Democrats try to subpoena Musk in Oversight hearing
Why it matters: Democrats think they have even better standing to compel Musk's testimony now that he is out of government, though Republicans are likely to block the move.
The move to subpoena Musk came during a hearing on the use of artificial intelligence in the federal government.
As the head of DOGE, Musk oversaw the integration of AI — including his own Grok AI — into federal agency workflows to analyze data and try to root out waste fraud and abuse.
Flashback: Democrats on the Oversight Committee tried and failed to subpoena Musk in early February, shortly after he took up the reins of DOGE.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House taking key vote on Trump's "big, beautiful bill," after pressure from GOP holdouts
Washington — House Republicans began taking a key procedural vote on President Trump's massive domestic policy bill late Wednesday evening, after scrambling for hours to shore up support ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline to get the bill to the president's desk. It remains unclear if House Republicans have enough support to get the current version of the bill — which squeaked through the Senate on Tuesday — over the finish line. Before voting on final passage, the House needs to vote on a resolution setting the rules of debate for the bill. That crucial procedural vote began Wednesday at around 9:30 p.m., after lawmakers spent much of the day huddling amongst themselves and with President Trump to sway skeptical members. While voting on the rule was underway, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters, "we feel very good about where we are." The Louisiana Republican called Wednesday a "long, productive day." "We had GREAT conversations all day, and the Republican House Majority is UNITED, for the Good of our Country, delivering the Biggest Tax Cuts in History and MASSIVE Growth," Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social shortly before voting began. House GOP leaders are aiming to move ahead quickly on the signature legislation of Mr. Trump's second-term agenda, which includes ramped-up spending for border security, defense and energy production and extends trillions of dollars in tax cuts, partially offset by substantial cuts to health care and nutrition programs. But some House Republicans, who voted to pass an earlier version of the bill in May, are unhappy with the Senate's changes. Potential holdouts, including moderates and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, met with Mr. Trump on Wednesday as the White House put pressure on House Republicans to get the bill across the finish line. One lawmaker called the meetings "very productive." But GOP Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, told reporters earlier Wednesday that he expected the procedural vote to fail in the afternoon. In a possible sign of movement, one key Republican, Ohio Rep. Warren Davidson, announced on X Wednesday evening that he'd support the bill. It "isn't perfect, but it's the best we'll get," he wrote, adding that he would support the rule and final passage. Davidson was one of two Republicans who voted against the bill when the House first voted on the measure in May. The president kept up the pressure, posting on Truth Social about June's low border crossing statistics and adding, "All we need to do is keep it this way, which is exactly why Republicans need to pass "THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL." Immigration agents "need more help and, they are counting on Republicans to, GET IT DONE," Mr. Trump wrote. Several members on both sides of the aisle had their flights canceled or delayed by bad weather as they raced back to Washington for the vote, delaying the process. All the Democrats appeared to be on hand for proceedings by Wednesday afternoon. Republicans can only afford three defections if all members are present and voting. The House Rules Committee advanced the Senate's changes to the bill overnight, setting up the action on the floor. GOP Reps. Ralph Norman of South Carolina and Chip Roy of Texas joined Democrats on the panel to oppose the rule. Both are among the group of hardliners who are likely to oppose the procedural vote in the full House. "What the Senate did is unconscionable," Norman said. "I'll vote against it here and I'll vote against it on the floor until we get it right." Hours later, Norman returned to the Capitol following a meeting with Mr. Trump and other House Republicans. He described the meeting as "very productive" but didn't say whether he will ultimately vote yes, telling reporters he's still trying to learn more about how the bill will be implemented if it passes. Johnson has spent weeks pleading with his Senate counterparts not to make any major changes to the version of the bill that passed the lower chamber by a single vote in May. He said the Senate bill's changes "went a little further than many of us would've preferred." The Senate-passed bill includes steeper Medicaid cuts, a higher increase in the debt limit and changes to the House bill's green energy policies and the state and local tax deduction. Other controversial provisions that faced pushback in both chambers, including the sale of public lands in nearly a dozen states, a 10-year moratorium on states regulating artificial intelligence and an excise tax on the renewable energy industry, were stripped from the Senate bill before heading back to the House. Johnson said Wednesday that "we are working through everybody's issues and making sure that we can secure this vote" amid the opposition. He added that he and the president are working to "convince everybody that this is the very best product that we can produce." "I feel good about where we are and where we're headed," Johnson added. Harris told reporters Wednesday that that the president should call the Senate back into town to come to an agreement on changes to the bill. GOP leaders, however, said the House would vote on the Senate bill "as-is." Should the House make changes to the bill, the revisions would require the Senate's approval, or force the two chambers to go to conference committee to iron out a final product that the two bodies could agree on, jeopardizing the bill's timely passage. Rep. Dusty Johnson, a South Dakota Republican, seemed optimistic after the White House meetings with holdouts Wednesday, saying "Donald Trump is a closer" and adding that "members are moving to yes.""I know there are some members who think they're going to vote no right now," the South Dakota Republican said. "I think when the choice becomes failure or passage, they're going to understand that passage beats the hell out of failing." GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina likewise urged House Republicans to get the bill to the president's desk Wednesday. "President Trump has his pen in hand and is waiting for the House to complete its work," Foxx said. "We've championed this legislation for months, have guided it through the appropriate processes, and now we're on the one-yard line." Meanwhile, with few levers to combat the bill's passage, House Democrats spoke out forcefully against the legislation. "We will not stand by and watch Trump and his billionaire friends destroy this country without putting up one hell of a fight," Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts said, calling the bill a "massive betrayal of the American people." Jeffries said that "every single House Democrat will vote 'hell no' against this one, big ugly bill," while adding that "all we need are four House Republicans to join us in defense of their constituents who will suffer mightily from this bill." Democratic leaders called out some Republicans by name, including Reps. Rob Bresnahan and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Reps. David Valadao and Young Kim of California. "It's unconscionable, it's unacceptable, it's un-American, and House Democrats are committing to you that we're going to do everything in our power to stop it," Jeffries said. "All we need are four Republicans, just four." Seven still missing after fireworks warehouse explosion in California Piece of plane found in North Carolina driveway may belong to Delta flight Puget Sound orca pod threatened by salmon decline
Fox News
34 minutes ago
- Fox News
CBS anchor claims Paramount settlement with Trump poses 'new obstacles' for journalists at the network
CBS News anchor John Dickerson lamented parent company Paramount's multi-million dollar settlement with President Donald Trump on Wednesday. "Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS News, settled a suit with President Trump today," Dickerson said on CBS Evening News Plus, a news program on their streaming service. "Journalists don't like to report on themselves. Sometimes that's false humility. Mostly, it's a practical limitation. Reporters try to find order in chaos." Dickerson said the settlement and ones like it hinder the press' ability to "hold power to account." "The Paramount settlement poses a new obstacle," Dickerson said. "Can you hold power to account after paying it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you've traded away that trust? The audience will decide that our job is to show up to honor what we witness." Fox News Digital has learned that the sum being paid to Trump could reach north of $30 million with $16 million being paid upfront for his future presidential library, in addition to another allocation in the eight figures set aside for advertisements, public service announcements, or other similar transmissions, in support of conservative causes by the network in the future. Current Paramount management disputes the additional allocation, and a source familiar with Paramount's current leadership told Fox New Digital only $16 million was sanctioned by the official mediator, and they have no knowledge of any deal Trump made with incoming ownership as Paramount is set to merge with David Ellison's Skydance Media. However, Fox News Digital has learned that the incoming ownership will be responsible for the additional allocation. During the "CBS Evening News" program, which airs on broadcast TV to a much-wider audience, Dickerson had less to say about the settlement. "In the end, Paramount decided to settle a suit it said is without basis in law and fact and an affront to the First Amendment," Dickerson said, quoting from a previous filing from Paramount. Trump initially sought $20 billion in his lawsuit against CBS over its handling of a "60 Minutes" interview last year with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, accusing the network of election interference leading up to the 2024 contest. CBS is not acknowledging any journalistic wrongdoing with the settlement.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Watch These Tesla Price Levels as Stock Bounces Back from Sell-Off
Tesla shares jumped Wednesday after the EV maker released its quarterly delivery numbers, rebounding from a steep decline the previous session sparked by the feud between CEO Elon Musk and President Trump. Tesla shares broke down from a bearish flag pattern and closed below key moving averages on Tuesday before recovering most of the move Wednesday, laying the groundwork for a potential bear trap. Investors should watch important support levels on Tesla's chart around $285 and $225, while also monitoring key resistance levels near $365 and $ (TSLA) shares moved back into high gear on Wednesday. The stock rose 5% to around $316 after the EV maker released data on deliveries in the second quarter, which showed a sharp decline in sales from a year ago but were largely in line with analysts' expectations. The gain offset a decline of about 5% on Tuesday, when a feud between CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump flared up again. Musk criticized the massive tax and spending bill that GOP legislators aim to approve this week, which led Trump to warn that Musk's businesses have benefitted excessively from government subsidy. Tesla shares rallied 23% in the second quarter, boosted by Musk's decision to leave his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency to spend more time at the automaker. However, the stock has lost 22% of its value since the start of the year, weighed down by declining EV sales and concerns that Musk's political involvement has caused damage to the Tesla brand. Below, we take a closer look at Tesla's chart and use technical analysis to identify price levels worth watching out for. Tesla shares broke down from a bearish flag pattern and closed below key moving averages on Tuesday before recovering most of the move Wednesday, laying the groundwork for a potential bear trap, a trading event that lures investors to sell upon a breach of major support before the price makes a sudden move higher. It's also worth pointing out that the 50-day moving average (MA) crossed above the 200-day MA earlier this week to generate a bullish golden cross, a chart pattern that signals higher prices. Let's identify important support and resistance levels on Tesla's chart that investors will likely be watching. The first support level to watch sits around $285. This area may attract buying interest near the bottom of the flag pattern that sits on a trendline connecting a range of corresponding trading activity on the chart that extends back to last November's election-driven stock gap. Tesla bulls' failure to successfully defend this important technical level opens the door for a larger drop to $225. Investors could seek buy-and-hold opportunities in this location near several prominent troughs that formed on the chart between early March and late April, which also closely align with a minor peak last August. A convincing close above the key moving averages could see the shares climb toward overhead resistance around $365. The price may encounter selling pressure in this location near a series of peaks that developed on the automaker's chart between November and May. Finally, further buying could drive a rally in Tesla shares to $430. Investors may seek profit-taking opportunities in this region near the mid-January countertrend high and the low of a minor retracement that formed shortly after the stock hit its record high in mid-December. The comments, opinions, and analyses expressed on Investopedia are for informational purposes only. Read our warranty and liability disclaimer for more info. As of the date this article was written, the author does not own any of the above securities. Read the original article on Investopedia
