As the dust settles on Congress frantically passing a stopgap bill at the eleventh hour to avoid a government shutdown, lawmakers are having their say on a chaotic week on Capitol Hill.

President Biden signed the 118-page bill into law on Saturday, extending government funding into March, the White House announced. The bill provides over $100 billion in disaster aid for those affected by storms Helene and Milton in the U.S. Southeast earlier this year. It also includes a $10 billion provision for economic assistance to farmers. 

President Biden has not yet publicly commented on the passage of the legislation, nor has President-elect Trump, although sources tell Fox that the incoming president is not that happy about the bill, because it does not suspend the debt ceiling. 

PRESIDENT BIDEN SIGNS STOPGAP FUNDING BILL INTO LAW, NARROWLY AVERTING SHUTDOWN

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who faced criticism from both Republicans and Democrats for his handling of the negotiations, said after the House vote that the result was “a good outcome for the country.” He said he had spoken with Trump and that the president-elect “was certainly happy about this outcome, as well.”

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., considered the legislation a win for his party. 

“The House Democrats have successfully stopped extreme MAGA Republicans from shutting down the government, crashing the economy and hurting working-class Americans all across the nation,” Jeffries said, referring to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., praised Democrats, including Jeffries and Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., for “their unity and courage withstanding the Trump-Musk irresponsibility.”

“Democrats will always fight to protect the needs of America’s working families, veterans, seniors, farmers and first responders against the GOP’s agenda for billionaires and special interests.”

A bulging 1,547-page continuing resolution was thrown into disarray earlier in the week following objections by Elon Musk and President-elect Trump. A slimmed-down version was then rejected by House members on Thursday before the House approved Speaker Mike Johnson’s new bill overwhelmingly on Friday by 366 votes to 34.

The Senate worked into early Saturday morning to pass the bill 85-11, just after the deadline.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, who faced criticism from both Republicans and Democrats for his handling of the negotiations said after the House vote that the result is “a good outcome for the country.” (AP/J. Scott Applewhite)

WHITE HOUSE PRESSED ON BIDEN REFUSING TO SPEAK PUBLICLY AHEAD OF SHUTDOWN

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer praised the passage of the funding legislation early Saturday.

“There will be no government shutdown right before Christmas,” Schumer wrote on X. “We will keep the government open with a bipartisan bill that funds the government, helps Americans affected by hurricanes and natural disasters, helps our farmers and avoids harmful cuts.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., said the revised funding package keeps government funded at current levels, delivers aid to Americans suffering from natural disasters and protects agricultural supply chains. 

“Not only is this straightforward bill much more palatable to me, but it respects the taxpayers we represent, unlike the previous backroom boondoggle I opposed that was over 1,500 pages long and gave unnecessary and costly giveaways to the Democrats,” Malliotakis wrote on X. 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer gives a thumbs up when walking out of the Senate Chamber after speaking on the floor of the Senate on Dec. 20, 2024. ((Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images))

“Passing this legislation today gives us what we need until President Trump is sworn in and settled so our Republican trifecta can deliver the results the American people voted for.”

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., questioned why President Biden appeared to play a limited role in negotiations.

“People fail to recognize that even though the focus has been on President Trump, Joe Biden is actually still the president, which is really mind-boggling, because nobody’s heard from him in weeks,” Lawler told Fox and Friends Weekend on Saturday, adding that the debt ceiling has been used as a “political piñata for decades.” 

“The party in the minority uses it as leverage in a negotiation, and I think what President Trump is trying to avoid is giving Democrats a loaded gun to hold to his head here.”

Elsewhere, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., applauded the Senate for approving the D.C. Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium Campus Revitalization Act, which he had introduced and helped pass in the House.

The bill would give the District of Columbia control of the 174-acre RFK campus and revive potential plans for a new Washington Commanders stadium.

Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., applauded the Senate for approving the D.C. Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium Campus Revitalization Act (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The surprising move came after a provision in the initial continuing resolution (CR) — to transfer control of the RFK campus from the federal government to the District — was eliminated from Thursday’s slimmed down version of the bill.

“The Senate’s passage of the D.C. RFK Stadium Campus Revitalization Act is a historic moment for our nation’s capital. If Congress failed to act today, this decaying land in Washington would continue to cost taxpayers a fortune to maintain,” Comer said.

“Revitalizing this RFK Memorial Stadium site has been a top economic priority for the city, and I am proud to have partnered with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to get this bill across the finish line and to the President’s desk. This bipartisan success is a testament to the House Oversight Committee’s unwavering effort to protect taxpayers and our full commitment to ensuring a capital that is prosperous for residents and visitors for generations to come,” he added.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

After the government pushed for the breakup of Google, accusing it of business practices that violate antitrust laws, the Mountain View, Calif., tech giant proposed its own solutions on Friday — to restructure its business contracts instead.

“Regulating a fast-changing industry like search with an invasive decree like the one proposed by Plaintiffs would harm competition, innovation, and consumers,” Google said in a court filingFriday.

The request comes after a federal judge in August found that the tech company had illegally maintained a monopoly in search. Google said it disagreed with the decision and plans to appeal.

Amit P. Mehta, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is now trying to decide on ways to restore competition. Last month, the U.S. Department of Justice and several states proposed solutions to fix what it described as Google’s illegal search monopoly that included forcing the company to sell Chrome.

Google’s proposed fixes are more narrow than what the DOJ suggested. What the judge decides could reshape the future of the internet and affect Google’s ad business.

In a court filing, Google proposed putting limits around its contracts with mobile device manufacturers and wireless carriers. For example, Google proposed that it wouldn’t enter an agreement with Apple in which it’s the default search engine unless its partners were allowed to set a different default search annually in the United States and promote other search services.

“We don’t propose these changes lightly. They would come at a cost to our partners by regulating how they must go about picking the best search engine for their customers,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs in a blog post.

The nearly 300-page landmark ruling by Mehta partly focuses on how Google held onto its dominance by paying major companies such as Apple and Samsung so it’s the default search engine on web browsers and mobile devices. These agreements hindered Google’s rivals from growing and reduced the incentive for other companies to invest in search, the judge found.

“The truth is, no new entrant could hope to compete with Google for the default on Firefox or any other browser,” the judge wrote. “Google’s query and quality advantage and high revenue share payments are strong incentives simply to stay put.”

Google’s default placements on Mozilla’s Firefox made up 80% of Mozilla’s operating revenue, the decision says. But Google also pays Apple more money than all its other partners combined. In 2022, Google paid Apple an estimated $20 billion so it could be the default search engine on the Safari browser.

This week, Mozilla raised concerns that some of the DOJ’s proposed solutions could harm web browsers. One of the potential fixes include preventing Google from entering revenue share agreements tied to the distribution of its search services.

“By jeopardizing the revenue streams of critical browser competitors, these remedies risk unintentionally strengthening the positions of a handful of powerful players,” Mozilla wrote in a blog post. Mozilla said that Google was the default search engine in Firefox in the United States because it “provides the best search experience for our users.”

Outside of partnerships with major tech companies, there are other ways Google maintains control over the way people access search engines. Google also runs popular web browser Chrome and a mobile operating system Android.

Last month, the DOJ and several states urged the judge to force Google to sell Chrome. The agency also suggested requiring the tech company to display a “choice screen” on every Google browser when a user hasn’t chosen a default search engine so people know there are other options available.

Other ideas the government floated include allowing publishers to opt out of having Google use their content to train artificial intelligence tools and giving advertisers more control over ads that show up in search results.

Google pushed back against the government’s proposed solutions, calling the approach an “unprecedented government overreach.”

Mehta is expected to decide on solutions by August 2025.

EXCLUSIVE: Senate Republicans are demanding answers on whether confidential human sources from Justice Department agencies beyond the FBI were used on Jan. 6, 2021, while also questioning whether Inspector General Michael Horowitz thoroughly reviewed classified and unclassified communications between handlers and their sources, warning that without that review, there may be a “major blind spot” in his findings. 

Horowitz last week released his highly anticipated report that there were more than two dozen FBI confidential human sources in the crowd outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but only three were assigned by the bureau to be present for the event. Horowitz said none of the sources were authorized or directed by the FBI to “break the law” or “encourage others to commit illegal acts.” 

But now, Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., are demanding further information from Horowitz, writing to him in a letter exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital that it is “unclear” if his office reviewed the use of confidential human sources by other DOJ components during the Capitol riot. 

DOJ IG REVEALS 26 FBI INFORMANTS WERE PRESENT ON JAN. 6

“This IG report was a step in the right direction, but Senator Johnson and I still have questions the Justice Department needs to account for,” Grassley told Fox News Digital. “The American people deserve a full picture of whether Justice Department sources from its component agencies, in addition to the FBI, were present on January 6, what their role was, and whether DOJ had knowledge of their attendance.” 

Grassley told Fox News Digital that Horowitz and his team “must redouble its efforts to make sure it has reviewed all relevant information and provide a sufficient response to our inquiry.” 

Sen. Chuck Grassley in the U.S. Capitol after the Senate luncheons on Sept. 24, 2024. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Johnson told Fox News Digital he believes the report made public last week “may have only provided a fraction of the story regarding the presence and activities of confidential human sources or undercover federal agents in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021.” 

“I urge the Inspector General’s office to be fully transparent about their work to ensure that Congress and the public have an accurate and complete understanding about what it actually reviewed,” Johnson said.

DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL DOES NOT DENY FBI INFORMANTS WERE AMONG JAN 6 CROWD

In their letter to Horowitz, Grassley and Johnson noted that the inspector general’s office received more than 500,000 documents from the Justice Department and its components as part of its investigation. 

“According to the report, your office obtained: CHS reporting, thousands of tips provided to the FBI, investigative and intelligence records from the FBI case management system, emails, instant messages, and phone records; contemporaneous notes of meetings and telephone calls; chronologies concerning the lead-up of events to January 6; after-action assessments; training materials and policy guides; and preparatory materials for press conferences or congressional testimony as well as talking points,” they wrote. 

Grassley and Johnson told Horowitz “it is vital” that his office “more precisely explain what records it sought and received from all DOJ component agencies.” 

Grassley and Johnson are demanding answers on whether Horowitz obtained evidence on whether other DOJ component agencies had tasked or untasked undercover confidential human sources in the Washington, D.C., area or at the Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021. 

TRUMP SAYS WRAY RESIGNATION ‘GREAT DAY FOR AMERICA,’ TOUTS KASH PATEL AS ‘MOST QUALIFIED’ TO LEAD FBI

They are also asking if all communications were obtained between DOJ component agency handlers and confidential human sources or undercover agents present in the D.C. area, and whether he has received classified and unclassified non-email communication platforms used by the FBI. 

Grassley and Johnson are also demanding Horowitz share all FD-1023 forms, or confidential human source reporting documents, used in the investigation with them. 

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz speaks during a Senate Judiciary hearing on Sept. 15. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

As for his initial report, Horowitz “determined that none of these FBI CHSs was authorized by the FBI to enter the Capitol or a restricted area or to otherwise break the law on January 6, nor was any CHS directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit illegal acts on January 6.” 

The report revealed that the FBI had a minor supporting role in responding on Jan. 6, 2021 – largely because the event was not deemed at the highest security level by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). 

Horowitz, though, said the FBI took significant and appropriate steps to prepare for that role. 

According to the report, there were a total of 26 confidential human sources in the crowd that day, but only three of them were assigned by the bureau to be there. 

One of the three confidential human sources tasked by the FBI to attend the rally entered the Capitol building, while the other two entered the restricted area around the Capitol. 

If a confidential human source is directed to be at a certain event, they are paid by the FBI for their time.