Frustration is boiling over among rank-and-file House Republicans with leaders’ practice of trying to mollify critics by bestowing plum posts and other perks.

The latest example: Speaker Mike Johnson’s appointment of Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) to the prestigious House Intelligence Committee. Given the former Freedom Caucus chair’s tendency to cross his own party leaders – not to mention his role in a federal investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election – his rise to the panel infuriated colleagues who see it as a sign that the party’s incentive structure is broken.

Many Republicans, including those on the Intelligence panel, had viewed Perry as ineligible before Johnson’s announcement in light of his polarizing history. But when the speaker blindsided the panel’s chair and GOP members with the appointment, shock quickly gave way to rage.

“It upends the meritocracy that has long been the defining practice on Intel,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said in an interview.

He followed with a warning other Republicans have echoed more privately: that rewarding behavior like Perry’s will only encourage more antics among hardliners, like tanking procedural votes, blocking bills or even future moves to oust a speaker.

Crenshaw, a member of the Intelligence panel, added: “The speaker needs to remember that there isn’t only one group that can threaten them. … Just do not teach the lesson that the only way for us to be effective here is threatening, because I’ll take the lesson and I’ll do it.”

Johnson handed the committee spot to Perry, a retired Army National Guard brigadier general with nearly 40 years of service, after heavy lobbying from the House Freedom Caucus. Some in the conference have speculated that the GOP leader capitulated to threats from the right-leaning group that it would cause further trouble if he did not agree.

The announcement, however, was happily received by Perry and his allies, some of whom have tried for years to get Perry on the panel that often deals with highly sensitive national security-related materials.

More broadly, some argued that the Intelligence panel, which tries to rise above partisan infighting, didn’t have full representation across the GOP’s ideological spectrum. (Notably, Democrats have not named more pugnacious progressives to the panel, either.)

Perry responded in a statement: “My 40 years of experience and service to our Nation speaks for itself.”

Beyond Crenshaw, a person familiar with the sitdowns said two separate groups of Republicans met with Johnson this week to share their frustrations about Perry’s appointment. That includes members of the Intelligence Committee who plan to meet with him on Thursday.

One Republican, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, said no previous committee assignment has sparked as much internal anger as Johnson’s decision about Perry.

Another GOP member added that Perry’s appointment “was the talk for a day or two” among Republicans during their recent trip to France because of how “angry” lawmakers are.

“There’s a lot of pissed people. A lot of angry people. …It’s a coveted spot, and a lot of people who have worked hard to be good team players feel like they are getting passed over,” the second GOP member said, adding that Republicans feel like Johnson is “rewarding bad behavior.”

It’s also a matter of the Republicans whom Johnson passed over along the way.

Reps. Laurel Lee (R-Fla.) and Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) were both viewed as in the running for the Intelligence Committee spot — both viewed within the conference as “team players” but now leapfrogged over. Reps. Blake Moore (R-Utah) and Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), who was promoted to rank of Air Force colonel this week, were also passed over.

Republicans are further fuming over Johnson’s failure to notify Intelligence Chair Mike Turner (R-Ohio) as well as other GOP members about his decision to appoint Perry.

The second GOP member called the move “not acceptable.” A third GOP lawmaker, also granted anonymity to speak candidly, said that Turner privately indicated he wasn’t consulted on Perry’s appointment.

Johnson’s office has also defended Perry, arguing that he will serve the panel well.

Another senior Republican member expressed surprise about the decision to put Perry on the Intelligence Committee but added that the Pennsylvania Republican had been “pretty helpful” at navigating divisions within the GOP conference at key moments.

“Perry’s got a good background for the committee,” this member added.

Donald Trump made a small peace offering Thursday to the remaining House Republicans who voted to impeach him after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, according to three members in the room.

“He referenced that there was one person left in the room that had voted for impeachment and that he is staying and that’s good. We need a bigger Republican majority,” said Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), describing Trump’s comments in a wider speech to the conference Thursday morning.

Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) agreed that the comments were “forward thinking” and “about winning the election.”

It’s a flip from Trump’s previous behavior. Since that second impeachment vote in early 2021, Trump had habitually attacked the 10 House Republicans who supported it, including backing some of their primary challengers. There are two GOP members left in the chamber who voted for that impeachment: Reps. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) and David Valadao (R-Calif.). Trump seemed to be referring to Valadao, who had skipped the meeting.

Newhouse had attended, but dismissed Trump’s comments when reporters asked if he read them as a dig at him, saying “he didn’t mention me at all.”

Sarah Ferris contributed to this report.

Donald Trump delivered a campaign-trail message to House Republicans on abortion during their Thursday meeting: Lean into it as an issue for the states.

According to a person in the room who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, Trump urged fellow Republicans to hit Democrats as too radical on the issue, which he acknowledged hurt GOP candidates in 2022 after conservative Supreme Court justices ruled to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Trump’s recommendation to his party: Talk about abortion access as a state issue, not a federal one, now that Roe’s reversal ended the national right to abortion — and try to turn it into a positive for the GOP.

The former president told lawmakers that “it’s left up to the states and that he supports the states’ handling of it,” Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) told reporters.

That view “didn’t land one way or the other” among lawmakers who were “respectfully listening,” Hill added.

Broadly speaking, several GOP members said Trump didn’t go too deeply into policymaking specifics as he touched on issues.

“I didn’t hear any agenda talk,” said Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.), describing the private club confab as “a pep talk.”

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) agreed: “He talked about politics. … It was about winning.”

According to Carter and Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), however, Trump did touch on taxes — specifically, support for a change to how tipped workers’ wages are taxed.

It wasn’t a given that Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) would show up to Thursday’s House GOP meeting with Donald Trump. After all, the Freedom Caucus chair is fighting for his political life against a Trump-backed primary challenger.

But Good showed up. And Trump responded with what sounded to at least one person in the room like a subtle jab at him.

Discussing his participation in tele-town halls during campaign season with House Republicans, Trump said: “There’s a couple in this room who aren’t so happy with that statement,” according to this person in the room, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Trump is holding one of those tele-town halls with Good’s GOP challenger, John McGuire, on Monday — one day before the Virginia GOP primary — per a second person who was granted anonymity to speak candidly.

Outside the private club just steps from the Capitol where Donald Trump met with House Republicans on Thursday, protesters hollered invective at GOP lawmakers who entered.

Inside the room, the mood was downright jovial.

Republicans handed the former president and presumptive 2024 nominee the game ball from their victory in Wednesday night’s Congressional Baseball Game, according to a person in the room who was granted anonymity to candidly share details. Trump added his own feel-good sentiment, praising Speaker Mike Johnson for “doing a great job,” per that person and a second in the room.

And Trump later made a wry reference to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) ongoing feud with Johnson, according to a third person in the room, pointing at the speaker and asking the MAGA firebrand: “Are you being nice to him?”

After his meeting with House Republicans, Trump is scheduled to address the Business Roundtable and then meet off the Hill with Senate Republicans.

Members of Congress try to create some fireworks with their play on the field every year at the annual Congressional Baseball Game. But this year’s edition saw some dramatic moments beyond the game itself.

Eight climate protesters at Wednesday night’s game stormed the field, prompting some momentary havoc. Jumping over the stands, the protesters donned shirts calling for an end to fossil fuels while galloping into the outfield. But few made it far — and none made it even close to the infield. All eight were swiftly tackled and arrested by police officers who’d been manning the perimeter.

The group Climate Defiance claimed credit for the disruption, boasting on social media that gameplay had paused.

“Congress sends billions of public $$ to subsidize deadly fossil fuels — but the police are tackling us instead,” the post read. “This Chevron-sponsored game cannot continue. This is unconscionable.”

Some climate protesters were also spotted outside a handful of entrances to the field, waving posters and chanting.

But aside from the momentary disruption, the game itself quickly descended the expected Republican rout.

The GOP team trounced their Democratic colleagues 31-11. Hardly a score you’d see in any professional baseball game, it was a striking run total for the GOP team, far surpassing scores from years past. For instance: Republicans won last year 16-6. Democrats have not won a game since 2019.

Still, the game lived up to its brand. Members of Congress donned their best baseball pants and surely not-so-broken-in gloves. Wednesday night, Republicans wore matching ruby-red jerseys while Democrats sported a mix of attire, including jerseys for other MLB teams. Staffers flocked to the stands and sat in split sections for Republicans and Democrats.

Surely, there’s going to be some gloating around the Hill on Thursday.

House Republicans voted on Wednesday to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress — dramatically escalating their fight with the Justice Department.

There was lingering skepticism just hours before the 216-207 vote about whether GOP leaders would be able to lock down the near unity required. Ultimately, nearly every Republican voted to take the largely symbolic step, which refers the attorney general to the DOJ for prosecution, with Democrats united in opposition.

Only Ohio Rep. David Joyce voted against it on the Republican side.

“As a former prosecutor, I cannot in good conscience support a resolution that would further politicize our judicial system to score political points. The American people expect Congress to work for them, solve policy problems, and prioritize good governance. Enough is enough,” Joyce said after the vote.

Garland is the first person to be held in contempt since Republicans took control of the House last year. The resolution cites his refusal to hand over audio of President Joe Biden’s interview with former special counsel Robert Hur, who was investigating Biden’s mishandling of classified documents. It’s unlikely Garland will face charges — a decision that’s expected to be up to U.S. attorney Matthew Graves — particularly after Biden asserted executive privilege over the audio.

“I think the case is so compelling. I think A, they’ve already waived the privilege, and B, we’re in an impeachment inquiry … and we’re entitled to the best evidence,” Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who issued one of the two subpoenas demanding the audio from Garland, said in a brief interview.

Garland and DOJ officials had pushed back against handing over the audio, warning that it could negatively impact cooperation in future investigations. They also argued, contrary to GOP claims, that by handing over the transcript they didn’t waive executive privilege for the audio.

“It is deeply disappointing that this House of Representatives has turned a serious congressional authority into a partisan weapon. Today’s vote disregards the constitutional separation of powers, the Justice Department’s need to protect its investigations, and the substantial amount of information we have provided to the Committees,” Garland said in a statement after the vote.

In a recent court filing, DOJ officials also aired concerns that releasing it to the public would make it easier to manipulate the audio or create deep fakes — a fear raised by congressional Democrats who worried Republicans wanted the audio to splice it into campaign ads. That worry particularly centers around incidents in the interview when Biden reportedly had trouble remembering key details, prompting Hur to write in his report that a jury would see Biden as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” The White House has pushed back on that description, saying it was inaccurate and improper to include.

Additionally, Democrats argue Republicans’ focus on the audio is more about showing progress on their long-stalled impeachment inquiry into Biden, which has mainly focused on the business deals of his family members.

“Hearing the President’s words rather than reading them … certainly will not reveal any new evidence of an impeachable offense,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, wrote in a memo to members ahead of the vote.

That argument didn’t deter centrists from voting to hold Garland in contempt, though many have been skeptical of their party’s broader efforts to antagonize the Justice Department.

Some Republicans, including GOP investigators and members of leadership, have publicly questioned if the audio matches the transcript, which the Justice Department has already given to Congress and was released publicly. A DOJ official, in a court filing with outside groups seeking the audio, said that the audio matched the transcript aside from minor instances like the use of filler words or repeated phrases. The official noted that both Hur and FBI personnel present for the interview agreed with the assessment.

One centrist Republican, who was granted anonymity to discuss private conversations, said they had personally told the Justice Department recently that “we should hear the audio.”

That GOP member raised Hur’s description of Biden as having a faulty memory, saying that when a then-special counsel raises that issue then “there’s a problem. That’s just the facts of life.”

The move to hold Garland in contempt is the biggest blow Republicans have been able to land on the Justice Department as they push back on a slew of charges and convictions against former President Donald Trump. And it will likely be welcome news to the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, who plans to speak with congressional Republicans near the Capitol on Thursday.

There’s more coming on Garland, too. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) has warned that she will try to hold Garland in “inherent contempt” 10 days after Wednesday’s vote if the Justice Department “doesn’t do its job.” The rarely used tool would let the House sergeant at arms take Garland into custody for a congressional proceeding. Many centrist Republicans would almost certainly oppose that effort — and several lawmakers have acknowledged they don’t really know what it means.

Rather, the GOP’s fight over the audio is likely to end up playing out in court, where outside conservative groups and a coalition of news organizations have also sued for the recordings. That legal battle, which Republicans have hinted is coming, likely won’t conclude before the election.