Biden fuzzy on dates, fumbled details in interviews with Special Counsel Hur

Transcripts of President Biden's interviews with former Special Counsel Robert Hur show the president repeatedly told prosecutors he did not know how classified documents ended up in his home and offices. 

More than five hours of Biden's interviews were turned over to Congress by the Justice Department on Tuesday, hours before Hur is set to testify to the House Judiciary Committee on his investigation into the Democratic president's handling of classified documents. The interview transcripts show Biden was at times fuzzy about dates as he recalled decades-old stories. 

"I have no idea," Biden said when asked how classified information ended up at his Delaware home and former Penn Biden Center office in Washington, D.C. The president added that had he known the documents were there, he would have returned them to the government.

The president did acknowledge that he intentionally kept his personal diaries — which officials said contained classified information. Biden insisted they were his own property, a claim also asserted by previous presidents and vice presidents, and that he had a right to keep them.

SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT HUR TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY ON FINDINGS FROM BIDEN CLASSIFIED RECORDS PROBE

Biden said that he left it to his staff to safeguard classified information that was presented to him, often leaving papers on his desk in heaps for aides to sort through and secure.

"I never asked anybody," Biden said. He noted that many of his staff had worked with him for years, to the point where they didn't need direction from him. "It just — it just got done. I don’t know. I can’t remember who."

Hur, in his report on President Biden’s alleged improper retention of classified records, did not recommend criminal charges against Biden. 

"We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter," said the report, which was released in early February. "We would reach the same conclusion even if the Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president." 

The special counsel infamously described Biden as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."  

Hur stood by those remarks in his prepared testimony to the Judiciary Committee. He will say his report "reflects my best effort to explain why I declined to recommend charging President Biden."

BIDEN RETAINED RECORDS RELATED TO UKRAINE, CHINA; COMER DEMANDS 'UNFETTERED ACCESS' AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

"My assessment in the report about the relevance of the President’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair," Hur wrote in a copy of the remarks obtained by Fox News. "Most importantly, what I wrote is what I believe the evidence shows, and what I expect jurors would perceive and believe. I did not sanitize my explanation. Nor did I disparage the President unfairly. I explained to the Attorney General my decision and the reasons for it. That’s what I was required to do."

Confusion over the timing of the death of Biden's adult son Beau — who died May 30, 2015 — was highlighted by Hur in his report as an example of the president's memory lapses. But the transcript shows that Hur never asked Biden about his son specifically, as a visibly angry Biden had suggested in comments to reporters the day the report was released.

"How in the hell dare he raise that," Biden said of Hur. "Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself it wasn’t any of their damn business."

However, the transcript shows that Biden recalled the interview incorrectly.

SPECIAL COUNSEL CALLS BIDEN 'SYMPATHETIC, WELL-MEANING, ELDERLY MAN WITH A POOR MEMORY,' BRINGS NO CHARGES

Hur asked Biden about where he kept the things that he was "actively working on" while he was living in a rental home in Virginia immediately after leaving the vice presidency in January 2017. And in that context, it was Biden himself who brought up Beau's illness and death as he talked about a book he'd published later in 2017 about that painful time.

"What month did Beau die?" Biden wondered aloud, adding, "Oh God, May 30th." 

A White House lawyer who was present supplied the year, 2015.

"Was it 2015 he died?" Biden said.

The president went on to tell a story about how his late son had encouraged him to remain involved in public life after the Obama administration ended.

Several portions of the transcript were redacted by the Justice Department, National Security Council and State Department to hide sensitive intelligence and details of foreign affairs matters. 

Fox News Digital's Greg Norman, Brooke Singman and Fox News' Tyler Olson, as well as the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Top House Republican reverses retirement plans after urging from Trump

A top House Republican lawmaker is changing his mind about retirement after urging from former President Trump.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn., said on Thursday that he is reversing course on his decision to not run for a fourth term.

"While my strong desire was to leave Congress at the end of this year, since my announcement, I have received countless calls from constituents, colleagues, and President Trump urging me to reconsider," Green said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

"I will be running for re-election so I can be here on Day 1 next year to help President Trump end this border crisis once and for all."

TRUMP WINS THE MICHIGAN GOP PRIMARY, BRINGING HIM ONE STEP CLOSER TO SECURING REPUBLICAN NOMINATION

His announcement came shortly after Trump urged Green to reconsider in a post on his Truth Social account. The former president said he would endorse Green if he ran.

"Mark Green has had lots of options because of his political talents, and the great job he has done as a Congressman, but given the fantastic work he’s doing as Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, I hope he runs for Re-Election to the U.S. House of Representatives. If he does, he has my Complete and Total Endorsement!" Trump wrote.

In addition to running for his own re-election, Trump is throwing his influence into House and Senate races across the country with various endorsements and behind-the-scenes maneuvering.

TRUMP HOLDS LARGE DOUBLE-DIGIT LEAD OVER HALEY AHEAD OF CRUCIAL SHOWDOWN

He met recently with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, House Republicans’ campaign arm.

Their sit-down at Mar-a-Lago earlier this month primarily involved discussions about the 2024 election cycle and how to keep and expand Johnson’s razor-thin two-seat House majority.

As chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Green has played a leading role in the House’s impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. 

He told Fox News Digital last week that his role has been "challenging, rewarding, and meaningful."

USER’S MANUAL TO WHAT’S NEXT NOW THAT THE HOUSE IMPEACHED MAYORKAS

"I am unbelievably proud of and grateful for the other Republican Committee members as well as the staff of the Homeland Security Committee," Green said at the time.

"I will never forget the hard work and long hours they put in to respond to an unprecedented and self-inflicted border crisis by holding Secretary Mayorkas accountable and passing H.R. 2."

Hunter Biden faces backlash for claiming his father was not involved in business deals: ‘Perjuring himself’

Critics lambasted Hunter Biden on Wednesday after he claimed during his opening statement before the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees that he "did not involve" his father, President Biden, in his business dealings.

Hunter appeared on Capitol Hill for a closed-door deposition as part of the committees' ongoing impeachment inquiry into his father, where he accused Republicans of having no evidence to justify their investigation.

"The goalposts are moving," Republican strategist Steve Guest wrote in a post on X. "Joe Biden used to say he [had] never spoken with Hunter about his business dealings. Hunter Biden is now playing cute linguistic games."

HUNTER BIDEN TESTIFIES BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AS PART OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AGAINST HIS FATHER

"REMINDER:  E-mails, texts, photos, voicemails, visitor logs, and witness testimony have shown that Joe Biden was INVOLVED in his son Hunter’s foreign business deals," Guest later wrote in another post.

Federalist co-founder Sean Davis wrote that Hunter had "no problem perjuring himself" with the claims because he "knows Daddy's DOJ will never charge him for it," while Washington Free Beacon reporter Chuck Ross wrote that there was "plenty of evidence Hunter did involve Joe in his business."

"Joe attended meetings w/ Hunter and CEFC, and with Tony Bobulinski to discuss China business. These were strictly business meetings," he added.

HOUSE REPUBLICANS SUBPOENA DOJ MATERIALS RELATED TO SPECIAL COUNSEL HUR INTERVIEW OF JOE BIDEN

"Well if we can’t trust a crackhead, who can we trust?" another critic wrote, while Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., accused Hunter of "falsely" making the claim, and posted an image of what he described as a text message from Hunter "using his father's name to shake down a Chinese businessman for millions of dollars."

"Hunter Biden clearly used his dad's brand to conduct corrupt business overseas. Even Hunter's closest business partners have testified that Joe Biden was THE BRAND and the BIDEN LIFT. How else does the Biden family and their associates get $24 million in 5 years?" Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., added.

Despite Hunter's claims he "did not involve" his father in any of his business dealings, one of his ex-business associates testified earlier this month that in 2017 Biden met with the chairman of a Chinese energy firm that Hunter sought to create a joint business venture with.

SCATHING DETAILS REVEAL WHY BIDEN APPEARS ‘SILENT’ ON CHINA'S ROLE IN FENTANYL CRISIS: BOOK

"I don’t remember the exact time, but I remember being in Washington, D.C., and the former vice president stopped by. We were having lunch," Rob Walker told the committees, according to a transcript of his interview reviewed by Fox News Digital. He mentioned how there were several CEFC executives at the meeting also.

Additionally, records show some of Hunter's business associates visited the White House more than 90 times while Biden was serving as vice president. Those visits included former associates connected with Hunter's now-defunct investment firm Rosemont Seneca Partners.

The House Oversight Committee previously told Fox News Digital that it can "now confirm Joe Biden met with nearly every foreign national who funneled money to his son, including Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, Romanian oligarch Kenes Rakishev, Burisma’s corporate secretary Vadym Pozharsky, Jonathan Li of BHR, and CEFC Chairman Ye Jianming."

Devon Archer, another former business partner of Hunter, told House Oversight investigators last summer that Hunter used his dad as "defensive leverage" to send "the right signals" to his foreign business partners, while selling him as "the brand" that offered "capabilities and reach," as well as a "unique understanding of D.C."

Archer also described how the elder Biden was put on the phone to sell "the brand" and that he was put on speakerphone at least 20 times by Hunter during meetings, contradicting multiple claims by the elder Biden on the campaign trail and during his presidency about talking to his son about his business dealings.

During his opening statement, Hunter said his claim that he "did not involve" his father in his business dealings was an "uncontestable fact that should end the false premise of this inquiry."

The first son said House Republicans "have built your entire partisan house of cards on lies told by" past witnesses, and blasted his ex-business associates Bobulinski and Jason Galanis, who also testified as part of the impeachment inquiry, as well as the since-indicted former FBI informant Alexander Smirnov. 

Hunter went on to address the "mistakes" he made in his life, including his battle with addiction, and claimed Republicans had taken the records of his various communications with individuals over the years "out of context."

He said he hoped his testimony would "put an end to this baseless and destructive political charade." 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House and representatives of Hunter for comment.

Fox News' Brooke Singman, Jessica Chasmar and Cameron Cawthorne contributed to this report.

Comer says impeachment inquiry moving to ‘next phase,’ with Hunter Biden testifying at public hearing

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said the impeachment inquiry against President Biden will move into its "next phase," which will include Hunter Biden testifying publicly during an open hearing.

Hunter Biden appeared on Capitol Hill for his closed-door, deposition at the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees on Wednesday.

HUNTER BIDEN TESTIFIES HE 'DID NOT INVOLVE' HIS FATHER IN HIS BUSINESSES, CALLS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY 'BASELESS'

The first son testified that he "did not involve" his father in his businesses, while blasting House Republicans for having "hunted" him in a "partisan political pursuit" and impeachment inquiry against his father. He also said Republicans have no evidence against his father, the president, "because there isn't any." 

Comer, R-Ky., made a public statement Wednesday afternoon, saying that Hunter’s appearance "was a great deposition for us."

Hunter Biden, however, thought the deposition went well for him. On his way out of the hearing room Wednesday, Hunter Biden told reporters he thought the hearing went "great."

A source with direct knowledge of the deposition told Fox News Digital that Hunter Biden "first made clear in his opening statement and emphasized throughout the deposition, Joe Biden was not involved in, did not benefit from, and took no official actions to benefit any of his business ventures." 

Regarding the infamous "10 held by H for the big guy?" email, the source said Hunter told the committee that his associate who sent the message, James Gilliar, was "out of his mind for even suggesting Joe Biden get involved in their joint venture." 

"Hunter discussed his addiction at length," the source said, adding that Hunter "admitted that he was high or drunk when he sent the ‘sitting here with my father’ WhatsApp message, sent it to the wrong recipient, and is now embarrassed by the message." 

That text was sent to a business partner for Chinese energy firm CEFC.

The source said Hunter also testified that his dad "was not sitting next to him." 

But Comer said after the deposition that "it proves several bits of our evidence that we've been conducting throughout this investigation."

 Comer added that "there are also some contradictory statements that I think need further review."

"So this impeachment inquiry will now go to the next phase, which will be a public hearing," Comer said.

BIDEN MET WITH CHAIRMAN OF CHINESE ENERGY FIRM HUNTER DID BUSINESS WITH IN 2017, EX-ASSOCIATE TESTIFIES

Comer stressed that Hunter Biden and his attorney have "demanded" a public hearing following the deposition.

"Just as I said, when we said we were going to do the deposition first, we will have a public hearing next," he explained. "So I think that the public hearing hopefully will clear up some discrepancies between some of the statements that were made between some of the associates and what we heard today."

Comer said "all in all," he is "very optimistic, very excited about this deposition."

"I look forward to releasing the transcripts as soon as both sides agree to that," Comer said, hinting that the first son’s transcript of his deposition could be released to the public by the end of the week. "Hopefully that'll be within the next 2 or 3 days." 

JOE BIDEN 'ENABLED' FAMILY TO SELL ACCESS TO 'DANGEROUS ADVERSARIES,' TONY BOBULINSKI TESTIFIES

During his opening statement Wednesday, obtained by Fox News, Hunter Biden testified that he was present "to provide the Committees with the one uncontestable fact that should end the false premise of this inquiry: I did not involve my father in my business."  

"Not while I was a practicing lawyer, not in my investments or transactions domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist. Never," he stressed. "You do not have evidence to support the baseless and MAGA-motivated conspiracies about my father because there isn’t any." 

The first son said he hopes his testimony will "put an end to this baseless and destructive political charade." 

"You have wasted valuable time and resources attacking me and my family for your own political gain when you should be fixing the real problems in this country that desperately need your attention," he testified. 

FLASHBACK: GOP-LED COMMITTEES RELEASE INTERIM REPORT ON HUNTER BIDEN, BURISMA PROBE

Hunter Biden's testimony comes after his uncle, President Biden's younger brother James Biden, testified last week as part of the impeachment inquiry. James Biden testified that President Biden "has never had any involvement or any direct or indirect financial interest" in his business ventures. 

House Republicans have heard testimony from a number of the first son's former business associates, like Bobulinski, who testified before the committees earlier this month that Joe Biden was involved in the family's business ventures. He also testified that he personally met with him. 

Days before Bobulinski's testimony, another former business associate, Rob Walker, testified that Joe Biden met with the chairman of the Chinese energy firm CEFC that his brother and son did business with. 

After Walker's testimony, the House Oversight Committee said it was able to "now confirm Joe Biden met with nearly every foreign national who funneled money to his son." 

House Democrats and the White House have criticized the inquiry as baseless, but Republicans insist they have just scratched the surface of the investigation into Biden family businesses.

House Republican critical of Biden impeachment push demands his removal via 25th Amendment

FIRST ON FOX: A House Republican who has been critical of rushing to impeach President Biden is calling for his removal over questions about his mental fitness for the job.

Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., told Fox News Digital that he plans to introduce a resolution on Monday to call on Biden’s Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment of the Constitution. 

His most-cited reason was Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report on Biden’s handling of classified documents. The report did not recommend any charges for the president but repeatedly painted him as an aging leader with a poor memory.

Buck said the report "addressed what many Americans have long witnessed with their own eyes – that President Biden is no longer fit to successfully discharge the critical duties of his office."

JAMES BIDEN SAYS HIS BROTHER 'HAS NEVER HAD ANY INVOLVEMENT' OR ANY 'FINANCIAL INTEREST' IN BUSINESS VENTURES

"Numerous instances were articulated in the report, and have played out in full public view, showing President Biden’s apparent cognitive decline and lack of mental stamina," he told Fox News Digital.

"The societal challenges and security threats our country faces are innumerable and require a chief executive with both strong mental and physical faculties. The time has come for the vice president and the Cabinet to put our country first and move forward on invoking the 25th Amendment."

DEVON ARCHER: HUNTER BIDEN, BURISMA EXECS ‘CALLED DC’ TO GET UKRAINIAN PROSECUTOR FIRED

In his resolution text, Buck also cited Biden’s verbal stumbles and public gaffes as evidence of mental decline. It pointed out that Biden recently confused French President Emmanuel Macron with a predecessor who died decades prior, and that he also mixed up German leaders’ names and mistakenly referred to the president of Egypt as the president of Mexico.

Biden and his allies have vigorously denied that his mental acuity is suffering.

But Buck’s resolution is a significant addition to the growing pressure for Biden officials to address scrutiny over the president’s mental fitness. 

The Colorado Republican, who is retiring at the end of this term, is one of the few House GOP lawmakers who have publicly expressed wariness over the push to impeach Biden over allegations that he and his family’s businesses profited off of his political weight.

Buck voted along with the rest of the House GOP Conference to formalize the Biden impeachment inquiry in December, but just last week he criticized the probe’s leaders for relying on allegations made by FBI informant Alexander Smirnov, who was recently indicted for lying to the bureau.

BIDEN MET WITH CHAIRMAN OF CHINESE ENERGY FIRM HUNTER DID BUSINESS WITH IN 2017, EX-ASSOCIATE TESTIFIES

"We’ve always been looking for a link between what Hunter Biden received in terms of money and Joe Biden’s activities or Joe Biden receiving money. This clearly is not a credible link at this point," Buck said in a CNN interview.

He told the network in September, "I want to make sure we don’t ruin this institution over a tit-for-tat impeachment. If the evidence is there… I will absolutely vote for impeachment. I don’t see the evidence at this point."

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows the vice president and a majority of the White House Cabinet to declare the president unfit to perform his duties, transferring power to the vice president. 

The president is able to take those powers back by writing to Congress that he is able to serve. The Cabinet would then have four days to refute that, after which Congress would vote on whether the president could remain in power.

Buck is one of several Republican lawmakers who have called for the constitutional amendment to be invoked in the wake of Hur's report, including Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, as well as Reps. Mary Miller, R-Ill., and Mike Collins, R-Ga.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment on Buck's resolution.

Burning down the House: February has been an unmitigated disaster for Republicans

Ah… Watch out!

You might get what you’re after.

Cool babies.

Strange. But I’m not a stranger.

I’m an ordinary guy.

Burning down the house. —Talking Heads. "Burning Down the House." 1983

David Byrne’s hypnotic, octave plunge between the lyrics "watch" and "out" is a sonic caveat.

THE SPEAKER’S LOBBY: WANTS AND NEEDS, AND THE LOOMING IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF BIDEN'S BORDER CHIEF

Those are the very first lines of the Talking Heads ‘80s anthem "Burning Down the House." The listener is forewarned. A tumultuous musical adventure lies ahead. The pending libretto is gnarly gibberish. Words which fit together — but don’t make any sense. A near homage to "I Am the Walrus" by the Beatles.

Like Byrne’s lyrics, what’s going on these days in the U.S. House of Representatives, doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Watch out. The House is seemingly out of control right now. Political arsonists are striking matches and pouring gasoline all over the place.

Republicans hold the majority. But they’ve been burning down their own House.

"Things have not been functioning well at all and that needs to change," beseeched Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Penn.

Chaos grips the House.

That’s saying something, considering this is an institution which practically mastered dysfunction.

"We can’t get anything done," lamented Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill.

Lawmakers are exasperated.

"My Republican friends are barely hanging onto this majority by their fingernails," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the House Rules Committee.

My house…

Is out of the ordinary.

That’s right.

Don’t want to hurt nobody.

SENATE VOTED IN FAVOR OF $95 BILLION INTERNATIONAL SPENDING BILL, THERE MAY BE ANOTHER AROUND THE CORNER

House Republicans have blocked their own bills — drawn up with the blessing of GOP leaders — from hitting the House floor a staggering six times in the past eight months. The House usually requires the lawmakers approve a "rule" to allocate debate time and dictate whether amendments are in order. Only then can legislation come to the floor. 

The majority usually votes yes, greenlighting the debate. The minority customarily opposes the rule. But Republicans have torched their own rule six times. That’s a startling figure. Previous majorities only defeated two rules in the previous 23 years.

Republicans have struggled for 13 months now with their narrow majority. It started with the 15-round Speaker’s race in January of last year — an exercise not witnessed since 1858.

"We only had a two-vote margin at the end (of our majority)," said former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

But Pelosi could empathize with the contemporary struggles of House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.

"I don’t think people understand how hard it is," said Pelosi "Respect members on both sides of the aisle. Build consensus. Prioritize your issues. Don’t put people out on a limb on things that aren’t important."

T. S. Eliot wrote that "April is the cruelest month" in his seminal poem, "The Waste Land."

Back on Capitol Hill, Johnson, might argue with Elliot about the brutality of April.

February has been an unmitigated disaster for House Republicans. More things have gone wrong for the GOP than points scored in the NBA All-Star Game.

To wit:

Republicans torched two of their own "rules." They failed during their first attempt to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas — before impeaching him by just a solitary vote after the GOP took a mulligan. Johnson even put a bill on the floor to aid Israel — which promptly failed. That was an unforced error. Conventional wisdom is that Johnson shouldn’t have pressed on the Israel bill — especially since the defeat came moments after the failed impeachment vote. And Republicans even saw their meager majority dwindle even further. 

Former Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y. won a special election in New York to succeed expelled Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y. The GOP majority will shrink from 219 Republicans to 213 Democrats when the House swears-in Suozzi on Wednesday. That means Johnson can only lose two votes on any given roll call and still pass a measure — sans Democratic assistance.

On the morning after Suozzi’s victory, Ryan Schmelz of Fox News Radio asked Johnson how he’d "handle a narrow majority."

"Just as we do every day. We just do a lot of member discussion," replied Johnson.

It’s about the math. But how they’ve done things "every day" hasn’t provided a victory.

This is why some Republicans are taking aim at Johnson. They’ve regretted the House ditching former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. That’s why McCarthy allies are particularly infuriated at how bad things have been in the House of late.

"Whatever the cards were for McCarthy are the same cards that are being dealt to Speaker Johnson," said Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla. "All it did was take a crowbar to it and make it worse."

Some Republicans criticized the leadership for indecision and making late play calls.

"They’ve got to start thinking strategically over the long-term. Not just what’s in front of us," said Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla.

Some lawmakers are certainly making long-term strategic decisions. They’re getting out.

So far, five committee chairs have announced their retirements: Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Kay Granger, R-Tex., Energy and Commerce Committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., special China committee Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wisc., Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, R-N.C. and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn.

Green said he wouldn’t seek re-election shortly after the House impeached Mayorkas. Green will serve as the lead impeachment manager (or prosecutor) as the House presents its case to the Senate. Green saw that as an opportunity to go out on top.

"My point being, you go out for the win, right? And I’ve accomplished what I wanted to do," said Green.

A recent poll by Monmouth University found that only 17 percent of people surveyed approve of the job Congress is doing. But not everyone believes political paralysis is bad.

"Let me just tell you something about the people I represent," said Rep. Chip Roy, R-Tex. "They don't want this body to keep passing more laws and spending more money for the sake of it."

This is the "burning down the House" problem which bedevils lawmakers. Especially as two government funding deadlines loom.

We talked about February and April earlier. So expect March to enter like a lion.

As David Byrne sang, some conservatives are "fighting fire with fire." And they’re not getting what they’re after, either.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

So not only burning down the House. But perhaps shutting down the government, too.

The Speaker’s Lobby: Wants and needs, and the looming impeachment trial of Biden’s border chief

There is a major difference between what we want – and what we need.

This is a staple of the human condition.

But especially politics

Lawmakers and politicians often make various demands of the president, Congressional leaders, the public and even the press corps. 

REPUBLICANS BLOCK THEIR OWN BILLS FROM THE FLOOR

But in politics – much like life – there is a big difference between what political figures want and what they need

Take for instance the recent process to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas

House conservatives frankly needed to impeach Mayorkas for political purposes. This may be especially important now for the GOP since their efforts to impeach President Biden were long sliding sideways. The arrest of FBI informant Alexander Smirnov further undercut the Republicans’ inquiry into the President, Hunter Biden and his family.  

House Republicans promised their base a political scalp during the 2022 midterm elections. Even last summer, Republicans couldn’t agree on who they wanted to impeach – be it the president, Mayorkas, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Washington, DC U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves, Attorney General Merrick Garland or Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.

"All of ‘em," replied Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., when I asked last summer who House Republicans endeavored to impeach.

The encompassing group have been who some Republicans wanted to impeach. But, politically, the GOP needed to impeach someone because of campaign promises. 

So, Mayorkas emerged as the "winner" of the GOP’s impeachment sweepstakes. Mayorkas is the surrogate Republicans are targeting for what they perceive as the myriad of administration’s ills, starting with the border crisis. A Senate trial for Mayorkas hits next week.

And we’re back to wants and needs.

REP MIKE TURNER FACES 'BLOWBACK' FOR SOUNDING THE ALARM OVER RUSSIA THREAT

Most Senate Republicans want a robust trial. A lengthy, bona fide trial presents GOPers with a stage to highlight what they believe are misdeeds by the White House and its handling of the border. Some conservatives have warned Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., about short-circuiting an impeachment trial. They wrote to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., demanding that the Senate "fully engage our Constitutional duty to hold a trial." They’ve also wanted U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts to preside over an impeachment tribunal. However, the Senate’s impeachment rules do not require the participation of the chief justice for anyone besides the president and vice president. And notably, former Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., even presided over the second impeachment trial of former President Trump in 2021. 

Do Republicans need a full-fledged Senate trial? Probably not. Did they need to place demands on Schumer and McConnell? Yes. But what Senate conservatives need the most is for their base to see them giving Schumer and McConnell the business about not conducting a lengthy Senate trial. In fact, the politics of the right might even dictate that conservative senators show outrage and disdain for an abbreviated trial. Such dismissiveness from the left plays into the conservative narrative that Democrats aren’t taking the trial seriously, and, vis-à-vis, the border.

Conservatives will also deploy this as what they say is another example of McConnell losing touch with the right.  

So, conservatives might achieve what they need – even if they fall short of what they want

There is another set of wants and needs emerging as the government barrels toward a potential set of government shutdowns in early March.

Some conservatives genuinely pine for a government shutdown. You can imagine why. Many would like to use that as a wedge. They argue "no government funding until the border is secure." Although no one can quite agree on what constitutes a "secure" border, let alone support a legislative plan to seal it. This is why conservatives detonated the bipartisan border package proposed a few weeks ago. Certainly many Republicans truly desire a secure border. But the politics dictate something else in conservative circles. They won’t admit it. But what conservatives may strangely need is an insecure border for political purposes. That’s how they can point to the Biden administration and portray this as a national security problem. So here, a need outweighs the want.  

But back to government funding.

Conservatives were genuinely securing some discretionary spending cuts on other spending bills. That may be what they want. But raising cane with the GOP leadership about cuts not being deep enough works better in some political circles. That’s a political need. And frankly, since Republicans have yet to force a government shutdown since they won control of the House last year, this may frankly be a GOP "need."

SENATE VOTED IN FAVOR OF $95 BILLION INTERNATIONAL SPENDING BILL, THERE MAY BE ANOTHER AROUND THE CORNER

Wants and needs are not exclusive to the Republican side of the aisle.

Democrats may not want a government shutdown. A shutdown is definitely not a Democratic "need." However, some on the left will privately tell you that a government shutdown might benefit them. Thus, this could be, in some diabolical quarters, a mild political "want."

The impeachment of Mayorkas is certainly not a Democratic "want" or "need." But Democrats guffawed when Republicans failed to impeach Mayorkas on their first try. A failed impeachment vote was definitely not a Democratic need. But Democrats basked in the schadenfreude and curated the narrative that the GOP can’t run the House. The failed impeachment vote was a Democratic "relish."

And Democrats definitely believe that Republicans overplayed their hand on impeachment. This is augmented by continued impeachment talk about President Biden – despite recent developments. Again, not a want nor need. But news like the Smirnov arrest is something Democrats welcome in small doses. 

But there are other wants and needs for Democrats, too.

Some liberals want and need to make a stand against funding for Israel because of concerns for human rights in Gaza. Again, enter politics. Progressives need to show they are standing up for Palestinians – because of political pressures emanating from the liberal base. That’s a big need for some on the left. However, the true "need" part is a little more vague for some Democrats when it comes to the complicated politics of progressives. It certainly helps some left-wing politicians to even challenge President Biden over the Middle East. That too is a need.

So do we want a pizza or need a pizza?

Do we want a Coach bag or need a Coach bag?

Air? Water? A place to sleep? Three squares a day? 

We all have wants and needs. But the things that get the most attention on Capitol Hill often land in the want category more than the need category. 

That’s why this essay will now come to an end. 

For those of you reading this, I don’t want any smart answers that you "need" me to end. 

I could go on and on. I want to. But I don’t need to. 

After all, it’s dinnertime.

I want a pizza.

Senate voted in favor of $95 billion international spending bill, there may be another around the corner

Members of the House and Senate usually like to gab.

But word of a cryptic, major national security threat against the U.S. cast a pall on Congress this week.

Loggorrheic lawmakers suddenly turned mute when they were sworn to secrecy considering the gravity of Russia potentially deploying a weapon in outer space.

"I can’t discuss this. I’m sorry," lamented Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla.

"Absolutely no comment," said Rep. Richie Torres, D-N.Y.

WARNING ABOUT 'THREAT' TO US HAS 'SOMETHING TO DO WITH OUTER SPACE': CHAD PERGRAM

"We should be concerned. It’s serious," offered. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., "That’s all I can say right now."

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., was practically verbose when he chatted up reporters about the threat.

"I’m going to be very precise and I’m not going to take questions," said Johnson.

But Johnson lent little detail into the disconcerting reports.

"Steady hands are at the wheel," said Johnson. "There’s no need for alarm."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, said the White House "confirmed that, in their view, the matter was ‘serious.’"

This consternation is cast against the backdrop of the Senate approving a $95 billion international security bill for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. In other words, if there’s a pressing threat from Russia, this could impact Ukraine.

An eye-popping 70 senators voted in favor of the bill just before daybreak Tuesday morning. Twenty-two Senate Republicans voted yes. Three senators who caucus with the Democrats voted nay.

HOUSE VOTE ON FOREIGN AID FUNDING IN LIMBO

Twenty-two GOP yeas is not quite half of the 49 member Senate Republican Conference. But that’s still a substantial showing. And 70 votes is a robust figure from the Senate. Seventy yeas would make the bill hard to ignore in the House - under other circumstances.

"I think the House will face a moment of truth. This is a historical moment," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. "You can also be sure our allies are watching, whether in NATO or East Asia, to see whether the United States surrenders, or betrays a partner." 

Democrats demanded that Johnson take up the foreign aid bill. But he immediately resisted. 

"We are not going to be forced into action by the Senate who in the latest product they sent us over does not have one word in the bill about America's border. Not one word about security," said Johnson.

Even though Johnson – and Senate Republicans – mauled a bipartisan Senate compromise for the border.

"What is he afraid of to put national security first to help our country, to push back and push back against (Russian leader Vladimir) Putin, and to make sure that our country is protected?" asked House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif.

It’s not often that House members can bypass the leadership and deposit a bill on the floor. But there is a way to do it. The gambit is called a discharge petition.

Here’s how it works:

A discharge petition requires a solid number of 218 House members to sign up to go over the head of the Speaker. The number is locked in at 218, regardless of the side of the House. The House has 435 members at full population. It’s currently at 431 members. Thus, the discharge petition provision wants at least half of the body to favor sidestepping the leadership.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee said he was "absolutely" for a discharge petition.

When asked if most Democrats would sign on, Nadler replied, "yeah, I do."

But not so fast.

Many Democrats might push to advance the foreign aid package. But there are plenty of progressives who aren’t in favor of the bill at all because of concerns for Palestinians.

RUSSIAN NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES IN SPACE COULD THREATEN INTERNATIONAL SATELLITES, US MILITARY COMMS: SOURCES

"I can’t support that bill with aid to Israel," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. "There’s also a lot of concerns about the restrictions on the aid to Gaza that the Senate put into the bill, including suspending aid to UNRWA, which is the only agency that can deliver aid in Gaza."

Moreover, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., thought it was "premature" to execute a discharge petition. He wanted the House to try to work through the issue and get it on the floor another way.

So certainly more Democrats favor of a discharge petition. But no one knows what might constitute that particular universe of votes. Therefore, a discharge petition certainly needs substantial GOP support.

A successful discharge petition will require the support of advocates for Ukraine and moderate Republicans. Someone in that wheelhouse is Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb. When asked if he was open to signing a discharge petition, Bacon replied "not now." He added he wouldn’t "lean too far forward" just yet.

The Nebraska Republican said "one or two" Democrats talked to him about signing the discharge petition. But he added a caveat.

"I'm interested in finding something we could all agree on," said Bacon.

But that’s just the start.

"I’d never sign a discharge petition when we are in the majority," said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., suggested that that signatories weren’t team players for the GOP.

"A discharge petition would be a betrayal on the part of anyone signing it," said Gaetz.

This is why there have only been two successful discharge petitions in the House in the past 22 years.

One was on the House’s version of the famous "McCain-Feingold" campaign finance law, named originally after late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., in 2002. The other was on a measure to renew the Export-Import Bank.

So, this enterprise is challenging. And while it’s an intriguing parliamentary maneuver, the odds – and history – work against discharge petitions.

The House is now out of session until February 28. The Senate is done until the week after next. Another (yes, another) deadline to avert a government shutdown looms on March 1. A bigger one is barreling down the tracks for March 7. And the Senate must wrestle with an impeachment trial for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas at the end of the month.

In short, a resolution to the international aid bill isn’t coming soon – if ever.

The threats loom – be a weapon from space for Russia. Threats at the border. Threats from China. The war in Ukraine. Instability in the Middle East.

The Senate finally acted – after a months-long circumnavigation into the border talks.

But there is no viable plan right now to pass the foreign aid package in the House.

It was long said that the Senate is where the House’s hot coffee cools.

In this case, the Senate served the House hot coffee.

And in today’s environment, it’s cooling instead in the House.

Tony Bobulinski attorney accuses Oversight Dems of ‘gaslighting,’ false smears against Hunter Biden associate

An attorney for Hunter Biden’s ex-business associate Tony Bobulinski accused House Democrats of "abusive conduct and disingenuous mischaracterizations" of his testimony on the Biden family's business dealings. 

In a letter to Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the ranking member and lead Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Bobulinski's counsel Stefan Passantino asserted that Democrats were attempting to assassinate his client's character. 

"We are watching the death throes of a political narrative that will be shattered upon the imminent public release of Mr. Bobulinski’s testimony before the House Committees on Oversight and Judiciary yesterday," Passantino wrote. 

"The facts are before Congress and will soon be before the American people. Minority assassination of Mr. Bobulinski’s character and grotesque mischaracterizations of his words will only serve to highlight the gaslighting and vilification Mr. Bobulinski has endured since he reluctantly came forward almost four years ago to share with the public the facts of his business experience with the Biden family," the letter continues. 

JOE BIDEN IS ‘THE BIG GUY,’ TONY BOBULINSKI SAID DURING ‘UNSHAKEABLE’ TESTIMONY AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

"As the public will see soon enough, Mr. Bobulinski has the facts and the receipts, and no amount of character assassination will change that."

Bobulinski testified behind closed doors for more than eight hours on Tuesday as part of the House impeachment inquiry against President Biden. He is one of the Republicans' star witnesses, having worked with Hunter Biden to create the joint-venture SinoHawk Holdings with Chinese energy company CEFC. 

Behind closed doors, sources said Bobulinski told the House Overisght and Judiciary Committees that he had "personally met" with Joe Biden in May 2017 in Los Angeles on the sidelines of the Milken Conference for somewhere between 45 minutes and an hour. 

Fox News Digital first reported on that meetings between Bobulinski and Biden in October 2020.

JOE BIDEN 'ENABLED' FAMILY TO SELL ACCESS TO 'DANGEROUS ADVERSARIES,' TONY BOBULINSKI TESTIFIES

Joe Biden, on May 3, 2017, spoke at the conference, hosting "A Conversation with the 47th Vice President of the United States Joe Biden."

Just days after the May 2, 2017, meeting came the now-infamous May 13, 2017, email, which included a discussion of "remuneration packages" for six people in a business deal with a Chinese energy firm. The email appeared to identify Biden as "Chair / Vice Chair depending on agreement with CEFC," in a reference to the now-bankrupt CEFC China Energy Co.

The email includes a note that "Hunter has some office expectations he will elaborate." A proposed equity split references "20" for "H" and "10 held by H for the big guy?" with no further details.

Bobulinski testified Tuesday that Joe Biden is "the big guy," a claim he has made since 2020. IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who claimed that politics had influenced the yearslong federal investigation into Hunter Biden, have also said "the big guy" was known to be Joe Biden.

FLASHBACK: HUNTER BIDEN BUSINESS ASSOCIATE'S TEXT MESSAGES INDICATE MEETING WITH JOE BIDEN

Bobulinski claims that Joe Biden was "the Brand" sold by Hunter Biden and other family members as part of a "foreign influence peddling operation." 

President Biden has repeatedly denied any involvement in his son Hunter's business dealings. House Democrats have rallied behind the president, with Raskin claiming that Bobulinski "offers absolutely no testimony that indicates any criminal activity by President Biden . . . or evidence that President Biden was involved in Hunter Biden's businesses."

In the letter, Passantino said Raskin's statement is "categorically false" and pushed back against other claims made by House Democrats, insisting that a soon-to-be-released transcript of Bobulinksi's testimony will prove them wrong. 

"Equally concerning are the false allegations impugning Mr. Bobulinski’s character and statements about law enforcement. Unlike those making these accusations, Mr. Bobulinski has a proud and exemplary history of serving this country in the military and his patriotism cannot be questioned," Passantino wrote.

BOBULINSKI OFFERED TO TESTIFY AT HUNTER BIDEN GRAND JURY BUT 'NEVER HEARD BACK': SOURCE

"As the transcript will show, Mr. Bobulinski did NOT accuse the FBI of lying about his voluntary statements before them in October 2020. The transcript will show that when Mr. Bobulinski was asked by the Minority about second-hand accounts of his words rather than asking him direct questions, Mr. Bobulinski simply corrected errors in the FBI’s internal 302 report about his statements.

"As Mr. Bobulinski testified yesterday, these errors could have been corrected years ago if Mr. Bobulinski had been shown the FBI’s internal summary or if ANY government agency had reached out to us at the time," the letter states.

Reached for comment, a spokesperson for House Oversight Democrats pointed to several statements from committee members questioning Bobulinski's credibility as a witness. Democrats have urged the committee to release the transcript of his testimony after Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., accused them of "witness intimidation." 

"Let’s read between the lines here: we asked questions on the very real credibility issues with your witness," Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, posted on X. "If his claims can’t stand up to the most basic scrutiny, that’s on you." 

"Hey Chairman Comer. You invited a sham witness and we asked basic questions — his lack of credibility is on you! Why not release the transcript?" posted Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif. 

President BIden's brother, Jim Biden, will be the next witness to testify to the committee as part of the impeachment inquiry on February 21. Hunter Biden is expected to appear for his deposition on February 28.

Fox News Digital's Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

2 House members from Florida missed Mayorkas’ impeachment vote over massive Palm Beach flight delays

Two U.S. House members from Florida missed the vote Tuesday that secured Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas' impeachment due to massive flight delays. 

Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., said he would vote to impeach Mayorkas, while Rep. Lois Frankel, D-Fla., fully expected to vote against impeaching the Biden Cabinet official, yet both members of Congress failed to get back to Washington, D.C., in time due to massive delays at Palm Beach International Airport. 

Mast shared a video to X from the airport "on about hour nine of waiting for a flight with a broken circuit board." 

"Hoping to get off the ground soon, but they did just call votes in the House of Representatives as they normally do at this time, and it looks like I’m going to miss the vote to impeach Mayorkas," he said. "I was there for the first one – absolutely voted to do that – but it looks like I’m going to miss this one." 

HOUSE REPUBLICAN WHO OVERSAW MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT WON'T RUN FOR RE-ELECTION

"There’s a couple other Palm Beach reps here as well. Lois Frankel is here in the airport sitting back there behind me," Mast said, showing the seating area next to the flight gate. "A few other representatives from this area that are going to miss it as well. But that is how I would be definitely doing that had I been there – there went Lois walking behind me."   

In the post itself, Mast wrote, "Not only is Secretary Mayorkas horrible at his job, he is willfully refusing to do it. Thankfully, despite mechanical failures on my flight, we still had enough votes to impeach him tonight. He has abandoned the trust of the American people, and he deserves to be impeached."

Frankel also confirmed the flight delay in a statement of her own. 

"Unfortunately, my flight from Palm Beach to Washington was severely delayed today. I waited at the airport for eight hours, which caused me, along with a Republican colleague on the same flight, to miss the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted no, as I did last week," Frankel said. "House Republicans’ vote to impeach Secretary Mayorkas despite having no evidence of wrongdoing was a shameful political stunt that does nothing to fix our broken immigration system." 

The House of Representatives voted Tuesday to impeach Mayorkas over his handling of the border crisis – by just one vote. 

The 214-213 vote historically made Mayorkas the first ever sitting U.S. Cabinet official to be impeached. It was nearly 150 years ago that President Ulysses S. Grant’s secretary of war, William Belknap, resigned before the House approved articles of impeachment against him over a kickback scheme in government contracts. The Senate acquitted Belknap that same year, 1876. 

USER’S MANUAL TO WHAT’S NEXT NOW THAT THE HOUSE IMPEACHED MAYORKAS

The charges against Mayorkas next go to the Senate for a trial, but neither Democratic nor even some Republican senators have shown interest in the matter, and it may be indefinitely shelved to a committee, according to The Associated Press. The Senate is expected to receive the articles of impeachment from the House after returning to session Feb. 26. 

It was House Republicans' second attempt to impeach Mayorkas after a vote failed last week. 

Three House Republicans who broke ranks last week over the Mayorkas impeachment – Ken Buck of Colorado, Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin and Tom McClintock of California – all did so again Tuesday. With a 219-212 majority, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., had few votes to spare. His margin got even smaller later Tuesday night when New York Democrat Thomas Suozzi won a special election to the seat once held by Republican George Santos before his expulsion from Congress.

In a dramatic development the first time around, Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, left the hospital bed where he was recovering from surgery to cast his "no" vote against Mayorkas' impeachment. 

Joining the three Republican defectors, Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, switched his vote to "no" at the last minute – a procedural move to be able to bring the resolution back to the floor. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.