White House asks for record-breaking $1.5 trillion for defense in new budget request

(WASHINGTON) — House Oversight Chairman James Comer has set a noon deadline Tuesday for Bill and Hillary Clinton to agree to the GOP’s specific terms for depositions that the Clintons signaled Monday night they generally would comply with, warning that if they do not then Republicans will reconvene to move contempt resolutions toward a full House vote.

“The Oversight Committee is seeking clarification the Clintons accepted the standard deposition terms that they were subpoenaed for: transcribed, filmed depositions in February with no time limit pursuant to the committee’s investigation. The depositions are pursuant to the Committee’s investigative purpose as laid out across its letters and contempt reports,” a person familiar with the matter told ABC News.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, in a news conference Tuesday alongside House GOP leadership, said Comer was “in the middle of a negotiation with the Clintons.”

“They have until noon today to fully comply, otherwise we will move contempt tomorrow against the Clintons,” Scalise reiterated.

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton agreed on Monday evening to sit for closed-door depositions in the committee’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

“They negotiated in good faith. You did not,” Clinton spokesperson Angel Ureña posted on X. “They told you under oath what they know, but you don’t care. But the former President and former Secretary of State will be there. They look forward to setting a precedent that applies to everyone.”

Last month, the House Oversight Committee voted to advance two bipartisan resolutions holding the Clintons in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with its subpoenas relating to convicted sex offender Epstein.

For months, the Clintons had insisted that the subpoenas were without legal merit. Comer, a Republican, has pushed back, saying the Clintons are not above the law and must comply with a subpoena.

Besides defying the subpoenas to testify before the House committee, neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary Clinton has been accused of wrongdoing and both deny having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. No Epstein survivor or associate has ever made a public allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior by the former president or his wife in connection with his prior relationship with Epstein. 

In a letter dated Jan. 31, the Clintons’ legal teams wrote the committee to lay out the parameters of a prospective interview — alongside a request for the committee to withdraw its subpoena and contempt resolution — proposing a four-hour transcribed interview in lieu of a deposition conducted under oath.

The letter states the interview should occur in New York City — open to all committee members — while the scope of questions would be “confined to matters related to the investigations and prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein.” The president also asked to designate his own transcriber, alongside a court reporter employed by the House.

“This framework is consistent with your priorities as communicated by Committee staff and as identified during the business meeting on January 21st,” the letter, signed by Clinton attorneys Katherine Turner and Ashley Callen, stated. “Pursuant to your request for this comprehensive written proposal, we ask that you respond in kind should there remain any specific area of disagreement to continue this good-faith effort to avoid legal proceedings that will prevent our clients from providing testimony in addition to the sworn statements they already submitted.”

Comer wrote back Monday, citing “serious concerns with the offer,” beginning with the proposed scope restriction — predicting President Clinton “would refuse to answer questions” related to his personal relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Comer also balked at the proposed four-hour time limit for the interview, and the president’s bid to break blocks of questioning into 30-minute periods — rather than 60-minute periods — that alternate between Republicans and Democrats.

“A hard time-limit provides a witness with the incentive to attempt to run out the clock by giving unnecessarily long answers and meandering off-topic. This is a particular concern where a witness, such as President Clinton, has an established record of being a loquacious individual,” Comer said.

“Limiting President Clinton’s testimony to four hours is insufficient time for the Committee to gain a full understanding of President Clinton’s personal relationship with them, his knowledge of their sex-trafficking ring, and his experience with their efforts to curry favor and exercise influence to protect themselves,” he added of President Clinton’s relationship with Epstein and Maxwell.

Finally, Comer took umbrage with the proposition for a transcribed interview, not a sworn deposition.

“A transcribed interview is voluntary, meaning that the subject may refuse to answer questions absent any assertion of privilege or constitutional right,” Comer noted. “The conditions requested thus would enable President Clinton to refuse to answer whatever questions he wanted for whatever reasons he wanted and leave as the Committee’s only recourse to again subpoena President Clinton’s testimony, effectively restarting this entire process from the beginning.”

As for Hillary Clinton, the lawyers’ letter echoes her sworn declaration, stating she “never held an office with responsibility for, or involvement with, DOJ’s handling of these investigations or prosecutions,” adding “the same is true as a private citizen after leaving office in 2013.”

The lawyers also requested that Comer withdraw the subpoena and resolution of contempt “so that we may continue to work in good faith toward an agreement that meets the Committee’s needs while accounting for the limited information Secretary Clinton can provide.”

In response, Comer emphasized “the necessity” of Hillary Clinton’s in-person testimony juxtaposed against the “unacceptability of simple sworn declarations.”

Comer concluded that the Clintons’ “desire for special treatment is both frustrating and an affront to the American people’s desire for transparency.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Rep. Gregory Meeks knows the pivotal role Black men can play in a young person’s life.

“In high school, my [Black] male teacher was Mr. Ozzie and he guided me, you know, through some difficult times and through good times,” Meeks, D-N.Y., told ABC News.

He praised Ozzie for giving him life advice and will never forget how his former teacher inspired him to pursue politics.

“He got me involved in student government at the time,” Meeks said, adding “Without the foundation, I would never be here.”

In interviews with ABC News over the last year, lawmakers across a broad spectrum discussed their relationship with the Black male figures who taught them during their formative years. Having a Black male — and a diverse group of educators — benefits “everyone,” not just Black students, according to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and education experts who spoke with ABC News.

However, less than 2% of all U.S. public school teachers are Black men, according to recent government data. It stems from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, which ended racial segregation in America’s public schools and prompted a massive white resistance to the new law of the land.

Leslie T. Fenwick, author of “Jim Crow’s Pink Slip: The Untold Story of Black Principal and Teacher Leadership,” ​​told ABC News that the resistance — by mostly white Southern politicians — helped cause the shortage of Black male educators, and Black educators as a whole were forced out in droves.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said the latest data on Black male teachers are a “concerning statistic.” Still, the Louisiana native told ABC News that he had “many” Black male teachers over the years.

“One of my favorites was Mr. Tilmer Keels,” Johnson recalled. “He was our band director in middle school. He was such a great inspirational leader,” Johnson added.

Johnson, Meeks and their colleagues overwhelmingly described Black male teachers as supportive, encouraging, and provided positive images for young people.

“They [Black male educators] were very significant for me, and we need more than just one,” Meeks said. “I should be able to talk about three, four, five, six, seven, eight of them,” he added.

Bipartisan appreciation

There’s bipartisan support throughout Congress for these impactful teachers.

Rep. Troy Carter, D-La., said teaching is one of the “most important” careers one can choose. Illinois Democratic Rep. Danny K. Davis, one of the oldest lawmakers on Capitol Hill, said his roles in public service include teaching.

Jonathan L. Jackson’s father, civil rights leader Rev. Jesse Jackson who passed away last week, served as a role model for Black youth across the nation. In the classroom, Jackson said he had at least two Black male teachers throughout high school who he said impacted his worldview.

“People need someone to look up to,” Jackson told ABC News. “That’s why we should be pushing specifically for more African American males in science, education, humanities, histories and all the other good things.”

Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., is also pushing to increase representation in the classroom.

“I’m an advocate for having more male teachers in general, but certainly Black male teachers,” he said, adding, “I think you need a picture of what you want to become in the world.”

Recruitment and retention

Over years of reporting, several Black male educators at public, charter and private pre-K-12 schools have told ABC News that they feel underappreciated and overstretched — with their numbers in the profession already small and appearing to dwindle, according to experts.

Today, 100 years after the first observance of what would become Black History Month, roughly three dozen Black males are serving in Congress. The ones who spoke to ABC News believe Black men deserve a space in the classroom.

Bobby Scott, the top Democrat on the House Education & Workforce Committee who grew up in the segregated South, doesn’t remember ever having a Black male teacher — from elementary school all the way through to when he earned his law degree from Boston College. He noted that teachers and coaches hold an important place in a child’s upbringing, stressing that there should be more Black male educators in schools.

Eric Duncan, the director for preschool-12th grade policy at the nonprofit organization The Education Trust, argued Congress holds the power to bolster the Black male educator through a multitude of levers that would incentivize them to stay in the profession, including scholarships, mortgage assistance, and teacher tax credits.

Duncan, a former social studies teacher, said Black male educators need to feel empowered. Their dismal numbers would improve if the legislative branch keeps level funding for teacher pipeline programs, he said.

“Congress has a role, I think, in continuing to appropriate those funds and continues to keep those programs for the teacher prep programs in the districts that are doing the hard work of trying to recruit and retain Black male educators in their schools,” he said.

“Artificial barriers” impeding progress

The Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education ruling had a crippling impact on the retention of Black male teachers.

More than 70 years after the resistance to the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling, some lawmakers say they feel different factors of the teaching profession keep men out of the classroom, including credentialing and salaries.

Rep. John James, R-Mich., said he wishes there were more avenues for Black men to become teachers but “artificial barriers” are impeding their progress.

“The licensing and certification, the time and the money required, this erects artificial barriers to create mentors and role models, particularly for young Black men who don’t necessarily have that in their life,” James told ABC News.

Last session, multiple teacher salary bills introduced in the House and Senate never received a vote. Freshman Rep. Shomari Figures, D-Ala. said Congress has a collective obligation to address the problem.

“The salary piece of it is certainly a big thing, but we also got to get real about, you know, conditions in schools,” Figures said.

“How are we making the environment the best suitable for teachers to want to stay and remain in the classroom long term?”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is facing two days of grilling on Capitol Hill as Democrats question her leadership of the Department of Homeland Security amid criticism of immigration enforcement operations and threats to the homeland after U.S. strikes against Iran.

Noem is testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday; she will testify before theHouse Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.

Her testimony comes as some parts of Noem’s agency — from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Transportation Security Administration to the Coast Guard — are shut down amid a funding fight over Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Democrats have said they will fund the department only if changes are made to the agency in the wake of the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis involving federal law enforcement.

Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Monday that Noem will face “tough” questions after “stonewalling” Congress.

“Secretary Noem is the public face for an abominable anti-immigrant crusade. Her agents continue to wreak havoc on our cities and act with unspeakable cruelty against children, immigrant families, and American citizens,” Durbin said. “The American people are horrified by what they’re seeing, and Secretary Noem stonewalled Congress for months because she knew her conduct was egregious. She will be asked tough questions and held accountable for her reckless and deadly enforcement agenda.”

The secretary’s testimony is the first time she will be appearing before Congress after tensions in Minneapolis and the killing of Good and Pretti.

Saying she had another meeting to get to, Noem left midway through her last hearing before the House Homeland Security Committee in December under intense questioning from Democrats over ICE operations and tactics.

In the hours following the shooting of Pretti, a Minneapolis Veterans Affairs ICU nurse, Noem drew criticism for insinuating he wanted to “massacre” law enforcement before the evidence and investigation was complete. Pretti was licensed to carry a handgun. Video from multiple angles showed that Pretti did not try to draw his gun from his waistband before or during the scuffle with federal agents.

Two Senate Republicans have said Noem should be out of a job, and Democrats have called for her impeachment.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he stands by Noem.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.