Jared Kushner's security clearance has been downgraded

• McConnell yesterday signed onto a resolution by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) seeking to change the rules of the Senate to dismiss articles of impeachment if they are not transmitted within 25 days of their approval — which would be Jan. 12.
• The Senate would require a two-thirds majority in order to change the rules, unless McConnell were to invoke the "nuclear option" and decide the issue by a simple majority vote.

The big picture, via Axios' Jonathan Swan and Margaret Talev: Democrats will have to convince at least four Republican senators to join forces with them in order to demand more disclosures as part of President Trump's trial.

• They're likely to lean on Republican senators like Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Mitt Romney of Utah and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee to press McConnell to agree to some witnesses and document releases the White House is so far refusing.

What she's saying:

"I am very proud of the courage and patriotism exhibited by our House Democratic Caucus as we support and defend the Constitution.  I have asked Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler to be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate.  I will be consulting with you at our Tuesday House Democratic Caucus meeting on how we proceed further.  

"In an impeachment trial, every Senator takes an oath to “do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.”  Every Senator now faces a choice: to be loyal to the President or the Constitution.  

"No one is above the law, not even the President."

Go deeper: McConnell backs changing Senate rules over Pelosi impeachment delay

• Three MIT vice presidents learned of Epstein's gifts to the school's Media Lab in 2013 — but without "any MIT policy regarding controversial gifts, Epstein’s subsequent gifts to the Institute were approved under an informal framework," the report found.

The big picture: MIT maintained that no senior team members violated the law or breached its policy in connection with Epstein's gifts, but notes that "certain" members failed to adequately consider:

1. "Whether accepting money from Epstein was consistent with MIT’s core values."
2. "The impact that MIT’s acceptance of Epstein’s money would have on the MIT community should those donations become known."
3. "Whether it was appropriate to accept donations with a requirement by MIT that they remain anonymous."

What they're saying, via the findings of the investigation, which was conducted by law firm Goodwin Procter: "Professor Lloyd knew that donations from Epstein would be controversial and that MIT might reject them."

• "We conclude that, in concert with Epstein, he purposefully decided not to alert the Institute to Epstein’s criminal record, choosing instead to allow mid-level administrators to process the donations without any formal discussion or diligence concerning Epstein."

Worth noting: The report did not find evidence that funds donated to MIT by Apollo Global Management CEO and Chairman Leon Black or Bill Gates were actually Epstein’s money or that the men acted to launder Epstein’s money.

• Per Axios' Felix Salmon, MIT's fundraising office devised an idea that Epstein should not donate money directly. Instead, Epstein would allegedly engineer a donation from Black, Gates or other undefiled third parties.
• Black's gifts were understood within the Media Lab to be Epstein money, according to three MIT sources — and that understanding applied more broadly than just to Black.

Flashback: MIT Media Lab's director Joi Ito resigned, left his board seat with the New York Times Company, and resigned from the MacArthur Foundation in September following a blockbuster report from The New Yorker's Ronan Farrow that said Ito flew to Epstein's private island twice and accepted more than $8 million in donations from him.

Go deeper ... Exclusive: MIT and Jeffrey Epstein's billionaire enablers

• Drummond's last day will be on Jan. 31, and he will not receive a severance package.
• In recent months, he's been selling hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Alphabet stock.

Forbes was first to report the pending departure, which the company has since confirmed to Axios.

Our thought bubble: This is a clear signal that new Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai is fully in charge. Pichai, who also continues to run Google, has said that he would have no tolerance for harassment and that no future employees leaving after such issues would get exit packages.

What they're saying: Drummond today sent a letter to Google employees. It reads, in part:

"The company is entering an exciting new phase, and I believe that it’s also the right time for me to make way for the next generation of leaders... As I do so, I’d like to thank everyone with whom I’ve had the privilege to work so closely over the past two decades... I know this company is in the best of hands, and I am excited for what the future holds for Google, for Alphabet and for me."

Bill Maris, who founded Google's venture capital arm and reported directly to Drummond before quitting in 2016, tells Axios:

"The news of David Drummond leaving Google today brings to mind a quote from one of my most favorite creatures. 'At an end, your rule is. And not short enough, it was.' I had been asked in the past why I left Google in 2016, and I have never really commented on that. David Drummond is the reason I left Google. I simply could not work with him any longer.  It’s that simple.  We have very, very different ideas about how to treat people, and this was a long time coming."

Go deeper: Google Ventures' #MeToo problems come to light

• Williamson did manage to achieve a few breakout moments, including during the second debate when she received raucous applause for her comments on reparations and the water crisis in Flint, Michigan.
• She did not qualify for the October, November or December debates, and was polling last nationally among Democratic candidates still in the race. She had not qualified for the January debate, with the cutoff also on Friday.
• Williamson laid off her campaign staff on Jan. 2.

What she's saying:

" I ran for president to help forge another direction for our country ... As of today ... I'm suspending my campaign."

Go deeper: 2020 presidential election: Track which candidates are running

• Iran is already under sanctions imposed by the Trump administration that impact more than 1,000 companies and individuals, per the Washington Post.
• The costs of the sanctions have largely been pushed onto ordinary Iranians — an issue that spilled over into widespread protests last year — rather than the senior officials they target.
• A former senior Justice Department prosecutor who handled sanctions cases told ABC News that "sanctions now touch every part of the Iranian economy and are unlikely to have any further impact."

By the numbers: Mnuchin said there are also targeted at 17 of "Iran's largest steel and iron manufacturers."

• There are also sanctions against eight senior Iranian officials, who Mnuchin said "advance the regime’s destabilizing activity and were involved in Tuesday’s ballistic missile strike."

Go deeper: Why the threat of an Iran war hasn't rattled the stock market

The big picture: Part of the bump is just cyclical, as large private equity firms now tend to raise new flagship funds every two or three years. But there also are several other factors in play, per conversations with placement agents and limited partners:

1. Product proliferation: Private equity firms used to just raise a single series of funds, with a consistent strategy. But many of them now also raise sector-specific funds, funds focused on specific geographies, or on different sorts of deals (small-cap, growth equity, distressed, etc.).
2. Denominator effect: The bull market for public equities has inflated the amount of dollars available, assuming constant LP target allocations.
3. Mainstreaming: Private equity is becoming more commonly-accepted among institutional investors and, in particular, large sovereign wealth funds. It's a voracious, double-sided supply/demand situation.

But, but, but: Every source I spoke with warned that "vintage years" with huge fundraising totals have a lousy historical record when it comes to returns.

The bottom line: Private equity has more money than ever before, which means it will keep offerings premiums to already-high prices, and also pounce if the bull ever dozes off.

Go deeper:

• Deaths of investment pioneers leave gap in institutional knowledge
• Gold has been 2020's star asset

• Iraq was the proxy battleground between the U.S. and Iran — with the storming of the U.S. embassy complex in Baghdad, the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani and the Iranian retaliation against U.S. bases all taking place on its soil.

Why it matters: A U.S. exit from Iraq could ultimately be one of the most consequential results of the escalation in U.S.-Iran tensions, because it would significantly hamper the fight against ISIS and achieve a major Iranian objective.

• In a statement, Abdul-Mahdi's office said Iraq rejects all violations against its sovereignty and asked Pompeo to "send delegates to Iraq to prepare a mechanism to carry out the parliament’s resolution regarding the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq."
• Secretary of Defense Mark Esper has previously said U.S. troops will not be leaving Iraq, despite a snafu earlier this week over a "poorly worded" letter that seemed to indicate a withdrawal.

The other side: The State Department issued a statement rebuffing Abdul-Mahdi's request, saying, "At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East."

• "Our military presence in Iraq is to continue the fight against ISIS and as the Secretary has said, we are committed to protecting Americans, Iraqis, and our coalition partners."

Go deeper:

• Iraqi parliament calls on government to expel U.S. troops
• Trump officials tried to stop Iraqi expulsion vote

• The group's combined assets under management are now $41 trillion with BlackRock's addition, organizers say. Its hundreds of members include CalPERS, Allianz, and UBS Asset Management, to name a few.

One big question: Whether joining Climate Action 100+ changes BlackRock's asset management policies and voting decisions on climate-related shareholder resolutions, which it has rarely backed.

• As the Financial Times notes, "BlackRock has voted against shareholder proposals brought about by Climate Action 100+ in the past and is under no obligation to vote for them in the future."

Quick take, per Axios' Felix Salmon: "If this means that BlackRock is going to vote its trillions of dollars worth of shares in support of climate resolutions, that could change corporate governance significantly. But no one yet knows whether it means that."

The other side: BlackRock's addition to Climate Action 100+ happened coincidentally on the same day that activists stepped up pressure on the company with the announcement of the Stop the Money Pipeline campaign, which is pressing banks and fund managers to end financing of fossil fuel projects.

• BlackRock is among the main targets of the mobilization — whose participants include Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, EarthRights and 350.org — that brings together several existing campaigns.
• Moira Birss of Amazon Watch and the BlackRock's Big Problem campaign, which is part of the umbrella effort, said they want BlackRock to end coal-related investments and to "prioritize fossil- and deforestation-free funds by making them the default option for all investors and clients."
• They also want BlackRock to support shareholder resolutions that push energy companies to align their business models with the Paris climate agreement's goals.

What they're saying: BlackRock called joining Climate Action 100+ a "natural progression" of the work its "investment stewardship" team already does with many companies in their passive and active portfolios.

• "We believe evidence of the impact of climate risk on investment portfolios is building rapidly and we are accelerating our engagement with companies on this critical issue," a spokesperson said.

Go deeper: The BlackRock affair