Democrats join Republicans in condemning antisemitism at Columbia University

A number of Democrats in the Senate have joined their Republican colleagues in denouncing discrimination against Jewish students at the prestigious Ivy League Columbia University, where an anti-Israel solidarity encampment persists on campus, prompting the institution to move classes online on Monday. 

"Every American has a right to protest," Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement. "But when protests shift to antisemitism, verbal abuse, intimidation, or glorification of Oct. 7 violence against Jewish people, that crosses the line."

"Campuses must remain safe for all students."

FETTERMAN HAMMERS 'A--HOLE' ANTI-ISRAEL PROTESTERS, SLAMS OWN PARTY FOR RESPONSE TO IRANIAN ATTACK: 'CRAZY'

Schumer, who represents New York City, where Columbia is located, is the first Jewish majority leader in the Senate and also the highest ranking Jewish elected official in U.S. history. 

Last week, the anti-Israel demonstration sprang up on Columbia's campus, with students camping out in tents and demanding that the university divest from all companies with ties to Israel. Since then, the protest has grown in size and presented a safety threat to Jewish students. This has mushroomed into such a concern that an Orthodox rabbi at the school advised Jewish students to leave campus because "Columbia University’s Public Safety and the NYPD cannot guarantee Jewish students’ safety."

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, another Democrat, also denounced the display of antisemitism at the university, saying she was "appalled." 

GOP PREPS ATTACKS ON VULNERABLE DEM SENATORS OVER MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT TRIAL DISMISSAL

"Threats of violence against Jewish students and the Jewish community are horrible, despicable and wholly unacceptable," she said. "Using the rhetoric of terrorists has no place in New York, where we pride ourselves on tolerance and the right of every group to practice their religion in peace."

Others who joined their party members in addressing the encampment were Sens. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., and John Fetterman, D-Penn.

"I’m outraged by the vile displays of antisemitism at Columbia University, including threats of violence," read a post on X, formerly Twitter, from Rosen, who faces a tough re-election battle in November in swing state Nevada. 

Fetterman, who has emerged as one of Israel's strongest supporters in his party, compared the demonstration to "Charlottesville for these Jewish students." Fetterman referenced the 2017 "Unite the Right" rally in Virginia that drew hundreds of white supremacists and ultimately turned violent, resulting in the death of one woman. 

"President Minouche Shafik: do your job or resign, so Columbia can find someone who will," Fetterman added. 

FETTERMAN HIGHLIGHTS NEED FOR 'SAFE, PURE, TAXED' MARIJUANA IN 4/20 PUSH TO LEGALIZE WEED

While a number of Democrats have chosen to make public statements on the events unfolding at Columbia, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., blamed the party for allowing it to happen in the first place. "The radical anti-Israel protestors have always been part of the Democratic Party’s base," he wrote on X. "Now Joe Biden is using them as an excuse to undermine Israel and appease Iran."

White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said the administration condemns "echoing the rhetoric of terrorist organizations" in the "strongest terms." 

Republicans in the Senate were quick to condemn the encampment at Columbia, and Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., even suggested, "Any student on a visa that is arrested for supporting Hamas needs to be deported immediately."

Many GOP members in the upper chamber have reinforced their support for Israel and the Jewish people frequently throughout the war between Israel and terrorist group Hamas in Gaza. Democrats have been more measured and careful with their commentary on the war and Israel as the party's divide on the issue expands, making the statements from them regarding Columbia particularly significant. 

President Biden and Democrats have faced criticism from their Republican counterparts for pulling back from Israel, a major U.S. ally in the Middle East. Biden recently warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that U.S. policy in support of the country could change depending on the actions it takes to minimize civilian casualties in Gaza.

And in the wake of Iran's recent direct attack on Israel, Republicans quickly blamed Biden and other Democrats, accusing them of emboldening Israel's adversary to undertake such an audacious attack.

Mike Johnson: The wartime Speaker battling on multiple fronts

"I regard myself as a wartime Speaker," declared House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.

Only, we’re not sure if Johnson was referring to the internecine war among Republicans over whether he should keep his job.

Many members wear pocket squares with their suits. But not Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. He walks around with a self-made, diode "debt clock" tucked into the breast pocket of his jacket, tracking the skyrocketing debt. Massie’s ascending fiscal chronometer may have read more $34 trillion dollars this week. But the only number which mattered on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning was "two." As in two House members who were ready to oust Johnson from his job: Massie and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga. 

"The motion (to remove Johnson) will get called. And then he’s going to lose more votes than (former House Speaker) Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., And I told him this in private, like two weeks ago," said Massie. 

GOP REBELS DERAIL SPEAKER JOHNSON’S BORDER BILL AMID FURY OVER FOREIGN AID

A reporter asked Massie about what that meant, not having a leader – again – for the second time in less than a year. 

"Some would say we’d be rudderless. But we have a rudder. We’re steering everything toward (Senate Majority Leader) Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.," replied Massie. "There has not been a change. I mean, if the country likes Chuck Schumer, then they should like what Speaker Johnson’s accomplished in the House." 

There’s strength in numbers – even if the numbers are low. After all, it’s about the math. It matters even more in a House which is currently split at 218 Republicans to 213 Democrats. That meager Republican majority shrivels to 217-213 after Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wisc., quits. Gallagher was supposed to leave Friday. But Fox is told that the Wisconsin Republican will at least hang around until Saturday as the House tries to approve the international aid supplemental package for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan. 

Greene beamed at the support from Massie for her effort to remove Johnson.

"It was significant," said Greene of Massie’s backing. "It also lets people know this is a lot more serious than people realized."

Greene echoed Massie, suggesting "there’ll be more" Republicans who might vote to remove Johnson "than were against Kevin McCarthy." 

Here’s the problem for Greene. She doesn’t have someone who could win a Speaker’s vote on the floor. That’s why the House burned 22 days on the calendar last October and thrashed through three nominees for Speaker before finally settling on Johnson. If the House approved a "motion to vacate the chair" (a "MTV," which removes the Speaker), there’s no telling how long it would take the get a successor this time.

"I don’t think that the threat is really real at this point, just because you don’t have an alternative," said Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., who was a top lieutenant to McCarthy. "We saw what happened last fall when this all went down. There’s not an alternative."

HOUSE TEES UP 17 BILLS RELATED TO IRAN/ISRAEL FOR THIS WEEK

Graves said a number of conservatives who were mad at Johnson "don’t think past step one. Which is why we have so many problems here right now." 

Graves asserted that the "painful scars" of the McCarthy debacle would be "a major disincentive for folks who actually pull the trigger on a motion to vacate."

There was significant blowback from conservatives after Johnson announced a four-pronged approach to grapple with the Middle East. Especially after the House plotted a course for the week of 17 bills dealing either with Israel or Iran. Johnson tailored his pitch on the foreign aid measure. He planned one bill for Israel. One for Ukraine. One for Taiwan. The final bill would include a plan to repossess Russian assets and grant some of the assistance to Ukraine as a "lease." That’s an option endorsed by former President Trump. But the sweetener to the fourth bill would be a measure to curb the use of TikTok in the U.S.

The House would then package the four bills together and send them to the Senate.

"It's got a chance of passing," said Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, Tuesday morning. But if you "MIRV" them together and pretend that they were really separate votes, but at the end of the day, it has the effect of being one vote. I mean, that's all smoke and mirrors."

Davidson characterized the TikTok provisions as "camouflage for defending America."

"‘MIRV’ them together?"

"MIRV" is a Capitol vocabulary term you’re going to hear about as the House tries to advance the four separate foreign aid bills - and then blend them into one for efficiency purposes before sending the package to the Senate.

SENATE VOTE ON MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT REACHES 'UNPRECEDENTED TERRITORY': CHAD PERGRAM

It’s pronounced "merve." A "MIRV" is a vestige of the Cold War and missile counts between the United States and Soviet Union. It stands for "Multiple Independently-Targetable Re-Entry Vehicle." Each MIRV had multiple nuclear warheads or "MIRVs" attached. This was an issue of contention between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. Was a MIRV counted as one missile or four or five? 

The idea is that the House would vote on each individual bill - then blend them together as one for the Senate. 

A parliamentary MIRV!  

Hence why conservatives are upset about the plan by Johnson. It’s four bills. Or is it one? 

Johnson defended the MIRV maneuver.

"I’m concerned that Israel might not pass through the Senate right now if it’s not included in the package," said Johnson. "If you separate them, then none of our priorities will be reflected, I’m afraid."

Conservatives have also implored Johnson to attach border security to the plan. But that might not be feasible.

"We don’t have the votes. If you put Ukraine in any package, you can’t also do the border because I lose Republican votes on that rule. My friends don’t get it," replied Johnson. 

"Are they still your friends?" asked yours truly.

"They’re all my friends," said Johnson. "I love everybody in this building." 

Johnson made his decision on Monday against taking the streamlined Senate aid bill approved in February and instead traveled his own route. Initial information about the plan was scant. 

"What are they doing over there?" asked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., of your reporter on Monday night as we both exited the Capitol. 

The "what" was the House’s approach on an international aid package. But "over there" referred to the U.S. House of Representatives, that hostile, untamed, political wilderness which lies beyond the boundaries of the Capitol Rotunda.  

The Senate isn’t exactly a peaceful place. But considering the contretemps in the House, the Senate is practically Xanadu. Especially as Republicans skirmish with one another over foreign aid, leadership and a wartime Speaker.

Johnson likely forced to get Dem help on foreign aid plan as Republicans decry lack of border measures

The foreign aid plan Speaker Johnson, R-La., unveiled on Monday night is already facing a growing red wave of opposition from his own colleagues as of Tuesday morning, making it likely he will have to seek House Democratic support to get the proposal passed.

Under Johnson’s tentative plan, aid for Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel would all be considered as separate bills. A fourth bill would combine miscellaneous national security priorities, including the House’s recently passed bill that could pave the way to a TikTok ban and the REPO Act, a bipartisan measure to liquefy seized Russian assets and send that money to Ukraine.

A lack of any border security measures, however, has prompted even reliable leadership allies to be wary of letting the bills move forward.

"I’m thinking of voting against the rule," Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital. "Unless we vote to send something to the Senate the same day that addresses the border, requires the president to take action on his executive orders. Or we can put something with the underlying legislation that would actually do a couple of things – we can stop money from going to NGOs that are transporting individuals, we can stop Homeland Security from releasing criminals into the interior."

JOHNSON TO PITCH HOUSE GOP ON ISRAEL, UKRAINE AID PLANS IN CLOSED-DOOR MEETING

While the four bills are designed to get separate House floor votes, they will first have to pass a procedural hurdle known as a rule vote, a House-wide measure that if passed will allow for debate and eventual votes on the four individual pieces. 

Rule votes traditionally fall along party lines, and with Johnson's razor-thin majority, he can only afford to lose two Republicans on any party-line vote – and it's becoming increasingly likely that he might, meaning Democrats will need to break precedent to help get the bills over the line.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., whose disagreements with Johnson have led her to threaten his leadership role, said on Tuesday morning that she would vote against the rule unless the Democrat-controlled Senate took up the House GOP's comprehensive border security bill known as H.R.2 – which Democrats have panned as a nonstarter.

"NO, I am NOT voting for the rule on Johnson’s bundle of funding bills for billions more to Ukraine and other foreign wars. When Joe Biden signs HR2 into law and Schumer holds the Mayorkas impeachment trial in the Senate, I will agree to vote for the rule only," Greene said on X. "Speaker Johnson is not holding Democrats accountable nor leading our Republican majority, he’s actually giving in to Democrats every demand. And he’s using dirty swamp tactics to push through the America Last agenda."

REPUBLICANS PRESSURE BIDEN DOJ TO PROBE ACTIVISTS CALLING FOR 'DEATH TO AMERICA'

Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, would not say how he would vote on the rule but told reporters, "The rule that was proposed last night at conference will fail."

Other critics of foreign aid similarly declined to say how they would vote but signaled they were opposed to Johnson's proposal itself.

"I think it leaves much to be desired. It doesn't have border control in it, it doesn't have any pay-fors in it," Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., told Fox News Digital. "I think those are two problems."

Other Republicans, however, argued it's a better plan than the Senate-passed $95 trillion supplemental aid package that its leaders are now pressuring Johnson to take up.

"No one wants to swallow the senate supplemental as a whole, and if we wait any longer without taking any action, that's exactly what's going to happen," Rep. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital.

HOUSE TEES UP 17 BILLS RELATED TO IRAN/ISRAEL FOR THIS WEEK

Rep. Anthony D'Esposito, R-N.Y., urged his colleagues to remember that they had already passed H.R.2 and have furiously been pushing for Democrats to take it up. He also told Fox News Digital that there were "conversations" about including border provisions before the text is released.

"I think we're in a critical time that, obviously, our allies need our support more than ever, and I hope that there's a way that we could include more border security into these packages," D'Esposito said. "But I think we need to remind ourselves that we've as House Republicans done our job. We sent a comprehensive border bill over to the Senate. They have failed to act."

House tees up 17 bills related to Iran/Israel for this week

FOX is told to expect a "robust foreign policy week" after this weekend’s events between Iran and Israel. 

The House is ditching its original plan for "appliance week" and putting 17 bills on the floor "to hammer" Iran or show support for Israel.

GOP GOV CLASHES WITH ABC'S STEPHANOPOULOS OVER TRUMP IN HEATED INTERVIEW

Eleven bills will be on the suspension calendar, meaning they require a 2/3 vote to pass. One of those bills would ratchet up sanctions on Iran

Six bills would head to the Rules Committee. Included in that batch is a bill to condemn Iran for the attack

What about aid for Israel?

WHITE HOUSE CASTS BLAME ON TRUMP AS BIDEN HIT OVER 'DON'T' FOREIGN POLICY

"That’s still being negotiated between the speaker and the White House," said a senior House Republican source. 

FOX is told it’s still possible aid to Israel is tied to assistance to Ukraine. 

Finally, FOX is told that the plan is to send the impeachment articles for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday. But FOX is told that could change based on events in Israel. 

House tees up 17 bills related to Iran/Israel for this week

FOX is told to expect a "robust foreign policy week" after this weekend’s events between Iran and Israel. 

The House is ditching its original plan for "appliance week" and putting 17 bills on the floor "to hammer" Iran or show support for Israel.

GOP GOV CLASHES WITH ABC'S STEPHANOPOULOS OVER TRUMP IN HEATED INTERVIEW

Eleven bills will be on the suspension calendar, meaning they require a 2/3 vote to pass. One of those bills would ratchet up sanctions on Iran

Six bills would head to the Rules Committee. Included in that batch is a bill to condemn Iran for the attack

What about aid for Israel?

WHITE HOUSE CASTS BLAME ON TRUMP AS BIDEN HIT OVER 'DON'T' FOREIGN POLICY

"That’s still being negotiated between the speaker and the White House," said a senior House Republican source. 

FOX is told it’s still possible aid to Israel is tied to assistance to Ukraine. 

Finally, FOX is told that the plan is to send the impeachment articles for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday. But FOX is told that could change based on events in Israel. 

House to focus just on Israel, Iran next week

EXCLUSIVE: House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R, La., tells Fox News the House is shifting its legislative docket next week to deal exclusively with the crisis in the Middle East.

Scalise says the House is jettisoning "themed" legislation focusing on attempts by the Biden Administration to curb the types of appliances people can buy and recalibrating toward foreign policy.

WHY THE HOUSE DELAYED SENDING MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES TO THE SENATE TO BEGIN TRIAL

The biggest issue is a potential aid package for Israel. Scalise says it’s not clear if the House would focus on just Israel or do something related to Ukraine and Taiwan. Scalise suggested an Israel-only bill was a distinct possibility. But did not rule out including Ukraine. Scalise says members must just figure out what can pass.

Scalise says the House is also looking at bills to support Israel and resolutions to condemn Iran and condemn this weekend’s attacks.

In particular, Scalise says the House will bring up a measure which was blocked last week when members torpedoed a procedural measure, blocking debate on a FISA bill.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Scalise says the House will resuscitate a resolution which supports Israel, condemning antisemitism and calls for a unilateral ceasefire.

Sen Ernst cites Jewish student discrimination in bid to protect free speech on campuses

FIRST ON FOX: Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, is looking to crack down on universities that receive federal funding but discriminate against students based on their viewpoint in a new attempt to protect free speech on college campuses. 

The Iowa Republican will introduce a new bill on Thursday, the Students Bill of Rights Act of 2024, which would safeguard free speech on public campuses.

'EXPECT NPR TO SUFFER’ UNDER GOP ADMIN: REPUBLICANS RENEW CALL TO DEFUND OUTLET AMID BIAS SCANDAL

"Freedom of speech is a core American value that our heroes fought and died to secure – we must protect it for future generations," Ernst said in an exclusive statement to Fox News Digital. "I want college students in Iowa and across America to engage in debates, challenge their ideas, and express their viewpoints freely, without facing discrimination or abuse. Echo chambers only serve to stunt the developing mind."

MORE THAN 40 SENATE REPUBLICANS CALL FOR MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT TRIAL IN LETTER TO SCHUMER

According to Ernst's office, the measure was prompted in part by concerns over the free expression of Jewish and pro-Israel students at various schools across the country amid the war between Israel and terrorist group Hamas.

HANDFUL OF VULNERABLE DEMS WILL DECIDE FATE OF MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

The goal of the Iowa Republican's bill is to push back on "left-wing activists on college campuses," who she accuses of eroding First Amendment rights, as well as attacks on Jewish students, her office said.

Ernst's bill proposes a universal speech and association protection standard for any public universities and colleges that receive funding through Title IV. 

BIPARTISAN SENATORS PUSH BACK AS KEY DEM SIGNALS DOOM FOR TIKTOK BILL

It addresses four areas to protect students from viewpoint discrimination. The measure specifically carves out provisions to assure students are assisted in finding faculty sponsors or otherwise gaining recognition at their schools; mandates institutions to disclose fund distribution and security fee charges to student organizations; mandates institutions similarly disclose policies in place to protect guest speakers; requires institutions to implement disciplinary measures for any students who threaten the safety of speakers invited to campuses. 

Since the onset of the Israeli war in Gaza, higher-education institutions have become hotbeds for anti-Israel demonstrations. Prestigious schools have been accused of allowing threats and attacks against Jewish students to occur, even prompting a congressional hearing. 

At the same time, a group created to express support for Israel recently faced difficulty in its quest to gain recognition at Columbia University Law School, illustrating the obstacles for some students to organize. After initially being denied by the law school's Senate, Law School Students Against Antisemitism was ultimately approved for recognition as a student organization in February after a re-vote. 

Dem senators voice concerns over Israel war status as Biden attempts ‘challenging’ balance with progressives

Senate Democrats expressed concerns over the status of the war between Israel and the terrorist organization Hamas in Gaza Tuesday as President Biden looks to strike a balance between supporting the U.S. ally and addressing concerns of progressives and Arab and Muslim voters who have made their displeasure known amid the conflict. 

"I don't support a cease-fire. I've been very clear about that," Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., told Fox News Digital Tuesday. 

In a call last week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu following an airstrike from the country that killed seven workers delivering food and aid in Gaza, Biden called for an immediate cease-fire to address the need to get aid to the war zone.

Biden's move to endorse a cease-fire comes as pro-Palestinian protests have plagued his campaign events in recent months. 

PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTERS' PAINTED RED HANDS A 'SYMBOL' ROOTED IN 'CRAZE TO SEE BLOOD': EXPERT

"There's been far too much civilian death right now," Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said of the situation in Gaza. However, he credited Biden with increasing pressure on Israel with "an uptick in humanitarian deliveries in the last few days."

Criticism over Biden's backing of ally Israel has ramped up in recent days, as reports emerged of his anger and frustration over the country's killing of several aid workers in Gaza. Last month, the U.S. allowed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a cease-fire to pass, breaking from a streak of vetoing similar measures.

Netanyahu slammed the move, claiming at the time the "United States has abandoned its policy in the U.N. today. Just a few days ago, it supported a Security Council resolution that linked a call for a cease-fire to the release of hostages."

ANTI-ISRAEL AGITATORS SHUT DOWN SENATE CAFETERIA; AROUND 50 ARRESTED

The prime minister attributed his cancellation of an Israeli delegation's trip to Washington, D.C., to the resolution's passage. 

Just two weeks after Biden's administration allowed the U.N. resolution to pass, Vice President Kamala Harris met with families of American hostages held in Gaza Tuesday. According to a readout from Harris' office on the meeting, she updated the families on U.S. efforts to bring home all hostages and reaching an agreement for an immediate cease-fire.

A White House official shared that efforts are ongoing to secure the release of more hostages and noted that the passed U.N. resolution additionally called for the release of hostages. However, the resolution did not include condemnation of Hamas, which prompted criticism against the Biden administration.

At a Senate Republican lunch Tuesday, GOP conference Chairman John Barrasso, R-Wyo., circulated a document to his colleagues, listing "27 times Biden & Democrats abandoned Israel" since the initial Oct. 7 Hamas attack. 

GOP SENATORS CONVINCE SPEAKER JOHNSON TO DELAY MAYORKAS IMPEACHMENT ARTICLE DELIVERY

The document, exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital, listed events, including the Biden administration urging Israel to end a ground campaign in Gaza last year and Senate Democrats in November voting against a stand-alone Israel aid bill that did not tie the assistance to aid for Ukraine. 

"President Biden is demanding a highly damaging, unconditional cease-fire. Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress are equating Prime Minister Netanyahu to Hamas. These unprecedented actions undermine Israel’s mission to free the hostages and eliminate Hamas," Barrasso told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement. 

Asked how Biden was handling support for Israel at the same time as addressing concerns for Palestinian civilians, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., said, "It's a challenging situation."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., avoided criticizing Biden for his handling of the Israel-Hamas war, instead telling Fox News Digital, "I lay blame with the Netanyahu government that has created a humanitarian disaster and doing everything possible every single day to make it worse."

DESPERATE ZELENSKYY WARNS 'UKRAINE WILL LOSE THE WAR' IF CONGRESS DOES NOT SEND MORE AID

While Fetterman noted his disagreement with Biden on a cease-fire, he said, "Overall, I think the president has remained to stand with Israel.

"But we need to allow Israel to finish off and go after Hamas." 

While Democrats were hesitant to address Biden's policy toward Israel directly, Senate Republicans were more than willing to slam the president for making decisions on the war based on "political calculus," as Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, claimed.

"I think it's really about trying to appease the increasingly vocal, frankly, pro-Hamas wing, I guess, of their party," said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo. "I mean, they must think that they have a lot of votes they need to open for them."

According to Vance, Biden's posture on the war is "completely inconsistent" today with what it was "two months ago."

"And they're doing it because they're worried about losing certain populations in Michigan," Vance claimed, likely referencing the significant Arab and Muslim populations in the state. 

Since the onset of the war in Gaza, Biden's 2024 re-election campaign has faced obstacles among Muslim supporters, who have claimed they are willing to turn their backs on him. 

His campaign has also seen efforts rebuffed by Muslim leaders who have on multiple occasions refused to meet with the president's team in campaign or official capacities. 

The Biden campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., blasted Biden's response to Israel's strike that killed seven aid workers, claiming it was held to a "different standard." 

"Why don't they tell us who got held accountable for the 13 people, warriors killed at the Kabul airport?" he asked, referencing the deaths of several service men and women during the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, overseen by Biden. 

Making a similar point, Fetterman explained, "I mean, terrible, terrible things often happen in a war situation, and we really cannot forget that this is all because of Hamas." The senator referenced a U.S. drone strike in 2021 that mistakenly killed a number of Afghani civilians in a car. 

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.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to potential timing for the Senate and the international aid package

The Senate has now cleared the first barrier to starting debate on the $95 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.

But how long until there’s a final vote?

In short, this might take a while.

Expect the strong possibility of weekend sessions and even important overnight votes. It’s possible this may not wrap up until next Tuesday – or beyond.

IMPEACHMENT OF ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS WILL HINGE ON THE MATH: CHAD PERGRAM

To wit:

The Senate overcame a filibuster just to start debate on the bill. From a very technical standpoint, the Senate is not on the bill just yet. Opponents of clearing the filibuster are awarded 30 hours after the vote early today.

So, unless there is an agreement to speed things up, the Senate could vote Friday evening around 7 pm ET just to get on the bill.

At that stage, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) will likely "file cloture" to try to end debate on the bill.

By rule, if Schumer files on Friday, the Senate cannot vote to overcome the second filibuster until Sunday. "Cloture" (to end a filibuster) requires an "intervening day" before voting to end the filibuster. So that means the Senate can’t vote to break the second filibuster until Sunday. Saturday serves as the "intervening day."

But this is where this gets tricky.

ISRAEL, UKRAINE FOREIGN AID BILL CLEARS FIRST HURDLE IN SENATE WITHOUT BORDER AND IMMIGRATION PROVISIONS

By rule, the Senate must vote to crack the second filibuster one hour after the Senate meets on Sunday. This presents "The Super Bowl Scenario." What the Senate MIGHT do if they are really trying to step on the gas (and get senators the game or to watch the Super Bowl), is meet at 12:00:01 am et SUNDAY. The intervening day (Saturday) will have expired. By rule, the Senate can vote at 1:00:01 am ET Sunday to end debate on the overall bill.

However, there is also the "non-Super Bowl" situation here. We’ll call this the "Ravens-Lions" scenario. Say for a moment that senators don’t give a care about the Super Bowl. So the Senate might meet at noon or 1 pm et Sunday. By rule, the procedural vote to end the filibuster would happen one hour after the Senate meets. So just after 1 pm ET Sunday or 2 pm ET Sunday.

SHOOTING BLANKS: HOW REPUBLICANS MISFIRED WHEN THEY TRIED TO IMPEACH MAYORKAS

If the Senate gets 60 votes to break a filibuster, the bill is on a glidepath to eventual passage. 

But we are far from finished.

Opponents of the bill can require the Senate to burn up to 30 hours after the Senate breaks the filibuster before the Senate can vote on final passage.

So, unless there’s an agreement, the Senate couldn’t vote on final passage of the bill until Monday night after 7 pm et or so… or… in the wee hours of Tuesday morning. Everything will hinge on when the Senate concludes the procedural vote to end the filibuster.

In addition, there’s lot of interesting stuff to watch in between. Debate. Votes on amendments related to the border. You name it. And, it’s entirely possible that the Senate may actually take several days of debate and amendment votes – and elect to not try to break a filibuster and then pass the bill until late next week.

This is all developing right now.