There’s no doubt Speaker Mike Johnson has a rough road ahead in 2024. He’s got two shutdown deadlines, fraught border negotiations and building pressure to impeach President Joe Biden.

In the midst of all that, he’s got an incredibly thin majority and he has to keep his right flank happy — never an easy task in split government. He’s been speaker for about two and a half months, and in that time we’ve learned a few things about him that will affect the legislative pileup:

1. He doesn't have a McCarthy-style inner circle.

Unlike his predecessor, Johnson isn’t surrounded by his closest friends acting as informal advisers. That has pros and cons: Those members helped Kevin McCarthy navigate the historically thin majority, but it further fueled distrust within GOP leadership.

Johnson leans on members of House leadership far more, a welcome change for some Republicans who appreciate the top-down communication style. He does have some allies and mentors that he trusts for advice at various times, including Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), retiring Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.), and Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.) as well as Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), according to a Republican close to Johnson.

At this point, Johnson doesn’t appear to have the deep support McCarthy had that allowed him to persevere through 15 ballots. While McCarthy's strategy obviously had its problems, Johnson will need some sort of loyal backing if he wants to successfully navigate tricky political terrain.

His press strategy critically differs from McCarthy, too. As a rank-and-file member, Johnson was extremely accessible to reporters. As speaker, he’s been far more reserved — avoiding hallway questions and finding roundabout ways to get onto the House floor to avoid reporters. It’s fueled a perception that Johnson is weary of answering questions, whereas McCarthy often dealt with journalists head on. However, Johnson has rejoined the weekly leadership pressers that McCarthy opted to skip.

2. He can’t keep punting.

Some Republicans have criticized Johnson over his willingness to punt on polarizing issues rather than call a tough play. And they don’t have a lot of patience left.

That approach was most on display during the spy powers fight last month, when Johnson tried to have members duke it out on the floor to decide which FISA bill would move forward rather than make the decision himself. That backfired: He was forced to withdraw the legislation and both conservatives and centrists complained that it was his job to pick which bill was better.

But conservatives weren’t happy with the results of Johnson wading into the toplines spending deal either. Congressional leaders announced Sunday they had an agreement on overall funding levels — which are effectively the same numbers included in the debt ceiling deal former Speaker Kevin McCarthy had negotiated — prompting swift backlash from the right flank.

That highlights another problem conservatives have with Johnson (and most speakers, at one point or another): They feel he’s too willing to make deals with Democrats. It didn’t help Johnson that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was doing a victory lap earlier today, bragging that not a “nickel” was cut.

All that means Johnson is a little boxed in. Conservatives will criticize any deal he reaches with Democrats, something he has to do in split government. But his conference broadly argues he can no longer try to lead from behind. Republicans want him to demonstrate — through spending, the border and impeachment — that he can pick a side when he has to, and stick to it.

3.  He’s approaching politically volatile issues, like the border, very carefully.

While Johnson has repeatedly demanded more border security and made it a central issue for the party for the November election, he's shown that he won't stick his neck out on it as far as some lawmakers want — at least not yet.

He'll call for conservative border priorities, but he's purposely stopped short of threatening a shutdown over it, the type of hardball tactics that some conservatives are demanding. At the same time, Johnson hasn't taken part in the bipartisan Senate negotiations, despite explicit calls from the Biden administration for him to do so. So far, it seems like he's waiting to weigh in further until those negotiators announce a deal.

That’s far from certain, which may be a part of Johnson’s calculus. But if they do, the speaker may face pointed questions from his conference if he doesn’t push hard enough for their conservative H.R. 2 bill, which is considered a non-starter in the Senate.

House Republicans will take a first step next week toward holding Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress, after he skipped a closed-door interview last month.

The House Oversight and Judiciary committees will vote Wednesday on resolutions to hold Hunter Biden in contempt, paving the way for a floor vote in which Republicans will need near unity from their increasingly narrow majority.

“Hunter Biden’s willful refusal to comply with our subpoenas constitutes contempt of Congress and warrants referral to the appropriate United States Attorney’s Office for prosecution. We will not provide him with special treatment because of his last name,” Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said in a joint statement.

Both committees are also expected to issue a report, which hasn't been released yet, making their case for why they believe the president’s son should be held in contempt.

It’s the latest in the standoff between House Republicans and Hunter Biden, whose legal team didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday. Republicans will ultimately need the Justice Department to agree to enforce any referral — making it unlikely that Hunter Biden will face new charges.

Republicans subpoenaed the president’s son to appear behind closed doors for an interview on Dec. 13. Instead, Biden skipped the appearance and spoke briefly to reporters outside of the Capitol, defending his father, President Joe Biden, and reiterating that he is willing to take part in a public hearing.

Congressional Democrats, the White House and Hunter Biden allies have criticized Republicans for refusing to accept the offer for public testimony, pointing back to remarks from Comer earlier last year where he seemed open to the idea. But House Republicans have rejected holding a public hearing — unless Hunter Biden meets with them privately first — arguing that the president’s son shouldn’t dictate their subpoenas.

Republicans are months into their investigation aimed at President Joe Biden that has largely focused on the business deals of his family members. They view Hunter Biden as one of their biggest targets. They are also working to get interviews with James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, and Rob Walker, a Hunter Biden business associate.

The contempt step comes as Republicans are nearing a decision about whether or not to pursue articles of impeachment against Joe Biden. It is far from clear they will have the votes to impeach him, even after Republicans voted to formalize their inquiry last month.

Republicans have poked holes in previous statements by Joe Biden and the White House, and they’ve found evidence of Hunter Biden using his last name to try to build his own influence. But they’ve struggled to find a smoking gun that shows actions taken by Joe Biden as president or vice president were meant to benefit his family’s business deals.

Former President Donald Trump’s businesses received at least $7.8 million "from foreign states and their leaders" during his time in office, according to a new report by House Democrats.

The findings come from a years-long investigation from Democrats on the House Oversight Committee.

“By elevating his personal financial interests and the policy priorities of corrupt foreign powers over the American public interest, former President Trump violated both the clear commands of the Constitution and the careful precedent set and observed by every previous Commander-in-Chief,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the committee, said in the report.

Read the full report.

Democrats used records obtained from Trump’s longtime accounting firm, worked out as part of a lengthy court battle, plus publicly available information to track payments from at least 20 countries, according to the report. And in addition to the report, Democrats released hundreds of pages of documents detailing payments they found.

A bulk of those payments came from the Chinese government and state-owned business. But they cautioned that their figures were a “conservative” estimate and likely incomplete after Republicans dropped the investigation after taking over the majority last year, ending additional document production.

The release of the report comes as Republicans are nearing a decision point in their impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, which has focused on the business deals of his family members. Republicans voted to formalize that inquiry last month, even as several said they hadn’t yet seen a direct link between actions taken by the president and the financial arrangements.

House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), in a statement responding to the report, said, "It’s beyond parody that Democrats continue their obsession with former President Trump."

Democrats and some ethics officials have argued for years that Trump violated the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which forbids a president from profiting from foreign governments, after he didn’t divest himself from his real estate empire and other business holdings. And while Trump faced lawsuits over the issue, the Supreme Court declared two of the lawsuits moot shortly after he left office.

Democrats are expected to release a separate report on potential domestic spending violations, noting that documents they received raised “significant potential conflicts of interest and potential violations of the Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause.”

And they are vowing to propose legislation to make reforms, though those bills could be stuck in limbo given Republicans’ narrow majority in the House. That legislative package is expected to include, among provisions, a requirement that the president and other senior executive officials disclose to Congress any foreign emoluments they received and set up a procedure to seek congressional authorization for receiving and keeping them.

“We will develop a package of proposed legislative reforms to ensure that all occupants of the Oval Office abide by the Constitution’s unequivocal language commanding loyalty to the interests of the American people,” Raskin wrote.

The Trump Organization did not immediately respond when asked for comment.

Speaker Mike Johnson doubled down Wednesday on Republicans’ push for stricter border policies — but stopped short of embracing his right flank’s demand to shut down the government without action.

Those critical funding deadlines are rapidly approaching, with the first set to hit on Jan. 19 and the second in early February. Senators have worked to strike a separate, bipartisan deal on border security and foreign aid for more than a month, but have so far failed to reach an agreement, even after the White House took a more aggressive role in the talks.

Asked about shutting down the government during a trip to the U.S.-Mexico border with dozens of other House Republicans, Johnson cautioned that it was “too early to pre-judge any of that,” pointing to ongoing negotiations with the White House over government funding. But as Washington draws closer to the first deadline — and still lacks an agreement even on overall spending levels — he warned that Republicans are “resolved” on their “top two priorities.”

“We want to get the border closed and secured… and we want to make sure that we reduce non-defense discretionary spending,” Johnson said.

Johnson and his colleagues used the Texas trip to hammer the Biden administration over what they characterized as a lack of action on the border, a hot-button issue they plan to use as a top cudgel against Democrats heading into November. Several conservative Republicans are urging Johnson to shut down the government unless they secure significant migration policy changes — a strategy some in that group say got support from Texas officials and others they met with during the trip.

“Multiple Texas stakeholders — from property rights advocates to sheriffs — urged us to shut down the border or shut down the government. It is refreshing that Speaker Johnson curated such an important and clear message,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who led the ouster of Johnson’s predecessor, former Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Asked during a subsequent interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper how seriously he takes threats from his right flank to oppose government funding, Johnson reiterated that the border and cutting spending are Republicans’ top priorities but “I’m not going to address hypotheticals.”

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) preempted Johnson’s trip by urging House GOP leadership in a Tuesday letter to be ready to partially shut down the government without significant border concessions. Without the latter, he warned, he will vote against any government funding or aid package.

“We must make funding for federal government operations contingent on the President signing H.R.2, or its functional equivalent, into law,” Roy wrote in a letter to his colleagues, referring to a conservative-favored border bill that Democrats have widely rejected. He added that he skipped Wednesday’s trip because “our people … are tired of meetings, speeches, and press conferences.”

House Republicans passed the sweeping bill last year, which would raise the asylum standard and fund the continued building of the border wall, in addition to other GOP migration priorities. Senate Majority Chuck Schumer has said the legislation is a non-starter in his chamber, urging bipartisan border negotiators to come to another type of consensus.

Still, any deal reached by those senators would still need to get through the House, where Johnson and other Republicans have reiterated that H.R. 2 is their standard. Though some House Republicans have been briefed on the status of discussions, the conference has largely remained on the sidelines of those ongoing talks.

“Our position is very clear and we have made that clear for seven months: H.R. 2 is the necessary ingredient,” Johnson said on Wednesday.

Underscoring the gulf between the two chambers, Schumer warned reporters at the Capitol on Wednesday that “when the House clings to H.R. 2 as the only solution … we're not going to get a deal.”

“I think if the Senate gets something done in a bipartisan way, it will put enormous pressure on the House to get something done as well,” Schumer added.

The White House and the administration also also went on defense ahead of Johnson’s border presser, accusing Republicans of paying lip service.

“Actions speak louder than words,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in a statement first obtained by POLITICO. “House Republicans’ anti-border security record is defined by attempting to cut Customs and Border Protection personnel, opposing President Biden’s record-breaking border security funding, and refusing to take up the President’s supplemental funding request.”

A senior administration official added that Johnson and House Republicans “should stop playing politics and work with the administration and the Senate to pass meaningful reforms.”

Meanwhile, Republicans are also ramping up a revived effort to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of the border, which would make him the first Cabinet official to be impeached since 1876.

House Homeland Security Committee Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) will hold hearings this month related to that effort, and has pledged that his committee will vote on an impeachment resolution. The first hearing will be on Jan. 10.

“The cause of the problem is Alejandro Mayorkas. … Accountability is coming, I promise,” he said on Wednesday.

A DHS spokesperson said in a statement ahead of Republicans' border trip that there is “no valid basis to impeach Secretary Mayorkas, as senior members of the House majority have attested, and this extreme impeachment push is a harmful distraction from our critical national security priorities.”

Support within the conference for impeaching Mayorkas has quietly been gaining steam behind the scenes. But Republicans still have a rough path given their thinning majority, a handful of openly skeptical members and Democrats’ likely unanimous opposition. Rep. Bill Johnson’s (R-Ohio) departure on Jan. 21 will bring them down to a two-vote margin. Plus, Democrats are feeling optimistic about their chances to flip former GOP Rep. George Santos’ seat during a Feb. 13 special election.

Olivia Beavers contributed to this report.

House Republicans were surprised by Hunter Biden’s press conference outside the Capitol earlier this month. And now, they are hunting for potential details on the backstory.

Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) sent a letter to the White House on Wednesday, requesting records related to Hunter Biden’s deposition with the House investigators. The president’s son had been subpoenaed to appear behind closed doors on Dec. 13. But he did not, reiterating that he was willing to testify publicly instead.

The two chairs are requesting documents and communications sent or received by Executive Office of the President employees related to Hunter Biden’s scheduled deposition.

“In light of an official statement from the White House that President Biden was aware in advance that his son, Hunter Biden, would knowingly defy two congressional subpoenas, we are compelled to examine as part of our impeachment inquiry whether the President engaged in a conspiracy to obstruct a proceeding of Congress,” Comer and Jordan wrote in the letter to White House counsel Edward Siskel.

Read the full letter.

A person close to Hunter Biden’s legal team told POLITICO earlier this month that the president's son had huddled with his attorney, Abbe Lowell, and attorney Kevin Morris to plan his remarks.

Two people familiar with Hunter Biden’s appearance at the Capitol also told POLITICO earlier this month that Hunter Biden notified the president in advance of his plans. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre separately told reporters that “the president was certainly familiar with what his son was going to say,” but referred questions about if Hunter Biden should comply with the subpoena to his legal team.

“I’m just not going to get into private conversations, because what you’re asking me is actually a private conversation. I’m just not going to get into it,” Jean-Pierre added when asked if Joe Biden attempted to talk his son out of his plan.

House GOP investigators said they were given no heads up that Hunter Biden would not attend their deposition — though his attorney, in statements and letters, had rebuffed a closed-door meeting and countered with a public hearing. Investigators also said at the time that they were not given a heads up that he intended to speak outside the Capitol.

House Republicans view Hunter Biden as a key witness in their sweeping impeachment inquiry into his father. And Wednesday’s letter is the latest sign that Republicans are eyeing obstruction as a potential article of impeachment, even as they likely remain well short of the votes to recommend booting Joe Biden from office.

Republicans are hoping to decide as soon as late January about whether or not to pursue articles of impeachment. But the House GOP is still facing skepticism within its own ranks despite a vote earlier this month to formalize their investigation.

GOP lawmakers have poked holes in previous statements made by the president and the White House, and found evidence that Hunter Biden used his last name to try to bolster his own influence. But they’ve struggled, so far, to find a smoking gun linking actions taken by Joe Biden as president or vice president to his family’s business deals.

In addition to questions about Hunter Biden’s deposition, the two House investigators are also requesting records related to comments President Joe Biden made on Dec. 6 regarding the business deals of his family members.

At the time, a reporter asked Joe Biden why he “interacted with so many of your son and brother's foreign business associates.” The reporter also cited an Associated Press-NORC poll from October, which found that nearly 70 percent of Americans believed the president acted either illegally or unethically in regard to his son’s business deals.

“I’m not going to comment on that. I did not, and it’s just a bunch of lies,” the president said in response to the question.

Devon Archer, a former Hunter Biden business associate, previously told House investigators that Joe Biden attended dinner with or was put on the phone with Hunter Biden’s business associates. But there is no evidence business was discussed during those meetings.

Betsy Woodruff Swan contributed to this report.

House Republicans are preparing to take a significant step toward impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas early next year.

Homeland Security Committee Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) said Friday in a statement that his panel is “initiating impeachment proceedings against Secretary Mayorkas early in the new year.”

The revival of the Mayorkas impeachment effort has flown under the radar in recent weeks as Republicans focused on rallying behind formalizing their impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

But Green has long flirted with moving toward impeachment. He told POLITICO last week that his panel was going to circle back to articles of impeachment early next year and added during a recent interview on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that he’ll hold hearings in January as well as a markup. (Committee spokespeople didn’t respond to a question on Friday about timing of the markup.)

Support for impeaching Mayorkas is growing within the House GOP conference, but it’s not clear that they have the votes — at least not yet.

Eight Republicans previously helped Democrats punt on articles of impeachment against the DHS chief. But some of those holdouts made it clear their opposition was based more on procedural reasons and at least one — Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) — has flipped.

But there are others within the conference worth watching — namely, Republicans in Biden-won districts. Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) is working behind the scenes to try to get moderate members on board.

The impeachment effort comes as Mayorkas plays a central role in the Senate-led talks on a deal that would combine stricter border security policies with new foreign aid. Across the Capitol, some Senate Republicans are critical of Mayorkas but skeptical of impeaching him, arguing that the House GOP criticism comes down more to policy disagreements.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, Gonzales and other top Republicans are also expected to take a trip to the border early next month.

Beyond disputing Republicans on the specifics of border policy, the administration and Democrats have accused Green of driving his months-long investigation toward a predetermined outcome of impeachment.

“The House majority is wasting valuable time and taxpayer dollars pursuing a baseless political exercise that has been rejected by members of both parties and already failed on a bipartisan vote," a DHS spokesperson said in a statement. "There is no valid basis to impeach Secretary Mayorkas."

Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.), the top Democrat on Green’s panel, sounded a similar note after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said she had cut a deal with leadership and the chair to pursue impeachment in the committee. At the time, Thompson accused the committee investigation of being a “shell game” to end up at a “pre-determined, evidence-free impeachment.”

Congress reacts to House approving Biden impeachment inquiry

lead image

House Republicans on Wednesday formally greenlit an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden, their biggest step to date toward trying to remove the president from office.

Every Republican supported the 221-212 vote, which legally will further empower House GOP subpoenas. It comes at a critical juncture: The conference is preparing to make a decision as soon as January about whether or not to draft articles of impeachment.

It’s a win for Speaker Mike Johnson, who managed to unify his conference after battleground-district Republicans spent months resisting a formal inquiry — leading his predecessor to backtrack and start the investigation unilaterally.

“This is an important step. The impeachment power resides solely with the House of Representatives. If a majority of the House now says we’re in an official impeachment inquiry … that carries weight. That’s going to help us get these witnesses in,” Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said ahead of the vote.

Republicans are months into their impeachment probe, which has largely focused on the business deals of Joe Biden’s family members. While they’ve found evidence of Hunter Biden using his last name to bolster his own influence and poked holes in some previous statements by the White House and the president, they have yet to find direct evidence that the president’s official decisions were meant to benefit family businesses.

Even as Republicans inch toward making Biden the fourth president to ever be impeached, they are trying to draw a bright line between their vote on Wednesday and any eventual vote on impeachment articles.

Instead, GOP leaders have rallied their ranks behind the formal inquiry. That’s in part because of a letter the White House recently sent to congressional Republicans, citing a Trump-era Justice Department opinion to state that their requests are invalid without a formalization vote.

At the time, the Trump DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel was pushing back on then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) decision to launch an impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump without initially voting on it. Republicans blasted Pelosi’s strategy at the time.

“I was reluctant to do the inquiry because he was providing information. Now, if he's going to stop providing the information, I think we have no choice but to do it.,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.).

Republicans got unexpectedly complete unity on Wednesday as Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), a conservative who is retiring at the end of next year, supported a move that he had publicly criticized.

Buck has been one of the most vocal critics of his conference’s investigation, calling it “impeachment theater” and reiterating this week that he still does not believe his colleagues have found a direct link from Joe Biden to Hunter Biden’s business deals. Still, he voted yes.

He said after the vote that he still doesn’t see a link between Hunter Biden’s business activities and Joe Biden, but that he spoke with other members who stressed the vote was about investigating, not impeaching.

“I’m irritated that the White House sent that letter back. … I'm irritated that Hunter Biden comes to the Capitol and then doesn't go in,” Buck said.

The vote to formalize the inquiry comes just hours after Hunter Biden skipped a closed-door deposition for which Republicans had subpoenaed him to appear. Instead, he spoke briefly with reporters outside of the Capitol, but did not take any questions — reiterating his offer to testify in public and slamming Republicans.

“Instead of doing anything to help make Americans’ lives better, they are focused on attacking me with lies," Joe Biden said in a statement after the vote. "Instead of doing their job on the urgent work that needs to be done, they are choosing to waste time on this baseless political stunt that even Republicans in Congress admit is not supported by facts.”

Now that Republicans have formalized their inquiry, investigators say they will try to compel Hunter Biden a second time to appear behind closed doors. They’re also vowing to hold him in contempt of Congress if he continues to resist the subpoena, as they prepare to get pulled into a court battle over their investigation.

Republicans are planning to sue to enforce their subpoenas against two DOJ tax officials, and they could also end up in court over their push to talk to a former White House counsel. In addition, the party is still waiting for documents it sought from the National Archives, which turned over new records just this week.

The White House has defended its compliance, noting in a recent memo that — between the administration, banks and private individuals — Republicans have received tens of thousands of financial documents and conducted dozens of hours of interviews.

Democrats are criticizing Republicans for moving forward to formalize their inquiry when some of their own members have acknowledged they haven’t yet met the bar for impeachment.

“A mountain of evidence and deluge of independent reporting, including from numerous conservative outlets, have discredited every single allegation leveled by Republicans against President Biden in their painstaking and fruitless inquiry,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), his party’s top member on the Oversight Committee.

Olivia Beavers contributed.

House Republicans are scheduled to vote Wednesday to formalize their impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. And behind closed doors, the Hill will wait and see if Hunter Biden appears at a deposition central to the House’s probe.

The impeachment inquiry vote is an attempt by House Republicans to give their probe stronger legal standing as they demand information from the White House and enforce subpoenas.

“We're not making a political decision. It's a legal decision,” Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Tuesday.

Earlier this year then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy was trying to have it both ways, announcing an impeachment probe to satisfy the conference’s right flank, but not holding a vote as Republicans in swing districts squirmed.

But many of those swing district Republicans, some in districts Biden won handily, are behind the effort now. And as of Tuesday evening, it appears Johnson will have the votes to make the Biden probe official.

Colorado’s Ken Buck is the only House Republican on the record opposing Wednesday’s vote to formalize the Biden probe and give the House more authority to seek documents and testimony.

As for Hunter’s deposition, it isn’t yet clear if he will show up. His lawyers have told the House Oversight Committee that he would cooperate, but that he also wanted to testify publicly. If he no-shows Wednesday, he is expected to face an effort to hold him in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena.

Supplemental state of play: On Tuesday night, Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell met with negotiating senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), along with Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and White House officials, including deputy chief of staff Natalie Quillian.

The meeting, which marked some of the most robust and visible involvement from the administration so far, followed comments from McConnell saying it would be “practically impossible” for Congress to pass legislation to boost aid to Ukraine and make significant border policy changes by the end of the year.

The meeting is unlikely to change the calculus on getting a deal by the end of this week when the House is set to leave for the year, but signals the eagerness by the White House to make progress and cut a deal.

House Republicans almost certainly have the votes needed to formally launch an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden this week.

Nearly all GOP members either plan to or lean towards supporting a vote to formalize their investigation into the Democratic president and his family’s business dealings, according to a POLITICO whip count, while all House Democrats are expected to unanimously oppose.

It was a tricky whip operation for Speaker Mike Johnson, who can only afford to lose three GOP votes assuming full House attendance. The Louisiana Republican, top investigators and his leadership team worked to win over Republicans in battleground districts who for months had been loath to support such a vote but, so far, only one GOP lawmaker seems likely to oppose the resolution to greenlight the inquiry on Wednesday.

Of course, the inquiry itself has actually been going on for months. And while Republicans have poked holes in the president’s previous statements, they haven’t found direct evidence that Joe Biden took actions as vice president or president to benefit his family’s business deals. But a new argument — which has swayed many centrists — has cropped up for formalizing the inquiry: The GOP needs such a vote to give more legal weight to their subpoenas and demands for records.

Some centrists pointed to a variety of factors that have shifted their thinking:

• They believe investigators have found enough evidentiary string that is worth following.
• They note the White House issued a letter arguing GOP subpoenas for documents and interviews are invalid without a vote (based on a Trump-era opinion). 
• Some acknowledge that they didn’t want to be the members blocking the GOP from taking this step. 

“When the White House attorneys basically said they were no longer going to cooperate with us, unless we actually raised our status, what did they think was going to happen?” said Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), who represents a district Biden won in 2020, adding that he would have been “more contemplative” about his vote if they had not been so “in your face” with the letter.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), another battleground Republican, added that he was previously a “no” vote but “the White House gives us no other option.”

The White House has defended its position, arguing it has cooperated with a tranche of Republicans’ document and interview requests. But Biden administration officials also argued, in a recent letter to GOP investigators last month, that the inquiry lacked legitimacy without a vote — basing that on a Justice Department memo from the Trump years. At the time, the memo was pushing back on then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) decision to launch an impeachment inquiry against Trump without initially holding a vote for it.

It wasn’t just Biden-district Republicans who were on the fence as recently as last week.

Rep. David Joyce (R-Ohio), who hadn’t made a decision as of last week, said Tuesday that he would support formalizing the inquiry and that it would allow Republicans to make “intelligent decisions” about any next steps.

“This allows the process to continue to move forward — allows evidence one way or another,” he said.

And the White House’s stance appears to have frustrated even the House Republican viewed as most likely to oppose the inquiry resolution: Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.).

“It’s nonsense. It’s not a valid reason,” he said on Tuesday about the White House letter, while adding that he is still a “lean no” in terms of formalizing the probe.

“So on one hand I’m frustrated,” added the retiring Colorado gadfly. “But on the other hand I still don’t see evidence that links Joe Biden to Hunter Biden.”