Category: Adam Schiff

McCarthy feels the heat as frustrated conservatives grow more aggressive

Posted on (Updated by Mike Lillis

Six months into the new Congress, Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is increasingly bending to the demands of the conservative fringe of his GOP conference, a dynamic highlighted this week by his surprise threat to impeach U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The Speaker has, to an extent, been successful in disarming his conservative detractors through the first half of the year, winning their support in January’s race for the gavel and sidelining them more recently in adopting must-pass legislation to raise the debt ceiling.

But frustrated conservatives are getting more aggressive, threatening to tank federal funding bills and risk a government shutdown while pushing harder to force the impeachment votes GOP leaders have sought to avoid. 

The dynamics reflect the bald political reality of governing with a tiny and restive House majority, one in which the conservative distrust of the Speaker runs deep and GOP leaders have little room for defections when their legislative priorities come to the floor. 

The result has been that McCarthy is compelled, more and more, to act on the demands of the small but pugnacious group of conservative firebrands who have threatened his Speakership from the first days of January and are vowing to exert their leverage to obtain their legislative objectives.

“I am maybe not on his Christmas card list,” said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), former head of the far-right Freedom Caucus, of his antagonistic relationship with the Speaker.

McCarthy has gradually responded to the conservative demands simply by conceding to them. 

In recent weeks, the Speaker has catered to his right flank by targeting next year’s spending at levels below those outlined in the bipartisan debt limit deal. He’s endorsed a resolution to censure Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) after an initial vote splintered the GOP. He’s swallowed a vote to impeach President Biden — even if only to punt the issue to committee.

He’s championed resolutions to expunge the two impeachments of former President Trump. And most recently, he’s adopted a harder line on the ouster of cabinet officials, like Garland.

“If the allegations from the IRS whistleblowers are proven true through House Republican investigations, we will begin an impeachment inquiry on Biden's Attorney General, Merrick Garland,” McCarthy tweeted Tuesday. 

That position is a major shift for the Speaker, who has been cold to the idea of rushing into impeachments this year, warning against politicizing the process and arguing for the conclusion of congressional investigations before launching any impeachment proceedings. But impatient conservatives have other ideas. 

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) last week forced the vote on Biden’s impeachment and is threatening to bring it to the floor again if the committees of jurisdiction don’t act quickly enough for her liking. 

“I would hope that it would be this year — and very soon,” Boebert said as Congress left Washington last week for a long July Fourth recess.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has introduced impeachment articles targeting at least four administration officials, including Biden and Garland, and is warning she’ll use special procedures to fast-track those bills to the floor. 

And Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said this week Garland might be just the start.

“It’s hard to keep up with it all,” Roy told WMAL radio on Monday. 

“We gotta look into [Alejandro] Mayorkas,” he continued, referring to the Homeland Security secretary. “We gotta look into Biden himself. We gotta look into Hunter Biden. … The American people deserve an administration that is not above the law and lawless.”

Even more pressing than impeachment has been the internal GOP battle over deficit spending. McCarthy, as one of the many concessions to his conservative critics in January, vowed a push to cut next year’s spending back to last year’s levels — a reduction of roughly $120 billion below the spending caps agreed upon in the debt ceiling deal.

McCarthy, backed by Appropriations Chairwoman Kay Granger (R-Texas), is vowing to make good on that promise, targeting 2024 spending at 2022 levels. But the conservatives are skeptical, accusing the Speaker of using budget “gimmicks,” known as rescissions, to claim savings that won’t materialize. 

“One place I’m pretty firmly planted is, we had an agreement on fiscal year 2022 discretionary spending levels as a fundamental component of the Speaker’s contest and the agreement that resolved that. I believe that needs to be honored,” said Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.). 

“I don’t know how, precisely, we’ll get it resolved.” 

Opposition from only a handful of conservatives would be enough to block the Republicans’ appropriations bills, raising the likelihood McCarthy will have to slash 2024 spending even further — at least in the initial round of House bills — and heightening the odds of a government shutdown later in the year, when Senate Democrats inevitably will oppose those cuts. 

In the eyes of Democrats, McCarthy has become captive to a small conservative fringe for the sake of retaining his grip on power. 

“The Speaker is catering to an extreme element in his caucus, and I don’t even think the majority of his caucus agrees with that position,” Rep. Annie Kuster (D-N.H.), head of the New Democrat Coalition, told reporters last week. 

Democrats are not the only critics. The conservatives’ threat to oppose their party’s spending bills is also frustrating more moderate Republicans and leadership allies, who say the hard-liners are ignoring the political reality of a divided government. 

“When it’s all said and done, you're gonna end up with the debt ceiling agreement,” said centrist Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). “Because the Senate’s not gonna go more conservative, and we’re not gonna let them spend more.”

Complicating McCarthy’s balancing act has been the candidacy of Trump, who remains the overwhelming favorite to win the GOP presidential nomination despite a long trail of legal and ethical troubles, including recent indictments over his handling of classified documents. 

In an interview with CNBC on Tuesday morning, McCarthy, who has not endorsed a 2024 candidate, raised the question of whether Trump is the strongest Republican contender to challenge Biden next year. The remarks reportedly sparked an outcry, forcing McCarthy to shift gears and hail the former president’s recent poll ratings. 

“Just look at the numbers this morning,” McCarthy told Breitbart News several hours later. “Trump is stronger today than he was in 2016.”

Mychael Schnell contributed.

Don’t Believe the Hype: McCarthy Totally Dodged Questions About Holding Russiagaters Accountable

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy threw conservative media outlets into disarray on Tuesday, with many suggesting Representative Adam Schiff should be removed from Congress.

McCarthy’s comments came in response to a reporter asking what accountability looks like following the release of the Durham Report.

Durham’s report, details of which were released earlier this week, found that the FBI did not have enough “factual evidence” to investigate allegations of Trump-Russia collusion and revealed that they and the Department of Justice “failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law.”

“You have pledged, if the GOP takes the majority in the House, that you would investigate the findings of the Durham investigation. Now that the report has been released, what does accountability look like?” a reporter asked.

McCarthy replied that House Republicans are looking to have Durham testify “so we can look at it more” and made the following comments about Democrat Adam Schiff:

“You remember when he told the American people he had proof? Remember when he told him he didn’t know the whistleblower and what he put America through and openly lied to us? And now it’s proven in this as well,” he continued.

“It raises a lot of questions about his character, his standing inside of Congress, or whether he should even be in Congress.”

RELATED: GOP Sen. Hawley Demands Prosecution of Democrats, Hillary Clinton After Durham Report Reveals FBI Used False Intelligence to Launch Trump-Russia Probe

Will McCarthy Kick Schiff Out of Congress?

Apologies for being a Debbie Downer here, but does anyone in their right mind think Kevin McCarthy has the intestinal fortitude to expel Adam Schiff from Congress? Or that he could whip up the two-thirds necessary to do so?

Even in the above video clip alone, there is some hedging.

Why does anybody have to “look at it more” with Durham’s testimony as McCarthy states, even as the report itself has “proven” Schiff  “openly lied”?

The report has been released to the public. His lies have been on record for years. His leaks have been readily transparent during that time. We’ve all seen it. It is “proven,” as McCarthy states.

Representative Schiff (D-CA) had repeatedly stated for years through friendly media outlets that there was “direct evidence” of collusion.

“I think there is direct evidence in the emails from the Russians through their intermediary offering dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of what is described in writing as the Russian government effort to help elect Donald Trump,” Schiff said during a CBS interview in March of 2019.

Direct evidence. He knew there was no such thing but he fed it to the media regardless.

Schiff would also claim that he had “more than circumstantial evidence” of collusion. He still hasn’t shown that alleged evidence.

Back in 2020, The Political Insider reported on transcripts of the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia probe showing Obama officials testifying time and again that they had no evidence of collusion.

Now, according to Durham, “The FBI had no information in its holding indicating that any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with any Russian intelligence officials.”

But don’t you worry, the Speaker of the House and his fellow Republicans are going to “look at it more.”

And to show he’s super-serious about holding Schiff accountable, McCarthy has issued a strongly worded … tweet. A tweet showing a letter from the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government inviting Durham to testify next week.

“If you’re concerned about threats to our democracy, you are right to be angry over the coordinated campaign to lie to the American public for years about Russia collusion—peddled at the highest levels of government, from Adam Schiff to the DOJ—to try to influence an election,” McCarthy wrote.

“This is why Republicans created a @Weaponization Committee—to get to the bottom of this abuse of power and bring accountability.”

RELATED: Transcripts Show Obama Officials Admitting Time After Time They Had No Evidence Of Russia Collusion

If You Can Dodge a Wrench, You Can Dodge Accountability

It would appear Kevin McCarthy’s big plan to deal with one of the biggest peddlers of Russian collusion misinformation – misinformation that would dog President Trump for years and undermine the entirety of his administration – is to have Durham testify about his already published report, hold committee hearings, tweet about them, and of course, “look at it more.”

Willing to bet he’ll even send out some fundraising emails. That’ll put Schiff in his place.

In an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo, McCarthy continued to dodge on what accountability looks like.

“Will there be accountability here?” she asked.

“There has to be,” McCarthy replied, but failing to note what form that would take.

“Maria, it’s not just me who knew. You knew it. And you got criticized for speaking the truth. And that’s what’s wrong. Is CNN talking about this? Is the White House talking about this?”

Why would they talk about it? They know Republicans will kick the can down the road with letters and hearings but with ultimately nobody being held accountable for their actions.

“Why is this individual still in Congress?” McCarthy asked, seemingly unaware that he, as Speaker of the House, is obviously the most powerful person in a position to do something about it.

Do you know who might want to look into that? Somebody with the ability to call into action Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution which states “each House may … punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.”

Prove you mean what you say, Speaker McCarthy. Call a vote. Even if it fails … do something. Force the media to talk about the vote, to talk about Schiff’s lies.

Oh, and as luck would have it, Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) on Wednesday introduced a resolution to have Schiff expelled from Congress.

“The Durham Report makes clear that the Russian Collusion was a lie from day one and Schiff knowingly used his position in an attempt to divide our country,” Paulina said in a statement.

She added that Schiff “is a dishonor to the House of Representatives.”

Paulina is taking appropriate action. Will McCarthy back her up?

To his credit, the Speaker did remove Schiff from the House Intelligence Committee earlier this year for leaking classified information in order to propagate the Russia collusion hoax.

“Schiff has lied to the American public,” he succinctly stated.

Now he’s got even more proof. Perhaps we’ve moved past the ‘let’s look into it more’ phase, Mr. Speaker.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Don’t Believe the Hype: McCarthy Totally Dodged Questions About Holding Russiagaters Accountable appeared first on The Political Insider.

Schiff criticizes lagging Justice probe of Trump

Posted on (Updated by Lauren Sforza

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the Justice Department Thursday for not moving quick enough into its investigation of former President Trump regarding his attempts at overturning the the results of the 2020 election.

"I do share the concern that the Justice Department should have moved on this case — if they are going to move on it — a long time ago," he told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on "CNN This Morning."

"The Justice Department has moved very slowly," he added.

Collins asked the California Democrat whether he shared the same concerns as others who have said the New York grand jury investigation of Trump's involvement in a hush money payment "does not have the same merits" as other cases Trump is facing.

Schiff, who led Trump's first impeachment trials, said that while the Justice Department moved quickly when it came to investigating the rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the department is at least a year away from investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election.

"And for that reason, you have other prosecutions now that are going forward first, but I certainly think that the Justice Department should have pursued this with far more urgency," he said.

Schiff said that the investigation into Trump keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida is being met with urgency, but he reiterated that the "most serious" charges around Trump's involvement in Jan. 6 should have been probed by the Justice Department "a long time ago."

Trump is facing a slew of investigations since leaving office. The Manhattan grand jury could possibly indict Trump in the coming days regarding his alleged involvement in a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair.

Trump is also being investigated by the Justice Department after officials found a plethora of classified documents at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago.

Schiff criticizes lagging Justice probe of Trump

Posted on (Updated by Lauren Sforza

CORRECTION: Schiff offered the remarks Wednesday on "CNN Primetime." A previous version of this story included incorrect information.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the Justice Department Wednesday for not moving quick enough into its investigation of former President Trump regarding his attempts at overturning the results of the 2020 election.

"I do share the concern that the Justice Department should have moved on this case — if they are going to move on it — a long time ago," he told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on "CNN Primetime."

"The Justice Department has moved very slowly," he added.

Collins asked the California Democrat whether he shared the same concerns as others who have said the New York grand jury investigation of Trump's involvement in a hush money payment "does not have the same merits" as other cases Trump is facing.

Schiff, who led Trump's first impeachment trials, said that while the Justice Department moved quickly when it came to investigating the rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, the department is at least a year away from investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election.

"And for that reason, you have other prosecutions now that are going forward first, but I certainly think that the Justice Department should have pursued this with far more urgency," he said.

Schiff said that the investigation into Trump keeping classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida is being met with urgency, but he reiterated that the "most serious" charges around Trump's involvement in Jan. 6 should have been probed by the Justice Department "a long time ago."

Trump is facing a slew of investigations since leaving office. The Manhattan grand jury could possibly indict Trump in the coming days regarding his alleged involvement in a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair.

Trump is also being investigated by the Justice Department after officials found a plethora of classified documents at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago.

CNN Gives Schiff, Swalwell, and Omar an Entire Panel to Continue Their Committee Removal Whining Tour

Posted on by Rusty Weiss

CNN offered Ilhan Omar, Eric Swalwell, and Adam Schiff an entire panel segment so they could continue whining about being removed from House committees by Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

By now, you all know the background. Swalwell has engaged in a reported relationship with a Chinese spy while Schiff has been accused of leaking classified information in order to propagate the Russia collusion hoax.

As such, he has rejected a bid to keep Schiff and Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee and is seeking to do the same with Omar on the Foreign Affairs Committee due to a career’s worth of anti-Semitic comments.

CNN swooped in and offered all three a panel on “State of the Union” with host Dana Bash – not a single dissenting voice – to express their outrage for being removed from their committee assignments.

Because the press conference they held on the matter, Swalwell’s statements accusing the Speaker of trying to have them murdered, Schiff’s TikTok video, and the trio’s incessant tweeting on the perceived miscarriage of justice wasn’t enough publicity.

RELATED: Ilhan Omar Whines That Democrats Being Kicked Off Committees is a ‘Threat to National Security’

Claim They’re Being Targeted Because They’re Really Good at What They Do

All three Democrats took a swipe at McCarthy for removing or seeking to remove them from various committee assignments.

Swalwell called the Speaker’s actions “BS” and suggested he targeted them because he perceives all three to be “effective political opponent(s).”

Swalwell, aside from having an affair with a Chinese spy – allegedly – is best known for riding a camel shirtless in Qatar during the pandemic and blaming a mug for an extremely embarrassing live interview moment.

But yea, he’s effective.

Schiff suggested the whole thing was some sort of effort by McCarthy to protect former President Donald Trump and secure support from MAGA Republicans.

“The only real explanation is he needs Marjorie Taylor Greene’s vote, he needs Paul Gosar’s vote,” Schiff stated.

“He wants to retaliate for their removal from the committee, and apparently, he believes I was very effective in exposing … Donald Trump’s misconduct, and that’s what they’re trying to stop.”

RELATED: Swalwell Lashes Out After Learning McCarthy Will Remove Him, Ilhan Omar, and Adam Schiff from Committees

Schiff, Swalwell, and Omar Run Into Some Trouble Explaining Behavior That Led to Loss of Committee Assignments

Perhaps the triumvirate of weak Democrats thought an interview with CNN would go off without a hitch, but each congress member had to do some level of explaining as to the real reasons for the committee controversy.

Bash brought up Swalwell’s Chinese spy affair.

“Did you put yourself in a vulnerable position in any way, so that this alleged Chinese spy could have benefited or even learn American secrets?”

“Absolutely not,” Swalwell fired back adding that the FBI claimed, “All I did was help them, and also, I was never under any suspicion of wrongdoing.”

Bash pivoted to Schiff and pointed out he lied about not knowing who the whistleblower involved with the first Trump impeachment was.

“Ahead of the first Trump impeachment, you said the committee had not spoken to a whistle-blower,” Bash challenged. “In fact, that turned out not to be true. The Washington Post said so in their fact check.”

Schiff responded that he “should have been more clear in my answer.”

That’s an incredibly strange way of saying, ‘I lied and got caught doing so.’

The former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee also continued pushing the Russia collusion hoax, the very thing he’s accused of using classified information to help spread in an effort to take down Trump.

“To most Americans, that is collusion,” Schiff said referencing the famed Mueller report. “Now, whether it’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime of conspiracy … I have always distinguished between the two.”

Then it was Omar’s turn.

Bash brought up her history of anti-Semitic comments to which the Minnesota Democrat insisted she had no idea that suggesting pro-Israel politicians were “all about the Benjamins” and that Israel had “hypnotized” the world would be controversial.

“I might have used words at the time that I didn’t understand were trafficking in anti-semitism,” Omar asserted. “When that was brought to my attention, I apologized. I owned up to it.”

Where will the whining tour head next? Swalwell has insisted they are “not going away” and McCarthy will “regret giving all three of us more time on our hands.”

It’s clear the attention-starved Democrats will continue soaking up the media spotlight as long as they can.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post CNN Gives Schiff, Swalwell, and Omar an Entire Panel to Continue Their Committee Removal Whining Tour appeared first on The Political Insider.

Democrat says booting Schiff, Swalwell from Intel committee ‘hurts our national security’

Posted on (Updated by Olafimihan Oshin

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday that Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) removal of Democratic Reps. Eric Swalwell (Calif.) and Adam Schiff (Calif.) from the panel will hurt the county.

Himes told “MSNBC Reports” host Alex Witt that he understands why Republicans are so angry with Schiff, who led the first impeachment of former President Trump.

“That made them angry. And to appease his right wing, Kevin McCarthy sort of had to throw Adam Schiff on the fire along with Eric Swalwell,” Himes said, referring to the Speaker's decision to block the lawmakers from the Intelligence Committee.

“That hurts our national security. Between the two of them, they’ve got 20 years of intelligence oversight, and that evidently is gone now,” Himes added. “And that’s a — that makes us a less safe country.”

McCarthy formally blocked both Schiff and Swalwell from serving on the Intelligence Committee in a letter to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), writing that both lawmaker's previous actions made them unfit to have jurisdiction over and access to sensitive national security issues. 

“In order to maintain a standard worthy of this committee’s responsibilities, I am hereby rejecting the appointments of Representative Adam Schiff and Representative Eric Swalwell to serve on the Intelligence Committee,” McCarthy wrote in his letter. 

McCarthy is also seeking to block Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) from serving on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. However, unlike Intelligence, which is a select committee, McCarthy will need majority support in the House to oust Omar, and it's unclear he has the votes.

All three Democrats targeted by McCarthy appeared on Sunday shows to defend themselves.

“This is some Bakersfield BS,” Swalwell said on CNN’s “State of the Union”.

“It’s Kevin McCarthy weaponizing his ability to commit this political abuse because he perceives me, just like Mr. Schiff and Ms. Omar, as an effective political opponent,” he said.

House Intel members look for ‘reset’ after partisan era of Schiff, Nunes

Posted on (Updated by Mike Lillis

The House Intelligence Committee will get a facelift this Congress following the booting of its former chairman and the retirement of a prior ranking member — a drastic makeover that’s prompting internal hopes that the panel can move beyond the partisan battles that have practically defined it in recent years.

The committee launched the last Congress with Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) at the helm, two national — and highly polarizing — figures whose epic battles, waged predominantly over issues related to former President Trump, came to symbolize the panel’s shift from a rare bastion of bipartisan cooperation to an arena of partisan warfare. 

This year, there may be a turnaround.

Nunes retired from Congress last January to lead the Trump Media & Technology Group, the former president’s social media company. And this week, Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) blocked Schiff from sitting on the panel, accusing the former chairman of lying to the public about Trump’s ties to Russia. 

Schiff’s eviction drew howls from Democrats, who denied the charges and rushed to his defense. But amid the protests, even some Democrats acknowledged that both Schiff and Nunes had become so radioactive in the eyes of the opposing party that it became a drag on the work of the committee. 

With that in mind, committee members of both parties are hoping the roster reshuffling will turn a page on that combative era and return the panel to its historic image as a largely collaborative body. 

"We're hoping it'll be a reset, and we can get past all the infighting … and just focus on national security,” said a source familiar with the committee dynamics.

Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who was first seated on the panel in the last Congress, echoed that message, saying the new chairman, Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), is making improved relations a priority as he takes the gavel.

"That's the goal,” Gallagher said. “I think we've got really good, thoughtful members. We've got the right leadership in Turner. And we're trying to get back to that more bipartisan approach.” 

In denying committee seats to Schiff, along with Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), McCarthy claimed their exit would help move the panel in a less partisan direction — something the two Democrats and their allies deny.

“I think what McCarthy is doing is actually quite the opposite,” Schiff said.

“He's politicizing the committee. No Speaker has ever sought to interfere with who the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee should be. Certainly, [Former] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi had many differences with Devin Nunes, but she has a reverence for the work of the committee and Kevin McCarthy evidently doesn't.”

Members of both parties pointed to Nunes’s departure, at the start of last year, as the beginning of improved relations on the panel. 

“We entered a new chapter after Nunes left. It really changed with Turner, a ton. And so I suppose maybe from their side they think that something is going to change on our side without Schiff and Swalwell. Perhaps? But I really thought everything changed for the better once Nunes was gone. We were very collegial,” said one Democratic source familiar with the panel’s innerworkings.

Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), an eight-year veteran of the Intel Committee, cautioned against pinning the panel’s problems on any one person.

“I don't want to say, ‘Yeah, the committee is going to work beautifully now because those two are gone,’” he said of Schiff and Swalwell, “because that would be unfair, and it wouldn't be accurate. So I don't want to indicate that the committee didn't work, or was more political, only because of them.”

Still, Stewart also said it was “fair” to say Nunes contributed to the panel’s combative environment —  a dynamic he blamed on the charged atmosphere of the Trump years, which also featured Schiff playing lead manager of Trump’s first impeachment. 

“Devin was associated with those very contentious times just like Adam Schiff was associated with those very contentious times. I don't think it was necessarily Devin, I think it was the two leaders who had to navigate through those tough times,” he said.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), another member, agreed that the impeachment era soured the committee’s dynamic, though he contributed the deterioration largely to the Republicans’ defense of Trump.

“Whatever my own view is, obviously, the committee became enormously polarized, which is pretty unusual. When we moved on [after] Ukraine, it already started to repair itself. You know, Devin Nunes moved on,” Himes said. “Mike Turner, in my opinion, has always been a fair actor.”

Turner declined to talk this week. 

The full roster of the committee remains unclear. While Republicans have named their members — including new additions that include Reps. Dan Crenshaw (Texas), Michael Waltz (Fla.) and French Hill (Ark.) — Democrats are waiting for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) to make his accompanying selections.

“A lot will depend on that,” said Gallagher. “But I hope that Leader Jeffries looks at who we've appointed … and responds in-kind with, not just bomb-throwers, but solutions-oriented types.” 

McCarthy’s refusal to seat Schiff has created a vacuum at the top of the Democrats’ roster — a void that virtually every committee Democrat is hoping to fill. 

Pelosi (D-Calif.), had she remained the leader of the party, was set to appoint Himes to the position, according to several Democrats familiar with her plans. But others are also expressing interest, including Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.).

Jeffries, however, has given no indication either who he’ll pick or when he’ll announce it. 

As the committee comes together, members say they’re not expecting to avoid partisan fights altogether. Gallagher pointed out that the panel will have to tackle a number of prickly topics this Congress — including the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court — which are sure to lead to partisan clashes.

But those are issues-based differences, he emphasized, not collisions of personality. And Gallagher said he’s established a good rapport with some of the newer Democrats on the panel, including Reps. Jason Crow (Colo.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), who has co-sponsored legislation with Gallagher to ban TikTok in the United States.

"Those younger members and I have a really good working relationship,” Gallagher said. “We just hope to build on that."