Comer subpoenas Jill Biden ‘work husband' for July testimony
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) issued a subpoena on Thursday for a deposition from Bernal on July 16 after Bernal, who was reportedly so close to the former first lady that he was referred to as her 'work husband,' declined to take part in an interview that was scheduled Wednesday.
President Trump's administration suspended legal protections for Biden officials testifying in the probe the day before Bernal was to take part in a transcribed interview with the committee.
'You have refused the Committee's request. However, to advance the Committee'soversight and legislative responsibilities and interests, your testimony is critical,' Comer wrote in a letter to Bernal on Thursday.
Comer had blasted Bernal publicly Wednesday after he skipped their scheduled interview with him.
'Now that the White House has waived executive privilege, it's abundantly clear that Anthony Bernal — Jill Biden's so-called 'work husband '— never intended to be transparent about Joe Biden's cognitive decline and the ensuing cover-up,' Comer said in a statement. 'With no privilege left to hide behind, Mr. Bernal is now running scared, desperate to bury the truth.'
'The American people deserve answers and accountability, and the Oversight Committee will not tolerate this obstruction,' Comer added. 'To avoid any further delays, your appearance before the Committee is now compelled.'
Bernal's influence in the Biden administration was detailed in the book 'Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again' by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios's Alex Thompson.
'He considered loyalty to be the defining virtue and would wield that word to elevate some and oust others – at times fairly and at times not. 'Are you a Biden person?' he would ask West Wing aides. 'Is so-and-so a Biden person?' The regular interrogations led some colleagues to dub him the leader of the 'loyalty police,'' the reporters wrote.
Comer has questioned who had authority to use the presidential autopen to sign off on White House actions while Biden was in office. The 'Original Sin' authors wrote that one source told them that 'five people were running the country, and Joe Biden was at best a senior member of the board.'
'The cover-up of President Biden's mental decline is one of the greatest scandals in our nation's history,' Comer said earlier this month in announcing the expansion of his investigation. 'These five former senior advisers were eyewitnesses to President Biden's condition and operations within the Biden White House.'
He also has sought testimony from top Biden aides Michael Donilon, Anita Dunn, Ron Klain, Bruce Reed and Steve Ricchetti.
The panel privately interviewed Neera Tanden, who was the former president's staff secretary, earlier this week.
Comer said Tanden revealed 'she had minimal interaction with President Biden, despite wielding tremendous authority.'
'Her testimony raises serious questions about who was really calling the shots in the Biden White House amid the President's obvious decline,' the oversight chairman said.
Comer's committee sought to subpoena Bernal last year after then-President Biden faltered in the presidential debate with Trump and ultimately dropped his reelection bid, but the Biden administration refused to waive executive privilege that shields White House staffers from divulging private conversations with presidents.
Axios reported that a person familiar with Bernal's interactions with the House Oversight panel disputed Comer's characterization of Bernal's stance on testifying.
'Calling this a 'refusal' is misleading, when there was simply a request to reschedule the interview,' the person, who Axios did not name, told the outlet.
The former president's official office didn't immediately respond to The Hill's request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
39 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
US tariffs on European goods threaten to shake up the world's largest trade relationship
FRANKFURT, Germany — The European Union expects to find out on Monday whether President Donald Trump will impose punishing tariffs on America's largest trade partner in a move economists have warned would have repercussions for companies and consumers on both sides of the Atlantic. Trump imposed a 20% import tax on all EU-made products in early April as part of a set of tariffs targeting countries with which the United States has a trade imbalance. Hours after the nation-specific duties took effect, he put them on hold until July 9 at a standard rate of 10% to quiet financial markets and allow time for negotiations. Expressing displeasure the EU's stance in trade talks, however, Trump said he would increase the tariff rate for European exports to 50%, which could make everything — from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals — much more expensive in the U.S. The EU's executive commission, which handles trade issues for the bloc's 27-member nations, said its leaders hope to strike a deal with the Trump administration. Without one, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and auto parts to beer and Boeing airplanes. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNN's 'State of the Union' program on Sunday that 'the EU was very slow in coming to the table' but that talks were now making 'very good progress.' Here are important things to know about trade between the United States and the European Union. The EU's executive commission describes the trade between the U.S. and the EU as 'the most important commercial relationship in the world.' The value of EU-U.S. trade in goods and services amounted to 1.7 trillion euros ($2 trillion) in 2024, or an average of 4.6 billion euros a day, according to EU statistics agency Eurostat. The biggest U.S. export to Europe is crude oil, followed by pharmaceuticals, aircraft, automobiles, and medical and diagnostic equipment. Europe's biggest exports to the U.S. are pharmaceuticals, cars, aircraft, chemicals, medical instruments, and wine and spirits. Trump has complained about the EU's 198 billion-euro trade surplus in goods, which shows Americans buy more stuff from European businesses than the other way around. However, American companies fill some of the gap by outselling the EU when it comes to services such as cloud computing, travel bookings, and legal and financial services. The U.S. services surplus took the nation's trade deficit with the EU down to 50 billion euros ($59 billion), which represents less than 3% of overall U.S.-EU trade. Before Trump returned to office, the U.S. and the EU maintained a generally cooperative trade relationship and low tariff levels on both sides. The U.S. rate averaged 1.47% for European goods, while the EU's averaged 1.35% for American products. But the White House has taken a much less friendly posture toward the longstanding U.S. ally since February. Along with the fluctuating tariff rate on European goods Trump has floated, the EU has been subject to his administration's 50% tariff on steel and aluminum and a 25% tax on imported automobiles and parts. Trump administration officials have raised a slew of issues they want to see addressed, including agricultural barriers such as EU health regulations that include bans on chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef. Trump has also criticized Europe's value-added taxes, which EU countries levy at the point of sale this year at rates of 17% to 27%. But many economists see VAT as trade-neutral since they apply to domestic goods and services as well as imported ones. Because national governments set the taxes through legislation, the EU has said they aren't on the table during trade negotiations. 'On the thorny issues of regulations, consumer standards and taxes, the EU and its member states cannot give much ground,' Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Germany's Berenberg bank, said. 'They cannot change the way they run the EU's vast internal market according to U.S. demands, which are often rooted in a faulty understanding of how the EU works.' Economists and companies say higher tariffs will mean higher prices for U.S. consumers on imported goods. Importers must decide how much of the extra tax costs to absorb through lower profits and how much to pass on to customers. Mercedes-Benz dealers in the U.S. have said they are holding the line on 2025 model year prices 'until further notice.' The German automaker has a partial tariff shield because it makes 35% of the Mercedes-Benz vehicles sold in the U.S. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, but the company said it expects prices to undergo 'significant increases' in coming years. Simon Hunt, CEO of Italian wine and spirits producer Campari Group, told investment analysts that prices could increase for some products or stay the same depending what rival companies do. If competitors raise prices, the company might decide to hold its prices on Skyy vodka or Aperol aperitif to gain market share, Hunt said. Trump has argued that making it more difficult for foreign companies to sell in the U.S. is a way to stimulate a revival of American manufacturing. Many companies have dismissed the idea or said it would take years to yield positive economic benefits. However, some corporations have proved willing to shift some production stateside. France-based luxury group LVMH, whose brands include Tiffany & Co., Luis Vuitton, Christian Dior and Moet & Chandon, could move some production to the United States, billionaire CEO Bernaud Arnault said at the company's annual meeting in April. Arnault, who attended Trump's inauguration, has urged Europe to reach a deal based on reciprocal concessions. 'If we end up with high tariffs, … we will be forced to increase our U.S.-based production to avoid tariffs,' Arnault said. 'And if Europe fails to negotiate intelligently, that will be the consequence for many companies. … It will be the fault of Brussels, if it comes to that.' Some forecasts indicate the U.S. economy would be more at risk if the negotiations fail. Without a deal, the EU would lose 0.3% of its gross domestic product and U.S. GDP would fall 0.7%, if Trump slaps imported goods from Europe with tariffs of 10% to 25%, according to a research review by Bruegel, a think tank in Brussels. Given the complexity of some of the issues, the two sides may arrive only at a framework deal before Wednesday's deadline. That would likely leave a 10% base tariff, as well as the auto, steel and aluminum tariffs in place until details of a formal trade agreement are ironed out. The most likely outcome of the trade talks is that 'the U.S. will agree to deals in which it takes back its worst threats of 'retaliatory' tariffs well beyond 10%,' Schmieding said. 'However, the road to get there could be rocky.' The U.S. offering exemptions for some goods might smooth the path to a deal. The EU could offer to ease some regulations that the White House views as trade barriers. 'While Trump might be able to sell such an outcome as a 'win' for him, the ultimate victims of his protectionism would, of course, be mostly the U.S. consumers,' Schmieding said.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Republicans just cut Medicaid. Will it cost them control of Congress?
'The other side is going to use Medicaid as an issue,' he said, even as he voted for the megabill. 'And I think the Senate [version of the bill] gives them a little more leverage to do so.' Republicans are walking a tightrope as they return to their districts to start selling the sweeping policy package. They're going to lean into the megabill's popular provisions, like eliminating taxes on tips, while trying to escape unpopular reductions to safety-net programs. The final bill slashes spending by $1.7 trillion. Voters broadly dislike the megabill; some recent polling shows a 2-to-1 margin of disapproval, according to surveys conducted by Quinnipiac University , The Washington Post , Pew Research and Fox News . Nearly half of voters want more federal funding for Medicaid, while just 10 percent want less, according to Quinnipiac. 'What we know from past elections is that messing with people's healthcare coverage is very problematic for politicians. And it has, in the past, yielded some very, very negative views about the people who supported it,' said Republican pollster Whit Ayres. Meanwhile Democrats are rushing to capitalize on the controversy and plan to make it a centerpiece of their midterm messaging . House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke on the floor for eight hours and 45 minutes, reading letters from constituents of vulnerable GOP lawmakers who could lose access to both programs. Democratic candidates followed up with post-vote statements blasting the Republicans they're looking to unseat for effectively kicking people in their districts off their health care plans. Their campaign arms and allied super PACs have already released several rounds of ads hammering vulnerable Republicans and say they plan to keep up the pace. Republicans are trying to figure out how to fight back. Their early salvos have focused on painting Democrats as supportive of tax hikes since they opposed a bill that would extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts and eliminate federal taxes on tips and overtime. Republicans also argue they're protecting the 'most vulnerable' Medicaid recipients by removing undocumented immigrants and others they say shouldn't have access to the program anyway. But in a tacit acknowledgment of the potential electoral fallout, some Republicans have pledged to try to reverse provisions such as the provider tax drawdown before they take effect in 2028. 'To the extent that there's reform, and … you can legitimately argue it's the waste, fraud, abuse, that's a good position to be in,' said Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho). 'If it's just strictly a situation where you say, 'We're just cutting and spending' and it's not cognizant as to how and where, that's where we get into trouble.'
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
'Attack on rural America': Kentucky governor hits Medicaid cuts in Trump's megabill
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear argued the Medicaid cuts in President Donald Trump's sweeping tax policy bill will have a 'devastating' impact on rural communities. 'It's the single worst piece of legislation I've seen in my lifetime, and it is a congressional Republican and presidential attack on rural America,' the Democrat told CNN's Dana Bash in a July 6 interview on "State of the Union." He said around 200,000 people in Kentucky are could lose their healthcare under the bill, which implements new work requirements for Medicaid and a raft of other restrictions that healthcare experts argue will trigger hospital closures in rural areas. Lawmakers included a $50 billion fund in the legislation to prop up these hospitals, but experts say it won't be enough to make up for the $155 billion expected decline in federal Medicaid spending in rural areas. Beshear, who is considered a potential presidential candidate for the party in 2028, said up to 35 rural hospitals in Kentucky could be at risk of closing as a result of the bill. 'What that means is our economy takes a huge hit,' he said. 'You lose 200 jobs from doctors and nurses and orderlies and all of a sudden the coffee shop does worse, the bank doesn't have as many folks coming in. This is going to hit rural America right in the face.' Still, Republicans have argued that the biggest expected cut to Medicaid – the implementation of work requirements for able-bodied adults – is popular among voters, and other changes such as more frequent eligibility checks are common sense options. Democrats "unfortunately seem to think that poor people are stupid. I don't think poor people are stupid. I think they have agency, and I think to have them register twice a year for these benefits is not a burden," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also said on CNN on July 6. "People who want to infantilize the poor and people who need these Medicaid benefits are alarmist.' Republicans in Congress passed the massive tax-cut and spending package on July 3. Trump signed it into law on July 4. It was the key goal for Trump and Republican leadership in Congress, which captured a trifecta during the 2024 elections and has used that political muscle to force what they've dubbed their "One Big, Beautiful Bill" through both chambers at a rapid-fire pace. The passage came despite deep reservations within their own party and unanimous opposition from Democrats who see it as a ticket to winning back congressional majorities in 2026.
