Category: fox-news/us/congress

Democrats block effort to impeach DHS Secretary Mayorkas with Republican support

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

House Democrats, with the help of a small group of Republicans, on Monday successfully blocked an effort led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., to impeach Homeland Security Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas in a straight up or down vote.

The final vote tally was 209-201, with eight Republicans joining all Democrats in support of the latter party's motion to stop that floor vote, and instead refer the impeachment resolution introduced by Greene to the House Homeland Security Committee. Twenty-four members — 12 Democrats and 12 Republicans — did not vote on the measure.

The eight Republicans who joined Democrats included Reps. Ken Buck, R-Colo., Darrell Issa, R-Calif., Tom McClintock, R-Calif., Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., John Duarte, R-Calif., Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., Cliff Bentz, R-Ore., and Mike Turner, R-Ohio. 

WH DISMISSES REPORTER ASKING IF BIDEN 'EMBARRASSED' ABOUT LIBERAL CITY'S ‘TOTAL MAKEOVER’ BEFORE XI VISIT

Greene introduced the resolution to impeach Mayorkas on Thursday, which would have forced a vote on impeachment without a hearing or a committee markup. If voted on and passed, it would have sent his impeachment straight to the Senate for trial.

The Department of Homeland Security responded to the vote with a statement accusing Congress of "wasting time," and calling on it to "do its job by funding the government, reforming our broken immigration system, reauthorizing vital tools for DHS, and passing the Administration’s supplemental request to properly resource the Department’s critical work to stop fentanyl and further secure our borders."

"Secretary Mayorkas continues to be laser-focused on the safety and security of our nation. This baseless attack is completely without merit and a harmful distraction from our critical national security priorities," the statement read.

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE'S CLAIM BIDEN ‘HAS DONE EVERYTHING’ TO FIX BORDER CRISIS MET WITH MOCKERY: ‘SPEAKS VOLUMES’

Mayorkas has faced increased calls for his impeachment over the past year concerning his handling of the border crisis. At the same time, Republican lawmakers have repeatedly raised concerns about the risk to national security and public safety posed by the numbers of illegal immigrants evading overwhelmed Border Patrol agents amid the crisis.

Under Mayorkas, migrant encounters at the southern border hit an all-time record in September with a massive 260,000 encounters as border officials continue struggling to cope with the large influx, sources told Fox News Digital.

Last month, Mayorkas confirmed that over 600,000 illegal immigrants evaded law enforcement at the southern border during fiscal year 2023.

Fox News' Adam Shaw and Tyler Olson contributed to this report.

House Speaker Johnson facing first true challenge since climbing leadership ladder

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

You can put lipstick on a pig, but…

If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck…

What’s in a name? That which we would call a rose…

Don’t spit on cupcakes and call it frosting…

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., faces his first true test this week. The newly elected House speaker is offering something he’s characterized in recent weeks as a "laddered CR." Yeah, not a lot of people in Washington knew what that was either.

Johnson engineered a plan to fund the entire government on a temporary basis through Jan. 19, which is when Congress is expected to pass one batch of spending bills to avert a shutdown. The remainders would have until Feb. 2.

The "laddered" concept stems from dealing with one "rung" of bills by one date and the next "rung" of bills later on. Laddered. Get it?

WHEN IT COMES TO THE NEXT SHUTDOWN FIGHT IN CONGRESS, SILENCE IS GOLDEN

Call it what you will, but what Johnson proposed is a "CR" – short for "Continuing Resolution." An interim spending bill which simply renews all funding at current levels to avoid a government shutdown early Saturday morning.

Ironically, this is exactly the same legislative idea that got former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., canned earlier this fall. So, what gives?

It’s rebranding. Companies change their names all the time. Firms wrap their products up in shinier, newer packages. It doesn’t affect the stuff inside. The term "CR" became toxified inside some quarters of the House Republican Conference. So, you have to alter the marketing. Moreover, Johnson reiterates that he is committed to advancing the 12 annual appropriations bills which fund the government one by one as Republicans promised.

Except for a couple of things. A CR is still a CR. There was never enough time from when Johnson clasped the gavel to advance all the spending bills through the House and merge them with the Senate to avoid a shutdown, so this was the only way out of this cul-de-sac for Johnson.

But moreover, Johnson is running into the same problems which dogged his predecessor. Republicans insist on passing their own partisan spending bills individually, but they can’t.

Republicans had to yank a Transportation/Housing spending bill off the floor last week and did the same with a Treasury/White House spending bill on Thursday.

And for the record, the latter bill met its demise after the House rejected an amendment to reduce the pay of White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre to $1 a year. That’s right. $1.

What is this? The Price is Right?

Jean-Pierre’s annual take-home pay is $188,000. Point being, Republicans burned crucial time making amendments like those pertaining to Jean-Pierre in order for debate and a vote when they couldn’t even get the overall legislation to pass.

These appropriations bills are not exactly ready for the Showcase Showdown.

THE SPEAKER’S LOBBY: THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO A POSSIBLE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

It’s far from clear whether the House can even pass Johnson’s proposal. And, because of GOP skepticism, Johnson may need to rely on Democrats to avert a government shutdown. Sound familiar?

If Republicans give Johnson a pass and approve his "laddered" CR – especially with Democratic assistance – we will have confirmed something significant about the Speaker’s debacle which consumed most of October and prompted McCarthy’s ouster: the motion to vacate the chair was never about spending bills or legislation. It was a personal vendetta against McCarthy.

But back to the task at hand: government funding expires at 11:59 p.m. ET Friday. There is not much turning radius to move a bill of any sort through the House and through the Senate. Either way, it doesn’t appear that Johnson faces some of the same opprobrium which was leveled at his predecessor, but Johnson doesn’t appear to have a Midas Touch yet, either.

Lawmakers from both sides long suggested that Johnson would enjoy a "honeymoon" after finally securing the gavel following a brutal three weeks incinerating one speaker and three speaker nominees.

"There’s a honeymoon period here. I’m not sure how long that lasts. Maybe 30 days," opined Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., late last Thursday.

HOUSE ENDS WEEK BEHIND SCHEDULE WITH DAYS UNTIL POSSIBLE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

But minutes later, House Republican leaders pulled the Treasury/White House bill from the floor because it lacked the votes to pass.

"With what’s going on over on the floor today, I think that indicates that the honeymoon might be shorter than we thought. And every time the CR expires, the speaker’s putting his head in the lion’s mouth," said Massie.

Johnson may not be able to control the CR and he also can’t control privileged resolutions offered by Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who filed a special resolution late last week to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. 

Since the resolution is "privileged," it goes to the front of the legislative line. The House will likely consider Greene’s gambit on Tuesday.

It’s possible that the GOP-led House could impeach Mayorkas with no hearings, no depositions and no markup of a resolution. This would be after Republicans brayed for months about "the regular order." Greene said it was too late for all of that.

"No more strongly worded letters. No more committee hearings. No more clips on the press. We have to do something about it," she said.

HOUSE MAY VOTE ON IMPEACHING MAYORKAS WITHOUT A MOTION TO TABLE: SOURCE

To be frank, many Republicans would rather talk about impeaching Mayorkas instead of actually impeaching Mayorkas, especially with no committee hearings or markups. 

The House just voted to table (or kill) a resolution to expel Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., because the Ethics Committee hadn’t completed a report on his conduct. Moreover, Johnson said on Fox he was concerned about "due process," but that’s cast to the wind with Greene’s measure to impeach Mayorkas.

A senior House leadership source told Fox to expect a straight up or down vote on the Mayorkas resolution. In other words, no motion to table. Of course, Democrats could move to table, but it’s unclear if they would do that. Democrats don’t want Mayorkas impeached, but they may feel it’s a victory either way.

One of two things will happen: The House votes to impeach Mayorkas. If so, he becomes only the second cabinet officer ever impeached. The last was Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876, but Democrats know that the Senate would never hold a full trial on Mayorkas. It must start the process. But the Senate can vote to dispense with the articles.

Democrats will view impeachment as a victory because Republicans wasted their time – impeaching Mayorkas – as the government runs out of money. They’ll also point to who authored the articles of impeachment: Greene.

The other scenario is if the House fails to impeach Mayorkas. It’s far from clear that the House has the votes to do so. Democrats will then point to Republicans chattering ad nauseam about impeaching Mayorkas and then stumbling. 

All talk and no action, and some Republicans have had it.

"I’m not going to be thinking a lot about every privileged resolution that Majorie (Taylor) Greene files because we’ve got real work to do," said freshman Rep. John Duarte, R-Calif., who represents a battleground district and won by 564 votes in 2022. "I’m not interested in these peripheral impeachments."

Regardless, Democrats will point to election results last week in Kentucky, Virginia and Ohio and suggest that Republicans are again focused on the wrong things.

Not everyone in the nation knows who Mike Johnson is yet, but if the government shuts down on Saturday, you can bet everyone will learn who he is.

So, you can dress things up by applying lipstick, mascara and anything else on a CR… but it’s still a CR. That’s something Republicans abhor, but Johnson has no choice when his side still can’t even pass their own spending bills.

There is one school of thought on Capitol Hill that maybe a shutdown is inevitable. Congress narrowly averted a shutdown once McCarthy put a straight, six-week CR on the floor at the last minute, so maybe McCarthy simply delayed a shutdown. McCarthy paid the price for preventing that earlier in the fall.

Johnson won’t pay an immediate price regardless of how things go. He might not get a laddered CR, but this is the challenge Johnson faces for climbing the leadership ladder.

House may vote on impeaching Mayorkas without a motion to table: source

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

A senior House Republican leadership source says the House will likely hold a vote Tuesday on impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Fox is told to expect a straight up or down vote on a privileged resolution to impeach Mayorkas, which Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., introduced Thursday morning.

The source suggested it would be unlikely a motion to table or set the measure aside is introduced. Such a vote could serve as a fig leaf to protect members who make a lot of noise about impeaching Mayorkas but may be unwilling to vote on the record.

JOSH HAWLEY CALLS OUT MAYORKAS FOR HAVING 'NO ANSWERS' ON DHS EMPLOYEE PRAISING HAMAS: 'TOTALLY INEXCUSABLE'

If that’s the case, Mayorkas could be impeached without a hearing or a committee markup.

That would automatically trigger a process that would compel the House to send articles of impeachment for Mayorkas and impeachment managers to the Senate.

That does not necessarily mean there would be a Senate trial. But the Democrat-controlled Senate would have to receive the articles of impeachment from the House.

MAYORKAS CONFIRMS OVER 600,000 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS EVADED LAW ENFORCEMENT AT SOUTHERN BORDER LAST FISCAL YEAR

Such a turn of events could be extraordinary considering how many Republicans spoke about "process." Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., prevented an effort this spring by Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., to impeach President Biden. The House extinguished the effort by dispatching the Boebert impeachment gambit of the president to committee.

McCarthy often spoke about handling impeachments "by the book." That involves depositions, hearings and a markup on the articles of impeachment themselves. None of that has happened with Mayorkas.

HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY GOP REPORT ACCUSES MAYORKAS OF CEDING BORDER CONTROL TO CARTELS

Notably, the House voted to table an effort last week to expel Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., largely because he had not received "due process." The House Ethics Committee had not finished a report on Santos nor held a public hearing. A report on Santos is due by Nov. 17. 

But many lawmakers from both sides opposed expelling Santos out of concern for due process.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., spoke out on Fox about potentially expelling Santos because of "due process."

But now it’s possible the House could impeach Mayorkas without the usual parliamentary mechanics that come with that special congressional power.

That said, it’s possible the House could reject an effort to impeach Mayorkas. That could be an embarrassment for hardline Republicans who have talked about impeaching Mayorkas for months — yet possibly stumbled when an actual impeachment resolution went to the floor.

Anti-Trump Dem claimed Maryland home as primary residence despite running for Senate in California

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff allegedly claimed a primary residence in Maryland for years despite his goal to represent Golden State residents in the Senate.

All while owning a 3,420-square-foot home in Maryland, Schiff has reportedly taken a homeowner’s tax exemption on a smaller 650-square-foot condo he owns and designates as his primary residence in Burbank, California.

By claiming his California home as his primary residence, Schiff was able to receive a $7,000 reduction in his property assessment – an estimated $70 in annual savings from property taxes, according to a CNN report. In California, each county collects a general property tax equal to 1% of the assessed value. Schiff, who announced his Senate ambition in January, did not take a similar exemption on his Maryland home.

Tax records reviewed by the outlet revealed Schiff paid his property taxes in California with a personal check featuring his Maryland address in 2017. The outlet's review of past records and comments from the lawmaker, as well as photos shared to social media in recent history, also indicated Schiff has made his Maryland home his full-time residence.

SCHIFF, PORTER URGED TO DROP OUT OF CALIFORNIA SENATE RACE BECAUSE THEY'RE WHITE IN NAME OF 'GENUINE EQUALITY'

Deed records also revealed Schiff designated his Maryland home his primary residence in 2003, the year he bought the home. Additionally, Schiff reportedly refinanced his mortgage and indicated that his Maryland home was his primary residence in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.

Los Angeles County deed records for Schiff's California condo, which was purchased in 2009 for a little under $300,000, were notarized in Maryland, the outlet highlighted.

FETTERMAN HITS NEWSOM FOR NOT HAVING 'GUTS' TO ADMIT HE'S RUNNING SHADOW CAMPAIGN AGAINST BIDEN

One page of the deed reportedly replaced "California" and "Los Angeles" with "Maryland" and "Montgomery County." The records also listed Schiff’s Maryland home as the return address.

A spokesperson for Schiff’s campaign told Fox News Digital the congressman's primary residence is in California and that he and his family made the "difficult decision" to move to the D.C. area so he could spend more time with his children while serving in Congress.

"Adam’s primary residence is Burbank, California, and will remain so when he wins the Senate seat," said Marisol Samayoa, a Schiff campaign spokesperson. 

"As Adam has discussed openly many times over the years, including in his recent New York Times best-selling book, he and Eve made the difficult decision to move their family to the D.C. area to spend more time with his children while doing his job — voting and representing the people of California's 30th Congressional District.

"Members of Congress have to decide how best to balance work and family, and the Schiffs did exactly that. Adam’s constituents appreciate how devoted he is to both the responsibilities of his job and his family."

The Schiff for Senate campaign also told Fox News Digital Schiff claimed both homes as primary residences due to "loan purposes."

"Adam’s California and Maryland addresses have been listed as primary residences for loan purposes because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property," his campaign said.

A 2010 to 2014 biography featured on Schiff's campaign website at the time made no mention of the Maryland home and indicated Schiff and his family were "settled" in Burbank. In 2020, however, Schiff refinanced his mortgage and indicated that the Maryland residence was his second home.

A family photo shared on Schiff's website in 2021, as highlighted in the report, matched the exterior of Schiff's Potomac home in Maryland. Additionally, several social media posts by Schiff in recent years suggested he still lives at his Maryland home.

In a June 2022 photo shared by Schiff on social media, the congressman posed with an "I Voted" sticker in front of his Maryland home on the day of the Democratic primary in the Los Angeles mayor’s race.

Under California law, to qualify for a homeowner’s exemption, the "dwelling must be the person’s true, fixed and permanent home and principal establishment to which he/she, whenever absent, intends to return." Certain factors used to determine if someone lives in the state include "in-state presence, vehicle registration, voter registration, bank accounts, and state income tax filings."

Several lawmakers have faced scrutiny in recent years for living in certain states and representing others at the federal level, including former Pennsylvania Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Republican.

The residency revelations surrounding Schiff, who served as the lead House impeachment manager for former President Donald Trump's first trial in the Senate, come as he prepares to take on stiff competition in the California Senate race. Democratic representatives Katie Porter and Barbara Lee of California also announced this year they would make a run for the seat.

Hunter Biden’s ex-partner Bobulinski calls on Bidens to join him for testimony after claim he lied to FBI

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

EXCLUSIVE: Hunter Biden’s ex-business associate, Tony Bobulinski, suggested he and the Biden family appear together for public testimony before Congress after lawyers for the president's son alleged Bobulinski lied to the FBI about the nature of his business relationship.

Fox News obtained a copy of a 10-page letter Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, sent to U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves, claiming Bobulinski lied to the FBI during an interview Oct. 23, 2020, about his business dealings with the president’s son.

Lowell called for Graves to investigate Bobulinski for "false" statements regarding his work. Bobulinski worked with Hunter Biden to create the joint venture SinoHawk Holdings with Chinese energy company CEFC.

An attorney for Bobulinski provided Fox News Digital a statement on behalf of his client, denying Lowell’s allegations.

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

"All of the allegations contained in Mr. Lowell’s 10-page letter to U.S. Attorney Graves are patently false, and I look forward to exposing these lies and laying out the facts in a public forum in short order," Bobulinski said in the statement. 

"The sad thing for our country is that Hunter, Jim and Joe Biden along with Abbe Lowell know they are all false and are trying to weaponize the DOJ against me.

"If Hunter Biden and the Biden family are so determined to ensure that the full truth is put before the American people, Hunter, Jim, Joe and I should all appear together before Congress, publicly and under oath," he continued. "They can name the date, time and place, and I would certainly be willing to do that for the American people."

Lowell, in the letter, claimed Bobulinski "lied about the business discussions among the partners involved" in the joint venture.

"The materials reveal the extraordinary lengths Mr. Bobulinski and other individuals were willing to go to implicate Mr. Biden or members of his family in some false and meritless allegations of wrongdoing," Lowell wrote. 

"Even in an era in which people peddle knowing lies with the goal of their falsehoods being repeated and disseminated for their political advantage, these statements by Mr. Bobulinski cannot and must not go unchecked."

Lowell also alleged Bobulinski was never in Miami in 2017 for initial discussions with Hunter Biden, CEFC chairman Ye Jianming and other associates.

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

Lowell references an infamous May 13, 2017, email that includes a breakdown of the "financial capitalization of the joint venture with CEFC."

The email, first reported by Fox News Digital in October 2020, shows a proposed equity split with references "20" for "H" and "10 held by H for the big guy?" with no further details.

Bobulinski has repeatedly said "the big guy" was Joe Biden. IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who claimed politics influenced the years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden, also said "the big guy" was known to be Joe Biden.

HUNTER BIDEN INVESTIGATORS LIMITED QUESTIONS ABOUT 'DAD,' 'BIG GUY' DESPITE FBI, IRS OBJECTIONS: WHISTLEBLOWER

Lowell, in the letter, claimed Bobulinski was "making things up" and claimed Bobulinski "has no basis in fact by which to assert that there was a reference to the ‘big guy’ or that it was not his own musing or that it was a reference to Vice President Joe Biden."

Lowell said Bobulinski’s "false statements are obviously made to greatly exaggerate Mr. Bobulinski’s short-lived business relationship" with Hunter Biden "in order to create a false narrative that Mr. Biden and Jim Biden were somehow involved in off-the-books business with CEFC Chairman Ye while Joseph Biden was still Vice President."

Lowell said Bobulinski’s "lie" is the "same false narrative that serves as the improper and illusory basis of an impeachment inquiry by House Republicans and the justification for Mr. Bobulinski’s testimony."

HUNTER DEMANDED $10M FROM CHINESE ENERGY FIRM BECAUSE 'BIDENS ARE THE BEST,' HAVE 'CONNECTIONS'

The House Oversight Committee, which is jointly leading the investigation with the House Judiciary and House Ways & Means Committees, reacted to Lowell’s request on "X," formerly Twitter, Friday afternoon.

"Hunter Biden and his legal team are once again attacking anyone who speaks out against the Bidens," the Oversight Committee wrote. "This time, their target is Tony Bobulinski, a potential witness in our investigation.

"We will not tolerate witness intimidation. The truth will come out soon enough despite the Biden team’s threatening tactics. We will give Hunter the opportunity to clear the air and speak with us soon."

Mike Johnson elected House speaker three weeks after Kevin McCarthy’s historic ouster

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The House of Representatives chose Rep. Mike Johnson to serve as speaker on Wednesday following the historic ouster of Rep. Kevin McCarthy from the role over three weeks ago.

Johnson, R-La., was elected speaker of the House during a full vote on the House floor Wednesday afternoon. The vote tally was 220 to 209. 

Johnson needed 215 votes to secure the speaker's gavel Wednesday. Typically, the threshold is 217, however, due to current absences, the threshold fell to 215.

House Republicans selected Johnson as their fourth speaker nominee late Tuesday after their past three nominees to lead the chamber dropped out of the race.

HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO HOLD 3RD INTERNAL VOTE TO FIND SPEAKER CANDIDATE 3 WEEKS AFTER MCCARTHY OUSTER

Johnson was elected House speaker after weeks of closed-door negotiating within the House Republican Conference after McCarthy, R-Calif., was removed as speaker of the House on Oct. 3 in a historic first for the chamber.

The House Republican Conference initially voted to select House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., as their nominee for speaker on a secret ballot, but he later withdrew. 

Then, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, was selected as the speaker nominee in a second conference vote, but the conference later voted to remove him after he failed three House-wide votes.

House Republicans considered a move to empower Speaker Pro-tempore Patrick McHenry that would give the interim speaker expanded power through January, but that effort also failed. 

By Tuesday, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer had been selected as the House Republican Conference's nominee for speaker, but by Tuesday afternoon, Emmer had dropped out of the race ahead of a formal floor vote. 

Emmer's drop out came shortly after a blistering attack on Truth Social from former President Trump, who called him a "globalist RINO," or, Republican In Name Only, and warned House Republicans that electing him speaker would be a "tragic mistake." 

After Emmer's drop out, Johnson, along with Reps. Byron Donalds, R-Fla.; Charles Fleischmann, R-Tenn.; Mark Green, R-Tenn., all were possible nominees. Johnson won the nomination Tuesday night. 

Trump didn't formally endorse any of the candidates in the next round, posting on his Truth Social account that he "could never go against any of these fine and very talented men, all of whom have supported me, in both mind and spirit, from the very beginning of our GREAT 2016 Victory." 

But in that post, Trump "strongly" urged House Republicans to vote for Johnson on the floor and "get it done fast." 

Later Wednesday morning, Trump said Johnson would be a "fantastic speaker," and said he is "respected by all and that’s what we need."

 "He’s popular, smart, sharp. He’s going to be fantastic. I think he’s going to be a fantastic speaker," Trump said ahead of the floor vote Tuesday. 

Johnson has been in politics since 2015 when he was elected to the state House, where he stayed until 2017.

The son of a firefighter, Johnson was elected to Congress in the 2016 election and serves on the House Judiciary and Armed Services Committees.

Johnson is currently in his second term as the vice chairman of the House Republican Conference. The Louisiana Republican previously served one term as the influential Republican Study Committee chairman.

Johnson is an ally of former President Donald Trump and defended him during the Democrat-led House impeachment hearings. He also filed an amicus brief co-signed of 100 House Republicans to support Texas litigation seeking to overturn the 2020 election results in four states: Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. He was the Chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee at the time. 

"President Trump called me this morning to let me know how much he appreciates the amicus brief we are filing on behalf of Members of Congress," Johnson posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Dec. 9, 2020. "Indeed, ‘this is the big one!’"

The lawsuit, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, tried to buy more time with the Supreme Court to allow investigations of purported voting issues to continue before the final electoral vote in the four swing states. The Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit. 

On several other issues, Johnson has aligned with the most conservative lawmakers in the caucus.

Last month, he voted against H.R. 5692, the Ukraine Security Assistance and Oversight Supplemental Appropriations Act, which passed. The bill appropriates federal dollars to assist Ukraine's military in its defense against Russia and establishes an inspector general's office to oversee aid. 

Additionally, he opposed the temporary spending measure, known as a Continuing Resolution (CR), aligning with 90 other House Republicans, at the Sept. 30 deadline. He also supported measures to bolster border security within the CR, which aimed to restrict eligibility for asylum seekers. The bill did not garner enough support to pass.

In June, Johnson voted in favor of a resolution calling for the impeachment of President Joe Biden. 

Prior to joining Congress, Johnson worked as a lawyer and was the senior spokesperson for the conservative Christian legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom.

This was the second-longest period the House has ever gone without a speaker. It lacked a speaker for two months in late 1855 and early 1856.

McCarthy’s ouster came after Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., introduced a measure against him known as a motion to vacate, accusing him of breaking promises he made to win the speaker's gavel in January.

Pelosi denies breaking promise to back McCarthy in speakership vote

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., on Friday denied that she had promised to support her fellow Californian Rep. Kevin McCarthy as he was ousted as speaker.

"Kevin McCarthy says that you essentially broke a promise to him to keep Democrats with him if there was a vote against him. Is that not true?" FOX 11 Los Angeles anchor Elex Michaelson asked Pelosi in a recent interview. 

Shaking her head, Pelosi said she had never promised to help McCarthy, R-Calif., remain as speaker.

"Not really. I had no promise to him," Pelosi told FOX 11. "Our Democratic members made that decision." 

GOP LAWMAKERS DENY REVENGE PLAY AGAINST PELOSI WITH OFFICE EVICTIONS AFTER MCCARTHY OUSTER

McCarthy lost the speaker's gavel this week after a handful of hardliners in the Republican conference led by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., forced a vote to vacate the chair. Eight Republicans and every Democrat voted together to remove McCarthy as House speaker. 

At a press conference after the vote, McCarthy blamed Democrats for his ouster, arguing they should have voted against the motion to vacate the chair for institutional reasons.

McCarthy claimed to have had a discussion with Pelosi in the days leading up to the vote and told reporters she had promised to support him.

But Pelosi said Democrats had numerous reasons to vote to oust McCarthy, citing the Republican-led impeachment inquiry into President Biden and McCarthy's support for former President Donald Trump after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. 

NANCY PELOSI EVICTED FROM HER PRIVATE OFFICE IN THE CAPITOL BY INTERIM HOUSE SPEAKER

"If you don’t respect the institution then don’t expect us to bail you out," she said.

McCarthy has since said he will not run for speaker again. On Friday, he denied reports that he will resign from Congress, saying, "I'm not resigning. I got a lot more work to do." 

McCarthy was succeeded by Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., a temporary replacement until the House votes on a permanent one next week. Among his first acts as speaker pro-tempore, McHenry evicted Pelosi from her private Capitol office in what was claimed to be an act of retaliation after McCarthy was ousted.

However, several GOP lawmakers told Fox News Digital that the evictions were not rooted in vengeance, but rather because the office is reserved for the immediately preceding speaker.

WHO IS PATRICK MCHENRY, SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE OF HOUSE FOLLOWING MCCARTHY'S OUSTER?

"This was a decision by Speaker Pelosi in getting removed because that is the office for the former speaker," Louisiana GOP Rep. Garret Graves told Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

"She's no longer the immediately preceding speaker so that was a decision she made by evicting Kevin McCarthy," Graves continued. "That was her own decision."

House Freedom Caucus chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., said the evictions were not done in revenge but that it seems to him "unfortunately that we have an unexpected recent vacancy in this with the speaker's office and that speaker that's been recently the speaker now has to have a place per the rules."

"So that [place] needs to be reoccupied or occupied by somebody different," Perry said. "That's just the that's just the flow of business here."

Fox News' Houston Keene contributed to this report.

What does McCarthy’s removal mean for Biden investigations, daily functioning of the House? Experts weigh in

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

EXCLUSIVE: Academics and experts with in-depth knowledge on how the U.S. government operates told Fox News Digital that former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's, R-Calif., removal from his post on Tuesday would likely not prevent the chamber from continuing to function, which includes the investigations into the Biden family and the impeachment inquiry against President Biden.

"There's nothing that requires committees to slow down their activities, so there's no reason why the Hunter Biden investigation or the impeachment-related investigation conducted on a joint committee basis would have to slow down," said Steven S. Smith, a professor at the Arizona State University School of Politics & Global Affairs.

Smith went on to say that "not a whole lot" would happen with the investigations in the span of a week anyway, assuming the search for a new permanent speaker to replace McCarthy and take over for Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry swiftly concludes.

TOP REPUBLICAN REP. STEVE SCALISE WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES TO REPLACE KEVIN MCCARTHY AS SPEAKER

"Of course, members are going to be distracted. So maybe some meetings are going to be called off because members are worrying about electing a speaker for the time being. If it goes longer than the end of next week, then I think there's going to be some serious issues about how they proceed," he added.

Mark Harkins and Joseph Huder, both senior fellows at The Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University. agreed with Smith.

"Today's event was historic. It was huge, but effectively it changed nothing," Huder told Fox. "The House has its rules, it's got committees, they're all empowered to do investigations, they're empowered to subpoena, to take witness testimony. The speaker, as the speaker pro tempore, has the powers of the speakership, and until he is reined in by his majority, he can use those as freely as the previous speaker."

‘SHELL SHOCKED’ KEVIN MCCARTHY WILL NOT RUN FOR HOUSE SPEAKER AGAIN FOLLOWING REMOVAL

"All of the kind of institutional mechanics at the House level operate just the same as they were. They're in place, and they're not going to change just because there's no speaker. What does change are some of the politics behind the scenes, and that's where it gets very murky about what Mr. McHenry can and cannot do," Huder added.

Harkins explained that the difference between January – when the House was at a standstill prior to McCarthy's election as speaker – and now is that the rules of the House have been established and there is somebody actually acting as speaker.

"So the committees can continue their operations. There's no change there. The only possible minor change that could happen that doesn't have to do with the Biden family investigations is that the Financial Services Committee, which Speaker Pro Tempore McHenry is the chair of, may pass off to somebody else as a chair for the interim," Harkins said. 

WHO IS PATRICK MCHENRY, SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE OF HOUSE FOLLOWING MCCARTHY'S OUSTER?

"There's nothing that needs to stop the chairs of the various committees doing investigations, whether it's Oversight or Ways and Means or Judiciary, from continuing to do their work and continuing to have public hearings. So that's the biggest difference," he added.

Clint Brown, the Heritage Foundation's vice president of government relations, agreed, but told Fox the main focus of the House would be to "quickly try to settle the question of speaker."

"They'll be focused on that, at least initially. It's a tough issue to resolve. It's going to require a lot of agreement. Failing agreement early on, the chairmen are still chairmen, the rest of the elected House leadership is still elected, including the whip and the majority leader. The majority leader schedules votes on the floor. The House can continue to function if it needs to under a speaker pro tempore," he said.

McCarthy was removed from his short-lived speakership by a narrow 216-210 vote on Tuesday, with eight Republicans joining all Democrats in voting in favor of the motion to vacate that was introduced late Monday by U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.

According to U.S. Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., the GOP conference's plan was to have a candidate forum on Tuesday then a vote on Wednesday to decide who would succeed McCarthy.

Legal experts divided over Biden impeachment case but agree on one point

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

After the first impeachment inquiry hearing launched by House Republicans against President Biden, some legal experts are split on whether the accusations leveled against the president warrant an impeachment. But they all said the evidence needs to be investigated.

Following the marathon hearing on Thursday that lasted several hours, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said that GOP lawmakers successfully outlined how the Biden family brought in "over $15 million in their foreign influence peddling, over $24 million if you account for their associate's earnings from the schemes" by leveraging access to then-Vice President Joe Biden.

"We have established in the first phase of this investigation where this money has come from: Ukraine, Romania, Russia, Kazakhstan, China, it didn't come from selling anything legitimate. It largely went unreported to the IRS. It was funneled through shell companies and third parties to hide the Biden's fingerprints," Comer said.

House Republicans are still making their case in the impeachment inquiry process, but legal experts who spoke to Fox News Digital are split on whether the evidence presented so far meets the threshold of an impeachable offense. 

FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS FLOATED SEX TRAFFICKING CHARGES AGAINST HUNTER BIDEN, DOC SHOWS

"There's smoke, but there's no fire. There's not enough to impeach, but there's enough to investigate," former Harvard professor and lawyer Alan Dershowitz told Fox New Digital in an interview. 

Dershowitz argued that because the allegations from Republicans revolve around activity from when Biden was vice president and not in his current position in the Oval Office, that precludes him from being impeached. 

"I think there's a lot of hypocrisy going on. Many of the same people who denied that Donald Trump was subject to impeachment now seem to be suggesting maybe that Biden is. And we have to have one rule for everybody. We can't have separate rules for Democrats or Republicans," said Dershowitz.

TEXTS SUGGEST BIDEN REQUESTED MEETING WITH SON'S CHINESE BUSINESS PARTNER AFTER COMPANY PAID HUNTER MILLIONS

But John Shu, a lawyer who served in both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush administrations, argued that Republicans have "plenty of evidence" to start an impeachment inquiry. 

"An impeachment inquiry is akin to a preliminary investigation or grand jury investigation. The purpose is to gather facts for later analysis and presentation, not to actually impeach anyone, and thus the legal standard to start it is lower," said Shu. 

"It is before the actual impeachment process, which is akin to a filing an indictment," he explained. "The Senate holds the impeachment trial, with House members acting as prosecutors and Chief Justice Roberts serving as the presiding judge." 

Shu said that starting an impeachment inquiry "opens the options for the House to subpoena certain people and documents and the investigations are no longer tied or limited to a specific committee and its specific oversight functions."

Which is exactly what Comer did; immediately following Thursday’s hearing, he subpoenaed the bank records of Hunter Biden, James Biden and their affiliated companies.

Shu added that what the Oversight Committee’s investigation has yielded thus far, including IRS whistleblower claims that suggest certain Justice Department individuals inappropriately intervened on behalf of President Biden during their federal probe of Hunter Biden, also warrants a congressional inquiry into the president — who, Shu says, "has been forced to backtrack from his previous claims that he’s had nothing to do with Hunter’s business activities."

DEMOCRATS SEEK TO SWITCH BIDEN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HEARING FOCUS TO TRUMP

For example, according to the whistleblowers, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf, who works for U.S. Attorney David Weiss in charge of the Hunter Biden probe, personally intervened to prevent investigators from following where the evidence was leading them, and Weiss’s office appears to have slow-walked the various Hunter Biden investigations to let the statutes of limitations run out," Shu suggests. 

Jim Trusty, a former federal prosecutor and former lawyer for President Donald Trump, concurred, saying congressional oversight and impeachment are "the only real options" for Republicans to deal with the alarming findings by the committee. 

"Biden-appointed U.S. attorneys are simply not politically suicidal — they will not open a case," Trusty told Fox News Digital. "There is no reason for Congress to think any prosecutor has an appetite for breaking ranks and pursuing this case, so oversight and impeachment (and thus, public scrutiny) are the only real options,’ he said.

In terms of the timing issue Dershowitz raised, Trusty doesn’t believe it’s an issue. 

"I don’t think it’s a particularly powerful problem here — if there are bribes and payments that essentially compromised or indebted the Bidens to these foreign actors, then the timing of those payments is pretty immaterial," Trusty said. 

"If President Biden made certain decisions on trade, on military action or weapons, on ignoring aggressive behavior by our adversaries because of the financial transactions or his fear of those transactions going public, the consequences are simply not over," he said. 

"You could also point to [the president’s] evolving story about Hunter’s dealings and his knowledge of the Biden brand being sold, particularly with the lighter definition of impeachable offenses that was established at President Trump’s expense," Trusty added. 

Former Democrat offers advice for Texas mayor under fire for ditching Dem Party to join GOP

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

EXCLUSIVE: A Democrat-turned-Republican congressman has advice for Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson, who also decided to switch parties and become a Republican last week: Follow your "heart" and your "brain."

Speaking with Fox News Digital as the four-year anniversary of his own party flip draws nearer, Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., said he appreciated that Johnson came to the "same conclusion" as he did that the Democratic Party of years past was simply "no more."

"I appreciate what he did, and, as the mayor of Dallas, he came to the same conclusion that I did. He just didn't fit into the party anymore," Van Drew said. "You know, I was just constantly arguing, voting against all the different things they wanted to do. And it climaxed with the Trump impeachment, which was baseless and false."

"What they've done to our Department of Justice, what they've done to our FBI, what the attorney general has done, what the FBI director has done, what our secretary of state did and still does, all of this is awful," he added. "[Johnson] knows that this is wrong, and he came to the right conclusion. And I'd tell him to follow his heart and his brain and he will be fine."

DALLAS DEM PARTY BLASTS 'SELF CENTERED' MAYOR'S 'VALUES' FOR SWITCHING TO GOP: 'INSULT TO THE ELECTORATE'

When asked if he had any regrets about switching parties in 2019, Van Drew gave the simplest of answers: "Not even in the slightest."

"The more I see and the more I hear, the happier I am that I have changed," he said. "I'm a conservative. There used to be room for something called a Blue Dog Democrat, a conservative Democrat. Those times are no more. I want people to know who are watching this, there is no longer really a conservative branch of the Democratic Party."

"This is not your mother's and father's or grandmother's or grandfather's Democratic Party. This is an extremely left-wing socialist party that wants to completely change our republic and completely destroy the American experience. So, I am happy that I changed," he added.

Van Drew said his strong feelings does not mean that Republicans, or anyone for that matter, are perfect, but it is a necessity to have "love of the United States of America in your heart and soul."

GOP, DEMS TEAM UP TO RIP ‘DELUSIONAL’ SINEMA OVER ‘PLAN’ TO SWIPE THEIR VOTERS IN INDEPENDENT REELECTION BID

"You have to believe in this great republic. And those are the kinds of elected officials and senators and congresspeople that we need," he said.

After news broke last week that Democrat New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez was facing a federal indictment on bribery and corruption charges, which he denies any wrongdoing, Van Drew, who represents New Jersey's 2nd Congressional District, confirmed he was "strongly considering" a run to unseat him.

Van Drew told Fox that, beyond Menendez's alleged crimes, New Jerseyans are "tired" of high taxes, Democrats interfering in the relationship between parents and children, policies that degrade law enforcement, the amplification of "woke" culture in the military, and the controversial subjects being taught to children in schools.

"This is unbelievable stuff. And New Jerseyans by and large — yes, it's a blue state, but they're hard-working, good people that pay an awful lot in taxes and are trudging through life — they're sick of it. So, it's more than just about me. It really is about the United States of America. It really is about the state of New Jersey," he said, noting that it has been more than 50 years since the state put a Republican in the Senate.

KARI LAKE BOOSTS NATIONAL PROFILE AS TOP TRUMP SURROGATE, GOP CAMPAIGNER AHEAD OF LIKELY SENATE RUN

"So, I'm going to think about it, you know, very seriously. I'm going to work my way through — it requires speaking to my closest friends. It requires speaking to my family and my advisers and other folks. I want to do this carefully and I want to make sure right now, though, I am focused on my job as South Jersey's congressman," he said.

However, Van Drew dismissed any timeline for when he might make a decision on a potential run.

"I'm going to think about it long and hard, make sure I'm doing the right thing for the country, the right thing for New Jersey and the right thing for my congressional district. I love my congressional district, so it is all very, very important to me. And I'm going to make sure that I do the right thing," he said.