Special Counsel David Weiss told lawmakers behind closed doors on Tuesday that he is the “decision maker” in the years-long Hunter Biden investigation, rebuffing allegations of political meddling.

Weiss had agreed to privately meet with lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee in the wake of IRS whistleblower allegations of interference into the years-long federal probe into President Joe Biden’s son. Republicans have pointed to those accusations as reason to believe the president or other officials have used the office to shield Hunter Biden from federal charges, and it’s become one prong of a sweeping House GOP impeachment inquiry.

Weiss sought to dismiss those allegations Tuesday, according to a copy of his remarks obtained by POLITICO, and told lawmakers that while he operated within federal law and Justice Department guidelines that “these processes did not interfere with my decision-making authority.”

“At no time was I blocked, or otherwise prevented from pursuing charges or taking the steps necessary in the investigation by other United States Attorneys, the Tax Division or anyone else at the Department of Justice,” Weiss said.

Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware who was already overseeing the Hunter Biden investigation, which dates back to the Trump era, was named special counsel over the summer. He reiterated during the closed-door meeting that he didn’t ask for that authority until August, when he was granted it.

Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told reporters that Weiss disclosed that he requested “special attorney” status in Spring 2022. The designation would let the attorney bring cases in other jurisdictions but without being named special counsel.

“When he was specifically asked: 'Did you ever request special attorney authority?' … Mr. Weiss’s response was: 'Yes, in the spring of 2022,'" Jordan recalled to reporters. "He requested it, he was not given that request."

But the Ohio Republican stopped short of saying that Weiss explicitly told lawmakers that he was denied special attorney status. And a person familiar with Weiss' remarks said he told the committee that “I was not denied 515 authority at any time,” referring to the special attorney statute.

Weiss had previously disclosed in a letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that he had a discussion with DOJ officials about a potential special attorney appointment and that he was “assured that I would be granted this authority if it proved necessary.”

It’s unusual for a special counsel to meet with lawmakers behind closed doors, given the federal investigation remains ongoing. Law enforcement officials generally won’t answer questions about probes that haven’t concluded, a fact that was clearly frustrating the members who were meeting with Weiss Tuesday. Republicans complained that the special counsel was evading questions while Democrats griped that the GOP-called meeting was pointless and set a precedent that could be used against future investigators.

“The entire interview process is stupid. … We’re not going to learn anything new because he can’t talk about the specific case,” said Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), advising reporters who were waiting outside the interview room to go eat lunch.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, echoed that sentiment, calling the meeting: “a waste of time.”

Weiss warned lawmakers at the outset of the closed-door interview that he would “address misunderstandings about the scope of my authority to decide where, when, and whether to bring charges in this matter,” but would not answer questions that could “jeopardize” the ongoing investigation or prosecution.

“I am in the midst of conducting an ongoing investigation and prosecution and will be limited as to what I can say at this point. I will prepare a report at the conclusion of the work by the Special Counsel’s Office and will be able to share more information at that time,” he added.

Republicans bristled at the suggestion they’d have to wait until an undetermined point in the future to get answers to questions at the heart of their investigation.

“Weiss was here incarnate but not particularly in spirit. Any time we had any question about any communication regarding the Justice Department … he would demure,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), adding that he believed Weiss had been “evasive.”

The Judiciary Committee, along with the Ways & Means Committee, has been looking for more information on an Oct. 7, 2022 meeting about the Hunter Biden investigation. An IRS whistleblower has said, both privately and in a public Oversight Committee hearing, that Weiss indicated at that meeting that he didn't have ultimate authority in the investigation — hinting that other political powers had a say in what sort of charges Hunter Biden would face.

Both Weiss and Attorney General Merrick Garland have refuted those claims, saying Weiss did have the authority to bring charges. Weiss did not shed any new light on that Oct. 7 meeting during his interview, according to lawmakers.

“All that stuff is internal deliberations. He’s not going to say anything specific about it,” said Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), describing Weiss and Republicans in the room as going “around and around.”

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) said on Wednesday he would not run for reelection after several recent breaks from his party.

Buck said on MSNBC that he has "been disappointed with our inability in Congress to deal with major issues, and I'm also disappointed that the Republican Party continues to ... rely on this lie that the 2020 election was stolen and rely on the Jan. 6 narrative and the political prisoners from Jan. 6."

The conservative Coloradan added: "If we're going to solve difficult problems, we've got to deal with some very unpleasant truths or lies and make sure we project to the public what the truth is."

Notably, Buck voted for Speaker Mike Johnson, who was a leading architect of the legal strategy behind GOP objections to certifying Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election.

Buck told POLITICO in August he planned to run for reelection during an interview in his sprawling Colorado district, despite local rumblings he would not. He was one of just two House Freedom Caucus members who voted to certify Biden's win.

In 2010, Buck came up just short in a Senate bid against now-Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.). He served as Colorado's state party chair from 2019 through 2021, and has comfortably won election to his House seat since 2015.

However, he grew less comfortable in recent years with his party's swing to the right — notably opposing the proposed elevation of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) to House speaker. A local landlord evicted him from office space following his refusal to back the Ohio conservative for the gavel.

Buck has also been critical of the Republican-led push to impeach President Joe Biden, arguing he didn't "see the evidence" to support the push in September.

He's the second House Republican — after Appropriations Chair Kay Granger (R-Texas) — to announce they would not seek reelection on Wednesday.

Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) told Republican senators that former GOP Rep. Peter Meijer will launch a Michigan Senate campaign this week, citing a conversation he had with a Meijer family member.

Young informed colleagues at a Senate GOP lunch Tuesday that he heard Meijer would jump into the race within 48 hours, according to two people in the room who were granted anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

Meijer, one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Donald Trump in 2021, lost his West Michigan seat the following year to a Trump-backed primary challenger. He announced in August that he was exploring a run for Senate but has since gone quiet.

His decision to enter the race would add to an already crowded Michigan GOP primary field — which includes another former Republican congressman.

Meijer is also an Army veteran who served in Iraq and the only first-term member who voted to oust Trump in the former president's second impeachment. That record could play well with moderate or independent voters who Democrats in Michigan will also work avidly to court.

Not to mention that, as the scion of the Meijer grocery dynasty, Meijer has ample ability to self-fund and allies who could choose to form a super PAC.

Meijer and Young declined to comment on talk of a potential Meijer candidacy.

The GOP primary field has gotten crowded in the months since Meijer first began weighing a bid. Two major candidates are now running: Rep. Mike Rogers, a one-time House Intelligence Committee chair, and former Detroit Police Chief James Craig. Still more Republicans could enter, lured by the prospect of an open-seat race to replace retiring incumbent Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.).

Democrats have largely coalesced around Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) in the race, though actor Hill Harper is running as well.

While Senate Republicans have a number of more viable targets to pick up seats this cycle — like West Virginia, Ohio or Montana — they’re still hoping to expand their map with good recruits in places like blue-leaning Michigan. That means trying to avoid messy primaries in key states, including Michigan.

John Tuttle, the vice chair of the New York Stock Exchange, bowed out of contention after considering a run on the GOP side.

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair Steve Daines has spoken warmly of Rogers, whom the committee recruited to run. In a September interview with POLITICO, Daines suggested that Meijer could struggle to win the nomination given how publicly he's crossed Trump.

“Can he win a primary and a general election? That’s always the question,” Daines said of Meijer. “Mike Rogers is best positioned to be able to do both.”

Olivia Beavers contributed.

Mike Johnson is House Republicans’ next speaker.

The fourth-term Louisianan sailed to victory with 220 votes, more than the 215 he needed to be elected speaker on the House floor. The final vote on the first ballot was 220-209.

Johnson’s win marked a stunning turnaround after more than three weeks of chaotic limbo in the House following the ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the demise of three other failed speaker candidates. He did not lose a single GOP vote from lawmakers who were present; Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) is in Israel and did not attend the balloting.

Before his election as speaker, Johnson served as vice chair of the GOP conference — but was seen by hard-line conservatives as somewhat outside the mainstream party leadership mentality that some of them faulted McCarthy for embodying. He was first elected in 2016 after practicing constitutional law for two decades.

“You know, sometimes new is better,” House Rules Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said Wednesday. “I think he starts off with trust. And he starts off with an understanding that he's going to have to move quickly and we don't have time for a lot of fun and games here.”

Johnson will lead the chamber as it faces some of the toughest challenges of this Congress, chiefly an impending government funding deadline and escalating war between Israel and Hamas. Just before the vote, Johnson said that a resolution condemning Hamas and supporting Israel would be the first item acted on during his speakership.

The new speaker has laid out an aggressive schedule to move appropriations bills to Republicans, which includes action this week on a spending bill covering energy and water-related agencies as well as three more spending bills next week. He also pitched canceling next year's August recess if all 12 spending bills are not advanced through the House by then.

He will take the gavel from Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) who served as acting speaker after the House voted to oust McCarthy from the post earlier this month.

Johnson voted against the stopgap patch to keep the government open that ended up tanking McCarthy’s speakership. But he did vote to retain McCarthy as speaker back on Oct. 3, and he has also proposed a similar short-term spending patch designed to avoid a shutdown next month.

Ahead of the vote, some Republicans accused McCarthy of trying to meddle behind the scenes to try to scuttle Johnson’s speakership chances — and potentially even launch himself back into the office.

“Kevin McCarthy did everything he could to scuttle Mike Johnson. ... But we smoked him out," said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who orchestrated McCarthy's ouster.

McCarthy has repeatedly denied that he wants to be speaker again, however, and he endorsed Johnson ahead of Wednesday’s vote.

Louisiana is now a clear winner of this Congress, claiming the top two spots in House GOP leadership: Johnson is in the speaker’s chair and Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) serves as majority leader.

"Mike is an honest broker and his word is his bond. There’s a lot of built up trust in the conference with him. People want to follow a great leader. He’s going to inspire people,” Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.) said.

Johnson, 51, was one of eight House members who served on Trump’s defense team during the former president's first impeachment trial in the Senate. He played a key role in assembling the House Republican case for objecting to certification of Trump’s 2020 loss on Jan. 6, 2021 — recruiting colleagues to support that effort and helming a legal brief seeking to overturn the 2020 election.

The elevation of Johnson marks a hard turn to the right for the House GOP. He has voted against legalizing same-sex marriage, is in favor of a national abortion ban and recently led a hearing on limiting gender-affirming care.

Jordain Carney, Daniella Diaz and Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

Senate Republicans are peeved that former President Donald Trump’s influence tanked the GOP’s latest speaker nominee, Tom Emmer.

Now, they’re hoping House Republicans will just ignore Trump’s takes on the race altogether.

“I was disappointed in it,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “As much as I like Donald Trump and I support him, I just think it's too bad that members of the House of Representatives would be influenced by it.”

“I couldn't care less what Donald Trump thinks about the speaker of the House. What I care about are the members who can vote on him and get it done,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). “They should box out the outside influences and lead.”

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who chairs Senate Republicans' campaign arm, said Trump's voice will be “very important” but that it’s up to the House to “sort this out.”

Trump spent Tuesday openly bashing Emmer on his social media platform, TRUTH Social, calling the congressman a “RINO” who “never respected the Power of a Trump endorsement.” After Emmer dropped out of the race Tuesday, Trump bragged to his allies about trouncing the short-lived speaker nominee, according to our colleagues.

But Emmer dropping out means the House GOP is back to square one. They’ll spend Tuesday evening doing yet another candidate forum, to nominate yet another speaker candidate who could — like the others — very well struggle to get to 217 votes.

All the while, government funding is on the line ahead of the Nov. 17 deadline, and aid for Israel and Ukraine is still in limbo. Even if the Senate passes anything, sending legislation to the House right now would be the equivalent of tossing a bill into a black hole.

“External forces — everybody, I’m not just talking about President Trump — ought to just let them figure it out because they’re having a lot of problems with it,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said of the House. “Any opinions are kind of unwelcome.”

Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said Trump may have been “piling on” and called it “another missed opportunity to bring some much needed stability and functionality to the House.”

While Trump still counts many allies in Congress, he has some notable foes in the Senate, where a number of more moderate Republicans have bucked him over the years. During his second impeachment trial, seven Senate Republicans crossed party lines and voted to convict him.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was the lone senator to vote to convict Trump in both impeachment trials. And while he said it’s up to House members whether or not to take cues from Trump on the speaker’s race, the senator did offer an assessment.

“He's been for some and against others,” Romney said. “And so far, he seems to be better at stopping people than electing people.”

As Jim Jordan goes for the speakership, he’s made a point to tout his track record as the lead on nearly every politically charged investigation during the Trump and Biden eras on Capitol Hill.

Since the Ohio Republican ascended to the Judiciary Committee chairmanship this year, his probes have issued 45 subpoenas, conducted or scheduled more than 80 transcribed interviews and depositions, held 48 hearings and compiled 260,107 pages of documents, according to data his team shared with POLITICO.

The numbers hint at Jordan’s main selling point: his tough stands against alleged Democratic corruption, particularly claims of politicization inside the federal government. The Ohioan has built a powerful brand on the right as a partisan warrior, one that’s helped make him the odds-on speaker favorite.

But when it comes to both the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden and claims of politicizing the government, Jordan’s House Republicans have yet to find a smoking gun — or anything close.

Not that it matters to many admiring fellow Republicans. If you doubt the power of Jordan’s reputation in his party, just listen to how Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) described the Jordan-Kevin McCarthy dynamic to us, almost exactly one year ago. Gaetz, who unleashed the former speaker’s ouster less than two weeks ago, compared McCarthy outranking Jordan to “watching Tom Brady sit on the bench, while Drew Bledsoe mismanages the offense.”

Translation, for non-football fans: It doesn’t matter to conservatives that Jordan’s pugilistic approach has yet to land any major blows in the House GOP’s nascent Biden impeachment inquiry.

What they care about is his relentless style, which has won Jordan more favor among fellow Republicans than the other top Biden investigator, Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.). Pundits and members on the right have occasionally grumbled that Comer and Jordan aren’t going fast enough with their investigations, but Comer’s more front-and-center role in the probes has exposed him to more criticism.

Jordan also has a long reputation in conservative media as an anti-Hunter Biden messenger. He helped engineer the party’s case against the first son during his stint leading the Republican response to Donald Trump’s first impeachment in 2019, when he helped drive a narrative that is now the focus of Comer’s investigation.

In the majority, Jordan has managed to achieve a profile that’s the best of both worlds. He tackles red-meat issues that the conservative base loves, often getting traction in the right-wing media (if rarely outside of that). But by ceding much of the impeachment inquiry to Comer, Jordan avoids having to demonstrate a direct link between Hunter and Joe Biden’s actions.

Instead, Jordan has conducted a sweeping, multi-pronged inquiry into so-called “weaponization” — a GOP catch-all for government politicization. That umbrella has included the FBI’s investigations into former President Donald Trump, a now infamous letter from former intelligence officials warning that a 2020 Hunter Biden story could be Russian misinformation and a deep dive into prosecutors’ current Hunter work.

Let’s be clear, though: Even grading on a curve, Jordan gets an incomplete on his Biden investigative report card so far (and if he becomes speaker, it might remain that way).

He’s raised the bar high for four years now by pushing his party to connect Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings to Joe Biden’s actions as vice president and, later, president. He was even added as a short-term intelligence committee member back in 2019 to coordinate the pushback to the first impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump.

In a letter to his colleagues earlier this year, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO, Jordan wrote that he had worked to "expose misconduct in the Executive Branch, fight the politicization of government and hold the Biden administration accountable.”

But, it bears repeating, House Republicans remain short of evidence that directly ties Joe Biden to any improper behavior his son may have engaged in while working for Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma during the Obama administration.

It's not just Kevin McCarthy — plenty of House Republicans are warning Steve Scalise that he's almost out of time to win the GOP votes he needs to be speaker.

And the longer Scalise hustles to win over his critics, the more allies of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) see a new opening for their candidate to come roaring back into contention.

Scalise used a closed-door Republican meeting Thursday to try to dispel claims he has made back-door deals to win more support. Some members described the meeting as a course correction after the Louisiana Republican won the GOP nomination for speaker, then hinted he would force his skeptics into a quick floor vote — only to backtrack from that.

But inside the room, the majority leader issued little direction to the conference. Other Republicans viewed it as another airing of grievances. (New York Rep. George Santos, who has refused to back Scalise, called it a “waste of time.”)

“This is petty. This is petty. And I’m getting fricken tired of it," said Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.), who likened the GOP's antics to the soapy TV show "House of Cards."

The longer Republicans delay taking Scalise's candidacy to the floor, the darker their already-furious mood becomes. Scalise clearly lacks the votes he'd need to win on the floor, with several Republicans predicting that he and his team will continue to work the phones and whip votes through at least early next week.

Some senior GOP lawmakers, though, have already grown inpatient and say it’s time to force their colleagues to vote.

“We may just need to bring it to the floor and have another episode, like we did with McCarthy. I don't really know if we're gonna be able to get the requisite votes right now,” a frustrated House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul told reporters amid the meeting, referring to the 15-ballot drama that elected the former speaker in January.

McCaul, no stranger to identifying global perils, then issued a blunt critique of his colleagues' failure to come together behind a speaker: “One of the biggest threats I see is in that room because we can’t unify as a conference.”

As of Thursday afternoon, the House remains frozen as tensions rise. Scalise is, so far, keeping members in Washington, signaling he could call up a speaker vote later in the day. Many Republicans, though, are skeptical he would allow a failed vote, and believe they will soon be sent home for the weekend — kicking off a second straight week without a leader.

Even Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), who had flipped to supporting Scalise one day earlier, said Thursday that she was now skeptical and would not support him on the floor.

“I need someone that can unite the conference because we're fractured,” Luna said while leaving the conference meeting.

Meanwhile, backers of the defeated Jordan have begun to talk seriously about a path forward for the Ohio Republican. They believe his pledge to give a nomination speech for Scalise and encourage allies to back the Louisianan is more due to strong-arming rather than an actual belief that his rival should be speaker.

Jordan told POLITICO that he is reiterating to colleagues and former President Donald Trump that he’s for Scalise — but he sidestepped when pressed if he would formally throw his name back in the ring, should Scalise fall short.

“Steve’s our speaker designee. I’m for him,” Jordan said.

One GOP member who is backing Jordan confirmed that the Ohio Republican is talking like a Scalise backer in private. But, this member added, “that doesn’t necessarily dictate how we will vote.”

The most important thing, this lawmaker added, is finding a candidate who can get the near-unanimous GOP support that's needed on the floor — starting to vote without that, the Republican added, would happen “at their own peril.”

At least a half-dozen of the Republicans publicly refusing to back Scalise have specifically vowed to support Jordan on the floor.

Adding to the equation is Trump's suggestion that Scalise should bow out because of his cancer diagnosis, which Luna pointed to in telling reporters why she flipped on Scalise.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), whose name is often floated as a consensus speaker pick, warned that the House GOP's failure to support the candidate who won a majority of its votes will "paralyze the country indefinitely at what's a very difficult moment.”

Cole added that the current chaos heightens the probability of an eventual House coalition government — centrist Republicans joining with Democrats.

“If people aren't very careful, they're going to open the door for a coalition speakership, which is not something that we should want to happen as Republicans,” Cole said, emphasizing he doesn’t want to be speaker.

Scalise also has more worries than just the conservative hardliners criticizing him in public. Some centrists were alarmed to hear Luna was claiming Scalise offered her closed-door concessions, including a vote on an impeachment inquiry.

“The message I heard is: no side deals, no commitment,” Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) said.

Asked how long the speaker fight might drag out, he replied: “When does government funding run out?”

(The answer: Nov. 17.)

Caitlin Emma, Anthony Adragna, Nicholas Wu and Mia McCarthy contributed.

During the House GOP's private Tuesday night forum with its two candidates for speaker, Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) asked a simple question of both Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio): Did Donald Trump win the 2020 election?

After Buck's question, which was confirmed by multiple people with knowledge of the meeting, some Republicans interpreted Scalise and Jordan's answers as equivocating on the validity of Trump's loss to President Joe Biden. One Republican who was granted anonymity to discuss the exchange said that both speaker hopefuls "tried to have it both ways."

Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) then tried to follow up on the question but also didn't get a direct answer from either Scalise or Jordan, both of whom voted against fully certifying Biden's 2020 victory.

It's a moment that reflects Trump's lingering influence on the GOP, as well as the difficulties that either Scalise or Jordan may have in winning over centrist Republicans such as the 18 who currently hold seats where Biden prevailed in 2020.

Aides to the former president — including his attorney general, Bill Barr — have affirmed that Biden was the fair winner in 2020, countering Trump's false claims that voter fraud cost him the election. The subsequent investigation by the Jan. 6 select committee uncovered further records of Trump advisers who had warned him against amplifying claims that his election loss was somehow fraudulent.

Buck, who initially posed the question, is one of only two members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who voted to fully certify Biden's victory. More than 130 House Republicans supported at least one objection to certification after the Capitol riot of Jan. 6, 2021.

Rep. Jim Jordan said he will run to be the next speaker, a move likely to prompt praise from House conservatives.

But his candidacy will likely run right into Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), who is also considering a speakership bid and has worked to court conservatives.

“I think I can unite the conservative base, and the party and the conference. That’s why I’m running," Jordan told reporters Wednesday morning.

In a letter to his Republican colleagues Wednesday morning, the House Judiciary Chair and Freedom Caucus member formally requested their support for the speaker’s gavel.

“We are at a critical crossroad in our nation's history. Now is the time for our Republican conference to come together to keep our promises to Americans. The problems we face are challenging, but they are not insurmountable. We can focus on the changes that improve the country and unite us in offering real solutions. But no matter what we do, we must do it together as a conference,” he wrote.

He did not mention McCarthy in the letter.

Jordan has worked closely with Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) on the impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden. He had also become a close ally of now-ex Speaker Kevin McCarthy in recent years.

“Jim is a friend, and I certainly think he brings a whole lot that this conference would be able to rally around, but we've got to all have a conversation and I'm not going to say who I'm supporting at this point," said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus.

"We’re going to figure this out behind closed doors as a family," he added.

The Ohio Republican was elected to Congress in 2007. He is a Trump ally within the GOP conference and one of the many chairs to have called for Congress to defund the Department of Justice over whistleblower claims that DOJ hampered the Hunter Biden investigation.

Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

House Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer is vowing the ouster of Kevin McCarthy won't impact his impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

"We're gonna continue to read emails, text messages, put together timelines, try to get people to come in," Comer (R-Ky.) told reporters late Tuesday. "We're gonna keep working like we've been working and continuing to follow the money."

Asked if he believed the committee could legally continue its work without an elected speaker, Comer replied: "I think we can."

That's not to say House Republicans are entirely on the same page. Ways and Means Chair Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.) said in a statement that McCarthy's exit "will stall and setback efforts to hold President Biden accountable for his involvement in his family’s business dealings."

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), the leader of the push for McCarthy's ouster, hammered the impeachment inquiry in floor remarks ahead of the vote: "It’s hard to make the argument that oversight is the reason to continue when it sort of looks like failure theater."