A House Administration subpanel has released its first analysis of what Speaker Mike Johnson deemed an “incomplete” record of the events of Jan. 6 as found by a special select panel last Congress.

The committee vowed to hold additional hearings throughout the year, beginning Tuesday with a hearing on the unsolved case of two pipe bombs left at the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee that day, and produce a final report before the end of 2024.

Republicans used their majority analysis Monday as an attempt to relitigate old battles waged by the Jan. 6 select committee, accusing the panel of violating House rules and suppressing key pieces of evidence to hurt former President Donald Trump — old allegations the committee sharply rejected.

The 80-page report focuses heavily on the select committee’s origin and structure — which withstood repeated legal challenges by witnesses who had been subpoenaed to testify — contending that the committee’s designation of then-Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as both its vice chair and ranking minority member violated House rules.

Republicans also scolded the panel for turning over some of its most sensitive transcripts to the White House and Department of Homeland Security, which prevented them from being publicly released. The panel has argued that the Biden administration would only permit those witnesses — White House military aides and valets, as well as Secret Service officials — to testify under agreements that they would get to scrub the transcripts for sensitive operational details.

The report is also a compilation of familiar swipes at the select committee, labeling its purpose “partisan” and questioning the testimony of a major witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, who provided sensational accounts of Trump’s movements that day — some of it which she said had been relayed to her via other White House officials.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), head of the Administration subcommittee, said the select panel last Congress “promoted hearsay and cherry-picked information to promote its political goal” of prosecuting Trump.

House Republicans have released thousands of hours of security footage from the insurrection and have vowed to continue to do so as it becomes available.

A bipartisan Kentucky duo is renewing a push to ban no-knock warrants in the aftermath of the death of Breonna Taylor, as Congress has struggled to enact policing reforms.

Sen. Rand Paul (R) and Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D), flanked by Taylor’s mother at an event in Kentucky, vowed to keep fighting to ban the practice nearly four years after her death. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), who played a key role in prior police reform negotiations, will be the lead Democratic co-sponsor of the bill in the Senate.

“I’m very hopeful that this will move forward. I’m sorry, that took the death of Breonna to get everybody unified,” Paul said. “We might try to see if it can pass unanimously.”

Taylor died in March 2020 after police in Louisville forced entry into her apartment through a no-knock raid.

“We think this legislation is necessary because it will continue to halt the practice of no-knock warrants in Kentucky and nationwide — and it’s very effective,” McGarvey said.

The office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declined to comment on whether he’d back the measure.

Context: There was a surge in police reform talks following the murder of George Floyd, a Black man who was killed by Minneapolis police in 2020. But the talks ultimately collapsed in September 2021, with negotiators saying their differences were simply too vast.

Booker pronounced himself as “sobered” in February 2023 by those talks collapsing, but indicated he thought something short of comprehensive police reform could still get done. There’s been little indication of movement in Congress since that time.

“It’s been four years. It’s been hard — it continues to be hard — but I still fight and I still make sure that what happened to Brianna doesn’t happen again,” said Taylor’s mother, Tamika Palmer.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said Monday she’ll seek unanimous consent this week for a vote on her bill that would expand access to in-vitro fertilization for all veterans.

The move came after an anticipated announcement Monday by the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense that they are expanding access to IVF, updating rules that had required beneficiaries to be legally married and restricted access for same-sex couples.

Under the changed rules, veterans still need to show that their fertility issues were caused by their service under existing law, which Murray’s bill would change to apply to all veterans.

The agencies’ decision comes after a legal challenge to their IVF policies. A lawsuit was filed in August, well before IVF took over the national conversation last month after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled frozen embryos are people. Murray’s push for unanimous consent is just the latest example of Democrats trying to capitalize on the issue ahead of the 2024 election and in the wake of the Dobbs decision returning abortion rights to the states.

“VA’s announcement is an important step forward that will help more veterans start and grow their families—and it’s especially timely as IVF is under attack from the far right,” Murray said in a release. “I will seek unanimous consent on the Senate floor to pass my bill that would help more veterans and servicemembers build their families and ensure no future administration can rip away the progress DoD and VA have made.”

A similar bid late last month by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) for her bill that would protect access to IVF nationwide failed after Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) blocked the vote. Murray’s bill has no Republican co-sponsors.

The policy: The VA has said it will align with the DOD’s changing policy, which requires beneficiaries to have had a “serious or severe illness/injury” during service that caused them to lose their ability to have children without assistive reproductive technology.

The agencies announced they will soon offer IVF to unmarried beneficiaries and ones in same-sex marriages, as well as those using donated sperm or eggs. The VA plans to begin delivering this care in “the coming weeks,” it said in a release Monday.

“This expansion of care has long been a priority for us, and we are working urgently to make sure that eligible unmarried Veterans, Veterans in same-sex marriages, and Veterans who need donors will have access to IVF in every part of the country as soon as possible,” VA Secretary Denis McDonough said in a release.

President Joe Biden used his official budget request as a campaign leaflet, taking a first-term victory lap and calling out Donald Trump by name.

In sending the annual budget request to Congress on Monday, Biden accused Trump and Republicans of “deliberately” hiding the cost of tax cuts to corporations and multi-millionaires. And the president made clear that he’s staking his reelection pitch on economic recovery four years after the Covid pandemic, looking to build on investments in national security while tackling student loan debt, housing and child care affordability, as well as a looming Social Security cliff.

“We have to acknowledge that the president is transparent — detailed every way he is going to show he values the American people,” White House budget director Shalanda Young told reporters. “Congressional Republicans hid behind high-level talking points about balancing. Well, who are you hurting in the meantime? What are you cutting?”

The budget request is Biden’s last major chance to showcase his policy and spending ambitions before facing the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in November. And it’s a high-stakes sales pitch, as voters’ perceptions of the current economy don’t match Biden’s triumphant talking points. While the new fiscal year kicks off on Oct. 1 — before U.S. voters head to the polls to pick their next president — Congress is likely to punt major government funding decisions until after Election Day, which means Biden’s latest budget request is even more of a political messaging exercise than usual.

And the Republican bashing isn’t subtle.

The blueprint knocks the GOP for tax cuts for the wealthy ushered in by the 2017 GOP tax law, insisting that Biden inherited a “fiscally irresponsible legacy” and that Trump, along with congressional Republicans, have tried to obscure how much their proposals have contributed to the federal deficit, in “one of the most egregious and fiscally reckless budget decisions in modern history.”

It also draws a sharp contrast with Republicans, who administration officials say are hellbent on slashing critical programs and benefits. It would pour $7.7 billion into fully funding federal nutrition assistance for women, infants and children, after GOP leaders recently fought against a $1 billion increase for the program, wanting to make that funding conditional on tougher food aid restrictions.

Overall, Biden’s proposal outlines more than $1.6 trillion in base discretionary funding for the coming fiscal year, largely in line with the funding limits established by the debt deal that he negotiated last summer with former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. At the same time, the plan aims to reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over a decade, raising tax rates on large corporations, cracking down on fraud and requiring billionaires to pay at least 25 percent of their income on taxes, among other revenue-raising measures.

Congress is likely to largely ignore the proposed budget, as usual, especially as lawmakers are still trying to finish spending bills for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Lawmakers still have yet to fund about 70 percent of the government thanks to months of House Republican infighting and partisan sniping. It’s highly unlikely Congress would be able to fund the government on time for the new fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1, as lawmakers hurtle toward a November election that will decide control of the House, Senate and the White House next year.

House Republicans recently passed their own budget proposal out of committee, a plan that aims to reduce the deficit by $14 trillion over a decade, relying on both detailed and some vague plans for spending cuts. It also includes some optimistic economic assumptions.

At the same time, GOP lawmakers are pushing for the creation of a fiscal commission tasked with writing a bill to stop the national debt from growing as a share of the economy. Congress would be forced to vote on the commission’s final proposal, including potential cuts to entitlement programs like Social Security, tax increases, spending cuts or some combinations.

After committing during his State of the Union address last week to “stop” anyone in Congress who tries to raise the retirement age for Social Security benefits, Biden’s budget calls for instead raising taxes on high earners to keep Medicare and Social Security from hitting insolvency within the next decade.

“As the president has made clear,” the budget reads, “he will reject any efforts to cut or undermine the Medicare or Social Security benefits that seniors and people with disabilities have earned and paid into their entire working lives.”

President Joe Biden plans to send his budget blueprint for annual spending and revenue to Congress on Monday, while lawmakers are struggling to finalize spending bills nearly halfway through the fiscal year.

It’s an odd juxtaposition. The president’s wish list is for the next fiscal year, while Capitol Hill is still tied up with the last one. The president’s budget is due the first Monday in February. But with Congress so behind on finalizing fiscal 2024 spending, it was pushed back.

Biden’s budget will outline the president’s priorities, but a divided Congress won’t be using it as a blueprint. Instead, they’ll view it as a vague guide for what the president might consent to.

On Tuesday, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young is scheduled to testify before the Senate Budget Committee about the president’s budget plan.

Where will it be used as a blueprint? The campaign trail. The president’s pitch for lower health care costs, tax breaks for families, smaller deficits and higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations will be central to his bid for a second term as he tries to rally Democrats around his agenda.

But for Congress, the real task at hand is a batch of the next six spending bills — the tougher ones to find compromise on. The next deadline is March 22, when lawmakers need to have a deal cleared through both chambers on Defense, Homeland Security, Labor-HHS, Financial Services, Legislative Branch, and State and Foreign Operations spending.

Last week, House Republicans voted on their own budget resolution for fiscal 2025 in committee. It would reduce $8.7 trillion in Medicare and Medicaid expenditures — cuts which Biden has pledged to stop.

Rick Scott is “seriously considering” it. Steve Daines might make a move after the election.

For now, though, it looks like the Two Johns may have the race for GOP leader to themselves for awhile.

In interviews with more than a half-dozen Republicans late this week, several said they did not expect any imminent alternative to emerge to Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) or Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a former whip.

That’s not to say someone might eventually launch a run to succeed Mitch McConnell. But Republicans don’t see that happening anytime soon.

“Right now it hasn’t surfaced. Obviously that group that voted against McConnell last go round, there could be maybe somebody that could come out of that group,” said Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.). “It may be just Cornyn and Thune. At this point, that’s the case.”

Sen. John Barrasso’s (R-Wyo.) decision to run for party whip instead of leader removed the most conservative, Trump-aligned option among the three Johns. Thune and Cornyn have been preparing for McConnell’s potential exit as leader for years, with up and down relationships with the former president but also deep experience and relationship with many GOP senators.

Scott or Daines could run, but Daines is the campaign chair and Scott is up for reelection this fall, making it tough for either to focus on the leadership race. And despite McConnell’s critics in the conference, it’s possible Thune and Cornyn are the only options during the secret ballot elections.

Both are natural heirs to McConnell, but conservatives dealt with the question of whether the party needs a clean break carefully.

“Everybody’s doing some soul searching right now,” said Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.). “I’m trying to figure out who Cornyn and Thune are outside of Mitch McConnell’s shadow.”

In an interview, Scott said he had no timeline on when he will make a decision. He suggested the GOP needs to assess its future and direction as a conference before making a decision: “The right process is to figure out what we’re going to be as a conference and then make a decision about what we do as leader.”

Scott lost handily to McConnell in 2022 but launched himself as an alternative to the GOP leader and won 10 votes, a move that cemented a band of McConnell critics. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) predicted there will be an alternative and said three Republican senators are thinking about it.

But with Cornyn and Thune “now beating up on each other,” Hawley said. “I could see folks that are thinking about it saying: ‘What’s the rush?'”

Another top McConnell foil, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who had toyed with a run in 2022, indicated tepid enthusiasm for it this time.

“My role in the conference has been the kid who points out the emperor does not have clothes on,” Johnson said. “That kid is not real popular.”

Of course, a non-John candidate could be fueled by former President Donald Trump if he wins the election, though a wholesale leadership shake-up seems out of vogue. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is running for conference chair, but he’s the only newcomer currently pursuing a leadership bid.

“Rick’s a good guy. … If Steve runs, I think he’d have support. But I haven’t heard anybody say, ‘It’s time to turn the page,’” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “Do we need to flush everybody out? No.”

Another thing’s become abundantly clear in recent days: There’s more appetite for a lengthy process than a quick one. McConnell will serve out his term as leader through the year rather than prompt a mid-Congress scramble. And there’s not a ton of protest about that.

Republicans will meet on March 20 to start the discussions, with more to come according to Johnson, who praised McConnell for giving the GOP time to work out its internal issues rather than force a quick succession.

Not everyone agrees.

“It’s hard to have a lame-duck leader. Nobody listens to you. I’d like to see [McConnell] be a consultant to somebody that we choose,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.). He wants a GOP leader that could campaign with Trump. And with a November leadership election, he added, “we lose that.”

Senate leaders are scrapping over a deal to pass a six-bill funding package as a partial government shutdown looms just after midnight thanks to GOP demands for votes on tricky immigration issues and nixing earmarks.

Republican senators are seeking votes on multiple amendments, including one particularly problematic request from Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.). His proposal would ensure undocumented immigrants aren’t counted toward the population when divvying up congressional seats.

“And Chuck Schumer is ready to shut the government down to avoid having to vote on that,” Hagerty told POLITICO.

“They don’t want to say the quiet part out loud,” he said. “And that is: Right now, illegal migrants are being used to allocate congressional districts and electoral votes. The American public doesn’t want that. Everybody that I talked with is shocked that it’s happening.”

As to whether there will be a partial government shutdown just after midnight, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday: “Ask the Republicans.”

Even if a partial shutdown does occur, Republicans holding up a final passage vote would eventually see their hand forced by the Senate’s clock — with the legislation remaining on track to pass Saturday, resulting in no meaningful disruption to funded agencies by Monday.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the chamber’s GOP whip, confirmed midday Friday that Democratic resistance to Hagerty’s amendment is a major holdup to getting an agreement to vote on sending the $459 billion package to President Joe Biden’s desk before the shutdown deadline.

Thune also noted requests for votes on an amendment that would ensure deportation of undocumented immigrants found guilty of attacking a police officer, along with another amendment related to “sanctuary city” policies.

“It’s gotten a little complicated, unfortunately,” Thune said. He added that “one possible” option could be an agreement to take up tough amendments during debate on a much larger funding package that Congress needs to pass before March 22.

That second group of funding bills would avoid a shutdown that would hit the military and many key non-defense programs. Senators seeking funding for Coast Guard icebreakers are asking for assurances now that it would be included in the second spending package, which leaders hope to settle on in the next two weeks.

“There’s always that risk” of a partial shutdown, Thune said. “But hopefully we can avoid that if we can find a path forward. But that’s going to involve the Democrats being willing to work with us on some amendment votes.”

The Senate Republican whip said he hoped a deal would come together “in the next couple of hours” to move ahead with passage of the six-bill funding package.

Senate Republicans are seeking votes on several other amendments, including two from Sen. Rick Scott of Florida that would strip out all of the package’s $900 million-plus in earmarks and nix a $1 million earmark Schumer secured for environmental justice work in New York City. The senator wants both of those amendments to be voted on with a simple-majority bar.

Funding is set to expire early Saturday morning for federal agencies covered under the six-bill spending package the House passed this week with overwhelming support. Transportation, agriculture, veterans and housing programs would be affected by a partial government shutdown, along with energy, military construction, science and water programs.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration would be hit by the shutdown, as well as the departments of Justice and Commerce.

Rep. Matt Rosendale suddenly announced Friday he would abandon a Montana House reelection bid and not run for any elected office, capping a whirlwind month where he entered a Senate race, abandoned it and intended to run again for his current seat.

“The current attacks have made it impossible for me to focus on my work to serve you,” Rosendale wrote in a statement. “So, in the best interest of my family and the community, I am withdrawing from the House race and will not be seeking office.”

His central and eastern Montana seat is heavily Republican and will likely be retained by the GOP. He only arrived in the House in 2021 after losing the 2018 Montana Senate race to incumbent Sen. Jon Tester (D).

Rosendale, an staunchly conservative House member, has faced allegations — made publicly by former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) — that he withdrew from the Senate contest over allegations he impregnated a staffer. His office strongly contested those claims and vowed legal action.

Sen. Katie Britt’s response to the State of the Union has drawn its own response — including plenty of barbs across the political spectrum.

The Alabama Republican is seen as a rising star among Senate Republicans and a potential future leader. But her speech, set at her home kitchen, was slammed among many allies of former President Donald Trump.

“Katie Britt is talking like she’s hosting a cooking show whispering about how Democrats ‘dont get it,’’’ wrote Charlie Kirk.

Staunch adversaries of Trump’s in the GOP world joined in too. Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) deadpanned: “That one staffer that was likely suggesting that ‘maybe we don’t do SOTU response in a kitchen’ is having a very braggy day at work today.”

POLITICO has reached out to Britt’s office for a response to the criticism of her speech.

But it certainly wasn’t just Republicans rebuffing the rebuttal.

“If Katie Britt gets some after school acting lessons I think she’s got a real shot at an ensemble role in next fall’s Montgomery HS performance of Our Town,” joked Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.).