James Biden told House GOP investigators on Wednesday that his brother, President Joe Biden, wasn’t involved in any of his financial deals.

In a 10-page opening statement obtained by POLITICO, James Biden kicked off what is expected to be an hours-long closed-door interview with lawmakers by trying to draw a hard line between his brother and his decades-long business arrangements. House Republicans had asked the president’s brother to testify as part of their sweeping impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden, which has largely focused on deals cut by his brother and son Hunter Biden.

“I have had a 50-year career in a variety of business ventures. Joe Biden has never had any involvement or any direct or indirect financial interest in those activities. None. I never asked my brother to take any official action on behalf of me, my business associates, or anyone else,” James Biden told lawmakers and staff from the Oversight and Judiciary Committees.

However, James Biden didn’t directly rebut a growing blitz of public reporting in recent years that have increased scrutiny over his business ventures. That included a recent POLITICO report that James Biden emphasized his ties to his brother as part of his pitch to work at Americore, with one former Americore executive saying James Biden spoke about giving his brother equity in the company.

Instead, James Biden tried to distance himself from those claims broadly, telling investigators in his opening statement that in every business venture “I have relied on my own talent, judgment, skill, and personal relationships — and never my status as Joe Biden’s brother.”

“Those who have said or thought otherwise were either mistaken, ill informed, or flat-out lying,” he said.

He added about his work at Americore specifically: Joe Biden “played no role, was not involved with, and received no benefits from my work with Americore.”

Republicans are now expected to spend hours trying to poke holes in his claims, as they hunt for clear evidence that would link official actions taken by Joe Biden as president or vice president to his family’s business deals.

“I think there’s an enormous amount of circumstantial evidence that shows that Hunter and Joe were selling the brand and Joe Biden was profiting from it, financially. So we’re going to find out if that’s true. That’s why we’re here,” Rep. William Timmons (R-S.C.) told reporters on Wednesday during a break in the interview.

So far, Republicans haven’t been able to establish irrefutable evidence Biden committed a crime — a criticism lobbed at the investigation even from some GOP lawmakers. A faction of Republicans believe the investigation has uncovered damaging information, particularly about Biden family members, but not an impeachable offense.

Asked if they were concerned about reports that James Biden name dropped his brother as part of his business deals, Democrats on the committee argued that was a separate issue than the center of Republicans’ impeachment inquiry — which centers on a theory that Joe Biden was involved in and benefited from his family’s financial arrangements.

“I think it’s time for Chairman Comer and the Republicans to fold up the circus tent,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, told reporters.

A bipartisan pair of senators is pressing the Biden administration to quickly finalize plans to distribute $1 billion in food aid that was announced last fall, amid spiraling hunger crises around the world that lawmakers fear could trigger new political instability and migration flows.

Lawmakers have been privately raising alarms about the delay since last October, when the Biden administration announced that the U.S. would deliver $1 billion worth of U.S. farm commodities to countries facing food insecurity, noting the “dire” spike in global hunger since the pandemic.

New pressure: Now, Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and John Boozman (Ark.), the top Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, are pressing USAID Administrator Samantha Power and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to finalize the plans for the aid “as quickly as possible” in order to start shipping it from the U.S. and stave off the worst of the growing crisis, according to a new letter obtained by POLITICO.

“There is no shortage of need and the urgency cannot be overstated,” Booker and Boozman write in their letter, which is dated Feb. 20.

Delays: USDA and USAID have hammered out most of the details for the aid distribution, which are awaiting White House approval, according to two people familiar with the matter who were granted anonymity to discuss internal plans. The type of non-traditional farm commodities that USDA selected as part of the aid disbursement appears to be part of the reason for the slowdown, along with the legal authority the department initially used to tap its internal funds for the move, according to a congressional aide familiar with the matter.

Vilsack recently told POLITICO that his department was working with USAID “to figure out exactly where that resource goes and how it gets distributed.”

“They’re the ones who basically call the shots on that,” Vilsack said when asked about the delay in delivering the food aid. “We basically provide the money; they basically direct where it goes.”

USDA spokesperson Allan Rodriguez confirmed the department is still working “expeditiously” with USAID on the matter.

More food aid stuck in Congress: Booker and Boozman’s push comes as a separate pot of more than $10 billion in humanitarian and emergency global food aid funding is stuck in Congress, part of the stalled Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel foreign aid package.

Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to allow a House vote on the package. Some House lawmakers are now working on a new, alternative proposal that would strip out the humanitarian and emergency food aid funding entirely, which many Democrats strongly oppose.

Gaza aid: The battle in Washington over global food aid funding has only intensified since Israel launched its war in Gaza in response to the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks.

The foreign aid package currently stuck in Congress includes money to supply food and water for civilians in Gaza and Palestinians fleeing the war there. Sending any U.S. aid to Gaza and Palestinian refugees in the region is now an especially fraught topic on Capitol Hill.

“There’s hungry people in Ukraine, about 11 million. But in Gaza, it’s 2.2 million people there, [and] 2.2 million people are starving,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said in a recent interview after meeting with World Food Program Chief Cindy McCain.

DeLauro also knocked the speaker for putting a standalone Israel aid bill on the floor that did not include any humanitarian aid funding. That legislation was voted down, in part due to opposition from Democrats who wanted to include humanitarian assistance for Gaza.

The U.S. has suspended support to the main United Nations aid agency in Gaza, amid an internal investigation over allegations that some employees participated in Hamas’ October assault on Israel. The WFP alone would likely receive the bulk of any U.S. aid resources to distribute in Gaza and nearby regions. But immense challenges remain in getting that aid into Gaza and other regions reeling from famine conditions.

What’s next: Unless a bipartisan group of House lawmakers can end-run Johnson and force a vote on the Senate-approved foreign aid package in the coming weeks, few lawmakers believe the $10 billion in humanitarian aid will pass Congress this year. That’s only increased congressional pressure on the Biden administration to send out its promised $1 billion in food aid as quickly as possible.

Caitlin Emma contributed to this report. 

Speaker Mike Johnson delivered a presentation at a weekend GOP retreat that — although it was billed as a map to keeping the House majority — took on a surprisingly religious tone, according to two people in the room.

Johnson’s private remarks to a small group of Republican lawmakers at Miami’s Mandarin Oriental Hotel over the weekend alarmed both people, who addressed the speech on condition of anonymity. Rather than outlining a specific plan to hold and grow the majority, these people said, Johnson effectively delivered a sermon.

The Louisiana Republican showed slides to the members of his Elected Leadership Committee (ELC) team in a bid to tout the party’s prospects of hanging onto its two-seat majority in November. Johnson, a devout Christian, attempted to rally the group by discussing moral decline in America — focusing on declining church membership and the nation’s shrinking religious identity, according to both people in the room.

The speaker contended that when one doesn’t have God in their life, the government or “state” will become their guide, referring back to Bible verses, both people said. They added that the approach fell flat among some in the room.

“I’m not at church,” one of the people said, describing Johnson’s presentation as “horrible.”

“I think what he was trying to do, but failed on the execution of it, was try to bring us together,” that person said. “The sermon was so long he couldn’t bring it back to make the point.”

A third person in the room who is close to Johnson said that the speaker dipped into historical and religious points for perhaps a third of his presentation, arguing that the party needed to save the country. That person, who spoke on condition of anonymity about the private gathering, said Johnson also talked about polling on the border, how President Joe Biden compares to Donald Trump on various issues and the House GOP’s core message.

The weekend retreat also featured notable tension between GOP conference leaders and Freedom Caucus Chair Bob Good (R-Va.), who argued in Miami that Johnson needs to lead Republicans in the direction that is favored by conservatives.

Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) pushed back, questioning if Good — who had voted to oust former Speaker Kevin McCarthy — would let Johnson lead or if he would block him whenever he disagreed with the GOP leader’s approach, according to all three people who addressed the speaker’s presentation. Conservatives have blocked legislation from being considered on the floor several times this term.

Johnson’s office declined to comment.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee will vote again on Julie Su’s nomination to lead the Labor Department on Feb. 27, according to a notice, despite no indication she’s won over Democratic holdouts to prevail on the floor.

Su has been serving as acting Labor secretary despite her stalled nomination. A Government Accountability Office report in September concluded that arrangement did not violate federal law.

The full Senate voted 50-47 to confirm her as deputy secretary in July 2021. But Su’s elevation to Labor secretary has proven far more difficult. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has publicly opposed her despite backing Su for the deputy post.

The HELP Committee previously voted to advance Su’s elevation to secretary in April 2023 on a 11-10 vote.

The Israel-Hamas conflict is opening new rifts in the House Democratic caucus, with a second Congressional Progressive Caucus quitting the group over the war and Rep. Rashida Tlaib backing an activist campaign to undermine President Joe Biden in the Michigan Democratic primary.

The new developments underscore that, more than four months in, Israel’s military operations in Gaza are still causing a painful rift within a Democratic Party that’s occasionally struggled to project both security-first and pro-humanitarian messages in the Middle East. It’s far from clear whether the enduring frustration with the Biden administration’s approach to the war — concentrated among progressives — will keep the party’s base sitting on its hands in November. But for the moment, Democrats aren’t done collectively wrestling with their approach.

In the latest sign of existential angst, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) has quietly left the Progressive Caucus over its treatment of the Israel-Hamas war, according to a person familiar with the situation. He’s no longer listed on the nearly 100-member bloc’s website.

Torres’ vocal support for the conservative Israeli government has put him at odds with other liberal lawmakers who have taken a more critical line. He described his advocacy in a previous POLITICO interview: “There are few people in American politics who have been as visibly and vocally supportive of Israel as I’ve been.”

A spokesperson for the Progressive Caucus declined to comment. Torres did not respond to a request for comment.

Torres isn’t the only Democrat rattling the party lately by speaking out about the Israel-Hamas war. Tlaib, a Michigander and member of the liberal “Squad” who’s the first Palestinian American Democrat elected to Congress, declared over the weekend that she’d be voting “uncommitted” in the Michigan presidential primary later this month.

She did so after repeatedly criticizing the Biden administration’s response to the conflict.

Michigan Democrats privately acknowledged that Tlaib’s push risks legitimately hurting Biden in a swing state where Arab American voters could hold the key to the general election this fall.

But many held out hope that the effort would blow over — that Tlaib and other liberals who have criticized Biden would pivot to supporting the president after registering their protest in the primary.

And others in the Squad aren’t likely to echo Tlaib’s outspoken “uncommitted” calls. Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), for example, is a vocal defender of the president. Unlike several other fellow progressive lawmakers of color, Tlaib also has the breathing room provided by the lack of a competitive primary and a massive campaign war chest.

Torres, for his part, had stridently opposed calling for a ceasefire in the conflict, a goal that other more liberal members have embraced. His departure comes after Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) also left the bloc amid other Israel policy-related disputes.

The Progressive Caucus has faced no shortage of drama within the party as Israel’s war in Gaza escalated. Several members of the progressive Squad are facing primary challenges this year, in part because of their vocal criticism of Israel’s handling of the war.

The Progressive Caucus’ chair, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), has faced criticism herself after making controversial remarks about Israel that she later walked back.

President Joe Biden needs to go on offense to cement a new funding agreement for Ukraine, one of the longest-serving House Republicans said Tuesday.

“I do wish the president would do a major address to the country and say, ‘This is why,’ and then lay it out,” Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) said. His constituents, he added, “are not hearing from the White House, they’re just hearing about accusations.”

Smith, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said fellow Republicans Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) and Don Bacon (Neb.) were working the floor to build support for their newly unveiled foreign aid and border security package last week. Smith did not sign onto the Fitzpatrick-Bacon package.

“Where’s the rallying cry from the president or the vice president? Or the secretary of Defense or the secretary of State?” he asked.

Smith’s position is hardly unanimous among House Republicans. The Senate passed an aid package with funding for Ukraine last week with just 22 Republicans in support, while nearly 100 House GOP members have opposed further assistance to the imperiled country during recent votes.

The longtime New Jersey Republican deflected on whether the death of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny added to the imperative to pass additional aid for Ukraine.

“There’s always urgency, but the commander-in-chief has the singular responsibility to articulate exactly why — not engage in the blame game,” he said.

House Republicans are pushing for evidence collected as part of the Justice Department’s prosecution of a former Hunter Biden associate.

Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) sent a Tuesday letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting records related to DOJ’s case against Patrick Ho, an official with a Chinese oil and gas company. Ho, whom the duo calls a “close business associate of Hunter Biden,” was later sentenced to prison in the United States on international bribery and money laundering charges.

The House Republicans wrote in their letter, a copy of which was first obtained by POLITICO, that as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden “the Committees have determined that there is a particular need to obtain certain materials the Department of Justice (DOJ) obtained during its investigation of” Ho.

The request is a fresh sign that Republicans are probing Hunter Biden’s Chinese business deals as they try to find a still-elusive smoking gun linking actions taken by Joe Biden as vice president or president to his family’s business arrangements.

Republicans want an unreacted copy of an email between Ho and Serbian politician Vuk Jeremić about “an individual that Mr. Jeremic was willing to bring to a dinner” with Ye Jianming, the chair of the Chinese company, after DOJ successfully got the name of the individual redacted during the trial. DOJ requested the step over concerns that the name could “introduce a political dimension to this case.”

The lawmakers also want a copy of Ho’s iPad that DOJ has seized. A spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed receipt of the letter, but declined to comment further.

It’s hardly the first time either Ho or Jeremic has cropped up in the House Republican investigation. Republicans requested testimony from Jeremic last year, hoping that he could provide details on the redaction.

The Washington Post reported in 2022 on Hunter Biden’s business dealings in China, including an email Jeremic had written to the president’s son about a dinner he was hosting in Washington with Ye Jianming, chair of the Chinese company. While Jeremic invited Hunter Biden to attend, he ultimately was unable to.

Jeremic told The Washington Post at the time that while he knew Hunter Biden and Ye that he was “not involved in their mutual introduction” and found out that they had met through media reports.

The Senate is preparing to quickly dispense with the House GOP’s much-touted impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Republicans across the Capitol crowed about their recommendation that the Senate boot Mayorkas from office in protest of his handling to the southern border — a vote that took them two attempts to pull off. Now that the House is done impeaching, however, some Senate Democrats are predicting that a snoozer will result from all the hype.

“We view it as a stunt,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said of Senate Democrats’ outlook on the Mayorkas impeachment. “I bet the preference is going to be to spend as little time on it as possible so we can focus on [spending], the [national security aid debate] … and then I think we also want to take up the House’s bipartisan tax reform bill.”

Kaine added that, while the structure of any Mayorkas trial is up to leadership, Democrats have tools they can use to shortcut the proceedings right from the start.

“There’s different options. Do you do a motion to dismiss? Do you recommit to committee? I don’t know what the leadership is going to decide,” he said.

A motion to dismiss the articles of impeachment against Mayorkas would not be without precedent. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) attempted to use a motion to dismiss at former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial, but the vote failed.

Senate Democratic leadership has already laid out some plans for the trial. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s office said House impeachment managers will present the articles of impeachment to the Senate after this week’s recess. Senators will be sworn in as jurors the next day and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) will preside over the proceedings.

Schumer himself has called the Mayorkas impeachment a “sham” and insisted “House Republicans failed to present any evidence of anything resembling an impeachable offense.”

Senate conservatives are still pushing for more action, though. A group of them sent a letter Tuesday morning urging Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to “ensure that the Senate conducts a proper trial.” The letter was signed by 13 Senate Republicans in total.

But that saber-rattling can only go so far. McConnell does not have control over Senate floor proceedings — and plenty of his Republican members have cast their own doubts about the House’s rationale for impeaching Mayorkas in the first place.