Jasmine Crockett rips Trump 'regime,' vows 'solidarity' with Biden witnesses during House probe
Crockett surprised reporters when she arrived roughly 15 minutes after House investigators' transcribed interview with former White House advisor Ashley Williams began, declining to speak on the way in.
The Texas Democrat emerged just over 30 minutes later, saying little about what went on inside but telling reporters she still had "absolutely" no concerns about Biden's mental fitness while in office.
She said it was important to "be there physically" for Biden allies being interviewed in the GOP probe – even going as far as suggesting the Trump administration created a threatening environment for members of Congress and its own political opponents.
FAR-LEFT FIREBRAND SAYS SHE 'NEVER HAD A CONCERN' ABOUT BIDEN'S MENTAL STATE AS HOUSE PROBE HEATS UP
"It is important…in my mind, to be there for these witnesses. Unfortunately, we know what happens when this regime gets going. We know about the threats that come upon them, that come upon us as members of Congress," Crockett said.
"I think it is important to stand there in solidarity and to at least be there physically so that they don't feel like they're alone as they are enduring egregious attacks consistently from this administration."
Crockett was the only lawmaker seen going in or out of Williams' meeting with investigators on Friday. The transcribed interview was expected to be staff-led, and lawmakers were not required to attend.
"Right now, the Republicans continue to act as if this is a main priority. Yet none of them are showing up," she said.
"I do think that it is important that I show up because if they are going to make allegations about the former commander-in-chief, egregious allegations they continue to wage. I want to make sure that I'm in the room to correct the record, because a lot of times they like to mischaracterize things."
COMER DISMISSES BIDEN DOCTOR'S BID FOR PAUSE IN COVER-UP PROBE: 'THROWING OUT EVERY EXCUSE'
When asked by Fox News Digital if the interview was still ongoing as she exited, however, Crockett answered, "It's still going. I'm leaving early. I've got to get to another thing."
A source familiar with the ongoing proceeding told Fox News Digital that Crockett came in during Republican investigators' round of questioning and so was unable to make inquiries herself. Fox News Digital reached out to Crockett for a response.
Williams was the former Director of Strategic Outreach under the Biden administration. She did not speak to reporters on the way into her transcribed interview.
Crockett initially caught reporters and potentially even staff off guard when she arrived for the closed-door deposition of Biden's former White House physician, Dr. Kevin O'Connor.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was there as well, as is the norm for sworn depositions.
Williams, unlike O'Connor, is not on Capitol Hill under subpoena.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
During her Wednesday appearance, Crockett declared she never had any concerns about Biden's mental state while he was president, though she did raise similar claims about Trump.
White House spokesman Harrison Fields told Fox News Digital in response to Crockett questioning Trump's mental acuity: "The Democrats' rising star has done more to cement the party's demise than the President she breathlessly supported, the decrepit and feeble Joe Biden. Jasmine continues to prove she'd be better suited as a reality TV star on VH1 than an elected official on Capitol Hill."
Comer is investigating accusations that Biden's former top White House aides covered up signs of his mental and physical decline while in office, and whether any executive actions were commissioned via autopen without the president's full knowledge. Biden allies have pushed back on those claims.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republican candidates for Spartanburg County Council seat taking part in public forum
Voters in Spartanburg County Council District 3 will have the opportunity on July 15 to learn more about the candidates on the Republican side of the race. The Spartanburg County Republican Party will host a candidates' forum at the Spartanburg School District 3 Community Auditorium on the campus of Broome High School. The event will begin at 6:30 p.m. It is a ticketed event, though tickets can be acquired free of charge through the party. Six candidates are vying for the Republican nomination to replace David Britt, who served on the council since 1991. He resigned in May to take a position with the South Carolina Public Service Commission. District 3 encompasses much of the eastern portion of Spartanburg County. Here's a glimpse at who's running for the GOP nomination: Paul Abbott is a retired magistrate. In a video posted to his campaign Facebook page, he said he wants to hear voters' concerns 'about growth, about the road condition, about government transparency.' Abbott is a peach grower and has served on the South Carolina Peach Council. Bryan Alverson challenged Britt in 2024. He describes himself as a 'bold conservative' who will take aim at tax incentives to lure companies to the county while promoting private property rights and government transparency. In a video on his campaign Facebook page, Alverson charged that county leaders are not taking responsibility for roads and bridges in the county. The video is shot at a 'bridge out' sign on Cannons' Campground Road, which has been closed for more than a year for repairs to the bridge over Peter's Creek. 'I promise you that I will work my best to do something about properly allocating the funds to fix roads and bridges in Spartanburg County District 3 as your county councilman.' The South Carolina Department of Transportation is conducting the work to replace the bridge on Cannons Campground Road. Tim Burrell's Facebook page says he will bring change to the county. He wrote, 'Development has decimated local wildlife habitats and erased precious green spaces, replacing them with overcrowded housing … We have the power to choose a more environmentally conscious, sustainable and fulfilling path.' On his Facebook page, Caylus Goodson said he wants to balance economic growth with other community needs. 'We must ensure that Spartanburg remains competitive in attracting new businesses while also prioritizing an improved quality of life for all our residents,' he said. 'This means continued investment in our infrastructure, supporting local entrepreneurs, enhancing educational opportunities, and creating vibrant, safe communities where families can flourish.' Jason Lynch is the general counsel for OTO Development, which is part of the Spartanburg-based Johnson Group. His campaign website touts his plans to cut government waste, promote quality of life, provide funds for law enforcement and other first responders, and support responsible economic growth. Lynch's website adds: 'Spartanburg is on a roll—and I'm stepping up to help keep it that way.' Stephen Mathis challenged Britt for the District 3 seat in 2016. On Facebook, he said he's running for council 'because I believe it's time for no-nonsense leadership – leadership that stands for conservative growth and puts Spartanburg first.' In a video on the Facebook page, he said that at his farm, 'the home that I love, I feel like I'm in the eye of a hurricane – the roar of developments and traffic just constantly getting louder and louder.' More: Spartanburg county, city council members to resign, accept state positions Spartanburg County Republican Party chairman Frank Tiller said he's excited about the group running for the GOP nomination. 'It's a very diverse group – people from all walks of life – and that's a good thing for Spartanburg,' he said. The GOP primary will be held on Aug. 5. A special election will take place on Nov. 4. The winner of the Republican nomination will face Democrat Kathryn Harvey, a Spartanburg native and businesswoman, and Sarah Gonzalez, of the Forward Party. This article originally appeared on Herald-Journal: Forum will feature Republican candidates for open county council seat
CNN
37 minutes ago
- CNN
Judge nixes a Biden rule in order to keep medical debt on credit reports
Americans' unpaid medical bills will remain on their credit reports after a federal judge last week annulled a Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule that would have removed such debt. Judge Sean Jordan of the US District Court of Texas' Eastern District found that the rule exceeded the bureau's authority under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, agreeing with the arguments of two industry associations. The court found that 'every major substantive provision of the Medical Debt Rule' exceeded the CFPB's authority, Jordan, a President Donald Trump appointee, wrote in his opinion. The rule, which the bureau finalized shortly before the Biden administration left office in January, would have removed an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of about 15 million people. It would have also banned lenders from using certain medical information in loan decisions. The rule also would have prohibited lenders from using medical devices, such as wheelchairs or prosthetic limbs, as collateral for loans and barred them from repossessing the devices if patients were unable to repay the loans. However, lenders would have been able to continue to consider medical information in certain situations, including when a consumer requests a loan to pay health expenses or asks for a temporary postponement of loan payments for medical reasons. Those with medical debt on their credit reports could have received a 20-point boost, on average, in their credit score, the bureau said when issuing the rule in January. Also, the rule was expected to lead to the approval of about 22,000 additional mortgages every year. Medical debt on credit reports is not a good predictor of a person's ability to pay other loans, the bureau's research has found. Plus, health care bills often contain mistakes, which can lead to extended battles between patients, health insurers and medical providers. Republican lawmakers voiced opposition to the rule soon after it was proposed last August. Several House Republicans wrote to Rohit Chopra, the bureau's director at the time, to express their 'serious concerns' that the proposed rule would 'weaken the accuracy and completeness of consumer credit reports.' They argued that it would undermine underwriting processes, increase risk in the financial system and harm access to and the affordability of credit for consumers, particularly lower-income Americans. The Consumer Data Industry Association, one of the plaintiffs in the case, applauded Jordan's decision, saying the rule would have meant that 'lenders would potentially have had an inaccurate and incomplete picture when making lending decisions.' 'America's financial system is the best in the world because it is based on a full, fair and accurate credit reporting system,' Dan Smith, the association's CEO, said in a statement. 'Information about unpaid medical debts is an important element in assessing a consumer's ability to pay. This is the right outcome for protecting the integrity of the system. The judge affirmed that the CFPB does not have the ability to write law — that is the job of Congress, ACA International, which represents credit and collection professionals, said in a statement. The association, which had also filed a lawsuit against the bureau's rule, said the rule would have forced lenders to reduce access to credit and prompted health care providers to require upfront payments.
CNN
40 minutes ago
- CNN
Judge nixes a Biden rule in order to keep medical debt on credit reports
Americans' unpaid medical bills will remain on their credit reports after a federal judge last week annulled a Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule that would have removed such debt. Judge Sean Jordan of the US District Court of Texas' Eastern District found that the rule exceeded the bureau's authority under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, agreeing with the arguments of two industry associations. The court found that 'every major substantive provision of the Medical Debt Rule' exceeded the CFPB's authority, Jordan, a President Donald Trump appointee, wrote in his opinion. The rule, which the bureau finalized shortly before the Biden administration left office in January, would have removed an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of about 15 million people. It would have also banned lenders from using certain medical information in loan decisions. The rule also would have prohibited lenders from using medical devices, such as wheelchairs or prosthetic limbs, as collateral for loans and barred them from repossessing the devices if patients were unable to repay the loans. However, lenders would have been able to continue to consider medical information in certain situations, including when a consumer requests a loan to pay health expenses or asks for a temporary postponement of loan payments for medical reasons. Those with medical debt on their credit reports could have received a 20-point boost, on average, in their credit score, the bureau said when issuing the rule in January. Also, the rule was expected to lead to the approval of about 22,000 additional mortgages every year. Medical debt on credit reports is not a good predictor of a person's ability to pay other loans, the bureau's research has found. Plus, health care bills often contain mistakes, which can lead to extended battles between patients, health insurers and medical providers. Republican lawmakers voiced opposition to the rule soon after it was proposed last August. Several House Republicans wrote to Rohit Chopra, the bureau's director at the time, to express their 'serious concerns' that the proposed rule would 'weaken the accuracy and completeness of consumer credit reports.' They argued that it would undermine underwriting processes, increase risk in the financial system and harm access to and the affordability of credit for consumers, particularly lower-income Americans. The Consumer Data Industry Association, one of the plaintiffs in the case, applauded Jordan's decision, saying the rule would have meant that 'lenders would potentially have had an inaccurate and incomplete picture when making lending decisions.' 'America's financial system is the best in the world because it is based on a full, fair and accurate credit reporting system,' Dan Smith, the association's CEO, said in a statement. 'Information about unpaid medical debts is an important element in assessing a consumer's ability to pay. This is the right outcome for protecting the integrity of the system. The judge affirmed that the CFPB does not have the ability to write law — that is the job of Congress, ACA International, which represents credit and collection professionals, said in a statement. The association, which had also filed a lawsuit against the bureau's rule, said the rule would have forced lenders to reduce access to credit and prompted health care providers to require upfront payments.
