Rep. Bob Good elected chairman of House Freedom Caucus
Virginia Republican Congressman Bob Good was elected to lead the House Freedom Caucus in a closed-door vote late Monday evening. Good is replacing conservative Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., who is stepping down. He takes command of the approximately three dozen-member caucus in January. The Virginia congressman has been known to march to the beat of his own drum, including his involvement in ousting former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. earlier this year. Good was one of eight Republican members who crossed the aisle to vote against McCarthy, the only Republican from the commonwealth to do so. Good also broke ranks with many in the caucus by endorsing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his presidential bid against former President Donald Trump in the Republican primary. Trump has remained a popular figure among caucus members, often characterized as MAGA Republicans by those on the left. Good’s chairmanship vote was not without some controversy within the conservative caucus. Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, announced he would not seek reelection to the caucus board following the recommendation that Good lead the group. Davidson reportedly sent a letter to colleagues voicing his concern as to the direction of the caucus. “I am concerned that our group often relies too much on power (available primarily due to the narrow majority) and too little on influence with and among our colleagues. This approach is not a strong foundation for success,” Davidson wrote in the letter, according to published reports. “For me, these concerns culminate with the Board’s recommendation that Bob Good serve as the next Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus.” Despite Davidson’s grim outlook on the news of Good’s chairmanship and the caucus, Good steered clear of any mention of infighting. He praised Perry’s work while focusing on the mission of the caucus. “It is my privilege and honor to serve as the next House Freedom Caucus chairman,” Good said in a statement. “I thank Rep. Perry for his outstanding leadership of the caucus, and I look forward to building on the work he has done and continuing the fight to reduce government spending, secure our borders, and defend our constitutional freedoms.” Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Shutdown inches closer as U.S. House GOP fails to pass defense bill, lawmakers exit D.C.
by Jennifer Shutt, Alabama Reflector September 21, 2023 WASHINGTON — U.S. House Republicans were unable for a third time Thursday to begin debate on the Defense funding bill, throwing another wrench into Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s leadership tenure. The 212-216 vote that rejected the rule for the $826 billion Defense spending measure was unexpected, coming less than a day after House GOP lawmakers gathered in a room in the Capitol basement to broker a path forward. Arizona Rep. Eli Crane and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene switched their votes to oppose the rule, after voting on Tuesday to adopt it. Colorado Rep. Ken Buck and South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman both supported adoption of the rule on Thursday after opposing it earlier in the week. Other Republicans voting no included Andy Biggs of Arizona, Dan Bishop of North Carolina, and Matt Rosendale of Montana. The rule would have allowed the House to begin officially debating the bill and voting on nearly 200 amendments. The failed vote led McCarthy to reverse course on the schedule, with many lawmakers heading home for the weekend on Thursday instead of sticking around for votes throughout the weekend. McCarthy had said exactly one week ago, “When we come back, we’re not going to leave. We’re going to get this done.” The update to the House schedule sent around Thursday afternoon said ”ample notice will be given ahead of any potential votes tomorrow or this weekend.” The stalemate and change of plans does not bode well for efforts to approve the short-term spending bill that’s needed to stave off a partial government shutdown when the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. McCarthy has yet to unify his members amid deep disagreements about how much the federal government should spend and what policy restrictions should be included in full-year bills as well as the stopgap measure. The ongoing dispute has ground the House chamber to a halt as McCarthy searches for a way to unify his razor-thin majority without turning to Democrats to pass a bipartisan bill. Arkansas Republican Rep. Steve Womack, a senior appropriator, said Thursday that his fellow lawmakers need to accept the Senate will re-work any partisan bills the House sends over. “Remember, this is all going to go to the Senate, so people don’t need to get real hot and bothered over where we are today,” Womack said. “It’s going to be based on what comes back and whether or not it can get to the floor.” Discussions among House Republicans, he said, are likely to become “heated” once the Senate re-works a short-term spending bill and sends it back to the House for a final approval vote. Infighting and political differences within the House Republican Conference have so far prevented GOP lawmakers from reaching agreement on their opening offer on a short-term spending bill, which is also called a continuing resolution or CR. Defense spending bill falters Before the Thursday vote, McCarthy had been somewhat optimistic the House could finally approve the rule and begin debate on the full-year Defense spending measure. Greene wrote on X that she switched her vote “because they refused to take the war money for Ukraine out and put it in a separate bill.” The rule approved 184 amendments for floor debate and votes, including one from Florida’s Matt Gaetz that would have prohibited “security assistance for Ukraine.” Crane wrote on X on Thursday that he believes votes “on CRs, omnibus bills and raising the debt ceiling should never take place.” “I’m going to do whatever I can to change the way this place works,” he wrote. Oklahoma Republican Rep. Tom Cole, chair of the Rules Committee, switched his vote on Thursday to a no vote after voting yes a few minutes earlier. The procedural maneuver allows him to bring the rule back up for a vote at a later time. The whip count error appeared to be a surprise for Defense Appropriations Chair Ken Calvert, a California Republican; ranking member Betty McCollum, a Minnesota Democrat; and staff — all of whom were seated at the tables on the House floor ready to lead debate on the measure. The Republican table held thick white binders as well as a large accordion folder, all filled with paperwork, and the Democratic table was stacked with paperwork as well. It’s highly unlikely that staff would have brought all the materials needed to debate the bill and amendments if they knew the rule vote was going to fail. ‘At least a short-term shutdown’ In addition to strong disagreement among House Republicans about the full-year spending bills, the House GOP Conference has yet to solidify a plan to pass the short-term stopgap spending bill that’s needed to hold off a funding lapse. Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson, chair of the Interior-Environment spending subcommittee, said he expects there will be “at least a short-term shutdown” as the House and Senate try to reach agreement on a short-term spending bill. “That’s a lot of work to do in a very short time,” Simpson said. House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican, said Thursday that he hasn’t seen details on any new short-term spending bills that might come to the floor. “I haven’t seen the language of any additional CR,” he said. Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran, the top Republican on the Commerce-Justice-Science spending panel, said he’s “hoping the House chaos is set aside.” “I keep saying I’m not voting for another CR again, but I keep voting for them because the outcome is worse with a shutdown,” Moran said. “But this just needs to be resolved in the House. I don’t think there’s a problem in the Senate that would cause a shutdown.” Any short-term spending bill will have to be bipartisan in order to get through the Democratically controlled Senate, where at least 60 votes are needed to limit debate on legislation. That could take more time than lawmakers have before Oct. 1, he said. “Nothing about this is conducive to getting
Debt ceiling talks grind on, but Republicans say there’s a ‘lack of urgency’ from White House
Debt ceiling negotiators for President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy traded more budget-cutting ideas at the Capitol Tuesday, but Republicans warned of a “lack of urgency” at the White House to resolve the standoff in time to avert a potentially chaotic federal default. With barely a week to go before a deadline as soon as June 1, the Democratic president and the Republican speaker were staring down a financial crisis. Failure to strike a deal would be unprecedented, and certain to throw U.S. financial markets into turmoil, inflicting economic pain at home and abroad. Markets lowered Tuesday with no deal in sight. “We’re not there yet,” McCarthy said at the Capitol, reiterating he won’t bring any bill forward “that doesn’t spend less than we spent this year.” Behind closed doors, McCarthy urged his slim House Republican majority to “just stick together” despite their own factions as he negotiates the strongest deal possible for conservatives, said lawmakers exiting the private session. He told reporters the teams are eyeing “creative” ways of rolling back spending that all sides can accept. “I believe we can still get there — and get there before June 1,” McCarthy, R-Calif., said at midday. Dragging into a third week, the negotiations over raising the nation’s debt limit, now at $31 trillion, were never supposed to arrive at this point — a crisis in the making. From the White House, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said it was “ridiculous” to suggest Biden wasn’t acting with urgency. “He wants to see this done as soon as possible,” she said. The White House insisted early on it was unwilling to barter over the need to pay the nation’s bills, demanding that Congress simply lift the ceiling as it has done many times before with no strings attached. But the newly elected speaker urged the president at an Oval Office meeting in February to come to the negotiating table on a budget package that would reduce spending to reduce ballooning deficits in the post-COVID era in exchange for the vote to allow future debt. Both men said after a crucial meeting late Monday at the White House — after the president returned from the Group of Seven summit in Japan — that talks were productive. But with time short to strike a deal, they are laboring to come up with a compromise that could be approved quickly by the Republican House and the Democratic Senate and be signed into law. Negotiations are focused on finding agreement over a 2024 budget year limit. Republicans have set aside their demand to roll back spending to 2022 levels, but say that next year’s government spending must be less than it is now. But the White House instead is offering to freeze spending at current 2023 numbers. Agreement on that topline spending level is vital. It would enable McCarthy to deliver spending restraint for conservatives while not being so severe that it would chase off the Democratic votes that would be needed in the divided Congress to pass any bill. “We are holding firm to the speaker’s red line,” said a top Republican negotiator, Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana. “Which is that we will not do a deal unless it spends less money than we’re spending this year.” The White House continues to argue that deficits can be reduced by ending tax breaks for wealthier households and some corporations, but McCarthy said he told the president at their February meeting that raising revenue from tax hikes is off the table. The negotiators are now also debating the duration of a 1% cap on annual spending growth going forward, with Republicans dropping their demand for a 10-year cap to six years, but the White House offering only one year, for 2025. Typically, the debt ceiling has been lifted for the duration of a budget deal, and in this negotiation, the White House is angling for a two-year agreement that would push past the presidential elections. Another main Republican negotiator, Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, who joined the speaker at the Oval Office Monday evening, said, “What I sense from the White House is a lack of urgency.” But on the Senate side, Republican leader Mitch McConnell said, “Look, I think everybody needs to relax.” Traveling in his home state of Kentucky, McConnell said of the back and forth, “This is not that unusual.” However, time is growing short. The House speaker promised lawmakers he will abide by the rule to post any bill for 72 hours before voting, making any action doubtful until the weekend — just days before the potential deadline. The Senate would also have to pass the package before it could go to Biden’s desk to be signed. McCarthy faces a hard-right flank in his own party that is likely to reject any deal, and that has led some Democrats to encourage Biden to resist any compromise with the Republicans and simply invoke the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling on his own, an unprecedented and legally fraught action the president has resisted for now. On Tuesday, the leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Scott Perry, said: “We all want to stick together. But again, it’s sticking together around the right thing.” He and others are skeptical of the June 1 deadline that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said is when “it is highly likely” the government will be unable to pay all the nation’s bills. Treasury said Tuesday it is keeping in close contact with federal agencies on their planned spending as it monitors cashflows. As the negotiators focus on the $100 billion-plus difference between the 2022 and 2023 spending plans as a place to cut, other priorities Republicans are pushing as part of the deal remain on the table. Republicans also want to beef up work requirements for government aid to recipients in the Medicaid healthcare program, though the Biden administration has countered that millions of people could lose coverage. The GOP additionally wants new cuts to food aid by restricting states’ ability to waive work requirements in places
Kevin McCarthy preps House GOP debt deal to draw Joe Biden into talks
Speaker Kevin McCarthy convened House Republicans behind closed doors Tuesday to build support for his plan to allow the nation’s debt limit to rise in return for strictly limiting future federal spending increases to 1% a year. It’s a bid, including other major policy changes, to draw President Joe Biden into negotiations. The typically fractured House Republican majority has appeared surprisingly open to the plan, which McCarthy outlined in a high-profile speech Monday on Wall Street, but it remains a work in progress. While the proposal has almost no chance of passage in the Democratic Senate, McCarthy wants to pass it in the Republican House to kickstart White House talks. “I’m confident we’ll have it and comfortable we’ll pass it,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., the chairman of the Rules Committee, who said a bill could come up for a vote as soon as next week. Even some of McCarthy’s skeptics from the House Freedom Caucus — including those who initially refused to back him to be speaker — seemed ready to give his debt ceiling proposal a look. But others remained deeply skeptical, showing the limits of the embattled speaker’s grip on his majority. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., a McCarthy holdout for speaker, said Tuesday he was unsold on the plan and suggested changes. And Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., said as he exited the session, “There is no ‘this.’ We’re discussing what the ‘this’ will be.” The nation’s legal debt limit must be raised soon to keep the U.S. from defaulting on its fiscal obligations. That high-stakes fight will play out in the weeks ahead as Biden confronts the new era of divided government with Republicans in charge of the House and eager to flex their majority power. If McCarthy succeeds in having the House pass his proposal, he would be able to enter into talks with the White House, showing that he has the backing of his fellow GOP lawmakers. Biden administration officials have privately expressed doubts about the benefits of negotiating with McCarthy out of skepticism that he can rally conservative Republican votes. Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries quipped on CNBC that the House Republicans’ budget plan is “in the witness protection program.” The proposal the Republican speaker outlined is far-reaching and expected to be rejected by the White House. It would raise the debt limit into next year — putting it squarely into the 2024 presidential election in exchange for rolling back spending to fiscal 2022 levels, recouping tens of billions of dollars of unspent COVID-19 relief funds, and imposing a 1% cap on future non-defense spending each year for the decade. The 1 percent spending cap would not include mandated Social Security and Medicare money. Additionally, McCarthy’s plan would impose new work requirements on recipients of government aid, cutting billions from the federal safety net. And it would tack on H.R. 1, a sweeping energy package of oil and gas drilling and permit changes that would undo much of Biden’s climate change agenda. The Treasury Department has said the government probably will need to raise the debt ceiling, now at $31 trillion, by summer. For now, Treasury is taking “extraordinary measures” to allow continued borrowing to pay off already accrued bills, but that will eventually run out. Unable to pass an actual Republican budget through the House, as Biden challenges him to do, McCarthy instead has been working furiously behind the scenes with his leadership team to unite the “five families” — the often warring factions of Republican caucuses, including the House Freedom Caucus — to join together on his new plan. He and the leadership team discussed the ideas Tuesday at the House Republicans’ private session in hopes of turning the slides of ideas into a firm legislative package. “I find all indications to be we’re going to put a very serious proposal on the floor and pass it with 218 or more votes,” said Freedom Caucus member Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., as lawmakers arrived at the Capitol late Monday evening, referring to the majority needed for passage. But by Tuesday, no vote was set, according to a person familiar with the private meeting and granted anonymity to discuss it. “I still have more questions than answers at this point,” said Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., complaining there were only a few slides of information. In many ways, this is the easy part for McCarthy: A vote as soon as next week would hardly be binding since the proposal would be dead on arrival in the Senate. That political dynamic may make it easier for McCarthy to rally his ranks behind the plan if Republicans see it as merely a starting point in negotiations designed to push Biden to the table. House Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said late Monday the plan was a step in the right direction, but he still needed details. “Kevin McCarthy is going to get 218 votes on this deal,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., a chairman of the conservative Main Street Caucus, referring to the majority needed for passage. Said Rep. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma, the chairman of the powerful Republican Study Committee: “There’s still hard work ahead of us, but I believe we can get 218 votes by the end of next week.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said if McCarthy continues down this path of negotiating over the need to raise the debt limit, the U.S. would be headed for a default. “No one should confuse this wish list as anything more than a recycling of the same bad ideas we’ve heard about for weeks, and it’s still not clear that Speaker McCarthy has the votes to even pass this,” Schumer said. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Tommy Tuberville and Lance Gooden introduce the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act
In advance of the Biden administration’s decision to finalize a rule that would revive the Obama-era policy of directing corporate settlement funds to third-party organizations, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville and Congressman Lance Gooden are reintroducing their Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act. The bill would prohibit the Department of Justice (DOJ) from allowing defendants to enter quid-pro-quo agreements that entail donations to third-party groups in exchange for reduced fines and tax deductions. This legislation would ensure that any settlements go only to the actual victims, injured parties in the dispute, or the U.S. Treasury. “The practice of funneling settlement dollars to political activists is an unacceptable abuse of the system,” said Sen. Tuberville in a statement. “If money is owed following a settlement agreement, every cent of that payout should go to those directly impacted by the defendants, or back to the Treasury. Public servants should not be allowed to use their influence to line the pockets of individuals who share the political views of the current administration.” Tuberville wrote on Twitter, “The Biden admin shouldn’t use the justice system to bankroll their partisan agenda. I introduced the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act to stop DOJ from directing corporate settlement dollars to third-party, left-wing organizations instead of victims or @USTreasury.” Tuberville introduced this legislation in the last Congress. “Directing legal settlements to third-party groups is nothing short of legal extortion to fund the Biden Administration’s partisan agenda,” said Rep. Gooden. “Congress can no longer allow the Executive Branch to circumvent our Constitutional power of the purse to fund their activist pet projects and must pass my legislation to end this corrupt practice.” The Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act is endorsed by the National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks, and Americans for Prosperity. Grover Norquist is the President of Americans for Tax Reform. “For too long, the Department of Justice has been misallocating settlement funds from civil suits to provide cash injections to political allies,” said Norquist. “This gross politicization of a government agency should be put to a stop immediately. I am proud to support Rep. Gooden’s bill to codify protections against the DOJ or any government official abusing their power to benefit special interest groups.” Adam Brandon, President of FreedomWorks, applauded the legislation. “The Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act would ensure that settlement dollars go to victims’ funds or to the general fund of the Treasury to be appropriated by Congress, which, as Article I of the Constitution requires, holds the power of the purse over funds spent by the federal government,” said Brandon. “It’s critical that Congress reins in the executive branch and assert its Article I powers, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act is a crucial part of this effort.” Alex Milliken, Policy and Government Affairs Manager at the National Taxpayers Union, thanked Gooden and Tuberville. “NTU supports the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act and applauds Congressman Gooden and Senator Tuberville for working together to protect taxpayers,” said Milliken. “The practice of diverting billions of settlement dollars out of the hands of victims and toward third-party groups is a dubious practice. Congress should act quickly to put a stop to this agency behavior and prevent the misuse of resources to promote partisan agendas.” The Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act would prohibit settling parties in a federal dispute from reducing their punishments by making “donations” to outside organizations. This was a common practice under President Barack Obama’s presidency. The Obama Justice Department almost routinely required settling parties to pay a portion of their settlement obligations, under the guise of “donations,” to outside groups of the Department’s choosing. Republicans claimed that most of those groups pushed a partisan agenda. Tuberville and Republicans claim that this practice turned federal settlements into “liberal slush funds.” President Donald Trump halted the practice when he was President. Proponents of this legislation argue that without it, the Biden DOJ is expected to finalize a rule allowing the practice to continue to bolster a progressive policy agenda. Original cosponsors in the U.S. Senate include Senators Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), Rick Scott (R-Florida), and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming). Congressman Gary Palmer is an original cosponsor of this legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives. Other Congress members cosponsoring this include Reps. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tennessee), Tom Tiffany (R-Wisconsin), John Moolenaar (R-Michigan), Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), Scott Perry (R-Pennsylvania), Darrell Issa (R-California), Randy Weber (R-Texas), Andy Biggs (R-Arizona), Claudia Tenney (R-New York), Jake Ellzey (R-Texas), and Ben Cline (R-Virginia). Tuberville is in his first term in the Senate, having been elected in a landslide in 2020, unseating incumbent Sen. Doug Jones. Tuberville is a native of Arkansas who spent forty years teaching, coaching, and sports broadcasting. He and his wife live in Auburn. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Kevin McCarthy makes big gains for speaker, but still falls short
Republican leader Kevin McCarthy flipped 15 colleagues to support him in dramatic votes for House speaker on Friday, making extraordinary gains on the fourth day and the 12th and 13th ballots of a grueling standoff that was testing American democracy and the Republicans’ ability to govern. The changed votes from conservative holdouts, including the chairman of the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, put McCarthy closer to seizing the gavel for the new Congress — but not yet able. The stunning turnaround came after McCarthy agreed to many of the detractors’ demands — including the reinstatement of a longstanding House rule that would allow any single member to call a vote to oust him from office. That change and others mean the job he has fought so hard to gain will be weakened. After McCarthy won the most votes for the first time on the 12th ballot, a 13th was swiftly launched, this time just between McCarthy and the Democratic leader, with no nominated Republican challenger to siphon GOP votes away. But six GOP holdouts still cast their ballots for unnominated others, denying him the majority needed. The showdown that has stymied the new Congress came against the backdrop of the second anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, which shook the country when a mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters tried to stop Congress from certifying the Republican’s 2020 election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden. A few minutes before voting began in the House chamber, Republicans tiring of the spectacle walked out when one of McCarthy’s most ardent challengers railed against the GOP leader. “We do not trust Mr. McCarthy with power,” said Republican Matt Gaetz of Florida as colleagues streamed out of the chamber in protest of his remarks. Contours of a deal with conservative holdouts who have been blocking McCarthy’s rise emerged, but an agreement had seemed still out of reach after three dismal days and 11 failed votes in a political spectacle unseen in a century. But an upbeat McCarthy told reporters as he arrived at the Capitol Friday morning, “We’re going to make progress. We’re going to shock you.” One significant former holdout, Republican Scott Perry, chairman of the conservative Freedom Caucus, tweeted after his switched vote for McCarthy: “We’re at a turning point.” But several holdouts remained. The final 12th vote tally: McCarthy, 213 votes; Democrat Hakeem Jeffries 211. Other Republicans Jim Jordan and Kevin Hern picked up protest votes. With 431 members voting, McCarthy was still a few votes short of a majority. When Rep. Mike Garcia nominated McCarthy for a 12th time, he also thanked the U.S. Capitol Police who were given a standing ovation for protecting lawmakers and the legislative seat of democracy on January 6. The agreement McCarthy presented to the holdouts from the Freedom Caucus and others centers around rules changes they have been seeking for months. Those changes would shrink the power of the speaker’s office and give rank-and-file lawmakers more influence in drafting and passing legislation. Even if McCarthy is able to secure the votes he needs, he will emerge as a weakened speaker, having given away some powers, leaving him constantly under threat of being voted out by his detractors. But he would also be potentially emboldened as a survivor of one of the more brutal fights for the gavel in U.S. history. At the core of the emerging deal is the reinstatement of a House rule that would allow a single lawmaker to make a motion to “vacate the chair,” essentially calling a vote to oust the speaker. McCarthy had resisted allowing a return to the longstanding rule that former Speaker Nancy Pelosi had done away with, because it had been held over the head of past Republican Speaker John Boehner, chasing him to early retirement. But it appears he had no other choice. The chairman of the chamber’s Freedom Caucus, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, who had been a leader in Trump’s efforts to challenge his presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, appeared receptive to the proposed package, tweeting an adage from Ronald Reagan, “Trust but verify.” Other wins for the holdouts include provisions in the proposed deal to expand the number of seats available on the House Rules Committee, to mandate 72 hours for bills to be posted before votes, and to promise to try for a constitutional amendment that would impose federal limits on the number of terms a person could serve in the House and Senate. Lest hopes get ahead of reality, conservative holdout Ralph Norman of South Carolina said: “This is round one.” It could be the makings of a deal to end a standoff that has left the House unable to fully function. Members have not been sworn in, and almost no other business can happen. A memo sent out by the House’s chief administrative officer Thursday evening said that committees “shall only carry out core Constitutional responsibilities.” Payroll cannot be processed if the House isn’t functioning by January 13. After a long week of failed votes, Thursday’s tally was dismal: McCarthy lost seventh, eighth, and then historic ninth, 10th, and 11th rounds of voting, surpassing the number from 100 years ago in the last drawn-out fight to choose a speaker. The California Republican exited the chamber and quipped about the moment: “Apparently, I like to make history.” Feelings of boredom, desperation, and annoyance seemed increasingly evident. Democrats said it was time to get serious. “This sacred House of Representatives needs a leader,” said Democrat Joe Neguse of Colorado, nominating his own party’s leader, Hakeem Jeffries, as speaker. What started as a political novelty, the first time since 1923 a nominee had not won the gavel on the first vote, has devolved into a bitter Republican Party feud and deepening potential crisis. Democratic leader Jeffries of New York won the most votes on every ballot but also remained short of a majority. McCarthy ran second, gaining no ground. Pressure has grown with each passing day for McCarthy to somehow find the votes he needs or
January 6 panel urges Donald Trump prosecution with criminal referral
The House January 6 committee urged the Justice Department on Monday to bring criminal charges against Donald Trump for the violent 2021 Capitol insurrection, calling for accountability for the former president and “a time of reflection and reckoning.” After one of the most exhaustive and aggressive congressional probes in memory, the panel’s seven Democrats and two Republicans are recommending criminal charges against Trump and associates who helped him launch a wide-ranging pressure campaign to try to overturn his 2020 election loss. The panel also released a lengthy summary of its final report, with findings that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to thwart the will of voters. At a final meeting Monday, the committee alleged violations of four criminal statutes by Trump, in both the run-up to the riot and during the insurrection itself, as it recommended the former president for prosecution to the Justice Department. Among the charges they recommend for prosecution is aiding an insurrection — an effort to hold him directly accountable for his supporters who stormed the Capitol that day. The committee also voted to refer conservative lawyer John Eastman, who devised dubious legal maneuvers aimed at keeping Trump in power, for prosecution on two of the same statutes as Trump: conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstructing an official proceeding. While a criminal referral is mostly symbolic, with the Justice Department ultimately deciding whether to prosecute Trump or others, it is a decisive end to a probe that had an almost singular focus from the start. Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said Trump “broke the faith” that people have when they cast ballots in a democracy and that the criminal referrals could provide a “roadmap to justice” by using the committee’s work. “I believe nearly two years later, this is still a time of reflection and reckoning,” Thompson said. “If we are to survive as a nation of laws and democracy, this can never happen again.” Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel’s Republican vice chairwoman, said in her opening remarks that every president in American history has defended the orderly transfer of power, “except one.” The committee also voted 9-0 to approve its final report, which will include findings, interview transcripts, and legislative recommendations. The full report is expected to be released on Wednesday. The report’s 154-page summary, made public as the hearing ended, found that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the election. While the majority of the report’s main findings are not new, it altogether represents one of the most damning portraits of an American president in recent history, laying out in great detail Trump’s broad effort to overturn his own defeat and what the lawmakers say is his direct responsibility for the insurrection of his supporters. The panel, which will dissolve on January 3 with the new Republican-led House, has conducted more than 1,000 interviews, held ten well-watched public hearings, and collected more than a million documents since it launched in July 2021. As it has gathered the massive trove of evidence, the members have become emboldened in declaring that Trump, a Republican, is to blame for the violent attack on the Capitol by his supporters almost two years ago. After beating their way past police, injuring many of them, the January 6 rioters stormed the Capitol and interrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election win, echoing Trump’s lies about widespread election fraud and sending lawmakers and others running for their lives. The attack came after weeks of Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat — a campaign that was extensively detailed by the committee in its multiple public hearings and laid out again by lawmakers on the panel at Monday’s meeting. Many of Trump’s former aides testified about his unprecedented pressure on states, federal officials, and Mike Pence to object to Biden’s win. The committee has also described in great detail how Trump riled up the crowd at a rally that morning and then did little to stop his supporters for several hours as he watched the violence unfold on television. The panel aired some new evidence at the meeting, including a recent interview with longtime Trump aide Hope Hicks. Describing a conversation she had with Trump around that time, she said he told her that no one would care about his legacy if he lost the election. Hicks told the committee that Trump told her, “The only thing that matters is winning.” Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but the former president slammed members of the committee Sunday as “thugs and scoundrels” as he has continued to falsely dispute his 2020 loss. While a so-called criminal referral has no real legal standing, it is a forceful statement by the committee and adds to political pressure already on Attorney General Merrick Garland and special counsel Jack Smith, who is conducting an investigation into January 6 and Trump’s actions. On the recommendation to charge Trump with aiding an insurrection, the committee said in the report’s summary that the former president “was directly responsible for summoning what became a violent mob” and refused repeated entreaties from his aides to condemn the rioters or to encourage them to leave. For obstructing an official proceeding, the committee cites Trump’s relentless badgering of Vice President Mike Pence and others to prevent the certification of the election results on January 6. And his repeated lies about the election and efforts to undo the results open him up to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States, the panel said. The final charge recommended by the panel is conspiracy to make a false statement, citing the scheme by Trump and his allies to put forward slates of fake electors in battleground states won by President Joe Biden. Among the other charges contemplated but not approved by the committee was seditious conspiracy, the same allegation Justice Department prosecutors have used to target a subset of rioters belonging to far-right groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Thompson said after the hearing that the seditious conspiracy charge is “something that the committee didn’t come to agreement on.” The panel was formed in the summer
Capitol riot panel blames Donald Trump for 1/6 ‘attempted coup’
The House panel investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol laid the blame firmly on Donald Trump Thursday night, saying the assault was hardly spontaneous but an “attempted coup” and a direct result of the defeated president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. With a never-before-seen 12-minute video of extremist groups leading the deadly siege and startling testimony from Trump’s most inner circle, the 1/6 committee provided gripping detail in contending that Trump’s repeated lies about election fraud and his public effort to stop Joe Biden’s victory led to the attack and imperiled American democracy. “Democracy remains in danger,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., chairman of the panel, during the hearing, timed for prime time to reach as many Americans as possible. “Jan. 6 was the culmination of an attempted coup, a brazen attempt, as one rioter put it shortly after Jan. 6, to overthrow the government,” Thompson said. “The violence was no accident.” The hearings may not change Americans’ views on the Capitol attack, but the panel’s investigation is intended to stand as its public record. Ahead of this fall’s midterm elections, and with Trump considering another White House run, the committee’s final report aims to account for the most violent attack on the Capitol since 1814 and to ensure such an attack never happens again. Testimony showed Thursday how Trump desperately clung to his own false claims of election fraud, beckoning supporters to the Capitol on Jan. 6 when Congress would certify the results, despite those around him insisting Biden had won the election. In a previously unseen video clip, the panel played a quip from former Attorney General Bill Barr, who testified that he told Trump the claims of a rigged election were “bull——.” In another, the former president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, testified to the committee that she respected Barr’s view that there was no election fraud. “I accepted what he said.” Others showed leaders of the extremist Oath Keepers and Proud Boys preparing to storm the Capitol to stand up for Trump. One rioter after another told the committee they came to the Capitol because Trump asked them to. “President Trump summoned a violent mob,” said Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the panel’s vice chair who took the lead for much of the hearing. “When a president fails to take the steps necessary to preserve our union — or worse, causes a constitutional crisis — we’re in a moment of maximum danger for our republic.” There was an audible gasp in the hearing room when Cheney read an account that said when Trump was told the Capitol mob was chanting for Vice President Mike Pence to be hanged for refusing to block the election results. Trump responded that maybe they were right, that he “deserves it.” At another point, it was disclosed that Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a leader of efforts to object to the election results, had sought a pardon from Trump, which would protect him from prosecution. When asked about the White House lawyers threatening to resign over what was happening in the administration, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner scoffed they were “whining.” Police officers who had fought off the mob consoled one another as they sat in the committee room, reliving the violence they faced on Jan. 6. Officer Harry Dunn teared up as bodycam footage showed rioters bludgeoning his colleagues with flagpoles and baseball bats. In wrenching testimony, U.S. Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards told the panel that she slipped in other people’s blood as rioters pushed past her into the Capitol. She suffered brain injuries in the melee. “It was carnage. It was chaos,” she said. The riot left more than 100 police officers injured, many beaten and bloodied, as the crowd of pro-Trump rioters, some armed with pipes, bats, and bear spray, charged into the Capitol. At least nine people who were there died during and after the rioting, including a woman who was shot and killed by police. Biden, in Los Angeles for the Summit of the Americas, said many viewers were “going to be seeing for the first time a lot of the detail that occurred.” Trump, unapologetic, dismissed the investigation anew — and even declared on social media that Jan. 6 “represented the greatest movement in the history of our country.” Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee tweeted: “All. Old. News.” Emotions are still raw at the Capitol, and security was tight. Law enforcement officials are reporting a spike in violent threats against members of Congress. Against this backdrop, the committee was speaking to a divided America. Most TV networks carried the hearing live, but Fox News Channel did not. The committee chairman, civil rights leader Thompson, opened the hearing with the sweep of American history. saying he heard in those denying the stark reality of Jan. 6 his own experience growing up in a time and place “where people justified the action of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan and lynching.” Republican Rep. Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, outlined what the committee has learned about the events leading up to that brisk January day when Trump sent his supporters to Congress to “fight like hell” for his presidency. Among those testifying was documentary maker Nick Quested, who filmed the Proud Boys storming the Capitol — along with a pivotal meeting between the group’s then-chairman Henry “Enrique” Tarrio and another extremist group, the Oath Keepers, the night before in a nearby parking garage. Quested said the Proud Boys later went to get tacos. Court documents show that members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were discussing as early as November a need to fight to keep Trump in office. Leaders of both groups and some members have since been indicted on rare sedition charges over the military-style attack. In the weeks ahead, the panel is expected to detail Trump’s public campaign to “Stop the Steal” and the private pressure he put on the Justice Department to reverse his election loss — despite dozens of failed court cases attesting there was no fraud on a scale that could have tipped the results in his favor. The panel faced obstacles from its start. Republicans blocked
Mo Brooks responds to January 6 subpoena
On Thursday, a House panel issued subpoenas to Mo Brooks and four other GOP lawmakers in its probe into January 6 Capitol attack. Brooks spoke alongside the former president at the massive rally in front of the White House on January 6, telling supporters to “start taking down names and kicking ass” before hundreds of them broke into the Capitol. Other lawmakers who were issued subpoenas were Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and Andy Biggs of Arizona. Brooks issued a press release on the subpoena, calling the group the “partisan Witch Hunt Committee” and indicating he hadn’t been served with a subpoena yet. “Eighteen months have passed since the 2020 election without the partisan Witch Hunt Committee bothering to seek testimony from me,” Brooks stated in the press release. “It’s no coincidence Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney seek to interfere with Alabama’s electing a conservative Senator by coming after me at the most campaign intense time of the GOP Primary and Runoff elections. Pelosi and Cheney hate America First candidates. With the release of the ‘2000 Mules’ documentary, the American people are learning what I’ve said since the 2020 election: the 2020 election was stolen, and Donald Trump is the rightful winner,” Brooks commented. Brooks went on to say that he was proud to stand with President Donald Trump on January 6. “I have already given at least two sworn statements in federal court during Eric Swalwell’s losing effort to sue me, plus numerous other oral and written statements about events relating to January 6. I have given numerous House Floor speeches about voter fraud and election theft in the 2020 elections. To my knowledge, no other potential Witch Hunt Committee witness has been so publicly open about the 2020 elections and January 6 events. If the partisan Witch Hunt Committee wants my observations of events, all it has to do is read or listen to my numerous prior statements,” Brooks continued. Brooks then listed questions he had if he was issued with a subpoena. Brooks asked the following questions: 1. Will my testimony be public, where the American people can see first hand my testimony (without the prejudicial leaks the partisan Pelosi Witch Hunt Committee is renowned for)? 3. Will I be questioned by Members of Congress rather than their underlings? If I, as a Congressman, must be at a hearing, the least the partisan Witch Hunt Committee can do is put forth Congressmen (not underlings) to do the questioning. If Witch Hunt Committee Congressmen don’t think it worth their time to question me, why is it worth my time to answer them? 4. The media reports the Witch Hunt Committee seeks to depose five Congressmen. All are Republicans. I believe it wise to wait and consult with Congressmen Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Andy Biggs, and Kevin McCarthy to determine whether it is best to present a united response to the partisan Witch Hunt Committee before giving a formal statement about how I intend to conduct myself in the face of a hyper-partisan effort to corruptly influence the 2022 general elections just as Democrats did in 2018 via the Russian Collusion Hoax.”
January 6 panel subpoenas Mo Brooks, four other GOP lawmakers
A House panel issued subpoenas Thursday to House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy and four other GOP lawmakers in its probe into the violent January 6 insurrection, an extraordinary step that has little precedent and is certain to further inflame partisan tensions over the 2021 attack. The panel is investigating McCarthy’s conversations with then-President Donald Trump the day of the attack and meetings the four other lawmakers had with the White House beforehand as Trump and his aides worked to overturn his 2020 election defeat. The former president’s supporters violently pushed past police that day, broke through windows and doors of the Capitol, and interrupted the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory. The decision to issue subpoenas to McCarthy, R-Calif., and Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona, and Mo Brooks of Alabama is a dramatic show of force by the panel, which has already interviewed nearly 1,000 witnesses and collected more than 100,000 documents as it investigates the worst attack on the Capitol in two centuries. The move is not without risk, as Republicans are favored to capture back the House majority in this fall’s midterm elections and have promised retribution for Democrats if they take control. After the announcement, McCarthy, who aspires to be House speaker, told reporters, “I have not seen a subpoena” and said his view on the January 6 committee has not changed since the nine-lawmaker panel asked for his voluntary cooperation earlier this year. “They’re not conducting a legitimate investigation,” McCarthy said. “Seems as though they just want to go after their political opponents.” Similarly, Perry told reporters the investigation is a “charade” and said the subpoena is “all about headlines.” Neither man said whether he would comply. The panel, made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans, had previously asked for voluntary cooperation from the five lawmakers, along with a handful of other GOP members, but all of them refused to speak with the panel, which debated for months whether to issue the subpoenas. “Before we hold our hearings next month, we wished to provide members the opportunity to discuss these matters with the committee voluntarily,” said Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the panel. “Regrettably, the individuals receiving subpoenas today have refused, and we’re forced to take this step to help ensure the committee uncovers facts concerning January 6th.” Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel’s Republican vice-chair, said the step wasn’t taken lightly. The unwillingness of the lawmakers to provide relevant information about the attack, she said, is “a very serious and grave situation.” Congressional subpoenas for sitting members of Congress, especially for a party leader, have little precedent in recent decades, and it is unclear what the consequences would be if any or all of the five men decline to comply. The House has voted to hold two other noncompliant witnesses, former Trump aides Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows, in contempt, referring their cases to the Justice Department. In announcing the subpoenas, the January 6 panel said there is historical precedent for the move and noted that the House Ethics Committee has “issued a number of subpoenas to members of Congress for testimony or documents,” though such actions are generally done secretly. “We recognize this is fairly unprecedented,” said Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger, the other GOP member of the panel, after the committee announced the subpoenas. “But the January 6 attack was very unprecedented.” Kinzinger said it is “important for us to get every piece of information we possibly can.” McCarthy has acknowledged he spoke with Trump on January 6 as Trump’s supporters were beating police outside the Capitol and forcing their way into the building. But he has not shared many details. The committee requested information about his conversations with Trump “before, during, and after” the riot. McCarthy took to the House floor after the rioters were cleared and said in a forceful speech that Trump “bears responsibility” for the attack and that it was the “saddest day I have ever had” in Congress — even as he went on to join 138 other House Republicans in voting to reject the election results. Another member of the GOP caucus, Washington Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, said after the attack that McCarthy had recounted that he told Trump to publicly “call off the riot” and said the violent mob was made up of Trump supporters, not far-left Antifa members, as Trump had claimed. “That’s when, according to McCarthy, the president said, ’Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” Herrera Beutler said in a statement last year. The GOP leader soon made up with Trump, though, visiting him in Florida and rallying House Republicans to vote against investigations of the attack. The other four men were in touch with the White House for several weeks ahead of the insurrection, talking to Trump and his legal advisers about ways to stop the congressional electoral count on January 6 to certify Joe Biden’s victory. “These members include those who participated in meetings at the White House, those who had direct conversations with President Trump leading up to and during the attack on the Capitol, and those who were involved in the planning and coordination of certain activities on and before January 6th,” the committee said in a release. Brooks, who has since been critical of Trump, spoke alongside the former president at the massive rally in front of the White House the morning of January 6, telling supporters to “start taking down names and kicking ass” before hundreds of them broke into the Capitol. Perry spoke to the White House about replacing acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen with an official who was more sympathetic to Trump’s false claims of voter fraud, and Biggs was involved in plans to bring protesters to Washington and pressuring state officials to overturn the legitimate election results, according to the panel. Jordan, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, spoke to Trump on January 6 and was
Mo Brooks introduces the Freedom to Fly Maskless Act
Congressman Mo Brooks has introduced a bill to prohibit the federal government from mandating masks, negative COVID-19 tests, and vaccinations on public transportation, including domestic flights. The Freedom to Fly Maskless Act aims to “limit the authority of the Department of Health and Human Services to regulate interstate commerce relating to communicable diseases, to amend title 49, United States Code, to limit the authority of the Federal Aviation Administration to regulate air commerce relating to communicable diseases.” In December, Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly told the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee: “The statistics I recall is that 99.97% of airborne pathogens are captured by the [high efficiency particulate air] filtering system, and it’s turned over every two or three minutes. I think the case is very strong that masks don’t add much, if anything, in the air cabin environment. It’s very safe, and very high quality compared to any other indoor setting.” Original cosponsors include Reps. Paul Gosar, (AZ), Jeff Duncan (SC), Bob Gibbs (OH), Scott Perry (PA), Brian Mast (FL), Brian Babin (TX), Thomas Tiffany (WI), Mary Miller (IL), and Byron Donalds (FL). Brooks stated, “The American people are sick and tired of being dictated to by unelected Washington bureaucrats. As we have seen throughout the pandemic, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has worked with other entities like the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to impose masks, testing, and vaccination requirements. Unelected bureaucrats have falsely claimed the power to foist unnecessary and anti-science mandates on the American people. These mandates have resulted in good Americans being fired from their jobs, being jabbed with needles against their will, and even losing their businesses in some cases. It is time to throw off the heavy boot of tyranny that’s crushing the American spirit. Washington bureaucrats need reminding that America was founded on freedom and liberty.” Brooks concluded, “My bill, the ‘Freedom to Fly Maskless Act’ would prohibit unelected Washington bureaucrats from requiring masks, tests, and vaccinations on public transportation, including domestic flights. Each individual has the right to decide what health precautions they want to take when confronting Communist China’s lab-created virus or any future illness. Let me be clear, there is no amount of mandates and dictates that will end the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 will continue to spread. Americans must learn to live with this virus because it’s going to be with us long-term. Continued mandates are not justified, and it’s long past time Americans return to our pre-pandemic lives.”
January 6 committee requests interview with Ivanka Trump
The House committee investigating the U.S. Capitol insurrection is asking Ivanka Trump, daughter of former President Donald Trump, to voluntarily cooperate as lawmakers make their first public attempt to arrange an interview with a Trump family member. The committee sent a letter Thursday requesting a meeting in February with Ivanka Trump, a White House adviser to her father. In the letter, the committee chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said Ivanka Trump was in direct contact with her father during key moments on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in an effort to halt the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s presidential win. The riot followed a rally near the White House where Donald Trump had urged his supporters to “fight like hell” as Congress convened to certify the 2020 election results. The committee says it wants to discuss what Ivanka Trump knew about her father’s efforts, including a telephone call they say she witnessed, to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject those results, as well as concerns she may have heard from Pence’s staff, members of Congress and the White House counsel’s office about those efforts. “Ivanka Trump just learned that the January 6 Committee issued a public letter asking her to appear,” her spokesperson said. “As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally.” The committee cited testimony that Ivanka Trump implored her father to quell the violence by his supporters, and investigators want to ask about her actions while the insurrection was underway. “Testimony obtained by the Committee indicates that members of the White House staff requested your assistance on multiple occasions to intervene in an attempt to persuade President Trump to address the ongoing lawlessness and violence on Capitol Hill,” Thompson wrote. The letter is the committee’s first attempt to seek information from inside the Trump family. Earlier this week, it issued subpoenas to lawyer Rudy Giuliani and other members of Trump’s legal team who filed meritless court challenges to the election that fueled the lie that the race had been stolen from Trump. The committee is narrowing in on three requests to Ivanka Trump, starting with a conversation alleged to have taken place between Donald Trump and Pence on the morning of the attack. The committee said Keith Kellogg, who was Pence’s national security adviser, was also in the room and testified to investigators that Trump questioned whether Pence had the courage to delay the congressional counting of the electoral votes. The Constitution makes clear that a vice president’s role is largely ceremonial in the certification process, and Pence had issued a statement before the congressional session that laid out his conclusion that a vice president could not claim “unilateral authority” to reject states’ electoral votes. “You were present in the Oval Office and observed at least one side of that telephone conversation,” the letter to Ivanka Trump said, adding that the committee “wishes to discuss the part of the conversation you observed” between the then-president and Pence. The letter also mentioned a message, in the days before the scheduled vote certification on January 6, 2021, between an unidentified member of the House Freedom Caucus to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows with an explicit warning: “If POTUS allows this to occur … we’re driving a stake in the heart of the federal republic.” POTUS is an abbreviation for President of the United States. The other requests in the letter to Ivanka Trump concern conversations after Donald Trump’s tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.” The committee said White House staff and even members of Congress requested Ivanka Trump’s help in trying to convince her father that he should address the violence and tell rioters to go home. “We are particularly interested in this question: Why didn’t White House staff simply ask the President to walk to the briefing room and appear on live television — to ask the crowd to leave the capital?” Besides the subpoenas issued this week, the committee had a victory Wednesday when the Supreme Court rejected a bid by Trump to block the release of White House records sought by lawmakers. The National Archives began to turn over the hundreds of pages of records to the nine-member committee almost immediately. They include presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts, and handwritten notes dealing with January 6 from the Meadows’ files. The committee’s investigation has touched nearly every corner of Trump’s orbit in the nearly seven months since it was created, from strategist Steve Bannon to media companies such as Twitter, Meta, and Reddit. The committee says it has interviewed nearly 400 people and issued dozens of subpoenas as it prepares a report set for release before the November elections. Still, the committee has run into roadblocks from some of Trump’s allies, including Bannon and Meadows, who have refused to fully cooperate. Their resistance has led the committee to file charges of contempt of Congress. The seven Democrats and two Republicans on the committee have also faced defiance from fellow lawmakers. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and GOP Reps. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Jim Jordan of Ohio have denied the committee’s requests for voluntary cooperation. While the committee has considered subpoenaing fellow lawmakers, that would be an extraordinary move and could run up against legal and political challenges. The committee says the extraordinary trove of material it has collected — 35,000 pages of records so far, including texts, emails, and phone records from people close to Trump — is fleshing out critical details of the worst attack on the Capitol in two centuries. The next phase of the investigation will include a series of public hearings in the coming months. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
