1) House sources are expecting Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) to force a vote to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in “inherent contempt” of Congress sometime in the middle of next week. Fox is told the vote likely comes Wednesday or Thursday.
What is “inherent contempt?”
It’s similar to “contempt” of Congress – in which the House voted to hold Garland earlier this month for failing to respond to a subpoena to provide audiotapes of the interview Special Counsel Robert Hur conducted with President Biden about the classified documents case.
But “inherent contempt” is a dramatic and historic escalation.
The House has not held anyone in inherent contempt since the 1930s. Prior to that, you must go back to the early 1800s and 1790s.
Yes. That’s correct.
With “inherent contempt,” the House approves the resolution – and doesn’t rely on the Justice Department to prosecute the contempt of Congress case. In this case, the House deploys its “inherent” powers and dispatches House Sergeant at Arms Bill McFarland and his team to “arrest” Garland. Ostensibly, Garland could be held BY CONGRESS (read that again) until he provides the audiotapes.
Such a scenario creates an extraordinary conflict between the legislative branch of government and the executive branch. Keep in mind that Garland is protected by armed FBI agents. Does this create some sort of a standoff?
Unclear. And no one seems to know on Capitol Hill.
2) The last time Congress used its inherent contempt powers, it held a Commerce Department official who refused to cooperate at the Willard Hotel in Washington for ten days in 1934.
Fox is told that Democrats would likely move to table or kill the resolution to hold Garland in “inherent contempt.” Thus, the vote is one step removed from an actual up/down vote on inherent contempt. If the House moves to the table, the issue is dead. However, if the House rejects tabling the measure, it proceeds to hold a vote on actual inherent contempt.
Fox is told that Garland has reached out to moderate Republicans, pushing them to reject inherent contempt.
3) Moreover, a senior House Republican leadership source doubted the House has the votes to approve inherent contempt.
“We have got to improve the rules on some of these resolutions where one person can make a privileged resolution or vacate the chair,” said one senior House Republican leadership source who asked not to be identified.
However, the current contempt resolution carries over. Republicans suggest that Garland could face prosecution should former President Trump win next year.
Moreover, Republicans are using Garland to underscore their “two tiered” justice system narrative. They note that the House held former Trump aides Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress after they failed to comply with a subpoena by the committee investigating the Capitol riot. They were both prosecuted by the Biden Justice Department. Navarro is in jail now. Bannon is on schedule to report to jail next month. Republicans will argue that the Biden Justice Department is unwilling to prosecute its own Attorney General – despite the same charge: failure to comply with a Congressional subpoena.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) Ways/Means Cmte Chair Smith First, Hunter Biden lied about the recipient of a WhatsApp message sent with the apparent intention to threaten a business associate and demand payment. In the message, Hunter Biden twice mentioned he was with his father. In the deposition, Hunter Biden sought to dismiss the message, claiming that he was either 'high or drunk' when he sent it, and in that state, had sent it to the wrong Zhao, and not actually the one affiliated with the Chinese energy company, CEFC. Hunter claimed under oath that the recipient, 'had no understanding or even remotely knew what,...I was even‚...talking about.'
2) Smith: However, phone records in front of the Committee today show Hunter Biden sent the message to the correct Chinese businessman by the name of Raymond Zhao who not only was affiliated with CEFC, but knew exactly what Hunter Biden was talking about.
3) Smith: For several months, the pair messaged back and forth on the same phone numbers, and ultimately an affiliate of CEFC, Raymond Zhao's company, sent $5 million to Hunter Biden and his associates just days after Hunter's threatening message. These documents make clear that Hunter Biden was using his father's name to shake down a Chinese businessman - and it worked. And when confronted by Congressional investigators about it, he lied.
1) The Hitchhiker’s Guide To How Democrats Support for Johnson Could Backfire On the Speaker
An astonishing email just hit inboxes around Capitol Hill from the House Democratic leadership team of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA) and House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar (D-CA):
“We will vote to table Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Motion to Vacate the Chair. If she invokes the motion, it will not succeed.”
2) So you have DEMOCRATIC leaders telling their rank-and-file members they support short-circuiting an effort to unseat House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA).
Here’s why this is a big deal:
It was thought that House Democrats would protect Johnson in some form if Greene were to trigger her resolution. That hasn’t happened yet. But it was believed that a small number of Democrats might vote to table or kill Greene’s motion, thus protecting him. Or, Democrats might just “take a walk” during that vote, diluting the voting pool in the House. That would protect Johnson by having fewer Democrats vote. Thus, Democrats could inoculate Johnson – without ever taking a vote.
3) But it is a MAJOR DEAL when the entire Democratic leadership team and rank-and-file Democrats say they would vote to protect Johnson.
Great for Johnson, right?
Maybe immediately. But there is a BIG downside here.
Such a maneuver could embolden the smaller coterie of Republicans who want to oust Johnson. And even some rank-and-file Republicans could see that Johnson is only in the job because of the Democrats. Thus Johnson is a “Democratic” Speaker. Especially since he largely did the Democrats’ bidding passing the Ukraine aid bill a few weeks ago, avoided multiple government shutdowns and passed nearly every major bill in recent months with lots of Democratic support – often with more Democratic votes than from Republicans.
This might not undercut Johnson now. But it could give those who might want his job – potentially House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) – an opportunity to use Democratic support as a wedge and perhaps challenge Johnson for Speaker next year or a leadership post in the new Congress if Republicans lose the majority.
1) User's Manual to how control of the House could flip to the Democrats before the election.
Control of the House has never changed in the middle of a Congress. But if it’s going to happen, the 118th Congress is as ripe for that possibility.
2) House Republicans face chaos in their conference. Members who planned to retire next January are now ditching Capitol Hill early. The House is an acrimonious place with yet another move afoot to dethrone the Speaker.
3) Fox is told that other Republicans are angling to get out as soon as they can. A big payday in the private sector could lure some members to cash in their voting card early.
First, let’s talk about the length of a given “Congress.”
A) From colleague Kelly Phares. There is sparring between Cotton and Tester about who is holding up an agreement to vote on the minibus spending bill.
B) Off the Senate floor, the two men came face to face while speaking to separate groups of reporters. Sen Cotton yelled at Tester over all the reporters: "Why don't you ask Senator Tester why we aren't voting?"
Sen Tester yelled back: "You can ask me anything you want!"
C) Tester then spoke to reporters: "Did Cotton say that they're holding amendments because of Jon Tester? Because if he did, he might be full of something that comes off the back of a cow"
1) There is no agreement between senators on a voting on a host of amendments related to border, migration and the Laken Riley Act. The mood in the Senate has grown increasingly dark over the past two hours and time slipping off the clock.
2) Even if the sides were to get a deal now, it would be hard to finish up before the 11:59:59 pm et deadline to align with the House.
3) “I thought we’d have it by now,” said Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND), looking at his watch, noting that deals like this usually come together around the 7 pm et hour.
When asked what the Republicans were offering, Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) replied “nothing good.”
1) Fox has learned that the Attorney General for the District of Columbia has dropped charges against Steve Nikoui for disrupting Congress during the President’s State of the Union speech earlier this month.
2) Nikoui is the father of Kareem Nikoui who was killed during the Biden Administration’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.
Fox learned of the decision this evening. The decision to drop the charges was confirmed by the Speaker’s Office.
3) Fox was told the DC AG’s office decided not to prosecute in this case just as they have in the cases of protesters in the past.
Steve Nikoui was a guest of Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) for the speech and interrupted the President, shouting “Abbey Gate!”