Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is appearing before the House Oversight Committee on Friday for a high-profile interview on whether senior staffers worked to obscure signs of mental decline in then-President Joe Biden.

Jean-Pierre is one of the highest-profile figures so far to appear before the committee, having been the most public-facing spokesperson for Biden from May 2022 until the end of his term.

The longtime Democrat-turned-Independent did not speak to reporters on her way into her closed-door transcribed interview with House investigators, which is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. and is likely to last into the afternoon.

House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., is investigating whether there was a cover-up of Biden’s mental and physical state in the White House, and whether any executive actions were approved via autopen without the then-president’s full awareness.

Of particular interest to committee investigators are the myriad clemency orders Biden signed, including about 2,500 toward the end of his presidency that were executed via autopen.

Biden himself told The New York Times recently that he made every clemency decision on his own. His allies have also blasted the Republican-led probe as a partisan exercise.

Jean-Pierre was among those who publicly defended Biden in the wake of his disastrous June 2024 debate against then-candidate Donald Trump. She told reporters at a press briefing in early July that Biden was ‘as sharp as ever.’

But unlike other ex-Biden administration aides who have appeared ahead of her – many of whom still hold close ties and fierce loyalty to Biden – Jean-Pierre had a very public falling out with their world earlier this year.

In June, Jean-Pierre announced she was writing a book titled ‘Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines.’

She also announced she was leaving the Democratic Party in a press release for that book, expected in October 2025.

A summary for her book suggests it is about ‘the three weeks that led to Biden’s abandonment of his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision.’

The announcement was reportedly met with scorn by others in Biden’s orbit.

‘The hubris of thinking you can position yourself as an outsider when you not only have enjoyed the perks of extreme proximity to power — which…bestows the name recognition needed to sell books off your name — but have actively wielded it from the biggest pulpit there is, is as breathtaking as it is desperate,’ one former official told Axios.

Another person told the outlet she ‘was one of the most ineffectual and unprepared people I’ve ever worked with.’

Comer sent a letter to Jean-Pierre in late June asking her to appear for an interview, in which he pointed out she was ‘a trusted inner-circle confidante’ and ‘near the president daily.’

‘Your assertion, on multiple occasions, that President Biden’s decline was attributable to such tactics as ‘cheap fakes’ or ‘misinformation’ cannot go without investigation. If White House staff carried out a strategy lasting months or even years to hide the chief executive’s condition — or to perform his duties — Congress may need to consider a legislative response,’ Comer wrote.

After the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk sent shockwaves through the political landscape this week, Fox News Digital spoke to several high-profile conservative speakers about the future of the movement and the influence Kirk’s legacy and style will have on it. 

‘Conservatives will not be silenced,’ Heather Mac Donald, Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal, told Fox News Digital, adding that Kirk ‘would not have been silenced’ so conservatives should ’emulate his courage.’

Columnist and commentator Bethany Mandel told Fox News Digital that Kirk’s assassination was ‘absolutely an effort to try to silence conservatives’ and that ‘we have to resist the temptation to allow that.’

‘We need to keep speaking out and double down on not only Charlie’s message, but his methodology,’ Mandel said.

Kirk was assassinated on Wednesday while speaking to thousands of students at Utah Valley University when a gunman positioned on a nearby roof fired a single shot, striking Kirk in the neck.

Kirk was rushed to Timpanogos Regional Hospital, where he was pronounced dead, prompting an outpouring of support from conservatives across the globe, including President Trump who called the killing a ‘dark moment for America.’

On Friday, authorities announced that they had arrested a suspect, 22-year-old Utah resident Tyler Robinson.

‘Charlie Kirk was a good man,’ John Ashbrook, co-host of the conservative podcast Ruthless, told Fox News Digital. ‘And his legacy will endure because none of us will ever forget his leadership nor the voice he provided for millions of regular people across this country.’

Mac Donald told Fox News Digital that it is ‘hard to imagine’ Kirk was killed for ‘any other reason than that he was breaking the stranglehold of anti-Western ideology on college campuses and beyond.’

‘It was sadly fitting that he was killed at a college campus, and not even one known for its leftward leanings, since colleges are the seed bed of modern day speech suppression and the false equations that political contrarian speech = hate speech and that hate speech may be snuffed out—apparently by any means necessary,’ Mac Donald said. 

‘The killer apparently agreed with those would-be censorers.  The self-centeredness and historical and moral ignorance of coddled American students has bloomed into something more pernicious, as the beatification of Luigi Mangione already showed.’

Going forward, in terms of security at events for prominent conservative speakers, Mandel called on campuses and cities that ‘claim to care about the future of America and civil discourse’ to step up and ‘ensure adequate security.’

‘We should not have to pay tax in the form of security in order to safely share our political opinions,’ Mandel told Fox News Digital. 

Conservatives have rallied around Kirk’s style of speaking out publicly and exchanging ideas with those who disagree, including prominent influencer Ben Shapiro who wrote on X that ‘we will never stop debating and discussing.’

‘We will never stop standing up for what America is and what she should be,’ Shapiro said, adding that he intends to continue speaking at colleges across the country despite the inherent dangers. 

Mac Donald told Fox News Digital, ‘It is a cliché and self-serving to say: they fear us because we are winning, but presumably, there is less of a perceived need to efface someone who is losing a cause anyway. Kirk was feared because he was winning.’

The rifle that federal investigators believe was used in the shooting that killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk contained ammunition inscribed with anti-fascist messaging, shedding light on the suspect’s motive.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox confirmed the messaging at a news conference Friday, saying investigators discovered inscriptions on casings found with a bolt-action rifle near the Utah Valley University campus, where Kirk was killed during an event.

One used casing and three unused casings contained the writings, Cox said.

News of the ammunition inscriptions was first shared on social media Thursday morning in a preliminary bulletin attributed to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. 

According to the bulletin, circulated on X by political commentator Steven Crowder, federal officials recovered a .30-06 caliber Mauser rifle in the woods that contained ‘engravings,’ including messaging expressing anti-fascist ideology and other messages.

Fox News Digital confirmed the veracity of the ATF bulletin through talking to multiple sources, but the sources stressed on Thursday that the information was preliminary.

The information about the firearm surfaced nearly 24 hours after Kirk, 31, was shot and killed during a speaking engagement in Utah. Both his graphic death and the scant public information revealed in the early hours of the investigation into his killing left the nation reeling and revived heated debate about political violence in the U.S.

Law enforcement officials worked frantically in the aftermath of Kirk’s death to track down and arrest the gunman, who they announced Friday was Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old Utah man.

Cox on Friday called the shooting a ‘political assassination.’

‘This is certainly about the tragic death, assassination, political assassination of Charlie Kirk, but it is also much bigger than an attack on an individual,’ Cox said. ‘It is an attack on all of us. It is an attack on the American experiment.’

FBI Director Kash Patel laid out the timeline of the investigation Friday, saying it took the FBI and Utah law enforcement 33 hours to make an arrest. Patel said authorities made ‘historic progress’ in such a short duration of time.

The FBI’s Salt Lake City Field Office released an image Thursday of a man they had said was a ‘person of interest’ in Kirk’s death and asked the public for help identifying him. The bureau also announced it was offering a $100,000 reward for information leading to his capture. Cox said a tip from a family friend of Robinson’s led to his arrest.

The federal trial of Ryan Routh, the accused would-be assassin of President Donald Trump at his West Palm Beach golf club last year, is scheduled to begin Thursday. 

After several rounds of jury selection that began Monday, a panel of 12 jurors — along with four alternates — were seated Wednesday. The group includes six White women, four White men, one Black woman and one Black man. The alternates consist of two White women and two White men.

Opening arguments are scheduled for Thursday at the federal courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, where prosecutors are expected to move swiftly into presenting their case.

Roughly 180 people were summoned for jury duty in three waves of 60. Both prosecutors and Routh, who has declined public defense and has chosen to self-represent, questioned candidates to determine whether they could serve impartially.

Routh peppered prospective jurors with offbeat questions, asking about Ukraine, the war in Gaza and even what they would do if a turtle crossed the road while they were driving.

The most recent high-profile federal defendant to represent themselves was Dylann Storm Roof, the mass murderer responsible for the 2015 Charleston, South Carolina, church shooting. Roof briefly represented himself in the federal death penalty phase of his trial in 2016. He requested to proceed pro se and was allowed to do so for part of the proceedings before ultimately reverting to court-appointed counsel.

By the end of Tuesday, the court had already dismissed more than 70 of the initial 180 prospective jurors, many citing strong opinions about Trump, connections to law enforcement or concerns about impartiality in a highly politicized case. 

Routh has pleaded not guilty to federal charges of attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate and assaulting a federal officer. Prosecutors say he was armed with an AK-style rifle when Secret Service agents stopped him near Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach in September 2024. The attempt came just months after Trump was shot and narrowly survived an assassination attempt in Butler, Pa.

The trial is expected to last two to four weeks with Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon at the helm of the trial.

Fox News Digital’s Diana Stancy contributed to this report.

Republicans from the House Oversight Committee released a report outlining what they allege are conflicts of interest, financial mismanagement and oversight failures associated with a Biden-era green energy grant program that sent $20 billion to just 8 different nonprofits.

The money stems from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which budgeted roughly $27 billion to advance clean energy and ‘environmental justice’ under the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). An undercover recording of a former Biden Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) political appointee, who described disbursements made through GGRF as akin to tossing gold bars off the Titanic at the end of Biden’s term, was cited by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin in February when he announced that the agency would be looking into the matter. Republicans are currently trying to claw back the funds, which they claim were rushed out the door at the end of the Biden administration with little oversight and steered toward Democratic allies. 

‘Today’s report from the House Oversight Committee exposes the Biden administration’s sweeping green energy scheme, designed to funnel tens of billions in taxpayer dollars to enrich Democratic allies and fund partisan, politically motivated projects,’ House Republican Oversight Chairman James Comer told Fox News Digital. ‘Americans deserve better than this green energy scam disguised as environmental justice, and Oversight Republicans will continue to hold the Biden administration accountable to ensure the EPA operates as intended and that taxpayer dollars are spent transparently, responsibly, and in the best interest of the American people.’

The EPA terminated most of these grants after the Trump administration took office, but the move was met with legal pushback from Democrats. However, last week, a federal appeals court judge struck down a lower court’s ruling that blocked the Trump administration’s move to freeze the funds, arguing the administration was acting in accordance with its role to provide ‘proper oversight’ of how funds are distributed.

The EPA has referred the matter to the agency’s inspector general. The Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation are also running concurrent investigations, the EPA has indicated. However, up to this point, no criminal wrongdoing has been uncovered.   

Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Ranking Member Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., declined to comment on the matter. Additionally, several other top ranking Democrats, including the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., did not respond to requests for comment.

However, in an Aug. 11 letter to Zeldin signed by several ranking Democrats, including Clarke, they accused Zeldin of ‘lying’ about the Inflation Reduction Act funding. 

‘Time and again, you have boasted about the unlawful activities EPA is conducting under your leadership without any credible evidence to justify your actions,’ the letter stated.

While there may not be any criminal wrongdoing alleged thus far, the picture painted by the investigation by House Oversight Republicans shows the Biden administration ‘turned the Environmental Protection Agency into a vehicle for rewarding political allies, all while risking the stability of our energy infrastructure,’ according to Comer.

‘Today’s report from the House Oversight Committee exposes the Biden administration’s sweeping green energy scheme, designed to funnel tens of billions in taxpayer dollars to enrich Democratic allies and fund partisan, politically motivated projects,’ Comer added.

The report released by Oversight Republicans details how committee staff reviewed ‘tens of thousands’ of documents produced by the GGRF awardees in question. The documents also included EPA materials for reviewing and awarding the GGRF funds, among other records.

The report shows how the EPA judged the applicants using a scoring system that awarded points for different parts of the nonprofits’ proposals. For example, flawless ‘financial risk management’ awarded a total of 85 points, while flawless ‘legal and compliance risk management’ could provide an applicant up to 40 possible points. Meanwhile, the EPA weighted ‘equity and environmental justice’ the same way it did ‘financial statements’ and more than it weighted good ‘governance’ or ‘legal and compliance risk management,’ among other categories. 

‘By doing so, the EPA all but ensured that the grants would go to President Biden’s political allies. All awardees of the GGRF had ‘climate equity’ or diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies in place or committed to putting equivalent policies in place,’ the House Oversight report argues. ‘EPA criticized multiple applicants because their targeted reductions in emissions were too low. In other cases, the EPA staff complained that there was not enough ‘environmental justice’ expertise represented in leadership or on the boards of the nonprofits. The Biden EPA insisted on climate equity metrics over merit.’

After receiving their scores, the program provided a ‘reconciliation process’ for EPA staff to discuss their assessments and adjust their scores, according to the Oversight report. The ultimate decision was then passed to a single ‘selection official’ who made the final determination.

The report also claims that the disbursement review process was ‘full of contradictions.’ It says documents showed EPA officials had concerns about the groups receiving the funds related to overly optimistic projections for financial benefits or emissions reductions, lack of access to private capital, high uninsured cash balances, and lack of transparency. Simultaneously, in other documents, the EPA justified the GGRF recipients as entities ‘with track records, staff, risk management policies, and other programmatic capabilities,’ according to the House Oversight report.

One of the groups under scrutiny, Climate United Fund, was established for the purpose of utilizing the GGRF, according to the Oversight report. The report points to claims from EPA staff indicating the group is ‘a new-entity purpose built for the execution of our program plan and does not have a robust reporting history.’

Climate United, reported just $95,557 in assets for fiscal year 2023 but received $6.97 billion from the EPA, representing a 7,293,980% increase in reported assets since 2023, the Oversight report points out.

Other groups also saw similarly significant increases.

Power Forward Communities received $2 billion as part of the GGRF disbursements. The group, not established until after the Biden administration announced the GGRF application process, reported just $100 in assets in its first and only tax filing – meaning that following the $2 billion GGRF award, the entities’ assets increased 2,000,000,000%, according to the House Oversight report.

‘These tired allegations distract from the fact that EPA’s illegal funding freeze will drive up energy costs for hardworking Americans across the country. When household bills are skyrocketing, Congress should be focused on deploying cheap, clean energy technologies rather than resurfacing false claims,’ Brooke Durham, a spokesperson for Climate United told Fox News Digital when reached for comment. ‘Climate United welcomes the opportunity to explain our work and the benefits of the NCIF program to Congress, federal agencies, and to the public.’

The spokesperson also noted that while the Climate United coalition – which is made up of three separate organizations – is new, the organizations that make it up are not.

‘The organizations that make up Climate United have been investing in communities for over 30 years, and are experts in the capital markets who have collectively managed more than $30 billion in institutional and public funds,’ Durham said. She added that the group was proud to tout a 946.5 point evaluation score by the EPA out of a possible 1050 points, which Durham noted was among the highest of all the awardees.

Power Forward declined to comment. However, the group’s CEO, Tim Mayopolous told CBS News last month that the GGRF award process ‘was a highly structured, competitive process that the United States government went through.’

‘The organizations that are part of our coalition that actually do this work – they have been around collectively for nearly a century, and they have invested or disbursed over $100 billion of capital into communities all over America over those years,’ Mayopolous added. ‘We’re not inexperienced people.’    

Climate United, along with some of the other groups in question, are also under fire for allegedly inflating their executives’ salaries and travel benefits in proposed budgets. The CEO’s salary at Climate United was slated to be over $500,000, and at Power Forward $800,000, with an increase to over $900,00 in a year. One group produced a budget that paid its executive staff of seven employees a total of $24,862,419 over three years, according to the report.

Meanwhile, conflicts of interest, which Zeldin has described as ‘blatant,’ were also laid bare in the report. The director of the GGRF selected by the Biden White House was a former policy director at the group that wanted to pay their executive staffers close to a combined $25 million over three years, according to the report. The report says the director had to recuse himself from the award process because of the conflict.   

At Climate United, the group currently staffs a former Biden climate advisor who worked during the last two years of the former president’s term. Their board makeup while pursuing the GGRF award also had ties to the Obama administration. However, Durham contested the implication that there were conflicts of interest, telling Fox News Digital that no staff or board members at Climate United helped with the design of the program, or the selection of the award recipients.

Power Forward’s GGRF application process was also accused of being led by Democrat allies in the Republican Oversight report. Power Forward was founded by executives at nonprofit Rewiring America, co-founded by top Obama administration advisors, the report states. It also claims that Power Forward had planned on awarding Rewiring America with nearly $500,000,000.

‘The nonprofits receiving awards are littered with connections to Biden Administration staff and allies. The executives and board members at some of the GGRF’s awardees even helped write the policies that created the GGRF and are now benefitting from exorbitant salaries provided by taxpayers,’ the House Oversight report states. 

‘The GGRF was a huge step for the Left in realizing the Green New Deal. The program is a National Green Bank that will flood the economy with billions in taxpayer dollars to fund partisan projects regardless of whether they merit investment or not.’