Trump Arlington cemetery incident still under investigation: Sources
Republican presidential nominee, former President Donald Trump at a wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery, Aug. 26, 2024, in Arlington, Va. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Law enforcement officials at a Virginia military base are still actively investigating an August incident at Arlington National Cemetery involving what has been described as a confrontation between former President Donald Trump’s campaign and a cemetery worker, even as the Army says it considers the matter closed, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
As part of the probe led by the Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall Police Department, an investigator with the base’s police department has sought in recent days to contact Trump campaign officials about the incident, the sources said.
Investigators are seeking to interview the officials involved in the incident, according to the sources.
Stanley Woodward, a lawyer representing the Trump campaign officials, declined to comment when reached by ABC News.
Although the Army oversees Arlington National Cemetery, law enforcement is handled by Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall in Virginia, as a neighboring base. The base’s police department falls under the Army in an administrative capacity, but operates as a law enforcement agency and is staffed by federal law enforcement officers, not military police.
“The investigation is ongoing at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall by base authorities,” a defense official told ABC News in a statement that indicates the Army is not directing the probe.
Last month, the Trump campaign was accused of engaging in a physical and verbal altercation with a staffer at Arlington National Cemetery while the former president was there to mark the third anniversary of the deaths of 13 service members in Afghanistan. Trump’s aides filmed a campaign video in a section of the cemetery where recently fallen service members are buried.
Federal law prohibits campaigns from using the military cemetery for political campaigning or election-related activities.
Trump’s campaign insisted its aides acted appropriately and promised to release video they said would exonerate its staff. That video has not been released.
In the days following the incident, the Army defended the cemetery staffer, saying the person had been “unfairly attacked” — but also said that it considered the matter closed.
“The incident was reported to the JBM-HH police department, but the employee subsequently decided not to press charges. Therefore, the Army considers this matter closed,” an Army spokesperson said on Aug. 29, three days after the incident. “This incident was unfortunate, and it is also unfortunate that the [Arlington National Cemetery] employee and her professionalism has been unfairly attacked.”
When asked for comment on Monday, an Army spokesperson referred ABC News to its Aug. 29 statement. Base authorities at the Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Separately, however, the Army on Monday acknowledged the case is still being investigated when it explained why it is blocking the release of documents related to the incident.
In a letter responding to a request filed by ABC News under the Freedom of Information Act, the Army said documents couldn’t be released yet because “those documents are part of an open investigation.”
(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson on Wednesday announced he’s pulling a planned vote for the afternoon on a short-term government funding bill.
The measure includes the SAVE Act, which would require individuals to provide proof of U.S. citizenship to vote. Johnson said he will continue to rally support for the act to be included in the spending bill.
“The American people demand and deserve that we do everything possible to secure the elections. That’s what we’ve been saying consistently. That’s what I have heard from the people across the country in 198 cities across 39 states. It’s consistent from coast to coast, north to south,” Johnson said, maintaining his support for the bill. A number of Republican lawmakers have said they oppose the measure, including Reps. Cory Mills, Tim Burchett, Thomas Massie, Jim Banks and Matt Rosendale, among others.
Johnson said he tasked Majority Whip Tom Emmer “to do the hard work and build consensus” on the plan.
“We’re going to work through the weekend on that. And I want any member of Congress in either party to explain to the American people why we should not ensure that only U.S. citizens are voting in U.S. elections,” Johnson, R-La., said. “We’re going to work on that issue around the clock because we have an obligation to the people to do it. And that’s what the fight is. That’s what’s important.”
“It’s the most pressing issue right now and we’re going to get this job done,” he added. “No vote today because we’re in the consensus-building business here in Congress. With small majorities, that’s what you do. That’s what I’ve been doing since I became Speaker.”
Johnson can only afford to lose the support of four Republicans on a party-line vote if there are no absences. House Democrats are expected to remain unified against it for the most part. However, moderate Maine Democratic Rep. Jared Golden said he would vote in favor of the bill.
Former President Donald Trump posted Tuesday on his social media platform that if congressional Republicans “don’t get absolute assurances on Election Security,” they should vote against a continuing resolution to fund the government.
The White House, Senate Democrats and House Democrats have all slammed Johnson’s plan to tie the voter eligibility legislation to government funding.
House leaders regularly attach priority items to must-pass stopgap funding bills as a means of pushing through measures their members demand.
Johnson’s opening salvo to address the looming funding deadline likely won’t be a winning solution. But with a narrow majority and conservatives clamoring for the SAVE Act, he will attempt to lay down a legislative marker in the House — and give GOP members legislation to point to on the campaign trail.
Sources said Johnson previously told members that he wanted to hold a vote on his short-term funding plan early this week. It was on the
Pressed if he’d accept a short-term funding bill without any policy riders like the SAVE Act, Johnson has said, “Let’s see if they [White House and Senate] have the guts to tell the American people they want illegals to vote in these elections.”
Senate Democrats have already said the SAVE Act is a non-starter for them, noting that it’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote, but Johnson’s move sets up a showdown between the chambers with just months remaining until Election Day.
What is the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act?
The SAVE Act, which has the backing of former President Donald Trump and the far-right House Freedom Caucus, is a bill that seeks to expand proof of citizenship requirements to vote in federal elections. It bans states from accepting and processing an application to register to vote in a federal election unless the applicant presents documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.
The House passed the SAVE Act on July 10 by a bipartisan vote of 221-198, with five election-year vulnerable Democrats crossing the aisle to vote with all Republicans. It’s unclear whether that same support would carry over into Johnson’s planed showdown vote over funding the government.
The Congressional Hispanic Caucus calls the bill “extreme and dangerous” and warns it would purge millions of legal voters from state rolls and make it much more difficult for Americans to reregister to vote.
“Let’s call it what it is — this is a direct attack on hard-working families, including Latino communities,” the Congressional Hispanic Caucus said in a statement following House passage of the bill.
During a press briefing last Tuesday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called on Republicans to drop the SAVE Act from their funding bill and to instead advance a clean short-term version, called a continuing resolution, or CR.
“We want to see a clean CR,” Jean-Pierre told ABC’s Karen Travers. “That’s what we want to see.”
The administration “strongly opposes” the SAVE Act, Jean-Pierre said. “It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections. It’s already illegal.”
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shalanda Young said that “Congressional Republicans are wasting time” when there is a bipartisan path for funding.
“Their 6-month CR approach ignores pressing needs that have real consequences for our defense, our veterans, and our communities,” Young said in a statement last week. “We urge Congress to quickly pass a bill to keep the government open and provide emergency funding for disaster needs across the country, as they have done on a bipartisan basis many times in the past.”
Senate Democrats almost sure to oppose
Johnson’s proposal will set off a fierce fight between the House and the Senate, as Senate Democrats will almost certainly reject the stopgap bill because of the inclusion of the SAVE Act.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray had called it a “poison pill” and a “nonstarter.”
“We’ve seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. Senate Democrats will continue to work in a bipartisan way to ensure we can keep the government funded and deliver responsible, bipartisan spending bills that can actually be signed into law before the end of the year,” Murray said.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has not yet outlined a plan for dealing with government funding, but he warned House colleagues against the inclusion of any partisan matters in a must-pass funding bill.
“As we have said each time we’ve had CR, the only way to get things done is in a bipartisan way and that is what has happened every time,” Schumer said in a statement to ABC News.
In floor remarks today welcoming the Senate back from a six-week recess, Schumer on Monday called Johnson’s opening proposal “transparently unserious and seemingly designed for scoring political points instead of avoiding a shutdown.”
The March 2025 extension date proposed by Johnson also is not likely to sit well with Democrats, who may seek a much shorter stopgap that allows them to continue to debate and potentially lock in annual appropriations during the lame-duck session at the end of this year.
Schumer on Monday flatly rejected Johnson’s timeline and called for a bipartisan path forward, suggesting Democrats will hold out for a clean, shorter extension.
Another funding fight
If it feels to you like we just did this, you’re not wrong.
Government funding expires annually at the end of the federal government’s fiscal year on Sept. 30.
Passing annual appropriations for 2024 was especially calamitous. Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy lost his job over it. Johnson was installed because of it, but not without also facing threats to his position. Johnson ultimately implemented a never-before-seen two deadline system to help push the ball over the line.
Congress did not complete its work codifying current spending levels until mid-March, blowing months past the annual deadline. By the time all the bills were passed, they only funded the government for about six months.
Once again, the deadline is fast-approaching at the end of the month.
As of Monday, the House had passed five of the 12 individual government funding bills, including for Defense, Homeland Security, Interior-Environment, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and State-Foreign Operations.
House GOP leaders hoped they would be able to clear all 12 bills, but the reality is that there is not enough time to do so.
Right after taking the gavel in October 2023, Johnson said in a letter obtained by ABC News to colleagues that he would not break for August recess until all 12 appropriations bills had passed the House.
“DO NOT break for district work period unless all 12 appropriations bills have passed the House,” Johnson wrote in his first letter as speaker.
That promise was not kept.
Meanwhile, to date, the Senate has not passed a single appropriations bill.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin gave an impassioned defense of women in combat on Tuesday following Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Defense, arguing that the United States “should not have women in combat roles.”
“I don’t know the potential nominee, so I can’t comment on and won’t comment on anything that he said,” Austin, who was asked about the comments made by Hegseth on women in combat roles, said while in Laos to participate in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ Defense Ministers Meeting. “I don’t know what his experiences are, but I can tell you about my experiences with women in the military and women in combat, and they’re pretty good.”
Austin’s comments are the strongest statement from the military since Hegseth, an Army veteran who did tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, was tapped by Trump to lead the DOD.
The Fox News host has said his concerns are with women specifically in ground combat positions, not with pilots or those in other military roles, because he claims they have led to the military’s physical standards being lowered and changed capabilities of combat units.
“I’m OK with the idea that you maintain the standards where they are for everybody. And if there’s some … hard-charging female that meets that standard, great, cool, join the infantry battalion,” Hegseth said during a podcast appearance days before his nomination. “But that is not what’s happened. What has happened is the standards have lowered.”
Speaking on his experience in his tours, Austin said, “Every place I went, there were women doing incredible things, and they were adding value to to the overall effort, whether they were pilots, whether they were operational experts, whether they were intel experts. You know, I see things differently and I see that because of my experience, and that experience is extensive. And so, I think our women add significant value to the United States military, and we should never change that.”
“And if I had a message … to our women, I would say I would tell them that you know we need you. We have faith in you. We are appreciative of your service, and you add value to the finest and most lethal fighting force on earth,” he said.
Of the active-duty military personnel, 17.5% are women, and women make up 21.6% of the selected reserve, according to the Pentagon’s latest statistics.
“I love women service members, who contribute amazingly,” Hegseth said during the podcast appearance earlier this month. But three minutes later, he added, “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated.”
Hegseth’s selection has drawn controversy as some service members express concerns about their futures in the military. Women began being able to be in ground combat units in 2013 after then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta rescinded a ban on women in these roles. Over 2,500 women serve in previously closed ground combat jobs, ABC News previously reported.
Panetta has come out in opposition to Hegseth’s position on women in combat roles.
“Those kinds of comments come from a past era, and I think it’s important for him to take the time to really look at how our military is performing in an outstanding fashion,” Panetta told ABC News. “We’ve got the best military in the world, and the reason is because we have the best fighting men and women in the world who are part of it.”
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump is denying he praised Adolf Hitler as having done “some good things,” as his former chief of staff and retired Marine general John Kelly was reported to have said this week.
“Never said it,” Trump said, answering reporter questions as he campaigned in battleground Nevada on Thursday.
Kelly told The New York Times in an extensive interview that Trump spoke positively of Hitler while in office. Kelly expressed overall concern that Trump would act more like a dictator if elected to another four years in the White House and said, in his view, the former president fit the definition of a “fascist.”
“He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,'” Kelly said of Trump.
Kelly’s comments came after The Atlantic reported that Trump once said he wanted generals like Hitler had.
Trump also denied saying the comments attributed to him in The Atlantic story.
“No, I never said that. I never said that. It’s a rag that’s made-up stories before. He’s done it before,” Trump said.
“Right before the election. It’s just a failing magazine,” Trump continued.
Harris pointed to Kelly’s comments as she campaigned alongside former President Barack Obama in Georgia on Thursday night.
“Take a moment to think about what that means, that Trump said, quote, ‘Hitler did some good things,’ and that Trump wished he had generals like Hitler’s, who would be loyal to Trump and not to America’s Constitution,” Harris said.
Obama also hit Trump over the reported remarks.
“The interesting thing is, he acts so crazy, and it’s become so common, that people no longer take it seriously,” Obama said of Trump. “I’m here to explain to you just because he acts goofy does not mean his presidency wouldn’t be dangerous.”
“Now, I happen to know John Kelly and Mark Milley,” Obama added (Milley was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). “They served under me when I was commander in chief. These are serious people … They are people who have never in the past even talked about politics because they believe that the military should be above politics,” he said. “But the reason they’re speaking up is because they have seen that in Donald Trump’s mind, the military does not exist to serve the Constitution or the American people.”
During a pull-aside interview with Fox News on Thursday, Trump lashed out at Harris for calling him a “fascist,” saying “everyone knows that’s not true.”
“I’ve never seen anybody so inept at speaking. I mean, I thought she her performance was horrible,” he said about Harris’ CNN town hall appearance.
“But she did call me a fascist, and everyone knows that’s not true. They call me everything until, you know, something sticks,” he said.
