the early months of his administration and cast a key vote for Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which passed the evenly divided Senate on a party-line vote. 

But talks between Manchin and the White House over Biden’s ambitious $3.5 trillion Build Back Better agenda broke down in December 2021, and Manchin delivered a blow to fellow Democrats by announcing on Fox News he couldn’t support the White House framework.  

Biden’s climate and tax agenda appeared dead in the water until Manchin suddenly resurrected it by announcing a deal he negotiated in secret with Schumer to establish a 15 percent corporate minimum tax, empower Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices, invest $369 billion in programs to promote domestic energy production and fight climate change. 

That deal, however, appeared to hurt Manchin’s approval ratings in West Virginia.  

A Morning Consult poll published in October showed his approval rating in his home state dropped by double digits, from 60 percent among registered voters in early 2022 to 42 percent six months later.   

This year, the West Virginia senator sharply criticized Biden’s leadership because of how his administration implemented the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which Manchin coauthored, and threatens to become a political liability for the West Virginia centrist.  

He has already helped derail several high-profile Biden nominees — such as Neera Tanden, the president’s pick to head the White House budget office, and Gigi Sohn, Biden’s choice to serve on the Federal Communications Commission. 

Manchin slammed the president this spring for not showing enough leadership in curbing the growth of the federal debt and for his initial refusal to negotiate with Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on raising the debt limit.    

But he has won some important victories recently.  

The debt limit deal negotiated in May by Biden and McCarthy included expedited approval of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a top Manchin priority that is estimated to create 2,000 jobs in West Virginia.  

The groundwork for including language to fast-track the pipeline was laid down during Manchin’s negotiations with Schumer in 2022 on the Inflation Reduction Act.  

In more good news for Manchin, who has made inflation and the federal deficit a top issue, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that annual inflation dropped to 3 percent in June — well below its recent high of 9.1 percent in June of 2022.