Connect with us

Politics

The Speaker’s Lobby: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Electing a House Speaker

Published

on

The Speaker’s Lobby: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Electing a House Speaker

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

The Constitution dictates that the 119th Congress begins at noon et on Friday. 

And the first order of business in the House is to elect the Constitutional officer for the legislative branch of government: Speaker of the House.

Advertisement

Only the House votes for Speaker. And the House can’t do anything – I’ll repeat that, anything – until it chooses a Speaker. 

It can’t swear-in Members until the House taps a Speaker and he or she is sworn-in. The Speaker then swears-in the rest of the body, en masse. Then the House must adopt a rules package to govern daily operations. Only then can the House go about debating bills, voting and constructing committees for hearings. 

HEALTHY LIVING, PARTY UNITY, ‘SMELLING THE ROSES’: CAPITOL HILL’S NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTIONS

If the House fails to elect a Speaker on the first ballot, it must proceed to a second ballot. 

And on and on.  

Advertisement

Consider for a moment that the House had never even taken a second vote for Speaker in a century before the donnybrook two years ago. It took four ballots to re-elect late House Speaker Frederick Gillett, R-Mass., in 1923. 

What is past is prologue for the House. Consider how the House consumed 15 rounds spread out over five days before electing former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in January, 2023. The Speakership remained vacant – and thus, the House frozen – for 22 days after Republicans dumped McCarthy nine months later. House Republicans then tapped House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., for Speaker. Scalise withdrew his name before there was even a floor vote. House GOPers then tapped Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to become Speaker. But Jordan lost three consecutive votes for Speaker on the House floor, bleeding support on each ballot. House Republicans then anointed House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., for Speaker. Emmer withdrew hours later. 

Fox News Digital briefly spoke with ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy during a rare appearance on Capitol Hill

House Republicans finally nominated House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for the job. The Louisiana Republican won on the floor. But some conservatives have been disappointed in Johnson ever since. They’ve flagged how he handled multiple, interim spending bills from last November on. They didn’t like that he allowed a bill on the floor to aid Ukraine. They opposed him doing yet another interim spending bill in September. They really didn’t like how he worked with Democrats on major, must-do pieces of legislation. And then there was the misstep of the staggering, 1,500-page interim spending package which Mr. Trump and Elon Musk pulverized from afar in December. Johnson then did President-elect Trump’s bidding with another spending package – which included a debt ceiling increase. But 38 House Republicans bolted on that bill. 

So Johnson’s tenure has been bumpy. And that’s why he’s on the hook come Friday afternoon during the vote for Speaker. Everyone on Capitol Hill is on tenterhooks when it comes to wrapping this up expeditiously. 

Advertisement

Here’s what will happen Friday at noon: 

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN CALLS ON INCOMING ADMINISTRATION TO TARGET ‘THE AXIS OF AGGRESSORS’

Acting House Clerk Kevin McCumber will preside until the House elects a Speaker. The first order of business is a “call of the House.” That’s where the House establishes how many of its Members-elect are there, simply voting “present.” The House should clock in at 434 members: 219 Republicans and 215 Democrats. There should be one vacancy. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., resigned in the fall – and said he did not “intend” to serve in the new Congress, despite having won reelection. 

Watch to see if there are absences in that call of the House. Fox is told that Democrats who have struggled with health issues of late – including Reps. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., Dwight Evans, D-Penn., and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., will likely be there. But the Speaker’s election is about the math. How many lawmakers report to the House chamber will dictate margins in the Speaker’s vote.

Then it’s on to nominating speeches. Incoming House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain, R-Mich., will nominate Johnson for Speaker. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., will nominate House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. Anyone else can then place someone’s name in nomination.

Advertisement

Then, the House calls the roll of Members-elect alphabetically. Each Member rises and verbally responds, calling out their choice by name. Reps. Alma Adams, D-N.C., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., and the aforementioned Aguilar are the first names out of the block.

(Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

But lawmakers can vote for anyone they want. That includes persons who aren’t House Members. That’s why there have been votes cast over the years for the late Gen. Colin Powell, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., former Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker. 

This is what Johnson – or anyone else must do – to win the Speakership:

The winning candidate must secure an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name. 

Advertisement

So let’s say there are 434 members and all vote for someone by name. The magic number is 218. If Johnson gets the votes of all 219 Republicans, he wins. If Johnson gets 218 votes, he also wins. But 217? No dice. Under those circumstances Johnson would have prospectively outpolled Jeffries, 217-215 – with two votes going to other candidates. But the “most votes” doesn’t win. 217 is not an outright majority of House Members voting for someone by name. The House must take ANOTHER ballot to elect a Speaker. 

Fox is told there are anywhere from 12 to 17 Republicans who could vote for someone besides Johnson. And some Republicans are being cagey about their votes. 

BERNIE SANDERS PLANS TO SPEARHEAD LEGISLATION ON KEY TRUMP PROPOSAL

Here’s something to watch: Members who vote “present.”

Rather than voting for someone besides Johnson, some Republicans may protest by simply voting “present.” A “present” vote does not count against Johnson. 

Advertisement

So let’s do some hypothetical math here:

Let’s say 434 Members cast ballots. Jeffries secures support from all 215 Democrats. Three Republicans vote “present.” In other words, not voting for any candidate by name. Johnson scores 216 votes. He has the most votes. But more importantly, only 431 Members voted for someone by name. 216 is an outright majority of 431. 434 doesn’t matter under these circumstances. So Johnson becomes Speaker. 

But there is serious danger in too many Republicans voting “present.” 

Consider this scenario: 

All 215 Democrats vote for Jeffries. But five Republicans vote “present.” Johnson records 214 votes. 429 Members cast ballots for someone by name. The magic number here is 215. Guess who’s Speaker? Jeffries. He marshalled an outright majority of all Members voting for a candidate by name.

Advertisement

(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

As they say in the movies, “You play a very dangerous game, Mr. Bond.”

With such a thin margin in the House, Republicans are absolutely tinkering with fire if they get too cute by half. Yes. Some conservatives might not want to re-elect Johnson as Speaker. But they certainly don’t want Jeffries. 

So it’s hard to say what happens on Friday afternoon. If the House dithers too long, this could delay the certification of the Electoral College vote on Monday. The House and Senate must meet in a Joint Session of Congress on January 6 to certify the election results. No House Speaker? No Joint Session. 

But something else will likely unfold if this drags on. Johnson loyalists and mainstream Republicans have had it with right-wing ideologues, the Freedom Caucus and other freelancers. Expect a full-on brawl between those two factions if Republicans struggle to elect a Speaker.

Advertisement

And as we wrote earlier, what is past is prologue. 

A protracted battle over the Speakership serves as prologue to the looming, internecine fights among Republicans when it comes to governing. That’s to say nothing of implementing a solitary plank of President-elect Trump’s agenda.

Politics

Iran fires missiles at US bases across Middle East after American strikes on nuclear, IRGC sites

Published

on

Iran fires missiles at US bases across Middle East after American strikes on nuclear, IRGC sites

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Iran launched missile and drone strikes targeting U.S. military facilities in multiple Middle Eastern countries Friday, retaliating after coordinated U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear-linked sites.

Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Jordan, according to regional officials and state media accounts. Several of those governments said their air defense systems intercepted incoming projectiles.

It remains unclear whether any U.S. service members were killed or injured, and the extent of potential damage to American facilities has not yet been confirmed. U.S. officials have not publicly released casualty figures or formal damage assessments.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) described the operation as a direct response to what Tehran called “aggression” against Iranian territory earlier in the day. Iranian officials claimed they targeted U.S. military infrastructure and command facilities.

Advertisement

Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, pictured above. (Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Adelola Tinubu/U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/U.S. 5th Fleet )

The United States military earlier carried out strikes against what officials described as high-value Iranian targets, including IRGC facilities, naval assets and underground sites believed to be associated with Iran’s nuclear program. One U.S. official told Fox News that American forces had “suppressed” Iranian air defenses in the initial wave of strikes.

Tomahawk cruise missiles were used in the opening phase of the U.S. operation, according to a U.S. official. The campaign was described as a multi-geographic operation designed to overwhelm Iran’s defensive capabilities and could continue for multiple days. Officials also indicated the U.S. employed one-way attack drones in combat for the first time.

IF KHAMENEI FALLS, WHO TAKES IRAN? STRIKES WILL EXPOSE POWER VACUUM — AND THE IRGC’S GRIP

Smoke rises after reported Iranian missile attacks, following strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, Feb. 28, 2026. (Reuters)

Advertisement

Iran’s retaliatory barrage targeted countries that host American forces, including Bahrain — home to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet — as well as Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and the UAE’s Al Dhafra Air Base. Authorities in those nations reported intercepting many of the incoming missiles. At least one civilian was killed in the UAE by falling debris, according to local authorities.

Iranian officials characterized their response as proportionate and warned of additional action if strikes continue. A senior U.S. official described the Iranian retaliation as “ineffective,” though independent assessments of the overall impact are still developing.

Smoke rises over the city after the Israeli army launched a second wave of airstrikes on Iran in Tehran on Feb. 28, 2026. (Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Regional governments condemned the strikes on their territory as violations of sovereignty, raising the risk that additional countries could become directly involved if escalation continues.

Advertisement

The situation remains fluid, with military and diplomatic channels active across the region. Pentagon officials are expected to provide further updates as damage assessments and casualty reviews are completed.

Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report. 

Related Article

Iraq War flashbacks? Experts say Trump’s Iran buildup signals pressure campaign, not regime change
Continue Reading

Politics

Why Iran resists giving up its nuclear program, even as Trump threatens strikes

Published

on

Why Iran resists giving up its nuclear program, even as Trump threatens strikes

Embassy staffers and dependents evacuating, airlines suspending service, eyes in Iran warily turning skyward for signs of an attack.

The prospects of a showdown between the U.S. and Iran loom ever higher, as massive American naval and air power lies in wait off Iran’s shores and land borders.

Yet little of that urgency is felt in Iran’s government. Rather than quickly acquiescing to President Trump’s demands, Iranian diplomats persist in the kind of torturously slow diplomatic dance that marked previous discussions with the U.S., a pace that prompted Trump to declare on Friday that the Iranians were not negotiating in “good faith.”

But For Iran’s leadership, Iranian experts say, concessions of the sort Trump are asking for about nuclear power and the country’s role in the Middle East undermine the very ethos of the Islamic Republic and the decades-old project it has created.

“As an Islamic theocracy, Iran serves as a role model for the Islamic world. And as a role model, we cannot capitulate,” said Hamid Reza Taraghi, who heads international affairs for Iran’s Islamic Coalition Party, or Hezb-e Motalefeh Eslami.

Advertisement

Besides, he added, “militarily we are strong enough to fight back and make any enemy regret attacking us.”

Even as another round of negotiations ended with no resolution this week, the U.S. has completed a buildup involving more than 150 aircraft into the region, along with roughly a third of all active U.S. ships.

Observers say those forces remain insufficient for anything beyond a short campaign of a few weeks or a high-intensity kinetic strike.

Iran would be sure to retaliate, perhaps against an aircraft carrier or the many U.S. military bases arrayed in the region. Though such an attack is unlikely to destroy its target, it could damage or at least disrupt operations, demonstrating that “American power is not untouchable,” said Hooshang Talé, a former Iranian parliamentarian.

Tehran could also mobilize paramilitary groups it cultivated in the region, including Iraqi militias and Yemen’s Houthis, Talé added. Other U.S. rivals, such as Russia and China, may seize the opportunity to launch their own campaigns elsewhere in the world while the U.S. remains preoccupied in the Middle East, he said.

Advertisement

“From this perspective, Iran would not be acting entirely alone,” Tale said. “Indirect alignment among U.S. adversaries — even without a formal alliance — would create a cascading effect.”

We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons

— President Trump

The U.S. demands Iran give up all nuclear enrichment and relinquish existing stockpiles of enriched uranium so as to stop any path to developing a bomb. Iran has repeatedly stated it does not want to build a nuclear weapon and that nuclear enrichment would be for exclusively peaceful purposes.

Advertisement

The Trump administration has also talked about curtailing Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support to proxy groups, such as Hezbollah, in the region, though those have not been consistent demands. Tehran insists the talks should be limited to the nuclear issue.

After indirect negotiations on Thursday, Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi — the mediator for the talks in Geneva — lauded what he said was “significant progress.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said there had been “constructive proposals.”

Trump, however, struck a frustrated tone when speaking to reporters on Friday.

“We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons,” he said.

Trump also downplayed concerns that an attack could escalate into a longer conflict.

Advertisement

This frame grab from footage circulating on social media shows protesters dancing and cheering around a bonfire during an anti-government protest in Tehran, Iran, on Jan. 9.

(Uncredited / Associated Press)

“I guess you could say there’s always a risk. You know, when there’s war, there’s a risk in anything, both good and bad,” Trump said.

Three days earlier, in his State of the Union address Tuesday, said, “My preference is to solve this problem through diplomacy. But one thing is certain, I will never allow the world’s number one sponsor of terror, which they are by far, to have a nuclear weapon — can’t let that happen.”

Advertisement

There are other signs an attack could be imminent.

On Friday, the U.S. Embassy in Israel allowed staff to leave the country if they wished. That followed an earlier move this week to evacuate dependents in the embassy in Lebanon. Other countries have followed suit, including the U.K, which pulled its embassy staff in Tehran. Meanwhile, several airlines have suspended service to Israel and Iran.

A U.S. military campaign would come at a sensitive time for Iran’s leadership.

The country’s armed forces are still recovering from the June war with Israel and the U.S, which left more than 1,200 people dead and more than 6,000 injured in Iran. In Israel, 28 people were killed and dozens injured.

Unrest in January — when security forces killed anywhere from 3,000 to 30,000 protesters (estimates range wildly) — means the government has no shortage of domestic enemies. Meanwhile, long-term sanctions have hobbled Iran’s economy and left most Iranians desperately poor.

Advertisement

Despite those vulnerabilities, observers say the U.S. buildup is likely to make Iran dig in its heels, especially because it would not want to set the precedent of giving up positions at the barrel of a U.S. gun.

Other U.S. demands would constitute red lines. Its missile arsenal, for example, counts as its main counter to the U.S. and Israel, said Rose Kelanic, Director of the Middle East Program at the Defense Priorities think tank.

“Iran’s deterrence policy is defense by attrition. They act like a porcupine so the bear will drop them… The missiles are the quills,” she said, adding that the strategy means Iran cannot fully defend against the U.S., but could inflict pain.

At the same time, although mechanisms to monitor nuclear enrichment exist, reining in Tehran’s support for proxy groups would be a much harder matter to verify.

But the larger issue is that Iran doesn’t trust Trump to follow through on whatever the negotiations reach.

Advertisement

After all, it was Trump who withdrew from an Obama-era deal designed to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, despite widespread consensus Iran was in compliance.

Trump and numerous other critics complained Iran was not constrained in its other “malign activities,” such as support for militant groups in the Middle East and development of ballistic missiles. The Trump administration embarked on a policy of “maximum pressure” hoping to bring Iran to its knees, but it was met with what Iran watchers called maximum resistance.

In June, he joined Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, a move that didn’t result in the Islamic Republic returning to negotiations and accepting Trump’s terms. And he has waxed wistfully about regime change.

“Trump has worked very hard to make U.S. threats credible by amassing this huge military force offshore, and they’re extremely credible at this point,” Kelanic said.

“But he also has to make his assurances credible that if Iran agrees to U.S. demands, that the U.S. won’t attack Iran anyway.”

Advertisement

Talé, the former parliamentarian, put it differently.

“If Iranian diplomats demonstrate flexibility, Trump will be more emboldened,” he said. “That’s why Iran, as a sovereign nation, must not capitulate to any foreign power, including America.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

Published

on

Video: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

new video loaded: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

transcript

transcript

Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.

“Cause we don’t know when the video will be out. I don’t know when the transcript will be out. We’ve asked that they be out as quickly as possible.” “I don’t like seeing him deposed, but they certainly went after me a lot more than that.” “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify. So we’re once again going to make that call that we did yesterday. We are now asking and demanding that President Trump officially come in and testify in front of the Oversight Committee.” “Ranking Member Garcia asked President Clinton, quote, ‘Should President Trump be called to answer questions from this committee?’ And President Clinton said, that’s for you to decide. And the president went on to say that the President Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved. “The way Chairman Comer described it, I don’t think is a complete, accurate description of what actually was said. So let’s release the full transcript.”

Advertisement
Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.

By Jackeline Luna

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending